{ "episodeId": "SLP497", "speakers": { "stephan": { "name": "Stephan Livera", "role": "host", "tag": "STEPHAN" }, "author": { "name": "Author", "role": "guest", "tag": "AUTHOR" } }, "segments": [ { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "00:09", "start": 8.57, "text": "Hi, you're listening to Stephan Livera podcast, a show about Bitcoin and Austrian economics, brought to you by swan dot com. How are KYC and AML destroying the world? Olivier Roland joins me to talk about this. He's an author, digital nomad and web entrepreneur, and he has some very interesting views and similarly aligned with other takes that you may have heard from my podcast from other others about critiques of AML, FATCA, as well as some discussion about taxes and the sovereign individual thesis, as well as how digital nomadism may end up disrupting nation states. This show is brought to you by Swann dot com, and Swann is organizing Pacific Bitcoin again. Last year the feedback was phenomenal, and it's coming back this year, October 5th and 6th in LA, in Santa Monica. There is an awesome lineup of speakers already announced, people like Jimmy Song, Elise Kaline Pierre Richard, Lynn Alden, Greg Foss, and with new speakers recently announced Max Kaiser and Stacy Herbert. And of course, I'm gonna be there, and I'm looking forward to seeing a bunch of you there. Now, for those of you interested, there is a VIP ticket. So for those of you who want preferred seating and viewing areas for the main stage and a private lounge for networking and connection, you get a better chance of meeting and chatting with some of the speakers. There'll be an open VIP bar access and a complimentary lunch. You'll also have access to the Pacific Bitcoin VIP conc This is a great chance to bring along any friends or family who you'd like to learn more about Bitcoin. Go to pacificbitcoin dot com to get your tickets and use the code levera for a discount there. And now onto the show. Olivier, I, had a chance to read your blog and, I thought it was really great with, some of the articles you're writing about AML and FATCA and, you know, the, the thesis you have about what's happening and what's changing in the world today with technology, remote working, and all of this. so firstly, welcome to the show." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "02:03", "start": 122.77, "text": "Thank you, Stefan. Thank you for having me." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "02:05", "start": 124.55, "text": "Yeah, so let's start with a little bit about your issues with AML. So can you give us a bit of a high- Level statement there. What are some of the problems that you see with the AML system and why do you say KYC and AML are destroying the world?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "02:22", "start": 142.46, "text": "Yeah, that is basically the title of the, of the article. It could be seen as a bit hyperbolic, but I think actually when you really do a deep dive into the efficiency of these regulations, I don't think it's so hyperbolic because so KYC is Know Your Customer and AML is Anti-Money, Laundering. And these two regulation were basically, created between the end of the eighties to, through the nineties, you know, to try to stop criminals and terrorists to use a financial system. And the, the idea wasn't stupid actually, the idea was like, hey, the main motives of criminals like drug traffickers is, to make money, right? And once they made money, they want to use it to buy stuff. So why, what happen if we make sure they can't use the money? Of course, they will lose all motivation and they will stop being criminals, right? That, that was basically the idea, which is I mean, why not, right? But when you look at the efficiency and, and now there, there is like three decades of, like feedback we can, we can look at, it's actually terrible, like terrible. there are various estimations of the percentage of criminal, money that is identified through this system, that, that go through the banking system, and the best estimation is one point two percent of criminal money That is identified by these regulations, which is obviously very low, and when you look at the percentage of money that is actually seized, it's even lower. It's from, the, the estimation is from zero point zero one percent to zero point three, zero point zero three percent, which is, I mean It's so, so bad. And when you look at the cost of this regulation, so you have the direct cost that you can quantify and the indirect cost that is, it's really hard to quantify, but direct cost is like Three hundred billions per year worldwide, more or less. I, I, I'm, I'm giving you the numbers from my head, but, I, I share the exact numbers in the article, right? and, the, the, the, these regulations make like seize maybe three billions per year. So we are looking at a direct cost of like one hundred times the money seized every year, and the indirect cost must be even, even higher because it creates so much friction in society, accounts That are closed for no reason, people are sending, you know, money to their family in some high-risk countries, quote, quote, like Pakistan, for example, and, they can't because the bank don't want or they, sometimes the, the accounts get closed because of this. I mean, it's ridiculous, it's absolutely ridiculous. And one of the points also I'm making in the article is like, it's also a big corruption of a pillar of democracies, which is, the presumption of innocence, because- You suppose in our societies, normal societies, to-- you need to be proven guilty, to-- you, you need to have investigation on you to be proven guilty, but these regulations, like every time you do something that, could, could be suspicious potentially, you need to prove that you are innocent. You know what I mean? So it completely subverts the sense principle and it's basically a mass surveillance on people that is completely inefficient." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "05:52", "start": 352.24, "text": "I totally agree. And of course, I think what many people are seeing, and we're seeing this now, and you sp- you speak about this in your article, is what happened with Nigel Farage in the UK. We've seen, other examples around the world where maybe a well-known individual has their account shut down, and maybe they are able to get it back, but other people aren't. Exactly. And so it sort of turns on your ability to get the masses riled up, or at least get some kind of public support for your case. How many people are there out there who are just getting- Their accounts shut down and they have no ability to get, banked again." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "06:27", "start": 386.59, "text": "Yeah, it's hard to know. I, I tried to look at this, but there is no, research on this yet. But we can guess it's, it starts to be quite high. There was an article in the New York Times a few months ago, e-especially about that, like people getting their account closed for, for no reasons. And I have to say, sometimes it's not directly related to KYC or AML. For, Nizar Faraj, it was apparently a" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "06:53", "start": 412.88, "text": "That this guy was too risky for their reputation. But my point is these kind of regulations help the banks actually to do these kind of discriminations because they have a lot of latitude to say, \"Hey, we don't want to, to do business with you, and we don't need to give you any reason.\" So it means basically they can use, even they don't want to, to, to back business with you because, I mean, I don't know, they are racist, for example, well, they can close your account and we'll, you will never know really why. White. And yeah, when you're famous, it's more easy to defend yourself. Actually, Nigel Farage, defended himself, efficiently. And right now he's, he's creating a movement, I think he called that the Unbanked or the Debanked maybe, and i-is trying to, to, to gather more testimonials from people. So I guess soon in the next few months we'll have a, a bit more clarity about exactly how many people are affected. I, I think it's gonna be higher than what most people think." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "07:50", "start": 469.67, "text": "Yeah, but It seems like they are making it more about this idea that everyone should have access to a bank account, but that's gonna still be distinct from all the AML and KYC checks, right? So it's not that he's going in there to try to deregulate and take away the AML requirements. And so there's a broader battle, isn't there, that has to be fought about getting people to realize why AML laws are unjust, ineffective, and I think maybe that's where the longer, the bigger battle is And of course, building alternatives and using alternatives like Bitcoin. But how do you see that broader battle, I guess, the winning hearts and minds? Do you think people can be won over in terms of hearts and minds about why AML laws are unjust?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "08:35", "start": 514.85, "text": "I, I think it's gonna be a tough battle, you know, a uphill battle. I mean, many people are completely unaware of this, maybe, most people don't earn enough money that they, you know, they, they trigger the threshold for investigations and this kind of things. But I mean, I, I think you, you see more and more people complaining about it, you see more and more articles about it, so I think the awareness is spreading, it's still, it's still quite low, we need to be honest, but I, I think it's gonna be Maybe one of the battles of the years to come. It's certainly something I wish would be more known, you know? Because I think it's actually revolting, honestly. And also something revolting about the system is like, it-- I mean, basically the government as- ask the banks and the financial institutions to do their job, and not only they do that, but they ask the banks to work for the government for free. They aren't paid for this. And it's even worse when you look at it, it's like not only they work for, for the governments for free, and they have to, but they also pay the governments for the privilege, because if, by you, you don't follow exactly the regulations, you-- I mean, the banks get fined and big time. It's like billions of dollars, you know? so I, I mean, how would you react if your government will ask you to work for them for free? And not only that, but if you do one mistake, you, you get fined heavily. For me, it's a, it's a form of servitude, you know? And it's not normal. And also, when you look at the efficiency of the system, one of the reason it's so inefficient is like the banks don't care really about the results, they just care about following, the regulations to the letter, you know? They, they are more interested in Following what is written, that what is the philosophy, what is the spirit of these regulations? And I think one of the reason is like, hey, I'm not paid for this, it's not my job, why should I do it well? You know? But also they are, it's not their job, so they aren't, they aren't skilled in that. It's the job of the police, of the investigators, and, these kind of things. so I mean, when you look at this, you see how these, all these inefficiencies, all these, like riveting things, and the fact that so many people are affected to it, and I think the cost to society is really enormous. So hopefully, hopefully, we'll spread the word and make it, an object of public debate. And one of the, of the subjects I, I share in my, in my article is like, I, I make some parallels with the situation of the Catholic Church in Europe in like the 1500s, you know, because, at the time the Catholic Church wa- was at the top of, of the peak, And the system was very corrupt, very corrupt. For example, one of the most famous, things of the time is like, the, the church was selling indulgences. I'm not sure if I pronounced it right, you know, indulgences. Yeah, indulgences. And basically it was like, hey, you, you were a sinner, you did some bad stuff, no, no worries, you can still go to heaven, just need to pay this small, small fee of x amount of money and you, your sins will be forgiven and you Christianity, right? There is nothing in the Bible about that, but it was making the church a lot of money, and you can draw some parallels from that because, here we have a system that is super inefficient, that creates a lot of friction in society, that is corruption of one of the core principles of our democracies, which is the presumption of innocence, and, Yeah. So it's, it's, it's not-- I don't think it's gonna be too sustainable. And like the Catholic Church back in the day, you know, it was so corrupt that it's actually, I mean, it created indirectly Protestantisms, because Protestants were protesting against the Catholic Church, and they used the printing press to spread their ideas. And you can make a, a lot of parallels with the crypto situation right now. One of the core reasons of, the creation of many crypto, including Bitcoin Obviously, was to be permissionless. And why is it important to be permissionless? Because when you look at the KYC and, and, and the permission system, it's actually very corrupt, very inefficient. So hey, if we, if we, we can't change the system, maybe we can create something that is completely outside of it and that will destroy it, you know? Is that, that was a Protestantism approach, and I think the situation is very, similar today." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "13:09", "start": 789.05, "text": "Yeah, for sure. and so in terms of- People having their accounts stopped or shut down or frozen. I guess the typical scenarios might be a user, a bank account user, is doing a transfer above a certain threshold, or maybe they're doing an international transfer, and for whatever reason, it comes up on some kind of monitoring or transaction monitoring system in that bank, and now a compliance officer or an automated email goes to that customer saying, \"Hey, we froze your account because explain this transfer, otherwise we're gonna, you know, shut your account.\" Or here's the new- new, form that you need to fill out, and if you don't fill out the form, we're gonna close your account. That seems to be the way this is happening for a lot of people. Is that been your experience or at least what you're hearing from people?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "13:54", "start": 833.58, "text": "Yes, although, in the New York Times article, there were like examples of people who got their account shut down with, without any explanation and no question asked beforehand, which is-- But the problem is, the fines are so high that if the customer is like a new- normal person, meaning it's not gonna make a lot of money, for the bank, even for, if it stays for, for a few decades. I mean, in some cases, the bank just don't bother. They're like, \"Well, best case we'll make a few thousand bucks from this guy, worst case it's gonna cost, this guy is gonna cost us millions. So the decision is easy, let's cut the account because we have other things to do. Let, let's focus on, higher priority cl-cust-mers, right? And," }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "14:41", "start": 881.42, "text": "And people are, are, are like waking up to, to, to this fact. but also about, the question asked beforehand, we are part of, of a group, in Dubai, and I don't know if you saw, but somebody shared, maybe, was it you? I don't remember. Yeah. So, oh, so it was you, okay. I mean, yeah. You, you said, \"Hey, there is HBC Australia, HSBC Australia.\" Oh, that wasn't" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "15:05", "start": 904.93, "text": "me, that" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "15:06", "start": 906.05, "text": "was another person. So, okay, so this guy was saying, \"Hey, HSBC Australia, ask me a few questions about this transfer, but look at the form they sent me, and it's a fucking thirteen pages form. Seriously, I mean...\" do you really want to fill thirteen pages of explanation for, for like, a wire transfer you did to your grandma in another country? I mean, at some point it starts to be completely ridiculous, right? But also you can see that the trend is toward this, you know, more and more bureaucracy. Why? Because, the banks want to, to cover the sam-themselves, you know, in case of investigation, they want to show the regulators, \"Hey, we did everything by the book. If this guy is a drug dealer or something...\" It's not our fault, right? We followed the, the regulations." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "15:54", "start": 954.08, "text": "Yeah, that's sadly, the situation we're in. But I think part of that, that part of what has driven us here is also the very high level of regulation and licensing for these banks, right? So it's not easy to set up your own competitor bank. And even if you did, there's a big chance that people try to shut you down, like if you look at what happened with Peter Schiff as an example. So he set up a bank, I believe, in Puerto Rico, and he has spoken publicly That has made it very difficult for him, and they eventually sort of railroaded him into shutting it down. And so it, it, it might normally have been a, a competitive environment with lots of different banks, so people can say, \"Oh, well, this bank treated me poorly, I'll go to somewhere else.\" But now we're operating in an environment where many of these banks have, in some cases, received bailouts, like NatWest did from the UK, from the British government. Some of these banks have received bailouts, some of these banks are, you know, just they, they And special permissions. So there's maybe a little bit of a tit for tat, right? So you said, like you said, they are being forced to work for free by some of these governments. But there's also a tit for tat element here, because the banks and the governments are sort of saying, \"Oh, we'll give you this holy blessing that you may work in this industry. If you don't have our blessing, you're not allowed to work in it.\" And so that's a little bit-- there's an element of control there, and but I think it, it comes into Theoretically, are electing the government into power, and that government in power should theoretically represent their interests, but actually, that's not really what happens in practice, because most average voters and people just don't understand all of these intricacies of the AML and, and the systems that are at play here." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "17:40", "start": 1060.13, "text": "Yeah, yeah. that, that's something I, I want to investigate more, you know? I, I mean, everything I share on the, on the, on my blog, so, Disruptive Horizons is Very, deeply researched as, as we may be so. So, these I didn't search enough, so I, I don't, I, I don't want to share my opinion right now. But, but I, I think there is definitely something to, to, to investigate, yes. but you know, all of this and, and many regulators are actually blind to this and many people in the banks too. all of this actually is one, is one push for cryptos, one out of many, right? more and more people will be driving to To us and to Bitcoin especially, and it, it's gonna be one of the reasons. I mean, when you see, you, you can send, your tran- a wire transfer to your grandma and receive a thirteen page form to explain why, or you can just send a, a bit of crypto and nobody will ask you anything. what is the obvious choice, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "18:40", "start": 1119.69, "text": "Yeah, exactly. I do think that's the way things are going, but it is, I think like you were saying, it's-- there's also an element of raising awareness and getting people Right, like the AML laws, FATF, et cetera. another area that you have written about is FATCA and the FATCA disaster. So can you just explain, what is FATCA and what, what are some of the issues you see with FATCA?