Friday, November 29, 2024


Immigration to the US is now heavily subsidized by government handouts, and it’s a no-brainer that all welfare for immigrants must be abolished. It's also important to limit citizenship. But some aspects of the Trump plan dangerously empower government agencies in ways similar to the state-building legislation of the post-9/11 days. We don’t need more federal power in the US. We need less.

Let's talk about the Trump immigration plan plans from both a free market laissez-faire classical liberal perspective and look at what's good and bad about the plan some aspects of it are great no brainer they protect private property rights some aspects essentially expand Federal police powers and that's not a good thing. 

GOOD PART OF TRUMP'S IMMIGRATION PLANS 

00:29.  Cutting out welfare dollars.  In recent decades, the US Immigration system has become a government subsidized scheme.  Show up, get free money, access to schools.  All sorts of free stuff get thrown at migrants.  Even those who go through the legal system after only 5 years they get access to a wide variety of welfare programs.  Also get access to citizenship they're at least begin the process after 5 years. 

Also, brand new immigrants showing up and have money thrown at them, like these five-star New York hotels subsidized by the government to turn them into fake "refugee shelters."  You see this in cities like New York but really across all US cities.  Debit card with thousands of dollars on it; free housing in luxury hotels; free food, as well as free natal care.  Americans saw it as a problem.  Huh.  That's why they're voting for Trump.  So no downside to cutting all that immigration welfare in this scheme of subsidizing migration.  Nothing wrong with true private sector migration where someone gets invited, offers a job to these people or the private sector supports these people and these people have to be productive in return.  Situation when we're facing.

02:12.  Citizenship is not a property right there is no natural righteous citizenship in any particular place except for the tiny number of people who would be rendered truly stateless where they denied you a citizenship none of these people arriving would be stateless without being granted you as citizenship they already have citizenship in the countries they came from when a lot of them get citizenship in the US they don't renounce their old citizenship they now have dual citizenship showing that they were never at risk being stateless but by not having citizenship are not forfeiting any property rights we should expand the time Horizon for citizenship to at least 10 years maybe 20 this requires a person to be far more invested in the local community to contribute a lot more to the local economy before they can start to extract resources in the form of social benefits programs and that doesn't endanger anyone's property rights you don't have to be a citizen to acquire property to keep it to have legal contracts with others.

MASS DEPORTATION

03:40.  How do you accomplish Mass deportation?

Border agents don't have special powers to determine who is legal or illegal.  How do you determine this?  You have to conduct investigations. How do you conduct investigations you ask people what their citizenship status is you investigate them you spy on them essentially You observe them demand they provide proof of citizenship ask people for their papers I know we're going to be told by many conservatives if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to fear that's what these people told us with regards to the Patriot Act, the NSA spying, and the war on terror, in general, those vast expansions in the surveillance state, that a lot of conservative supported said "Hey, it's no big problem, because the government would never abuse its power."  Of course, we know, they always do.  So any scheme to go out and start investigating people more closely to determine what their citizenship status is, it's problematic.  Some migrants will volunteer themselves for deportation; these people are criminals in many cases.

05:54.  Since World War II, the US created this whole new idea of a "Border Zone."  [Border Patrol was created in 1924, and became part of US Customs & Border Patrol, CBP, in 2003.  This 25-mile wide border zone was created in 1952.] It's no longer just the border with a wall checking to see if a migrant is a felon; that's one thing that virtually nobody has a problem with.  But since World War II this new invention of the federal government, the obviously unconstitutional, 20th-century thing created was this 25-mile "Border Zone," where border agents can wander around asking people to prove their citizenship.  That was unilaterally extended without approval from Congress up to 100 miles and more recent decades.  You've seen videos with this on YouTube where people are just driving through the American Southwest and they're being stopped and asked about their citizenship.

