Detecting language using up to the first 30 seconds. Use `--language` to specify the language
Detected language: English
[00:00.000 --> 00:10.920]  Today, the Senate approved a $480 billion hike in the debt ceiling.
[00:10.920 --> 00:13.040]  Now, the debt ceiling is just a joke.
[00:13.040 --> 00:18.240]  When you create a statute that requires Congress to vote on something, but the voting is just
[00:18.240 --> 00:23.440]  pro forma because the argument is always, if we don't raise the debt ceiling, horrible,
[00:23.440 --> 00:25.320]  terrible things will happen.
[00:25.320 --> 00:30.400]  When we talk about things like the budget and the ridiculous debt ceiling, which is
[00:30.400 --> 00:35.480]  in fact no ceiling at all, if you're older, I mean if you're in your 20s this probably
[00:35.480 --> 00:40.320]  isn't going to work for you, but if you're older, especially if you're say 40, 50, 60,
[00:40.320 --> 00:44.720]  think back because we've had a series of administrations, Republican, Democrat, Republican, Democrat,
[00:44.720 --> 00:47.480]  Republican, Democrat, Republican, Democrat.
[00:47.480 --> 00:53.080]  Look back and ask yourself if on the whole the federal government's financial picture
[00:53.240 --> 00:58.640]  in terms of being fiscally responsible or reducing spending has changed at all under
[00:58.640 --> 01:02.600]  any administration of any of the two dominant political parties.
[01:02.600 --> 01:04.960]  It never has.
[01:04.960 --> 01:08.800]  Spending just continues to climb exponentially.
[01:08.800 --> 01:16.200]  And with it, the national debt.
[01:16.200 --> 01:27.680]  The Dr. Reality Vodcast with Dave Champion.
[01:27.680 --> 01:30.280]  I think it should be obvious, even with the federal government running the printing press
[01:30.280 --> 01:37.920]  and the dollar being the world's reserve currency, massive, continual growing debt is unsustainable.
[01:37.920 --> 01:42.080]  The only real question is at what point will the chickens come home to roost?
[01:42.080 --> 01:45.640]  Not if they will come home to roost, it's when they will come home to roost.
[01:45.800 --> 01:49.400]  And you know what the best way is to make sure that that day doesn't come is to be fiscally
[01:49.400 --> 01:50.400]  responsible today.
[01:50.400 --> 01:54.400]  So, again, I want to repeat, if we go back, say, 50 years and we look at Republican, Democrat,
[01:54.400 --> 01:57.320]  Republican, Democrat, Republican, Democrat administrations about that, I'm not putting
[01:57.320 --> 02:02.160]  the I'm not pointing a finger at the executive branch because this is all really done by
[02:02.160 --> 02:03.160]  Congress.
[02:03.160 --> 02:05.240]  And in a moment, I want to talk about who's responsible for that.
[02:05.240 --> 02:12.560]  But before I get to that, the next item I want to talk about is Joe Biden wanting the
[02:12.560 --> 02:20.560]  IRS to get information from banks on every single person's financial transactions, $600
[02:20.560 --> 02:21.560]  or above.
[02:21.560 --> 02:26.960]  Now, of course, Joe Biden's tax position, publicly and privately, who knows what the
[02:26.960 --> 02:32.840]  fuck he wants, but publicly the pitch has been he wants to make billionaires pay their
[02:32.840 --> 02:38.960]  fair share, which, of course, would mean that every single American who has transactions
[02:38.960 --> 02:44.160]  in a bank of $600 or more has to have that automatically reported to the IRS in order
[02:44.160 --> 02:49.640]  to get the billionaires to pay their fair share.
[02:49.640 --> 02:56.280]  What a lot of people will consider good news is that Democrats and Republicans in the House
[02:56.280 --> 03:01.000]  and the Senate are working to change that $600 limit, and the number that's being bandied
[03:01.000 --> 03:05.520]  about right now is they're going to raise it all the way up to $10,000.
[03:05.520 --> 03:09.160]  And there are some people, I imagine, that are going to say, well, that's much better.
