Rafi Phil Discuss Silver Charity Post End Game Yield Curve and Talmud
Summary
➡ If debt becomes worthless and gold replaces it, a global banking crisis could occur, forcing banks to reset their balance sheets. This could lead to a demand for physical gold, causing issues as most gold is stored in large bars in Fort Knox. The banks would need to melt and redistribute the gold, but with banks out of business, this could cause a liquidity problem. In the meantime, silver and copper could become the daily trading currency until banks can reestablish themselves, which could take up to five to ten years.
➡ The speaker discusses the potential for global conflict and economic crisis, suggesting that these events could lead to drastic changes in society and the economy. They believe that despite these challenges, humanity’s knowledge and technology will help us recover faster than in past crises. They also discuss the role of silver in the economy, suggesting it could become more important in a post-crisis world. Lastly, they touch on the concept of the yield curve in economics, explaining how it can indicate the health of an economy.
➡ The article discusses the financial concept of the yield curve and its inversion, which is often seen as a sign of an upcoming recession. The author explains that the inversion is not the cause of a recession, but an indicator that the Federal Reserve is in panic mode. The Federal Reserve can try to “uninvert” the yield curve by lowering short-term rates, but this can lead to inflation. The author also discusses the concept of charity from a religious perspective, emphasizing the importance of work and limiting charity to a maximum of 20% of one’s income.
➡ The speaker discusses the concept of charity, taxation, and societal roles. They argue that paying 20% of one’s income to the government is akin to slavery, and that giving more than 20% in charity can create a class of people who rely on handouts. They suggest that it’s better to employ people, giving them a sense of purpose and dignity. They also touch on the importance of taking care of one’s parents, and discuss misconceptions about Jewish laws and traditions.
➡ The text discusses Jewish laws and their application in business dealings between Jews and non-Jews. It explains that while Jews are obligated to be honest and fair with each other, the same rules don’t necessarily apply when dealing with non-Jews. However, it’s not about exploiting non-Jews, but rather about the lack of enforcement mechanisms outside the Jewish community. The text also differentiates between robbery and theft, and discusses the obligation to return lost items within the Jewish community. Lastly, it suggests that returning lost items to non-Jews can be seen as a way to enhance the reputation of the Jewish community.
➡ Rabbi Shiman bin Shattach bought a donkey but returned a gem found with it, showing honesty and faithfulness. This story suggests it’s good to return lost items to non-Jews if it promotes God’s name. However, if under attack, it’s better not to return their resources. The speaker also predicts a financial crisis similar to 2008, with signs like a clog in the system and recession indicators. He believes the crisis could lead to the death of the dollar in a few months, followed by a rebuilding phase. He plans to go offline when the crisis starts, hoping to work in Israel’s treasury. He invites everyone to make sacrifices at the temple once it reopens, although only priests can enter the temple itself.
Transcript
You should do that and get off the phones and get off the computers and be in three dimensional space. So Phil, I hope you enjoyed your hike and what is, what is going on on your end of the world? We were just discussing before I started recording that it feels like everything is falling apart at a faster and faster pace and like violence could break out anytime, everywhere simultaneously. And we want to be ready for that. Not with a whole bunch of weapons but with tools for exchange for people who won’t be able to make exchanges if that happens.
So after our camping trip we drove back. We swung by a cracker barrel on the way home and I don’t eat out very much after. What’s a cracker barrel? I don’t know what that is. You know what a cracker barrel is? I’ve heard the name but I don’t know what it is. It’s like Applebee’s but its theme is like american in like the forties and fifties. So it’s all like, you know, it’s like the ads from like the walls are adorned with ads from Nabisco from like the forties and fifties and stuff like that. Little girls have pretty curls.
But I like Oreo. Girls are nice, but boy, what icing comes with Oreo and cigarette. Like lucky strike cigarettes, like Johnny rockets. Yeah, yeah, it’s kind of like that. But it’s more homey. It’s not um, it’s not like a diner. It’s more, it’s more going for like a, like a country store. It’s this, the, is the motif. It’s very schlocky. Like, it is very, very schlocky. But they do serve, they do serve at least a pastiche of american home, you know, like home style cooking from the good old days of America. Okay, but it is fascinating, I mean it’s fascinating that you can tell that was a prosperous time and that the restaurant is trying to capture the motif of the prosperity.
And that, like, something’s missing because it’s all like plastic. Like it’s the, like the decorations on the wall, they’ll be like old gas cans and stuff like that. And you’re like, that was, you know, you have the feeling like, oh, that was a time when America was very short of itself and we are no longer. But the reason I brought this up was I covered this on my research. I don’t eat out much. Before COVID we ate quite a bit, but during COVID we just stayed home. This is pain in the ass to go out. And we also discovered, a, we saved a ton of money and b, we really liked it.
Like, we enjoyed cooking and spending time with each other at home and stuff. So we just really stopped going out. But coming back from there, we actually stopped by a cracker barrel. And I hadn’t been in a restaurant in very long time. And the bill was substantially higher than I remember. And I looked, I was going through it and it was like $4 for an iced tea. It was like $4 for an iced tea. And this is. We discuss inflation every single day. And still I was caught off guard just this deep. I had this deep visceral reaction to iced tea being $4 when I know it should be one dollar fifty cents to two dollars max.
Right. So it’s this, you know, even, even with my thorough understanding of what’s happening, you still get, you still get caught off guard when reality smacks you in the face. Yeah, it happens to me too, because I’ve been preparing my family for this, particularly my wife who does the shopping for years. I’m like, look, for food prices are going to go up here, especially here, because there’s a war and, and Turkey is embargoing us and not trading with us anymore. And there’s going to be more countries that cut us off. That happens. And there really nothing we can do about it.