07:20.  Going around asking citizens to justify their existence with paperwork is a problem.  We can't have a society that punishes private citizens for trying to rent an apartment to a person who doesn't have the correct government paperwork.  Or for someone who's paying a migrant to mow their lawn and they don't have the correct government paperwork.  These are all examples and excesses of Federal power expansion beyond a border issue.  Cutting off welfare dollars is the best start.  Or changing the citizenship situation that actually limits Federal power

None of these people arrive stateless.  By not having any citizenship, these people are forfeiting any property rights.  They have citizenship in their old country.  They are dual citizens.  We should expand the 

You don't have to be a citizen to acquire property, to keep it, to   

03:56.  The reality is that this is a foreign policy that team that at worst is going to be pro-Israel.  

I look at somebody like Marco Rubio and I don't see Rubio as any kind of mask massive hockey I see him as Little Marco he does what he's told and that's that Marco Rubio planning on making Latin America is planning on making Latin America and North America is priority for his term and that is a clear signal to the rest of the world that are foreign policy is going to shift radically away from the Asian pivot of the Obama Administration I don't think for a second Trump wants anything to do with a confrontation I don't think Trump really wants a confrontation Iran I don't think for a second he's going to get us involved into a war with Iran.

05:35.  That's an impossibility this is a distraction from what is the most important thing which is Ukraine if it's true that Elon went up and met with Iranian the Iranian ambassador to the uniformly

JEFFERSON AIRPLANE, 1969: Feed your head

ALEX KRAINER: The globalist cabal are planning a false flag terror attack on London which they'll blame on Russia so that they can trigger a whole-of-society mobilization by all of the western powers against Russia

The globalist cabal are planning a false flag terror attack on London, which they'll blame on Russia so that they can trigger an all out whole-of-society mobilization by all of the Western powers against Russia. Now if that seems far-fetched, there are now several important elements that fit coherently with this scenario, starting with the general geopolitical state of things.  Ukraine is too important for them, and the stakes could not be higher.  From the Imperial cabal's point of view, the price, in fact, is the whole world.  

In April 2022, then U.S. Chief of Staff, Mark Milley, said "If we lose in Ukraine, the world order we created 80 years ago will crumble."

Poland's prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, said in an April 2023 TV address, "If we lose in Ukraine, we will lose the world for decades.  Defeat in Ukraine could be the beginning of the end of the Golden Age of the West." 

Former NATO Secretary and member of the UK House of Lords, George Robertson, said in January 2024, that "If Ukraine loses, world order will be established by our enemies.". 

Finally, in April 2024, former British prime minister, Boris Johnson, recorded himself telling the world that "If Ukraine fails, it would be a catastrophe for the West, it would be the end of Western hegemony and we will have no one to blame but ourselves."

It is unlikely that the Empire's vested interests will quietly accept this catastrophe.  This is why they are escalating provocations against Russia, desperately hoping that the Russians will strike at a NATO member nation, creating the pretext to avoid Article 5 of the NATO treaty and to unleash a united response where the collective West would confront Russia in a whole-of-society effort and hopefully snatch a victory out of the jaws of a certain defeat.  A new false flag attack aimed at triggering World War 3 against Russia wouldn't be unusual in the context of history.

Thursday, November 28, 2024

MARC ANDREESSEN: Operation Chokepoint: No due process, none of this is written down. There are no rules. There is no court. There is no decision process. There is no appeal. Who do you appeal to, right, like who do you go to to get your bank account back?

the way we would describe it is it's administrative power.  It's political power being administered not through legislation, right, so there's no defined law that covers this.  It's not through regulation, right, there's nothing you . . . you can't go sue a regulator to fix this.  It's not through any kind of court judgment.  It's just raw power.  It's just raw administrative power.  It's the government or politicians just deciding that things are going to be a certain way, and then they just apply pressure until they get it.  --Marc Andreessen

Marc Andreessen.  

00:00. Debanking is where you as a person or as a company are literally kicked out of the banking system.