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "19:05", "start": 1145.33, "text": "Yes, so, the US is one of two countries in the world who do something very special, they care very much about their citizen. So, the Americans have the incredible luck of, having to- Pay taxes wherever they live, because the US has, a tax on citizenship basically. In basically all the other countries except one, which is Eritrea in Africa. you pay taxes where you're resident. So for example, I'm French, if I go to live in Spain, I'm not gonna pay taxes in France anymore, unless I have some sources of income like real estate there, but I will pay my taxes in Spain. It's like most of the world works like this. But Americans, no! if an American goes to Spain, he has to pay taxes in Spain, but he also has to send every year to the IRS, a, a tax form explaining, how much he, he earned, you know? And if it's above a certain threshold, it will have to pay taxes in the US too. Doesn't mean, it will have to pay taxes twice because usually you have-- there is a tax treaty, there is a tax treaty between Spain and, and the US, and usually it will be able to, it will be able to say, okay, I paid this amount of taxes in Spain, and it's gonna be deducted from the amount of taxes you will have to pay i-in the US. so, but obviously if the American goes to a tax haven like Dubai, he'll, he He's not living there anymore, he's not using the infrastructure, he's not using the school, the roads, the hospital or whatever, but that's how it's, that's how it is right now. So until recently in history, it was quite, theoretical, because the US didn't have a lot of ways to enforce this. But, At the beginning of the, of, twen-the twenty-tens, they put in place something called FATCA, which is basically a requirement, it's a worldwide regulation that said, \"Hey banks, good news, we have very good news for you starting from now. you will have to report to us, the US government, the IRS, all the bank accounts of Americans you have. And if you don't, no problem, we'll just take thirty percent of every transaction you do in dollars. Up to you. So, so it means like any wire payment that goes from one of these banks in Spain, in, Japan, in whatever, through, through the US system, the US will take thirty percent. Imagine that. So it was like, I mean, it's a one of the first, example of a country saying, \"Hey, the world, you need to follow our national regulation, even though you're not in the, in our country, or else.\" You know? So, many countries weren't so happy about that, but many, pa- countries signed an agreement with the US, and, it created a lot of unexpected, side effects. I mean, there are many, so I don't know how, how deep you want to go into this subject, but one of these, side effect is like for many, non-US banks, American customers are like radioactive now, and they don't want to do business with them because, the cost of all this paperwork and sending the information to the US, and also, I mean, there is the problem of if they don't do it correctly, they can, you know, get this thirty percent fine on every US, USD transaction. so many banks are like, \"Why bother? We, we're not just accepting American customers, and, it's gonna be easier, you know? Our life is gonna be easier.\" and there is also the problem of, accidental Americans, because the US, like, quite a few countries in the, in the Americas, I mean, it's very generous. If you are born in the US, you get the, the US citizenship. Amazing, right? Yes. But in this case, you get a right You have your active citizenship when you don't live in the US. So what is a, a accidental American? Is someone who was born in the US but didn't live there. He was born there just because his parents were there for, when he was born, for many reasons could, could have been students or working there temporarily or even sometimes tourist, you know? and they don't, sometimes they don't speak English, they never lived in the US, they don't-- I mean, some people didn't even know they were Americans, right? And then suddenly the bank said, \"Hey, Because we're not going to work with you anymore, thank you, bye-bye. And, I give one example of a very famous person in, in my article is Boris Johnson. Many, many people don't know this, but Boris Johnson is an accidental American. He was born in New York, just because his parents were students in New York when he was born. And a few months later, I think he was not even six months old, his parents came back to the UK, and Boris Johnson never lea- He lived again in the US. Yes, he did a few trips, like most of us, right? He never lived there. And so what happened is like in 2009, he was, at the time mayor of London, he sold, his house And in the UK, you don't, you don't, have to pay taxes on capital gain on your, on house, but in the US, you have to. And the IRS said, \"Hey, hello, Boris Johnson, good news, you have to pay taxes to the US. How amazing is it?\" And Boris Johnson was like, \"What the fuck?\" Hahahahahaha. Because, I mean, he didn't know, right? Like many accidental Americans back then didn't know. I think now most of them know, right?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "24:46", "start": 1486.36, "text": "and, he-- There Taxing, to the IRS is outrageous. I'm not American, I was just born there by accident, I have nothing to do with the US, and blah, blah, blah, you know. but in the end, he had to pay. But here we see an example of someone who is clearly British, who doesn't feel American, who sold a house in London, and the, the IRS says, \"Hey, you need to pay taxes.