But grocery price are going to go up. And even though I’m rooting for it because I know that we have to get through this part in order to get to the end, it still hurts. And I’m still cutting back on other things that I didn’t cut back on a year or two ago. Like I used to buy a beer a week for Shabbat. I bought a nice beer for Shabbat dinner, but now I’m not doing that. And that’s probably better for me. But I still miss it. And, you know, it’s. The inflation hurts. Even if you, even if you’re rooting for it, even if you want it in your intellect, you don’t want it in your emotions.
Well, why don’t you buy 100 beers now and then drink one a week so that will stop the. You’ll have locked in. I could theoretically do that, but, you know, I know myself, and having a hundred beers in my house is not a good idea for me. Okay, you keep it limited. Okay, guys, hurry up. The magic bridge is back. How long do we think silver will stay remonetized in parentheses? You have. I think it actually might be quite a while, the more I think about it. What are you thinking about? Why are you thinking about it that way? And why is it being more and more in your head? I haven’t had really worked out how long it’s going to be, but I do know that the longer that we’re going to be using silver coins, the worse the initial.
That means the worst initial impact of the end game is going to be. So I’ve been thinking about this because you had a video, you put out several videos. You said it might be as. Might be as fast as a day or a few days. Where I think it’ll be longer than a few days. I’m just hoping. But it’s going to be longer than a few days. So I said, well, and I started thinking, well, how long? So let’s think about it. So let’s, let’s steal, man. Let’s steel, man. The fed here in the treasury, so they’ve got, they’ve got a full 8300 tons of gold.
It’s all there, it’s all accounted for and there’s no liens on it. Or they’re just going to give the finger to anyone who calls in the liens and say, sorry, no, we’re going to. We didn’t actually mean you could have the gold when we loaned it out to you. We just meant you could say you had it. So let’s say they default on that. They keep it in there and they’re going to re, they’re going to reestablish the currency when the current dollar dies. And we’ll call the new currency the new dollar. Right. So the first problem is the gold is in huge bar forms.
Well, sorry, let me, let me run this a second. The derivatives, the new dollar is going to be 100% backed by gold. Let’s say it’s $100 equals one asset, gold, just for simplicity. Right? And they start issuing these new dollars. What are people going to do the second they get their hands on new dollars after a global hyperinflation where all paper currencies in the world at the same time collapse? Okay, they’re going to exchange gold. I’m going to try to simplify this and continue where you left off. And I’m just simplifying the reasoning, the logical changes made.
So if we follow Daniel Oliver’s logic, that in 1980, at $650, the dollar was on a gold standard by the market, because the market value of the gold that you steal, man, that was on the Fed’s balance sheet, equaled 100% of the Fed’s other liabilities. That was an overshot. That was an overshoot even back then, because the remaining debt on the Fed’s balance sheet still had value, because it was still possible to pay those high interest rates. And even then, even in a situation where it was possible to service that debt, the market still insisted for a few days on 100% gold backing.
So this time, if it’s going to be worse and all of the bonds on the Fed’s balance sheet really go to market value of zero, that means that the remaining gold on its balance sheet will have to balance out the rest of its liabilities, which are the dollar, the paper dollars that are on the other side of the assets by 100%, which means that the other assets are worthless, because otherwise gold wouldn’t have to compensate 100% for them. What would happen is they wouldn’t even have to issue new dollars. There just be dollars, and then that most of the debt would be worthless and gold would take its place as backing the remaining dollars.
But what you would have is a serious global banking crisis where none of the banks in the world would be able to work with their current balance sheets, and they’d all have to reset based on this new dollar. And then the question is, how do all the countries reorganize their financial affairs without mass riots? So the only reason I said they were making new dollars, because it could be too many zeros, but going to gold, now you’re talking. What I think we said $50,000 in ounce or something like that, that would be around 100%. Yeah. Yeah.
So it’s gonna be probably too many zeros. Maybe they want to keep it that way. I don’t know. That’s irrelevant. The number of zeros is irrelevant. Whether they make a new dollar or use the existing dollar and just pay it back to gold, what are people going to do? They’re going to say, I want the gold like I don’t trust this paper. I’m never going to trust it again for the rest of my life. Now, maybe they will change their mind later, but in the initial aftermath, they say, I don’t want paper ever again in my life, I want the gold.
There’s logical, there’s immediate problems. First off, all the gold is in giant bars at Fort Knox. They’re going to have to melt it down and then redistribute it. Now, how are they going to redistribute it? All the banks, like you just said, are out of business. Wells Fargo is gone, bank of America is gone. They’re all gone because they didn’t have any money in them. And a bank is a place where you store your money. Now, the buildings are still there, new banks can show up, but this initial blast is going to be, there’s no banks to go to to exchange your dollars in and get the gold, and the banks that will be there won’t have the gold.
So there’s this liquidity problem immediately where just all the gold, the gold was originally widely distributed, and then the geniuses in the thirties decided, let’s all put it in one single building in giant bars and make it as illiquid as we possibly can. Yeah. So there’s going to be a, there’s going to be a reliquefying problem. And I don’t think the, I don’t think they can do what they did in the thirties where they just said, oh, just, just use the notes, we’ll keep the bars here and they represent the notes. But, you know, you can’t, you can’t physically change it.
I don’t think the market’s going to buy that. I really don’t. Maybe I’m wrong. Well, I think, I think you’re right about that. But they wouldn’t, they wouldn’t be exchanging gold with the Fed, they’d be exchanging gold with whoever has any at the 100, at around the 100% backing market rate. And then you would see what they’d want to redeem the notes for the gold. Yeah, yeah. They’d have to redeem, they’d have to change, you’d have to go to a coin shop or monetary metals or miles Franklin or whatever, and then get some gold and use that.
But then the exchange rate would, assuming that bonds have all gone to zero or something close to it, and they’re effectively worthless, that nobody wants them, then demonstrably you have people going to coin shops and buying gold because they don’t want the paper, but eventually the exchange rate would balance out at somewhere around 50,000, assuming bonds are worthless. And then I think maybe the paper. This is the best case scenario. I could be wrong. I’m just trying to figure out possibilities here. Maybe the paper would still be functional at $50,000 an ounce, and then somebody would lop off three zeros or something.