[03:09.160 --> 03:10.160]  It's not.
[03:10.160 --> 03:11.360]  Let me explain why.
[03:11.360 --> 03:16.000]  This is a profound shift in the law.
[03:16.000 --> 03:24.440]  It has always been presumed that without some at least tenable connection to potential criminal
[03:24.440 --> 03:29.120]  conduct, your banking is your private business, and it's not the business of the government.
[03:29.120 --> 03:32.880]  If you own any taxes, that's your job to report that on your tax return.
[03:33.240 --> 03:39.360]  It is not the legal responsibility of banks to shovel your private information day in
[03:39.360 --> 03:41.280]  and day out to the IRS.
[03:41.280 --> 03:46.440]  In fact, the IRS, historically, if they've wanted to look at your bank account, they
[03:46.440 --> 03:48.560]  have to survey summons on the bank.
[03:48.560 --> 03:49.560]  And I'm not going to get into that.
[03:49.560 --> 03:52.720]  You probably are aware I'm the author of Income Tax Shattering the Mist.
[03:52.720 --> 03:57.320]  And so a lot of these things that we in society and even the bank's legal department consider
[03:57.320 --> 04:00.960]  lawful when you actually get into what the statutes and the regulations really say, they're
[04:01.040 --> 04:02.360]  not lawful at all.
[04:02.360 --> 04:04.660]  But we're not going to get into that today.
[04:04.660 --> 04:09.080]  As of this very moment in time, if the IRS wants to look at what's in your bank account,
[04:09.080 --> 04:13.800]  the information about your bank transactions, they have to send a summons to the bank.
[04:13.800 --> 04:18.520]  And that summons has to be part of an examination, what the public typically calls an audit.
[04:18.520 --> 04:19.520]  It can't be random.
[04:19.520 --> 04:20.520]  It can't be arbitrary.
[04:20.520 --> 04:25.440]  And the broader context is that to target a bank account, that person has to be someone
[04:25.440 --> 04:28.120]  upon whom Congress has imposed the income tax.
[04:28.120 --> 04:30.960]  And again, to keep this short, I'm not going to get into that.
[04:30.960 --> 04:34.120]  But if you want to know more, certainly read Income Tax Shattering the Mist.
[04:34.120 --> 04:41.440]  But the reason I say this is an utterly profound shift is this does away with the summons part
[04:41.440 --> 04:42.440]  of it.
[04:42.440 --> 04:47.240]  This says you don't have to be a person upon whom Congress has imposed the income tax.
[04:47.240 --> 04:51.560]  You don't have to be undergoing an examination by the IRS.
[04:51.560 --> 04:53.640]  No summons is required now.
[04:53.640 --> 04:58.040]  No human beings are involved in saying, you know what, we believe we actually have cause
[04:58.040 --> 05:02.600]  to pull back the curtain, do away with this person's financial privacy, and look at what's
[05:02.600 --> 05:03.720]  in their bank account.
[05:03.720 --> 05:05.520]  No longer is a person involved in that.
[05:05.520 --> 05:09.640]  What Joe Biden and the Democrats are doing right now is they're saying, if you have a
[05:09.640 --> 05:12.400]  bank account, you no longer have privacy.
[05:12.400 --> 05:15.520]  If you do anything over $600 and you have a bank account, the government gets to know
[05:15.520 --> 05:17.180]  about it, period.
[05:17.180 --> 05:24.020]  In other words, this is very close to being a 100% eradication of banking privacy in the
[05:24.020 --> 05:25.020]  U.S.
[05:25.020 --> 05:32.300]  So it doesn't matter whether Biden's $600 or the compromise number in Congress as $10,000.
[05:32.300 --> 05:38.740]  It's still a complete repudiation of your financial privacy, complete.
[05:38.740 --> 05:42.620]  So with all that said, who's responsible for this?
[05:42.620 --> 05:44.580]  Well, you are.
[05:45.220 --> 05:48.900]  Let me explain, at least from my point of view.
[05:48.900 --> 05:53.980]  We have this horrible, horrible, horrible system in the United States called the two-party
[05:53.980 --> 05:54.980]  system.
