Subnostr

Mike Benz is clearly a crazy piece of shit who doesn't actually understand the nature of trade. When others get rich we get rich, destabilization never helps with anything unkess the goal is theft & authoritarian control. But this episode of Tucker is really interesting.

https://fountain.fm/episode/wJD97c9BB9v7JvVgmapw

mrclownworld 11mo ago

Totally disagree with you on Benz. He’s not saying what he personally believes, he’s playing devil’s advocate, after hundreds of podcast appearances where he decries the villainy of what we do to other countries.

And his point is not that materials from all over the world wouldn’t be available to America in a free and open situation, he’s arguing that they might be a lot more expensive (I.e. America’s prosperity has been subsidized by cheap debt and aggressive foreign policy)

And he’s only arguing this, again, after sounding the alarm on hundreds of podcast about what USAID does and why it’s (mostly) not good for America

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Jeff Swann 11mo ago

Success breeds copycats. If the US had simply been a beacon of freedom instead of actively working to destroy other free & prosperous countries trade & sound money would have made everything far cheaper. He is just plain wrong. The only thing that makes stuff more expensive is money printing & a lack of production due to destabilization. The US literally does one to fund the other.

mrclownworld 11mo ago

I generally agree with everything you’re saying, and I suspect from listening to Mike Benz a lot, he would too. What you’re saying is totally compatible with what he’s saying.

I think what he is essentially suggesting is that American Foreign Policy has arguably been a form of theft, making things cheaper for Americans (and the West) for the last 80 years. In the long run, free markets and cooperation makes everything cheaper for everyone. In the short term, theft can make it a lot cheaper for some at the expense of others. And ending a theft program can make it more expensive in the short term for those accustomed to being beneficiaries of theft. He’s essentially warning there could be unexpected consequences to stopping the theft.

I don’t think he’s advocating for the foreign policy of the last 80 years, just suggesting that it may have benefitted Americans (albeit unjustly and certainly unequally). It’s still a violation of property rights and certainly democratic freedoms, so it’s wrong. And I think he would agree.

TLDR this subset of Mike Benz’s thinking is not fully representative of his views.