It would have to be redeemable at some point in the chain. Like, at some point, you have to be able to show up at some door, whether it’s the Federal Reserve door itself or the banks, and say, here’s $50,000, give me an ounce of gold. Somebody has to take that note. That’s the only thing that gives it any value to. If you can’t exchange it anywhere, then monetary metals isn’t going to take. They’ll say, I’ll just keep the gold. I’m not going to take your paper in exchange for gold. So I think it’s going to have to be redeemable on some level.
Now, maybe you can’t show up with $50 and demand a grain of gold. Maybe you have to show up with enough to get a sizable chunk out of a bank. But I don’t know. I don’t know. We’ll see. The market will decide that one. But anyway, during this liquidity crunch, all the banks are gone or not functioning well, at a bare minimum, unable to service their clients very well. People are going to need something to trade with, and that is where silver and copper come in as the money of daily life. That’s when silver remonetizes and people start trading in that until the banks get their shit together.
Okay, so you’re saying, how long do you think it would take for the banks to get their shit together? That’s a good question. You said the more you think about it, the longer you think it’s going to take. Why? What’s your thought process? Yeah, well, that’s why. I mean, like, I just explained the decentralization process of the gold, because people are going to say, I want my gold redeemed. I want to be able to redeem the paper before I trusted it again. Right? So once they redeem and they have the gold in their house, and they’re like, well, it’s in my house now, and it’s dangerous.
So I think I want to put it back in a bank. So they take it back to the bank and get another note. Right. That process is going to take time to build the trust the bank has to rebuild and say, no, we’re not the Ponzi scheme. We were. Now, we are a firm, sound institution. Look, we have armed guards protecting your real money, which is gold in the bank. Come deposit, we’ll give you the notes. All that thing. They’re going to have to win the trust of the public back. So I’m thinking. I’m pulling a number out of my.
Out of my hat here, but I’m thinking, you know, five years, maybe ten years, 510 years. Okay, well, if we’re talking about. And of course, it’s not the collapse of the global banking system, we’re talking about the end of global wars, or at least the breaking up of wars from huge conflicts to little petty cross border skirmishes everywhere, which could be just as scary depending on how you look at it. But, I mean, personally, I’d rather have little border skirmishes between all these little countries than threat of nuclear war between Russia and NATO. It just seemed.
But then you could argue, like, who’s going to have the nuclear weapons? This is why I don’t. I don’t really think about nuclear weapons. I just leave that in God’s hands, because really, there’s nothing else I can do or think about it. Of the things that I can’t control, the least thing I can control is how Russia and NATO handle their nuclear arsenals. They’re not really, you know, talking to me about it. So, I mean, no, I will say this. Having. Having people that are on death’s doorstep with nothing left to lose, you know, with their finger on the nuclear button, is kind of scary because they know as soon as, you know, as soon as they’re out of power, like, their family’s gonna be prosecuted and they’re, you know, they have no more access to power.
Like, you know, it is a little scary. Five years. I don’t think it’s going to take five years. I think it’s going to take about a year, because if I imagine how I would be motivated with the. The amount of silver I have, and I don’t have a crazy amount of silver. I have, like, enough for a year’s worth of expenses at, you know, at, let’s say, 25, $30 an ounce in today’s dollar terms, right. Not a huge amount, but, you know, more than most people, apparently. So what. What I would do if I suddenly saw a 15 to one ratio, which would signal the end game, I don’t think there’s anything, any recovering from a 15 to one ratio this time, then I would.
I would spend it all as fast as I could because there’s no reason to hoard the silver. Absolutely. Once it hits 15 to one, it’s not going to go any. It wouldn’t be just me. It would be like people taking their kiddush cups and their candlesticks and their silverware and just buying anything they can get with it. And it would just blast out, which is what? But because we’re so trained to have not a 15 to one ratio, and for it to last for such a short period of time that it would encourage this blast of silver out into the econo sphere, and then the ratio would go back up to maybe like 30, 40 to one pretty quickly.
I mean, that’s. I don’t know. That’s how I’m seeing it. Maybe I could be. I could be totally wrong about that. I don’t. I don’t. I don’t know. I think I would personally be. I would. I’m saying I’d personally be motivated to jettison my. Almost my entire silver horde to get what I could. I totally agree with you there. There’s. There’s no reason to keep it. You should. You should, and it helps. The more silver that’s flowing, the less this is going to suck anyway. So you should definitely discourage your silver. But the question is, how long will it take? You know, once you’ve bought your.
Once you’ve bought your mansions and your, you know, your porsche and all that stuff, you know, how long before you can actually drive the Porsche down the street without experiencing gunfire? I don’t think it’s going to take five years. And I guess I could base this loosely on some religious texts, like, when the mashiach comes, it’s gonna lead to, like, about a year of war and then a calming down. And that could. There’s, like, there’s sources in the Talmud about this, about it takes about a year for things to calm down. And we already see, we were discussing, like, war is about to break out everywhere between Russia and NATO, possibly, and we’re looking at a possible civil war developing in the United States.
If the blue team cheats or the blue team accuses the red team of cheating or whatever, they’re both accusations going to fly every way. And depending on what states are going to line up and what they think they can accomplish, you could have some, maybe secession, I don’t know. And some violence, and violence is breaking out here all the time, and we’re always threatening to invade Lebanon. It could happen tomorrow. But, yeah, there’s a huge war, world war, global war, that’s just simmering, and it’s going to blow up. And hopefully that will coincide with also the monetary crisis and how we can get all this stuff done at the same time because everything’s linked anyway.