00:13.  Like they did to Kanye.

00:14.  Exactly, like they did to Kanye.  My partner [Ben Horowitz], Ben's father, has been debanked.  

00:15.  Really! 

00:16.  We had an employee . . . 

00:17.  For what?

00:18.  For having the wrong politics.  For saying unacceptable things under current banking regulations here's a great thing under current banking regulations after all the reforms of the last 20 years called "Politically Exposed Person," PEP.  And if you are a PEP, you are required by the financial regulator to kick them off to kick them out of your bank you're not allowed to have a . . . 

00:40.   Whaaat?  Well, what if you are politically on the left?

00:42.  That's fine because they're not politically exposed.

00:47.  So no one on the left gets the bank?

00:48.   I have not heard of a single instance of anybody on the left getting debanked.

00:50.  Can you tell me what the person you know did, what they said that got them debanked?  

00:55.  Oh, well Dave Horowitz is a right-wing, Pro-Trump.  I mean he's said all kinds of things.  He's been very anti-Islamic terrorism.  He's been very worried about migration, all these things.  

01:02.  And they debanked him for that?

01:03.  Yeah, they debanked Dave.  So you get kicked out of your bank account.  You get kicked out of . . . you can't do credit card transactions.  By the way, you can't . . . 

01:10.  How is that legal?

01:12.  Well, exactly.  This is the thing.  This is where the government and the companies get intertwined, back to your fascism point, which is . . . there's a constitutional amendment that says the government can't restrict your speech, but there is no constitutional amendment that says the government can't debank you, right? If they can't do the one thing, then they do the other thing.  Then they don't have to debank you, they just have to put pressure on the private company on the private company banks to do it, then the private company banks do it because they're expected to.  But the government gets to say, "We didn't do it.  It was the private company that did it," and, of course, JP Morgan can decide who they want to have as customers, of course, right, because they're a private company.  And so it is this sleight of hand that happens, so it's basically a privatized sanction regime that lets bureaucrats due to American citizens the same thing that we do to Iran is to kick you out of the financial system.  And so this has been happening to all the crypto entrepreneurs in the last 4 years.  This has been happening to a lot of the fintech entrepreneurs, anybody trying to start any kind of new banking service because they're trying to protect the big banks.  And then this has been happening, by the way, also in legal fields of economic activity that they don't like.  And so a lot of this started about 15 years ago with this operation Trump point where they decided to . . . as marijuana started to become legal, as prostitution started to become legal, and then guns, which there's always a fight about.  Under the Obama Administration, they started to debank legal marijuana businesses, escort businesses, and then gun shops . . . just like your gun manufacturers, and just like you're done, you're out of the banking system.  And so if you're running a medical marijuana dispensary in 2012, guess what, you're doing your business in cash because you are literally . . . you can't get a bank account, you can't get a Visa terminal, you can't process transactions, you can't do payroll, you can't do direct deposit, you can't get insurance; like none of that stuff is available.  You have been sanctioned.  None of that stuff is available.  And then this administration extended that concept to apply it to tech founders, crypto founders, and then just generally political opponents.  Yeah, so that's been like super pernicious.

03:05.  I wasn't aware of that.

03:06.  100%.  So it's called Operation Chokepoint, 1.0 was 15 years ago against the pot and the guns.  Choke Point 2.0 is primarily against their political enemies, and then to their disfavored tech start-ups.  And it's hit the tech world like we've had like 30 founders debanked in the last 4 years.  It's been a big recurring pattern.  This is one of the reasons why we ended up supporting Trump.  We can't live in this world.  We can't live in a world where somebody starts a company that is a completely legal thing, and then they literally like get sanctioned, an embargo by the United States government through a completely unaccountable . . . 

By the way, no due process, none of this is written down.  There are no rules.  There is no court.  There is no decision process.  There is no appeal.  Who do you appeal to, right, like who do you go to to get your bank account back?