[05:54.980 --> 06:01.780]  And really, what the two-party system thrives on is animosity towards anyone in the other
[06:01.780 --> 06:05.100]  party or the other party's principles, if you would prefer.
[06:05.100 --> 06:09.740]  So what happens is someone comes along who's moral and ethical and wants to do the right
[06:10.180 --> 06:16.340]  for the American people, especially as we get into the national level of politics.
[06:16.340 --> 06:19.740]  That means that person cannot be part of the Democrat Party or part of the Republican Party.
[06:19.740 --> 06:22.780]  They have to go to someplace like the LP or some other party.
[06:22.780 --> 06:24.060]  By the way, I'm not an LP member.
[06:24.060 --> 06:25.780]  I think the LP has a whole lot of problems.
[06:25.780 --> 06:27.060]  I'm libertarian-minded.
[06:27.060 --> 06:29.860]  I'm not a member of the Libertarian Party.
[06:29.860 --> 06:33.380]  But the point is somebody who's honest and fair and decent and reasonable and wants to
[06:33.380 --> 06:38.580]  be a servant to you has no home in the Democrat or the Republican Party.
[06:38.620 --> 06:42.740]  So what happens is we get these absolute a-holes in each side of the party.
[06:42.740 --> 06:47.060]  And somebody says, look, there's that guy over there who's moral, he's ethical, he's committed,
[06:47.060 --> 06:48.940]  he wants to be a servant of the people.
[06:48.940 --> 06:54.860]  But if I vote for that kind of person, I'm—do you want to fill in the blank?—wasting my
[06:54.860 --> 07:04.540]  vote because I need to vote for my scumbag in my party that I love that I cling to emotionally.
[07:04.540 --> 07:10.980]  I have to vote for that guy to make sure the other a-hole in the other party who I detest
[07:10.980 --> 07:12.020]  doesn't get into office.
[07:12.020 --> 07:16.020]  So I'm going to vote for this a-hole so that a-hole doesn't get into office.
[07:16.020 --> 07:19.860]  And then I'm going to feel really fucking good about having done that.
[07:19.860 --> 07:23.300]  That is just insane.
[07:23.300 --> 07:30.740]  We talk about the lesser of two evils, which is what a morally, ethically bankrupt principle.
[07:30.740 --> 07:33.700]  Because when you vote for the lesser of two evils, what do you get?
[07:33.700 --> 07:35.620]  Yes, evil.
[07:35.620 --> 07:43.300]  Our system today, this two-party system, is set up so that you are always voting for evil.
[07:43.300 --> 07:44.300]  Always.
[07:44.300 --> 07:51.980]  I love the wasting your vote thing because that is the ultimate self-fulfilling prophecy.
[07:51.980 --> 07:55.980]  You've got millions of people who could vote for that guy over there who's moral, ethical,
[07:55.980 --> 07:57.780]  and really wants to be a servant of the people.
[07:57.780 --> 08:01.220]  A million, perhaps hundreds of millions of people who could vote for him, and that person
[08:01.220 --> 08:02.260]  would win.
[08:02.260 --> 08:06.740]  But instead, they say this self-fulfilling prophecy, well, if I voted for that person,
[08:06.740 --> 08:09.420]  then I would be wasting my vote.
[08:09.420 --> 08:15.020]  One of the things that blows my mind when I see comments on social media and postings
[08:15.020 --> 08:24.500]  is people on the right, as an example, just spewing vitriol at somebody like Pelosi, and
[08:24.500 --> 08:31.020]  people on the left spewing vitriol at somebody like Mitch McConnell.
[08:31.020 --> 08:34.060]  The part that I find so humorous about that is, guess what?
[08:34.060 --> 08:38.500]  There's no vitriol between McConnell and Pelosi.
[08:38.500 --> 08:40.380]  They get along fine.
[08:40.380 --> 08:41.380]  They sit down.
[08:41.380 --> 08:42.380]  They have dinner.
[08:42.380 --> 08:43.380]  They have cocktails.