And hopefully it won’t take more than a year to calm down. From your lips to God’s ears, I guess. Yeah, I would prefer everything to go back even, you know, even if we get five years of silver at 15 to one, and people like us do very, very well in that scenario, I would much prefer we get back to functioning civilization because then youre talking. Its hard to get the electricity bill. Its hard to keep electricity running on the silver standard or with silver moving, I should say, with having to pay in physical coinage because the utility man has to come physically to your door, take the silver out of your hand, put it into his coffers and then drive away.
They did do it. That’s how they did it in the past. But it’s not as efficient. But also the entire structure of the global economy is going to have to change drastically these extremely concentrated and centralized food production pieces of capital and the way that we produce massive amounts of, of food and what I can only think of food, but like everything is centralized or construction material, anything, it’s all extremely centralized. But is it centralized physically or is it just centralized through ownership? Or is it this or is it both? Or is that the same thing? I don’t really understand that much about the actual structure of the centralization to comment that much on it.
Well, at least for farming, I mean, you talk about these giant combines instead of a, you know, a small farmer with his tractor. Right? So, and you need, you need the land to rep, you need the land to make the combine worth it. And you need the combine to make, you know, to actually get all that land harvested. So if we break up into, you know, small, if the farm parcels break up into small yeoman farmers again, then they all have to get much smaller, much smaller combines and, you know, farm their, from their local land.
And, yeah, then you’re talking, yeah, you are talking about, you know, not enough, not certainly lean times compared to what we’ve seen before. But, you know, I mean, you know, people, people lived in the Soviet Union for 80 years. They didn’t, you know, they didn’t thrive, but, you know, you survive. You make it work. If, if they can get through that, then we can get through. We can get through this. So then why the dark ages? Why did they last a thousand years? That’s a good question. That’s a very good question. It seems like when something blows apart, maybe it takes a while to congeal.
I think in our advanced state, I think we can congeal much faster. I don’t think it’s going to be a thousand years, if that makes sense. Now, look, if we blow ourselves back to the 17 hundreds, then yeah, but we’re also going to have a 17 hundreds population, and that’s gonna be, that’s gonna be grim. So let’s not dwell on that too much. But I think, look, I mean, the satellites are still up there. The buildings are all gonna stop their orbit. Orbits are gonna break down. There’s a shower of space junk hitting everybody. Yeah, I mean, we still have, you know, the books are all written.
We understand how fit, you know, I mean, I guess part of the problem is the fall of Rome was like, you know, the libraries were burned and that was where the, that’s where the knowledge was. Well, the priests, the priests. I think the catholic priests saved the lot. Yeah, they did. They did. So, I mean, you know, you can, you can, you can keep things. I think we can keep the knowledge base and the tech base. I don’t think we’re going back into a dark, I mean, we. Compared to the hedonistic life we’re living right now.
We’re like, you can have avocados on. You can have avocado toast on demand. Yeah, I think that’s probably going away. I think you’re going to have, wherever you are, much more local food. Um, and that may not include avocados. So, yeah, you know, that, that the joy of that is probably going away, at least for quite some time. But are you going to have no food? I don’t, I don’t think so. So, yeah, I think that. I think the desperation will quickly break up the capital that needs to be broken up, and the, the explosion of silver into the monetary system will provide the people who can make the capital make smaller pieces.
And it should, it’ll take some time, but, yeah, it’s not going to take 1000 years, and I don’t think it’s going to take five. I’m betting on a year, maybe two. You relentless optimist here. Okay, so let me ask you this. Do you think. I think Silver’s going to stay money or stay monetized for quite some time after that as well, even at 30 or 40 to one, rather than, you know, 15 to one, because I think there will still be, it’ll be like, you know, it’ll be like America in the 1940s, right? There were gold certificates, but there, people still use the coinage of silver to break down the golden.
Well, after this, the gold supply and the silver supply are going to be radically decentralized. And what I’m hoping to see is competing gold and silver, money derivatives and private money derivatives. And then you have just competition between the derivatives. And then when you have competition, the most honest derivative wins. That’s just how it works in every industry. Unless the government comes in and subsidizes its buddies, and then the whole thing starts over again, as it often does. Yeah. All right, we want to move on to yield curve, right? Right. So let’s go over the yield curves.
You’re still being peppered with questions that imply that everyone gets it. And I especially liked your analogy of the yield curve, that it doesn’t make any economic sense to loan out money for a longer period for less interest because we’re all mortal and we’re all going to die. But you can. But what the central bank can do is it can presumably, or make it look like it’s breaking economic law. Just like when you throw a ball up in the air, it looks like there’s no gravity. But then eventually gravity takes over. So that helped me understand it.
So, yeah, the yield curve right now is normalizing. I’ll share a graphic of this. The ten year minus two year. It’s all just arbitrary. Whatever spread you pick, if it’s below zero, then short or long term rates are lower than short term rates. And if it’s above zero, then long term rates are higher than short term rates. So really in a stable economy, it should just go weekly up and down with a very low amplitude at whatever the rate of profit is, let’s say one, 2% or whatever it should be, and not going radically up and down like this, and especially never below zero.
So this is just evidence that natural forces are fighting the central bank. And the central bank is fighting natural forces. That’s what it shows. What’s your commentary on this chart over here? Well, I noticed the news and then financial, financial, YouTube was all, they were all abuzz about the yield curve uninverting. And they’re saying this is 100% sign of a recession. And the yeoman’s takeaway, like, if you were not fully understanding what was happening, the takeaway would be, well, don’t let the yield curve uninvert. You’re going to keep the yield curve inverted, otherwise we’re going to have a recession.
That’s not going to work. And my point, the point I made that the channel was that’s like the inversion of the curve itself is a defiance of nature and it cannot be avoided. And if you did nothing, the fed was like, no, we’re going to keep an inverted, what’s going to happen is you’re going to get a massive sell off on the long term bonds when there’s liquidity. So if you think of it, when people are holding long term debt and then the short term debt ends up higher, they hold onto their long term debt because they think, oh, this is just a temporary blip, it’s going to go back down.