\" It's ridiculous, right? It's completely ridiculous. You, you see like this kind of unintended side effect of like a regulation too, overreaching. So in the end, he, he paid the taxes and he, he renounced his, his US citizenship. And I mean, again, Boris Johnson is famous, probably he, he made some kind of deal with the IRS, we don't know, exactly the details, but many people are not in this situation. Right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "25:38", "start": 1537.57, "text": "Yeah, and I think the important, thing you're getting at there as well, as, as you talk about in that article, is it's not just about these accidental Americans as an example, it's also about the viability of some kind of global taxation system. And I think that's kind of a deeper implication that you get to, because that's something that it seems other countries might like to do, but maybe it's not feasible for them to do, or at least not yet. So what are your views on this idea of global-" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "26:08", "start": 1567.81, "text": "Yeah, one of the, of the thesis, so basically my blog is like the articles in my blog are like extracts of my upcoming books. I'm writing a book about the disruption of the nation state by the internet and globalization, and one of the core thesis is, as the population will be more and more, more mobile, it's gonna be harder and harder For nation states to, tax these people. And when you look at the repartition of taxes, you see that the top, in many countries, the top ten percent, wealth, wealthier people, they pay more or less seventy percent of the income tax. It's the case in the US, in, France, in the UK is very close, in Canada it's like twenty percent of the richest people pay sixty-four percent of, of income tax. And usually it's I mean, there is no, official number about this, but many people, in this category are entrepreneurs, so you can guess also it more or less the same for, corporate tax, sales tax like VAT, et cetera, et cetera. So you don't need that many people out of these, of this strata, to, to, to leave the country to, to make the, the, like the, the balance, the budget imbalance, right? So I think we're gonna see more and more countries The freedom of movements of their citizen, especially the, the, the more wealthy ones. and one of the possibilities is to do what the US are doing, which is a taxation on citizenship. And you see quite a few countries who studied this possibility. and, I, so I'm French, and, the, the French government actually studied that in depth, in twenty nineteen. there was, nine- 92 pages report from the National Assembly about the possibility of doing exactly that. And the good news is, they don't think they can, they can pull it off for, for, for, for a few core reasons. The first is, well, the US are doing that, but France is not as powerful, as influential, than the US, right? So it's gonna be harder for France to pull it off, which is good news for most of us because no- Other country has the same clout as the US, right? and, second reason is France, if France can pull it off, let's say, theoretically, they will have to re- renegotiate all the tax treaties they sign with every countries, which will take years and years and years. I, I think maybe France signed like something like thirty, one hundred thirty tax treaties, and they can maybe renegotiate five a year, right? And not only they will have to renegotiate tax treaties, but also No, they, they say many countries will want something in return, so it's not sure we're gonna gain anything. Third is, actually it's doubtful that the worldwide taxation will bring more money than what it costs, and they, they gave the example of the US, because we didn't talk about that, but actually when you look at the system, it was supposed to bring, I don't remember exactly, but like a hundred, at least a hundred of millions of dollars every year of, of For taxation. And when you look at the numbers, it's, it's completely ridiculous. It brings fifteen point five millions a year, and it costed like maybe eight hundred millions, of, for, for compliance and stuff, just for the, for the US government, in, in the, for the first years. All, all the numbers, exact numbers are in my article. and actually, FatCat is profitable, but only through the fines, only because banks, many banks I have to pay the, the thirty percent fine, you know? So again, you see a completely ridiculous regulation that isn't, so efficient. and the fourth reason, but this is more, is, is-- I mean, it's not gonna be universal. It's like, because France is part of the EU, and, in the EU there is a fundamental right of, being able to, to move from, country one country to another. It's like the freedom of movement of person, companies and capital. And, Attacks like this will be contrary to this freedom of movement, so if France pull it off, it's not gonna apply in the EU, which will open so many loopholes, right? so, I mean, doesn't affect, all the countries in the world, but it's still twenty-seven, of the wealthiest, countries in the world, right? So long story short, it seems unlikely that other country than the US will be able to pull it off, but they were exploring other possibilities, like, so for example, in- In Portugal, they, they have a blacklist of tax havens, and if you have been a Portuguese resident for, I don't, I don't exactly remember the years, but maybe five or ten years, and you move to one of these tax havens, they're like, \"Hey, good news, you, you moved to Dubai, congratulations, I hope you're, you're gonna enjoy it, but you will need to pay, to still pay taxes in Portugal for the next five years. Thank you, bye-bye.\" and so this is one of the possibilities, right? It's like a softer form of worldwide taxation. they were also, thinking of the possibility of, raising the exit tax. So if you're an entrepreneur and you move, abroad, you will need to, you know, pay a, a tax on capital, of theoretical capital gain on your company. they were thinking of the possibility of, making you pay for the use of the education system if you leave before... certain age and this kind of things, you know, so there were, there are still many possibilities, and I think we're gonna see more and more countries trying to do this kind of things. because we, the trend is clear, more people will be more mobile, digital nomads are gonna be, more numerous by the year and, it's gonna, it's gonna affect literally, the, the budget of countries. And we, we were talking recently in the group about, what Osvaldo, is doing, right? So they're also trying to, to implement a, a system like this. It's not as bad as Portugal, but it's like for two years if you don't- It's, sure that you really live abroad, you're still tax resident in Australia." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "32:40", "start": 1959.99, "text": "Back to the show in a moment. Mempool dot space is my preferred Bitcoin and blockchain visualizer. I use it to target my fee before I send on-chain transactions. It can show you the low, medium, or high priority, which you can then attach as a fee for your Bitcoin transaction so that the miner's included. I can also use mempool dot space to look up transactions. So it's a fantastic tool that allows you to view the fully fledged multi-layer ecosystem. of Bitcoin and MemPool v3 is now coming. They've got a MemPool accelerator integration coming. The MemPool blocks are scrollable, they can help you visualize full RBF zero or full RBF equals one. There's so many features, and of course, it's open source, so you can even run it yourself. Go to mempool.space to check it all out. When it comes to securing your coins, you need to think about hardware, and CoinKite dot com make the best. You can go to CoinKite and get a range of hardware, most notably the Coldcard. The Coldcard is an ultra secure Bitcoin hardware device, and you can use it to generate your keys as well as keep them secure while you are signing. Now, many people know about the MK4, but they also have different color devices coming. So if you want the MK4 but with gold sprinkling, or with, or in red, or black, or glow-in-the-dark, go A whole range available there, and don't forget they also have a range of accessories, so if you want a block clock or if you want a seed plate to do your metal seed backups, you can get all that over at CoinKite also. Now get a discount on your cold cards using the code Livera. And now back to the show. Right, yeah. So just to clarify there, so that is an item that's in consultation right now, but it looks, it looks likely that that, that's the direction they're going. And basically the rule there is something like, if you were a, a long-term tax resident of Australia and you don't follow certain aspects, like if you don't get an employment contract, I think for more than two years with accommodation in another place, they will just treat you like you're an Australian tax resident, even if you've literally packed up- Up and left everything out of Australia and you've gone to somewhere else, and I think you could theoretically be on the hook for up to three years, depending on the timing, but again, this is still unclear exactly what, where, and when this comes into force, but it looks likely at this point. So it's, it's, certainly they're sort of trying to push in this direction, and I guess to be fair, like you said before, they, you, they would still have double tax agreements, right? So, but what they're doing, maybe the net effect, That effect is that they want to restrict your, let's call it escape pathways. They want to restrict which countries you can go to to say, \"Ah, you're not allowed to go to a zero tax place. But if you're going somewhere else that also has high tax, okay, fine, we've already got a double tax agreement with them, you're allowed to go there, you know?\" And so that, that, that's kind of a weird thing that they're doing, and, you know, they, they have this concept called adhesiveness, right? They want to make it easier" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "35:41", "start": 2140.89, "text": "Australian tax residents, right? They, they call that a principle, right, that you should so-called pay your fair share. but as you said, there are going to be, or there is becoming, there is this class of, let's say, top ten percent earners, let's say roughly, who might have an incentive to leave, and if even a small number of those- You know, people really start moving in numbers, that could cause a lot of issues for some of these nation states, couldn't it? Because they are reliant on them for tax revenue." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "36:12", "start": 2171.64, "text": "They do. It's gonna be, I think, one of the big battle of the years and decades to come. yeah. So one of the articles I published is like, ten principles of history to try to predict the future, and the first principle is the power of governments is based on the immobility of the subject. And we have many cases in history of people, trying to leave their country, sometimes in mass. one of the most recent examples was in the Soviet Union, you know, and, in, East and Germany. Before the Berlin Wall was, built, I mean, millions, I, I don't remember exactly, but I think it was two or three millions Eastern German escaped to West Germany. So it was like a lot, and probably, I'm not saying it's gonna be the same, the same Same volume of people, right? But I'm just saying, when it happens, what do they do? Well, the governments they build, they build walls, either physical or, in the law, like, like what we're saying. and one of the oldest example we can find in history is, in the Roman Empire, when, Diocletian, it was in the, at the end of the third century, he, he basically completely reformed the, the government and it was like, the, the, the biggest government of the whole history of Roman Empire until this time, and it costed a lot of money, so it had to raise a lot of taxes, and it made many Romans escape to the barbarians, you know, quote, quote, to, to escape the taxes. So what, what, what did, the government did, at, at, at this time? They were like, \"Hey, good news! Now, you won't be able to move freely until you pay your fair share of taxes. you will be attached to your land if you're like At, like, a worker or, or whatever, and it started actually, serfdom. That one of the things that started serfdom, which was a quasi-slavery system that lasted for more than one thousand years. I'm not saying it's gonna happen again, right? I'm just saying that we, we saw that in history again, again and again. When people are, are starting to escape, the governments are trying to tie the people to the land." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "38:30", "start": 2309.71, "text": "And this also ties in, and I'm not sure how deeply you've looked into this, the demographic collapse that people-- there's this narrative going now, people are, you know, speaking and writing about this idea, right? So the gist, as I understand it, is, you know, the world population today is about eight billion. It's still growing. It's gonna be projected around ten billion in maybe twenty fifty or twenty sixty, around there. But the issue isn't, it's, it's the composition. So as I'm understanding, it's like normally societies have been, or at least Decades. It's been more like a pyramid. There's been a few old people, but a lot of young people to sort of pay for that, to sort of fund the welfare state, fund, you know, the militaries and all this other stuff that the governments are spending on or wasting money on, rather. But instead of being a pyramid, we're sort of shifting more to being like a cylinder. And so there's less and less young people to pay for the old people. Now, the common response that a lot of governments are using here is immigration. They're saying, \"Well" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "39:29", "start": 2369.05, "text": "And having lots of children, let's just import people from elsewhere in the world. But the problem with that is it will tap out eventually, and so there are these big problems coming in the decades to come because these governments will have these big, big tax bills and not as many people to pay it." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "39:46", "start": 2386.49, "text": "Yeah, I, I, I mean, I, I'm not there yet in my articles, but I, I wrote about that in my book already. oh, I mean, there are many disruptions coming for the nation states. These, what we talk about is just one of them. And not only the-- it, it's gonna be hard for them to resist, it would have been hard in any situation, but no, it happens at the worst time in their history because many Western countries are broke already when you look at the level of debt they have, the cost of servicing the debt, And, I mean, it's bad. And when you look at the demographics, it's even worse. I mean, it's like, yeah, in many countries, almost all of them, the population is getting older. you need, you have less and less workers to support the old population, and it's, it's not a recipe for, for, for success in the long term, right? So yeah, many countries will have to im- to, to, to have immigration. But when you look at the demographics today, most of the- of the newborns are, are in Africa, right? So it means basically most of the immigrants will have to come from Africa, just mathematics. and yes, it's gonna be a competitions, among countries to attract the immigrants. At the same time as the, the, the more mo-mobile segment of the population will look At what I call the market of jurisdictions, because when someone is mobile enough, like is, is doing basically a full remote work or is, is has a, an internet company, he has access to a market of jurisdictions, like dozens of countries fighting to attract him and his family or her and his, and, and her family, with the best conditions. So it's gonna be interesting to see how this dynamic plays out, you know? maybe we'll see, you know, you, you, you talk about the concept of it's easier to, to become a Tax residents are to escape, maybe it's gonna be easier to immigrate than to escape. we don't know. i-it's gonna be interesting to, to watch." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "41:48", "start": 2507.69, "text": "Yeah, I think that's, and in fact, I believe The Sovereign Individual mentions an idea related to that. have you, have you read The Sovereign Individual? Yeah." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "41:57", "start": 2516.84, "text": "Absolutely. I was heavily influenced by, by, by this book. I read it at the end of twenty twenty-one. So I have been a digital nomad since, at the end of twenty ten, I, I lived, I left France in, twenty fifteen to live in London for three years, and now it's been, five years I've been in Dubai. Right now I'm in Brazil, so it's not Dubai here. but, so, when I read The Sovereign Individual, I was already doing what they described in the book actually, and so I was amazed by, the, the precision of the predictions. I mean, this book was published in nineteen ninety-seven, so probably it was written in nineteen ninety-six Six or something, it's, it's amazing, all the trends are predicted. It's actually one of the inspiration. When I, I, I saw what they did, I was like, how did they do? To be so precise in their prediction, they didn't get everything right, but they get-- they got like many things right, and it, it inspired me to try to find, principles, universal principles in history so you could think about the future from first principles, you know? but so yeah, I read the book and, I highly recommend it. Yeah." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "43:12", "start": 2591.65, "text": "Yeah. Well, that's great, and, I think some of what you're writing is almost like an updated version, in some ways, right? It's sort of like taking Of where we are today in twenty twenty-three, but I think the fundamental point is that there are now options available for, let's say, people who are earning in the top ten percent. If you're in that top ten percent, it's something like that, now not every one of those top ten percent people can, can leave, but there's at least options for some of them, and I think that is going to go into what people talk about, some people call it flag theory, some people call it global citizenship, but they sort of, it's this broader idea that You don't have to just be born in one place and die in one place, that, that you might actually pick and choose and, you know, use different things like a residence here, a citizenship there, or a bank account here, or a phone number there, or things like this. So, do you wanna just elaborate a bit on how your, I guess how you would explain, flag theory or some of these ideas?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "44:11", "start": 2651.15, "text": "Yes, sure. first, just to clarify, something. I put the emphasis on the top ten percent because of the people, because It's very, unbalancing for, for the countries, but I think i's, i's gonna, I mean, m-many digital nomads aren't part of the top ten percent, you know? and now with the de-democratization of, remote work, i-i- even people from middle class will be able to, to enjoy these kind of things, right? so, yeah, the flag theory. So you, you mentioned you don't need to, to die in the same country you were born. so I, I call these You were born in one country, you were raised in this country, you speak more, more, more, more often than not the, only the language of this country. you, you got married in this country, you have a job in this country, you, you take your vacations in this country most of the time, you retire in, in this country and you die in this country, you know? And when you look at the people around you, it's probably like ninety-five percent of the population, maybe more, right? Many people are like this. And there Blind spots. When you, when you stop being a monocountry, you, you, the blind spot are obvious to you, but it's not for, for, for them. And one of the blind spots is, many, I mean, many people, they don't know what happens in other countries. Like, I, I'm not talking about the news, everyone can, read a newspaper, right? I'm talking about exactly how the system work in different countries. Just to give you one example, in France, maybe ninety-five percent of the people Population is absolutely persuaded, they, they think the social security system is the best in the world. And when you ask, \"How, how do you know it's the best? Did you compare with other countries?