[08:43.380 --> 08:44.380]  They shoot the breeze.
[08:44.380 --> 08:45.380]  They ask about family.
[08:45.380 --> 08:46.380]  They talk about things.
[08:46.380 --> 08:49.020]  Of course, they get down to the business of what they're doing in Congress, but there's
[08:49.020 --> 08:54.580]  no animosity or vitriol between the two of them, using just the two of them as an example,
[08:54.580 --> 09:00.780]  because they understand the game, the game they're playing.
[09:00.780 --> 09:06.100]  That game is to keep one party in power, and then a little bit down the road, the other
[09:06.100 --> 09:09.860]  party's in power, and then a little bit down the road, then the first party is in power
[09:09.860 --> 09:13.340]  again, and a little bit down the road, then the second party is in power again.
[09:13.340 --> 09:21.060]  They understand that's the game, so they keep the power, and you don't.
[09:21.060 --> 09:23.740]  If you participate in that, and I'm not talking about going out and voting.
[09:23.740 --> 09:25.140]  I'm talking about up here.
[09:25.140 --> 09:29.180]  If you're on the right and you're like, oh, Nancy Pelosi's the worst scumbag in the world.
[09:29.180 --> 09:32.380]  I wish those January 6 people had gotten a shot her in the head.
[09:32.380 --> 09:37.220]  If you're on the left, and you're like, Mitch McConnell needs to be hung as a traitor.
[09:37.220 --> 09:43.260]  You're the fucking problem, not McConnell or Pelosi, because you're too fucking stupid
[09:43.260 --> 09:51.540]  to see what's actually going on, to see how they are using and manipulating you.
[09:51.540 --> 09:52.540]  What's the solution to this?
[09:52.540 --> 09:57.140]  Is there some magical third party going to spring up, and maybe a fourth party and a
[09:57.140 --> 09:58.140]  fifth party?
[09:58.140 --> 10:02.420]  Who are the only countries that really has this locked in two party system thing that's
[10:02.420 --> 10:03.860]  so corrupt?
[10:03.860 --> 10:08.620]  Most countries, they have a wide variety of parties from which to choose from, and then
[10:08.620 --> 10:11.860]  they have to make alliances in order to govern.
[10:11.860 --> 10:17.820]  What are the odds that a third party is suddenly going to pop up in a fourth and a fifth, if
[10:17.820 --> 10:22.100]  possible, and start competing effectively against the Republicans and the Democrats?
[10:22.100 --> 10:24.260]  That would be zero.
[10:24.260 --> 10:27.940]  There are a number of reasons, but probably the most significant is how the debates are
[10:27.940 --> 10:29.100]  run.
[10:29.100 --> 10:35.220]  You cannot get into the debates, even if you would smoke the Democrat candidate debating,
[10:35.220 --> 10:39.700]  if you would smoke the GOP candidate at the debate, if you would absolutely smoke them.
[10:39.700 --> 10:45.380]  You can't get in unless your polling numbers are sufficient.
[10:45.380 --> 10:50.680]  Your polling numbers will never be sufficient, because even when people are polled, they're
[10:50.680 --> 10:57.080]  thinking in their mind, I can't support this guy, because that would be wasting my vote.
[10:57.080 --> 11:01.200]  The only practical solution that I can come up with, because there's many things that
[11:01.200 --> 11:05.480]  we could do, but it's absolutely not going to happen, and probably the one I'm about
[11:05.480 --> 11:11.000]  to suggest is also not going to happen, what we need to do is have a constitutional amendment
[11:11.000 --> 11:14.840]  at the federal level, and here's what it would do.
[11:14.840 --> 11:20.600]  It would take the total number of registered voters, and it would require in any given
[11:20.600 --> 11:27.420]  election for a candidate to be declared the winner and move on to holding office, get
[11:27.420 --> 11:32.920]  sworn in and go through all that, that person would have to receive a minimum percentage
[11:32.920 --> 11:39.560]  of votes, that percentage being against the total number of registered voters.