But the longer they hold the line, the longer the fed holds the line here in the short term, debts gets more and more expensive. The more money theyre losing, the more money theyre losing. Exactly right. And eventually theres a liquidity crunch, and then they panic and they say, fine, just sell everything. And thats when the long term bonds yields also skyrocket because the long term bonds are being tossed as well. Now usually before then, the fed starts cutting rates. And thats what they call the bear steepener. Everyones talking about the bull and the bear steepener. The bear steepener is a panic sell off to uninvert the yield curve because nature is being defied and nature will not be defied forever.
The bull steepener is when the Fed says, you know what, never mind, we’re going to slam rates back down and they uninvert on this side. And that’s when the part that’s, oh, have another part. That’s what’s called bull steepener because let’s have another party. And it’s usually some combination of the two that causes the yield curve to re invert. But that is a sure sign of an imminent keynesian recession. The yield curve un inverting does not cause the recession. What’s happening is the Fed is in full panic mode. That’s why they slammed the interest rates back down to zero, because there’s a recession slamming into them.
So the unadversion is not causal to the recession. It’s just an indicator, it’s a correlated indicator of a recession. Continue. Yeah, yeah. So on that topic, how does the fed uninvert the yield curve? By pushing low, by pushing short term rates down? Yes, exactly right. Yes, yes. By going back. The only one they have direct control over is the federal funds rate. Now, they can, I think they can buy, they can buy treasuries and stuff if they want to, but they try to avoid that because that is extremely inflationary. It is extremely inflationary, and here’s the proof of it.
This is the fed’s balance sheet. Right. But this is just the treasuries on its balance sheet. Right. So we see here from 2002 to 2008 or 2007, it’s going up in that same relentless, inexorable way, just very slowly, higher and higher as they accumulate more and more treasuries, because the debt needs to always rise and the money supply needs to rise with the debt, because debt and money are two sides of the same fiat paper. And then look what happened in 2008. So the amount of treasuries actually went significantly down. This looks like QT, doesn’t it? But it’s not QE.
QE was what was happening over here in March 2008. Right. We’re all familiar with the huge spike up in balance sheet around this time. But here is specifically when treasuries, long term treasuries, were going down on its balance sheet, because they were trying to balance it out. They thought they were going to buy this commercial paper, huge amounts of commercial paper, all this other stuff. They needed to. They need to make more liquidity, but they did it by selling off treasuries at that time in order to make their balance sheet look a little bit less crazy.
So they were buying the mortgages and selling us treasuries? Yeah, that’s what they were doing. They were trying to balance it out somewhat. They were being somewhat conservative and a little bit rational there. Looks like they gave up. Here’s Qe two, maybe, and then Qe three, and then, I don’t know, operations sounds probably twist. Oh, this is twist or this is three? I don’t know. There’s twists and there’s three. Like one, two, three twisted. Do we tear the house down? What’s the difference in QE and Operation Twist? I mean, did anything functionally differ between Operation Twist and Qe two? Yeah, Operation Twist, that I think they were selling short term and buying long term with the proceeds.
So they were twisting. Yeah, yeah. I think Peter Schiff called it operations screw, but that’s his line. That’s about right. So anyway, when the Fed starts buying treasuries en masse, that is that. That’s how the Mississippi bubble blew in. The John law’s Mississippi bubble in, I think it was pre revolutionary France. I’m pretty sure it was like during. Yes, 1720. I think this is. This is the. This is the exact same scam as the Mississippi bubble. So if you read the Mississippi bubble, if you read about it, you will understand what’s. What happened is just on a much bigger scale, but it’s the exact same scam.
You can’t. The way a scam works is that you get other, you get other suckers to buy into your scam. If you have to buy the paper yourself, like if you have to buy the notes of the scam yourself, then the scam falls apart because you’re the scam artist. You need other people to buy it. You can’t buy your own paper. Right. But the fed does buy its own paper and it seems to elongate the scam every time it does it. But every time it elongates it, it’s a shorter elongation than the time before. It’s illusory.
Yeah, it’s illusory. So what they temporarily do is cause a boost of confidence, but each time they do it, it’s less effective than the time they do it before. And eventually it all just goes to nothing. Yeah. That’s why my thesis is that the next time they do this, the next time they have to buy long term treasuries because there’s a huge clog somewhere. It’s going to be the last time. That’s going to be it. It’s going to be over and I think it’s going to be over quickly. I think Daniel Oliver is right. We’re going to go from like, let’s say 3000, 3500 wherever we’re going to be in a few months.
We’re going to go from there to maybe like for a week or two. We’ll go down to maybe 2000 in a panic and then all the way up to like 910 thousand or more. I think that’s what’s going to happen. So it’s, I don’t, yeah, I’m making myself nervous even talking about it. All right, let’s get into your religious books. They provide you a great deal of comfort and you know that talking to you makes me feel better as well. So. Well that’s good. Your next topic here is charity during and in the aftermath of the end game.
I’m curious what your religious texts say. I’m also wondering how useful charity is in general. Does it just create a class of mutism patrons or does it lead to a more prosperous society? So first of all, we are, we are strongly discouraged. Jews are strongly, just discouraged from making a living bumming and snoring money. It’s not ideal. You don’t want to do it. It is embarrassing and people should be embarrassed about it as a living. It should not happen. We’re commanded to work six days a week and rest on the 7th. If we’re not working six days a week.
That’s a problem. So it’s not ideal. And in terms of giving charity, there is a limit. We’re not supposed to make money and then give it all the way to charity and say, well, God, that’s a good deed. So you take care of me, and I’m just going to give away all of my belongings and all of my money. That, that’s. That’s crazy. And we’re not allowed to do that. The maximum that we are allowed to give to charity, no matter how much money we have, is 20%. Now, that there are ways to get around it.