03:57.  And then there's the civil asset-forfeit side of it, which is right the other side.  And that doesn't happen to us, but it happens to people in a lot of places now who could get arrested, and all of a sudden the state takes their money: civil asset forfeiture.  

04:07.   Yeah that happens to people who get pulled over and have a large amount of cash in some states.

04:12.   Right, or there'll be well-publicized examples of like, you know, there'll be some investigation into like safe deposit boxes, and the next thing you know the FED have seized all the contents of the safe deposit boxes and that stuff never gets returned.  It's this . . . this is when Trump says the "Deep state," the way we would describe it is it's administrative power.  It's political power being administered not through legislation, right, so there's no defined law that covers this.  It's not through regulation, right, there's nothing you . . . you can't go sue a regulator to fix this.  It's not through any kind of court judgment.  It's just raw power.  It's just raw administrative power.  It's the government or politicians just deciding that things are going to be a certain way, and then they just apply pressure until they get it.

04:55.  So what happens to those 30 tech people that you know?

04:58.   They go into a different field and try to do something different.  Yeah, complete upending of your life, and try to change . . . try to get out of . . . try to get away from the Eye of Sauron.  Try to get out of whatever Zone got you into this and keep applying for new bank accounts at different banks and hope that at some point a bank will say okay we've checked it's now all right but there's no . . . 

05:24.  So what do they do with their money, like what happens?  

05:27.   You go to cash.

05:30.  So where do you put it?

05:32.  Under your mattress?. 

05:37.  That is so insane so if someone has 30 million dollars in the bank and they get d-banked . . . 

05:42.  Diamonds.  Art.  I don't know, go overseas.  Somewhere.  Yeah, yeah.  It just happens, and it's really really important, there are no fingerprints.  There's no person 

05:55.   Right.  There's no stick above the strings.  

05:56.  Yeah, exactly.  It just happened, and we can trace it back because we understand . . .  we know the politicians involved, and we know how agencies work, and we know how the pressure is applied, and we know that the banks get phone calls, and so forth.  And so we understand the flow of power as it happens, but when you are on the receiving end of this, your specific instance of it, you can't trace it back.  There's no such . . .

06:19.  What are the instances like what is the company what are they trying to do and how do they run afoul . . . 

06:25.  All the crypto startups in the last 4 years the crypto thing got everybody got excited and like it just like stopped and the reason it stopped is because is because every crypto founder every crypto startup got d-banked personally and forced out of the industry or their company got debanked where they couldn't keep operating or they got prosecuted charged or they got threatened with being charged this is a fun twist the SEC has been trying to kill the crypto industry under fight this has been a big issue for us because we're the biggest crypto startup investor the SEC can investigate you they can subpoena you they can prosecute you they can do all these things but they don't have to do any of those things to really damage you all they have to do is issue you what is called a Wells notice and the wells notice is a notification that you may be charged at some point in the future it's like you are on notice that you might be doing something wrong and they might be coming after you at some point in the future terrifying yes the eye of Sauron is on you now trying to be a company with a Wells notice doing business with anybody else try to work with a big company try to get access to a bank try to do anything

07:36.   So that's when I support Dei initiatives.

07:39.  The SEC under Biden became a direct application of exactly, so DEI.  They did a lot with that, and then all the ESG stuff, and ESG is very malleable concept and they pile all kinds of new requirements into that.  So through this process, the SEC could basically just simply dictate what companies do with no accountability at all there's no oversight.  There are hearings where they get yelled at, but nothing ever changes.  Nothing ever happened in the hearing that changed anything.  It's just the raw application of power.

08:11.  And these are your friends that this has happened to?

08:13.  We had an employee who got debanked because he had "crypto" in his job title.  He was doing crypto policy for us, and his bank booted him because they did a screen across the . . . that's what they told us, they did a screen across there customer base because anyone with crypto became "Politically Exposed Person."