[11:39.560 --> 11:46.000]  For illustrative examples, let's say a particular jurisdiction had a hundred registered voters,
[11:46.000 --> 11:50.640]  and those hundred registered voters looked out and they said, okay, so these candidates
[11:50.640 --> 11:54.520]  are horrible, none of these candidates are going to do right by us.
[11:54.520 --> 11:57.720]  Now, this presumes that people can pull their head out and stop doing the, I have to vote
[11:57.720 --> 12:03.440]  for this guy to keep that guy out of office, that the people have to be smarter than to
[12:03.440 --> 12:08.560]  be manipulated like that, so then what would happen is the people would say, I'm not going
[12:08.560 --> 12:09.560]  to vote for anybody.
[12:09.560 --> 12:11.240]  Now, here in Nevada, we have that.
[12:11.240 --> 12:15.840]  You have the people that are running, and then the last choice is none, so this could
[12:15.840 --> 12:20.360]  be done all over the country, so what happens is people don't go to vote or they vote on
[12:20.360 --> 12:25.180]  certain issues, but in the scenario we're discussing where the candidates are trash,
[12:25.180 --> 12:27.180]  they hit none.
[12:27.180 --> 12:32.040]  If enough people do that, then nobody wins the office, okay?
[12:32.040 --> 12:37.720]  This expresses the dissatisfaction of the voters with the choices they've been given,
[12:37.720 --> 12:43.080]  and I think just shifting to that mindset would allow third parties to have more sway
[12:43.080 --> 12:50.400]  with the voters because the voters would then say, you know what, I don't have to elect
[12:50.400 --> 12:55.720]  any of these sphincters unless somebody I think is going to do a good job, somebody who's
[12:55.720 --> 13:01.440]  going to truly be a servant of the people is on the ballot, so until that happens, I'm
[13:01.440 --> 13:02.440]  not voting for that office.
[13:02.440 --> 13:07.240]  In other words, the candidates put up by the dominant parties can't get elected.
[13:07.240 --> 13:08.240]  Let me just lay that out.
[13:08.240 --> 13:12.880]  What do I think is the obstacle to that succeeding?
[13:12.880 --> 13:14.760]  Is it the constitutional principles?
[13:14.760 --> 13:19.200]  Well, they probably would be challenged, but where they would end up, we don't know, but
[13:19.200 --> 13:24.760]  in my opinion, the real problem is the American voters.
[13:24.760 --> 13:30.000]  Having watched with a careful and I hope discerning eye for decades now what voters are doing
[13:31.000 --> 13:37.520]  I don't think they really give a shit about personal liberty.
[13:37.520 --> 13:47.000]  What they really want is, are you ready, whatever they want, whatever they feel is right.
[13:47.000 --> 13:49.320]  That's what they want government to do.
[13:49.320 --> 13:53.920]  If they're on the right and something the right wants infringes on the constitutional
[13:53.920 --> 13:57.140]  rights of the left, well, the right's happy to do that.
[13:57.140 --> 14:01.460]  If people on the left want to get something done that's important to them, and it infringes
[14:01.460 --> 14:04.500]  on the constitutional rights of people on the right, well, they're more than happy to
[14:04.500 --> 14:07.260]  do that without a moment's hesitation.
[14:07.260 --> 14:16.060]  In other words, we have a nation of voters who are children, without any consideration
[14:16.060 --> 14:21.580]  to constitutional constraints or personal liberty, and that's, I mean, they don't act
[14:21.580 --> 14:25.980]  like that publicly when they're talking to other people, but in here, they're like little
[14:25.980 --> 14:26.980]  children.
[14:27.820 --> 14:30.220]  If I want it, and if I want it, then I'm going to get it, and I'm going to vote for my guy
[14:30.220 --> 14:32.060]  so I can get it.
[14:32.060 --> 14:38.220]  Because of that mindset, we have this continual diminution of personal liberty in the United
[14:38.220 --> 14:39.900]  States, and it's not stopping.
[14:39.900 --> 14:43.020]  As far as I can tell, it's actually increasing.
[14:43.020 --> 14:46.220]  Ultimately, what's the answer?