If you’re like a multi billionaire and you want to set up a trust that, you know, that helps education or hospitals or whatever, you know, there’s ways around it if you want to set up vehicles. But in general, there weren’t, like, billionaires back 1502 thousand years ago. That’s also a function of the world we’re in. There were rich people, and there were some very rich people, but the maximum we’re supposed to give is 20%. And where do we get that from? One of the sources is that before the enslavement in Egypt, Joseph, after he took over the country, repeating pattern, Jews taking over countries and then getting enslaved.
It’s happening now. You know, we’re being accused of this. We’re being accused of taking over the world, and soon we’re going to be enslaved by different countries where, you know, if we’re not back home, and, you know, that’s a warning. I’m telling you now. So he, he instituted a 20% tax. It’s called chomesh, or one fifth. And he basically monopolized the entire silver supply. It belonged to Pharaoh. And then he. And then Pharaoh owned the entire country, and everyone was enslaved, and everyone had to give everyone. He gave everyone a plot of land to grow food and then said, a fifth of it is mine.
So 20%. So if you’re paying 20% to your king, to your government, you’re a slave. If you’re paying more than that, oh, boy, you know, which we all are. So we’re not allowed to give more than 20% in charity, and we have to give at least ten, no more than 20. And so that limits it. Like, there is a limit to how much charity can, can do. So we don’t want to make a class of people who bum around. That makes sense. And then the social, you know, the. In the old days of private charity, before the, you know, before the government was handing out welfare to everybody.
You had to, you know, you kind of had to do the shame ritual, right? You know, the guy had to go, you know, in front of his church or whatever and say, hey, I lost my job. I broke my leg and lost my job at the boilermakers, you know, and then can, can you pass my hat? Or. I’ve been a loyal member of this church for many years and I’ve helped out in the church. Can, you know, can everyone help me out? In the past, they had around, they raise some charity for. Right. That actually happened to my, that happened to my paternal great grandfather on, my, my grandmother’s father, he worked in the railyard, broke his leg, went on charity for a while.
This was in the Great Depression. And they lived on, they lived on very, very little. So, but, you know, once, once the government comes in, and part of this is the government needs to increase the debt, so what better way to increase the debt than to borrow from the taxpayers and, and dole it out to moochers? And they say, don’t have any shame in this. Just, you do whatever you need to do to take care of yourself. And here’s a bunch of free money, and there’s a bunch of economists who said, oh, let’s make a Ubi because that will maximize utility.
Rather than giving people food stamps, we’ll just give them cash and then they can do whatever they want with that. That’ll maximize utility. Right. But they’re not thinking like, economists have a tendency to get very autistic and not think about, like, the human element of creating. Oh, now we’re just got a bunch of moochers sitting around playing switch all day instead of going to do our day’s work. You know, I wouldn’t even call them economists. They’re just social engineers and they’re trying to create societies based on econometric gobbledygook equations. It’s just, it’s a different form of playing God.
I mean, you’re not, you’re not supposed to engineer societies. We have, we have a, we have a law. We have a natural law. We have, you know, you could argue we have a good, we have God’s law. Follow that. That’s it. So when the people who didn’t listen to you come knocking at your door in the end game begging you for silver, do you have a, do you have a percent in mind of how much you’re going to dole out, like in terms of charity maximum? Probably 20, 20%. Okay, so you have like 20% satisfaction? If I do any more than that.
If I do any more than that, it’s bad for them. That’s true. You know, so, I mean, I could. I could hire people. I mean, it’s not like people are going to lose their skills. Whatever skills they have. I can pay them. I can. I can gather capital. I’d be willing to do that. But, yeah, I’m not going to give more than 20% away. I shouldn’t. Yeah. Nobody should. Yeah. So don’t feel I supported. I mean, I’m thinking also, this is advice for the viewers, like, you know, if you can employ. It’s actually better if you can employ people, if you can say, hey, mow my lawn or something, because then they don’t feel like total losers and bombs.
Either they feel like they did, you know, you know, they painted your house or they stood behind you with a palm font frond and fanned you for a while. Right. People. People are going to. People are going to be losing. They’re going to have lost confidence in themselves and their entire paths in life, and it’ll be up to us to try to regain. Help them regain some of that confidence so that they can be part of whatever new division of labor exists. And the best way to do that is to hire them, not give them charity.
Yeah. Okay. All right. And if there’s, you know, if there’s. Now, let me ask you this. Would. Would you consider taking care of your parents charity? Or is that just like, let’s say your parents lose everything? No, no. That. That’s under a. That’s under a completely different mitzvah that’s honoring your father, mother and father. Okay. So whatever you give them is not charity, it’s your obligation. Yeah. I’m not going to tell my parents. Tough luck. Thanks for taking care of me and, you know, sending me to George Mason, but, yeah. Good luck, guys. Yeah, absolutely. Don’t give more than 20% and don’t feel guilty.
If you give only ten is your obligation and 20 is the max. That’s all. Don’t take any farther than that. All right. Finally, we had. So I have been many people, and the viewers have probably been on the Internet before, and when you’ve been on the Internet, you will run into people who don’t care for the jews very muCh. And they will. They cite the Talmud. They take passages out of the Talmud and. Or they make up passage. Mostly. It’s mostly made up. It’s like, I’ve looked through these sheets. It’s about 80, 90%, totally fabricated. Completely.
And about ten to 20% which have a basis in truth and totally taken out of context. And that’s pretty much the slits. It’s like an 80 20 split. So there’s one, before we get into the financial one, there’s one that’s really prominent, and it’s like sex among gentiles is like sex among cattle. Some rabbi said somewhere. And upon, you know, the initial. The initial. The initial reading of that is like, well, that’s pretty derogatory to other people. But if you read what they. And I think you explain it to me, what they are talking about is the virginity of Jewish girls and how important that is for their.
