How to not have white guilt? Do not believe in collectivism. 

Treat people as individuals, but you can notice patterns and stats

White flight from crime.. where do you go if you are already in a homogenous suburb? You stop feeling sympathetic to criminal justice reform efforts.

Can victims of Waukesha parade attack sue BLM, CNN, etc if found to have directly motivated the perps' actions. 

White guilt is used by black racial race hustlers to extract benefits to their group by guilt tripping your racial group and putting individuals into that group.

What is my super power? no white guilt--- why white guilt led to whites run over by a black male criminal- good way to frame it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Umzl4c1mOvc&ab_channel=FOX4Dallas-FortWorth

Compare and contrast

An entire group is not on trial, individuals are on trial. 

I didn't talk about this but this is a crucial step in the process of how an individual gets replaced on trial for a group in the mind (Huber and others shot are seen as BLM soldiers who have sacrificed themselves for BLM)--- by denying individual rights, elevating self sacrifice and the service to a group. The concept of altruism, collectivism and service to a group like BLM. Then it becomes our group vs the enemy- blacks against whites. Statism always leads to racism, just like altruism leads to collectivism.

Some blacks (anytime I say blacks in general I never mean all) make race an issue in Rittenhouse even when no blacks were involved by substituting the people shot in for BLM. This is absolutely the wrong thing to do. No group is on trial or involved in the trial in any way, only individuals. This is the most problematic thing I see going on right now across heavily covered trials.

Even though Chemirmir is alleged to have murdered 18 mostly white elderly women, the black race isn't on trial here, an individual is and only an individual. Whites are not threatening to riot if the jury doesn't convict. The state only brought one murder charge and they aren't seeking the death penalty here.

Bitcoin isn't about freedom it is about aligning with government using tax payer money to get rich themselves.

Bitcoin hodlers like Pomp and Nic Carter are acting like socialists who want UBI in the form of bitcoin. These holders are okay with wealth redistribution, just with bitcoin.

Isn't it interesting that both El Salvador and in Miami have been bribed by the hodlers to implement some gov coercion involving bitcoin .

Whatever is good for bitcoin is okay, principles are trashed.

Don't expect a lot of bitcoiners to say this is bad.

Bitcoin adoption can't happen fast enough organically, so hodlers have adopted a new strategy in El Salvador and now Miami. Bitcoin by force and bitcoin to be bought with tax payer money and given to 'the unbanked' (probably). More to come.

https://twitter.com/nic__carter/status/1458831904606666756

https://twitter.com/APompliano/status/1458823702041223168

https://twitter.com/spcohn/status/1458824726579666944

Pomp's reply is incorrect, bc the dividends come from city money (tax payer money)

https://twitter.com/jp_koning/status/1453685169878151171

http://jpkoning.blogspot.com/2021/10/does-it-make-difference-if-tether-lends.html

My comment on John Paul Koning's blog.

PayPal would never created an account out of thin air for someone without first taking in real dollars. Why would they? Now they owe real dollars to the account holder whenever they want to transfer it to their bank, which they do not have.

Also, Paypal's accounts are yes IOUS, but they represent real digital dollars, not some stablecoin, like usdt.

Tether is exactly like the Federal Reserve, they can print without limit. But they are only printing more tokens, not dollars. That is why the government doesn't care.

Any collateral which Tether may or may not receive for new usdt lent directly does not give value to the tokens that are printed out of thin air. It gives some assurance that the loan will be back with interest- it is value to the loan.

Ask some bitcoin maxi's what is the difference between what Tether does and what the Federal Reserve does--- I really want to know why they don't like what the Fed does... but they love Tether.

This is meant for the bitcoin maxi's out there. 

Legal argument

Ownership

Copyright 

Patent 

Could be a good argument if you end up in a dispute in the courts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh7BTOPh5qM

Massive shortages and price controls coming

Review contract law

Invitation to treat

Auctions

Massive inflation, producing a lot less stuff, but with more money being printed, it causes price spikes and shortages. Gov reaction to price control will make it worse.  Price gouging law is different however than the gov setting prices.

Ebay - no reserved price- cannot be considered price gouging

Technically all price gouging cases should use the invitation to treat concept to fight price gouging allegations, because any advertised price should be argued that it is just that - not a listed price.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVT_fpz-6KM&ab_channel=AnthonyMarinac

Gold storage device

https://www.totenpass.com/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIitpIDfRbo&ab_channel=Goldmatters

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weWM1xk2eOo

https://worldcoin.org/

You can't replace your idea of UBI with a currency that you just made out of thin air. 

The people that get the coin first will benefit maybe from hype. 

I have already discussed why wash trading NFTs are not illegal in previous podcast and will not discuss here. At least not illegal yet and why they aren't likely to be found illegal or have much risk.

This works just like Uniswap-- it attracts liquidity and it provides a service-- instead of exchange- it does wash trading services for people that want to make and sell NFTs.

I haven't quite figured out the mechanics of it as far as account creation and wallets on NFT marketplaces. I haven't figured out how any of this could work- just talking outloud about some ideas.

Someone makes and NFT that they want wash traded. They sent eth to the DAO. Then the DAO buys the NFT with its liquidity. The DAO might trade it within itself if possible. Or...

Someone buys the NFT from the DAO with their own account from the outside-- the DAO then pays them 'back' but the guy still holds the NFT. The guy would have to initially deposit some funds in the DAO, or he could just profit when a real buyer comes along and not have to give any of back to the DAO.

What would people think about this if it was loud about it? Is Chainanalysis tracking this? How hard is it to track?

If you think this is unethical, you do not know how such high valuations for 'rare' NFTs are created. Even if you don't like NFTs, the best thing to do is to sell short, meaning sell into the market. 

This is a legitimate use case and it could be very profitable. I think if it makes money for liquidity providers they will contribute liquidity- they won't care how the profits are found. Anything goes when code is law.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2102.07001.pdf