[14:46.220 --> 14:47.900]  I don't know.
[14:47.900 --> 14:54.580]  I think ultimately the answer is for Americans to be honest with themselves, acknowledge
[14:54.580 --> 14:56.940]  how they vote and why they vote.
[14:57.900 --> 14:59.500]  This is why it'll never happen.
[14:59.500 --> 15:01.400]  They cannot be mature.
[15:01.400 --> 15:06.700]  They cannot say, yes, that's actually, that whole thing that Dave just went through, that's
[15:06.700 --> 15:11.820]  actually how I've been voting for the last 20 or 30 or 40 years.
[15:11.820 --> 15:15.420]  They're not emotionally capable of saying that because they've done it time and time
[15:15.420 --> 15:16.420]  again for decades.
[15:16.420 --> 15:21.820]  I don't know if you're aware psychologically, the more you hold a particular idea or principle
[15:21.820 --> 15:23.860]  or notion, and then you act on it.
[15:23.860 --> 15:29.860]  Each time you do that, you reinforce in your mind, psychologically, the correctness of
[15:29.860 --> 15:30.860]  that action.
[15:30.860 --> 15:36.540]  Even if it's flat out wrong, the more often you do a thing based on a particular mindset
[15:36.540 --> 15:43.500]  that you have, the more you cement in your mind the rightness of your conduct.
[15:43.500 --> 15:48.020]  Somebody who's been voting one way or the other way, they've been voting to diminish
[15:48.020 --> 15:52.980]  the boundaries of the Constitution, just nudge them a little bit more all the time, to diminish
[15:53.060 --> 15:56.660]  the rights of people who disagree with their political views.
[15:56.660 --> 16:04.780]  They always have a concocted moral justification because those motherfuckers are evil and I
[16:04.780 --> 16:06.920]  am righteous.
[16:06.920 --> 16:10.740]  That becomes a part of their emotional construct.
[16:10.740 --> 16:12.840]  The other people are the enemy.
[16:12.840 --> 16:15.180]  They are the righteous.
[16:15.180 --> 16:18.620]  What I'm sharing today that you're not, I don't care whether you're Democrat or Republican,
[16:18.620 --> 16:23.100]  if you're doing the kind of things I discussed, what, probably 10, 15 minutes ago now, you're
[16:23.100 --> 16:25.060]  not doing the right thing.
[16:25.060 --> 16:26.980]  You're not the moral guy.
[16:26.980 --> 16:29.560]  You're not saving America.
[16:29.560 --> 16:36.920]  You have bought into the two-party system BS that is keeping the elites in power while
[16:36.920 --> 16:41.740]  you lose more and more of your freedom.
[16:41.740 --> 16:47.060]  By all means, do not acknowledge to yourself who you really are, what you've really been
[16:47.060 --> 16:48.060]  doing.
[16:48.060 --> 16:52.220]  Earlier, I mentioned income tax shattering the mess, not going to go into it here.
[16:52.220 --> 16:58.500]  I'll just say, if you really want to know about personal liberty and you really want
[16:58.500 --> 17:02.140]  to tell the system, then you have to get educated.
[17:02.140 --> 17:06.300]  I'm going to suggest to you that if you would like to get educated, you're willing to admit
[17:06.300 --> 17:10.100]  that perhaps there's some things you don't know, see the evidence with your own two eyes,
[17:10.100 --> 17:14.980]  go to DrReality.News, grab yourself a copy of income tax shattering the mess, and also
[17:14.980 --> 17:19.700]  Body Science while you're there, both of them will reinforce in a way that probably
[17:19.700 --> 17:25.020]  nothing you've ever read has reinforced, that the entire establishment, the entire political
[17:25.020 --> 17:35.020]  structure, the entire community of elites, the establishment has never been working in
[17:35.020 --> 17:37.260]  your interest.
[17:37.260 --> 17:40.820]  Grabbing a copy of income tax shattering the mess or Body Science helps me be here for
[17:40.820 --> 17:41.820]  you.
[17:41.820 --> 17:41.840]  Thank you.