For your religious needs, you know, marrying high priest or something. Is there any other reason to. I mean, just. Also just to stay pure, but. Well, I think we had the discussion, and I think it cited page 76 b of Sanhedrin or something. And then I looked. I looked through that daf, and I didn’t see anything related to sex with animals compared to sex with gentiles. I’ve never heard of any source like that. Okay, so this is a made up one. All right, never mind. I said theoretically, like, if you would have a discussion in the Talmud about, let’s say, the rape of children, right? And then the conclusion being that, you know, raping a girl below the age of three, theoretically, she’s still a virgin after that rape because her hymen grows back.
This is a legal category. It’s not. So you could read that one way. Oh, well, jews encourage the rape of two year old girls. Or you can. It’s. We’re defining what virginity is through the most extreme possible cases, so that we can create a legal framework for things that we have to deal with when dealing with sexual issues. Well, what that. What that law is actually saying, as I think you. You explained to me, was that it. The girl should not be punished as somebody who has lost her virginity because she was molested as a child, as a very small child.
Yeah, yeah, right. So this is actually. This is actually victim protection laws. But, you know, it’s not reading that. It’s open season on everyone’s children. And the. Even the one with the sex among the gentiles, assuming it’s real, is sex among the gentiles the same as sex among cattle or something like that? The reason they are saying that is that they’re saying maybe it’s an. If it is real, we’ll have to figure out if it’s real or not. But if it is real, maybe it’s indelicately. Worded. But what they’re saying is that our jewish laws are talking about Jews.
We don’t care about the virginal status of gentile women because they’re not our women. So that’s for you. That’s for you people to decide if you care about that or not. That’s not our business. That’s sort of what. That’s the way I. That’s the way I interpreted what they were. What the. What I think what you said they were saying. So anyway, let’s go to the market here. So there are tracks in there about how to. How jews and gentiles deal with each other. And there are a bunch of laws that the Jews must treat each other in ways that they do not have to treat gentiles.
And the initial reading of that is that it’s like the happy merchant meme. We’re like, yes, do what you will with the goyim. But if you read it another way, the way I read it, the way I understand it, the rabbis are saying, we have social enforcement mechanisms within our community. So if you go to sell your car, that your car was in a bomb blast, right? And you put some putty on over the holes, and then you repaint it and you go sell your cars as. As new or good as new. He’s not speaking theoretically.
Literally. My car was bombed. Yeah. Yes. Your car has a bunch of shrapnel in it. So you putty it over and then you paint it. You know, you paint over the holes and then you go sell it as new. And then the guy buys it a little bit, you know, a week later, the LPG tank blows up and he can go to. Under this talmudic law, he can go to the rabbis and say, he sold me a car with shrapnel holes in it. He didn’t tell me. And they can make you whole. They can make him whole.
They can say, rafi, you shouldn’t have done that. You have to recompensate him for the lemon you sold him. What they’re saying is that we have no enforcement mechanism among gentiles. We cannot go to a gentile. Especially, this is written the roman times. This was written a few. Like, it’s. That’s a hard question for the dark ages in a certain time. Doesn’t mean that the law existed way, way before that. Right? Well, my point is they can’t. They can’t go to Caesar and be like, hey, Caesar, you know, Vittorio over here sold Shmuel a, you know, a rabid donkey.
We want to. He needs refunds. He’s gonna say, no, we don’t care about you. So what they’re saying is we have no. We have no enforcement mechanisms, we have no market enforcement mechanisms for fair trade on the outside of our community. So you are on your own. Now. That goes both ways. It just means we’re not getting involved. So if you sell your car to a gentile, you know, that’s none of our business. And the gentile needs to do a full examination of the car. And if he buys it, then he buys it, and good luck to him.
So I’ll simplify this, and then I’ll just show you the sources in plain Hebrew and English. Look, there’s three issues here. There’s stealing. There’s two kinds of stealing. There’s robbery and theft. Robbery is out in the open. Theft is in private, and there’s different laws regarding each of them. There’s also returning lost objects and being upfront in business, completely upfront, returning last objects, is Hashava Saveda. And Jews have a special obligation to return lost objects to each other. That means you have a lost and found. You announce things, whereas if you’re in a gentile city or a non jewish city and there’s like, a.
You know, there’s an object that you would have to announce in a jewish neighborhood, you don’t have to. You could just take it. It’s yours. You know, this is not taking into account the law of the land in that place, but in Jewish law, you do not have to return a lost object to a gentile. There’s no. There’s no inion of that, because the verse says Lachica to your brother, you return lost objects, which excludes Goyen. The other thing is being upfront in business or CAUsinG an error, or if you see a gentile doing error in a MarKet exchange, you don’t have to correct him.
You don’t have to go out of your way to correct him. But you can’t make him make that mistake. You can’t mislead him purposely. I’ll just read the sources here. This is a digested version or a digested version of the Talmud by the Rambam, by Maimonides, who basically, systematically went through both Talmuds, the Jerusalem Talmud and the Babylonian Talmud. There’s two of them. And he organized everything conceptually in 14 books. So this is basically the conclusions, the halachic conclusions of the Talmud regarding theft and robbery from gentiles and Jews. So this is law one, chapter one of the laws of Gzeila.
Aveda of robbery and lost items. So I’ll just read the English here. I’ll skip the Hebrew. It says, whoever robs an object worth a puta, which is like two and a half cents from a copper, maybe $0.03 now, because of inflation, it’s a copper piece from a colleague, transgresses the negative commandment. As Leviticus 1913 says, do not rob. Violation of his negative. Negative is not punished by lashes, because it can be corrected by the fulfillment of a positive commandment, which is returning the money. Right? Returning what you stole. If you violate something that can be corrected theoretically, then you don’t get whipped.
Whipping is only for things that can’t correct. If a person robs, he is obligated to return what he obtained by robbery. As it says in 523, he shall return the article he obtained by robbery. This is a positive commandment. Now, in two, it says here it is forbidden to rob even the slightest amount. That means even less than a pruta, even less than you would have to pay back. It’s still forbidden to rob even a penny, even less than the minimum amount. You don’t have to pay it back, but it’s still forbidden to do that. It’s forbidden even to rob or withhold money from a gentile who worships idols.
If one robs or withholds money from such a person, one must return it. Simple. Okay? That’s the conclusion. You cannot rob gentiles. Next in except in San Francisco, under $900. Yeah. So this is about stealing. The other was about open theft. Lashes are not administered for the violationist commandment. For this is also about theft. This is not open robbery. This is theft. It’s different. The Torah requires the thief to compensate the party for him he stole. Whether he be a jew or a gentile, an adult or a minor, doesn’t matter who you steal from. You cannot do it.
Okay, so that should settle that. And nobody disagrees with the rambam here. The difference is in lost objects. So here it says in chapter eleven, Halacha three, it is permissible to keep an object lost by an idolater, because deuteronomy 22 three speaks of returning an object lost by your brother. Indeed, if one such honorable transgressions of prohibition, for one strengthens the power of the wicked peoples of the world, so returning a lost object to an idol worshipper, you’re not supposed to do that, because then you’re making him richer. And if you don’t have to, then you shouldn’t.
But if, however, one returns it to sanctify God’s name so that others will praise the jewish people and know that they are trustworthy. This is praiseworthy. So basically, we’re dealing with a situation here of if the goyim are nice and there’s no problem with them, then you should return their lost objects, because then it will increase our name among the Gentiles. But if we’re dealing with hostile, still people, there’s no reason to go out of your way to return their objects when you don’t have to do that. Right. Okay. So the last thing I’m going to do here is this is a story that is actually pertinent today because it talks about Arabs.
Okay? This is Dvarim rabba. This is not halachic, but it is. What do you call that stories? Exegesis on deuteronomy. This is going off on some verse. You don’t have to get into what verse it is, but it’s telling a story. There was an incident involving Rabbi Shiman ben Shaitach. So this is around the time of the late hashemite dynasty, the late hasmonean dynasty. So Shiman ben Shattach was the head of the rabbinical court at the time when Alexander geneus or Alexander Yanai was king from the hasmonean dynasty. And one of his attendants, one of Yahni’s slaves, happened to be Herod the Great.
Right before he was great, he was a slave to the Chasmonians. So this is around maybe 100 before the common era. Right? So there was an incident involving Rabbi Shimon ibn Shattach, who purchased a certain donkey from a certain ishmaelite. From a ishmaeli, meaning an arab, right before they were Muslims. Islam didn’t exist back then. So he was definitely an idolater. He wasn’t like a monotheist. He was an idolater. Straight up. His disciples went and found on the donkey a gem suspended from its neck. They said to him, rabbi, the blessing of the Lord, it will enrich, right? You do not have to give back a lost object to a goi, to a Ishmaelite.
He can keep that gem. He can do it if he wants to. Rabbi Shiman bin Shattach said to them, I purchased the donkey. I did not purchase a gem. He went and returned it to that ishmaelite that Ishmaelite called out in this regard, blessed it is the Lord God of Shimon ben Shattach. That is from the faithfulness of mortal men. You can know the faithfulness of the holy one. Blessed be he was faithful to pay Israel a war for the midst of what they perform. So it is a good idea to return lost objects to non jews if it is going to increase the name of God in the world.
Otherwise, if you’re under attack, then you don’t want to give them back their resources if you can avoid it. That’s basically the difference here. That makes sense. That makes sense. If the Talmud really was written the way people say it, you know, the people who don’t like the Jews or say it’s written, the society would not function. It would be just the worst, most horrible society you could imagine, and it wouldn’t function among themselves or either. It’s just not possible. So, you know, I was. I was suspicious. I was highly suspicious that the words even. Even the ones that are there mean what was what they were saying they meant? They don’t.
They don’t. All right, well, that’s about an hour offy. We can call it here if you want. Any final thoughts? Yeah, so I do think we’re. I think we’re within. We could see the end game, endgame by the end of this year, by December, maybe november. It could be. It could be longer than that, but I think we’re in the months phase, and I’ve put together some calculations about how many weeks it might take. We’re going to see two things. We’re going to see some. We’re going to see some obvious keynesian style recession indicators like we saw in 2008.
And we’re also. This time we’re going to see a clog in the plumbing. I don’t know if they’re going to come at the same time or one after the other or what’s going to come first. Exactly. But we’re going to see both of those things. And once we have both of those things, I think the end game is just ahead. How long do you think endgame is going to take? Weeks. That’s the same question as how long are we going to be using silver? I think from when, I would say maybe from when the plumbing panic starts to the death of the dollar, maybe three, four, five months, something like that.
And then we’ll be in the 15 to one universe for how long? And maybe a year, and then we can rebuild after that. But things are coming apart pretty fast and I’m feeling it. You know, war is about to break out here again. It keeps doing that and, yeah, hopefully we can all stay safe. Well, on that note, I am on the note staying safe. I just want to remind viewers, I am going. Once. Once the peanut butter makes contact with the fan, I am going dark. So I’m going to private all my videos and shut down my twitter and stuff.
Because there’s. Once the market is making clear that the direction to go, and there’s really no need for my services. So once I go dark, that’s why. And you’ll know. You will know at that point that at least I think the in game has started. That will be my trigger. Now, maybe it hasn’t actually started. I’m just chicken little. But that’s when I think that’s when I will have thought that it has started. Hopefully, I will be treasury secretary. Treasury in Israel or something like that. Be in charge of the temple’s word of silver. That would be my dream job.
That would be nice. That’d be amazing. And you know, Phil, you’re. You’re invited to come in and give a sacrifice if you would like to do so. Anyone can come give any sacrifice they want. Once we started up again, now you can’t go into the actual temple. That’s only for priests. I can’t even go there. But if you feel like bringing a lamb or a cow, you know, you’re all invited. That’d be awesome. Thanks, Rafi.
[tr:tra].
See more of Rafi Farber on their Public Channel and the MPN Rafi Farber channel.
Author