\" They said, \"No, sorry, I only left, live in France until now, so I don't know.\" So how do you know? Basically, they repeat what, what they have been told, right? The government say, \"This is the best, it's the best system in the world, trust us.\" And people, they don't have any comparisons, so So the, the health system was really good in Dubai too. So when you start to escape from, your own country, you can start to compare and you see, I mean, sometimes you see stuff in your country that are, are, are better than the rest, but more often than not, you see how actually it's not exactly what I've been told, right? So you have these more, like Like, I don't know, like objective way of thing, of seeing things. so I think the more, the more, the more mobile people will be, the more they will travel the world and not only as tourists, but like really living in other countries, the more they will realize that and they will start to compare jurisdictions. So the idea of the, of the flags theory is to actually use the friction that borders create to protect yourself, or to make- You, less appealing target for administrations and governments. It was basically designed in the sixties, first it was just the idea of three, flags. So basically the idea was like, you should put your business in another place as where you live and put your investments in ano- in another country. Then in the eighties it was, expanded to five flags, and now we, we are, we, we speak more of six flags. So what, what are the six flags? The first flag is your Flag of citizenship. And if you want to follow this strategy by the book, you shouldn't have anything in your country of birth, because out of all the countries in the world, it's gonna be the country that takes you the most for granted. They want to attract people like you, but they don't care. That's a very, it's a big paradox. it's, it's like schizophrenia actually. they take you for granted, but they consider you more like someone who should follow the rules than a customer. But If so, someone abroad with exactly the same profile as you, they won't track him, right? So, you can take advantage of this because all the other countries in the world will treat you better than your country of birth. so that, that's by the book, okay? I never met anyone who follow exactly the strategy by the book. So I'm just giving like the theoretical example. Second flag is, your country of residence, and you should usually choose the country with, that treats you the best, basically that gives you the best quality-price ratio of government services, like how much you pay and what do you get, and not only of government services, but obviously of, do you like the place or not. I would never, never advise to go to a country you hate just to pay less taxes. It's completely ridiculous, right? Don't do that. I mean, life is short, I hope at the end of your life you will remember more the, the love letters you got than the, than the bank letters, right? So, but, but my point is you don't need to go to places you don't like. There are so many interesting, amazing places in the world that are less, probably less taxed than your country of birth, that you can choose, a place you love and also where you will be less taxed, right? and the third fly Where you put your business. Now nowadays it's, it's harder and harder to put your business in another country that where you are, but we can expand the concept to, you can have your business in the same country as your residence, but your customers will be, will not be in this country. And with a web business, it's quite easy, right? The fourth flag is, where you put your investments. It, it can be different countries, right? Not, not just one. The fifth flag is where you, what, what they call the playground, so where you spend Spend your time. So for example, my, my base is in Dubai. I, I spend six months a year there, but during the rest of the year, I'm traveling. Right now, I'm in Brazil. And the sixth flag is, where you put your digital assets. So if you want to follow the strategy by the book, every flag should be separated, but obviously It's not mandatory. So why doing that? Well, it's a asymmetric defense against nation states. What do I mean by that? It means it's not so hard to pull it off. For example, it's completely integrated into my lifestyle. I don't have to do really work to do that. I just do it naturally. So it's easy for many people to do that, but it's very hard for, an administration to fight against it. That's what is the asymmetrical defense. It's like cryptography, right? Geography is easy to use and very hard to break or impossible to break. So, for people who want to maximize their freedom against governments, it's a strategy. And I need to be clear that I don't think anyone is invincible, alright? If you're a famous drug trafficker like, I don't know, if you're the new Pablo Escobar and you use that, no worries, the FBI is gonna get, get you at some point, okay? It's not, the idea isn't to be invincible. The idea Is if you're a honest entrepreneur, just a normal one, this setup will create so much friction that it's not gonna be worthwhile for administration to, to try to pursue you. They would choose a easier target, like, a monocountry entrepreneur, you know? And, I mean, you could argue about the moral, the ethic, the ethical, of this, right? Is it right or wrong? I, I'm not talking about that, I'm just saying that's the, the strategy. And if you want to maximize your freedom against government So it's quite efficient. And let's not forget that some people also try to protect themselves again, against auto-authoritarian governments, you know, like, Russians and, Chinese and this kind of things, right?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "52:02", "start": 3122.48, "text": "Right. Yeah. And a-as you're saying, this- \"Quote unquote game is going to play out over the next few decades that more and more people are looking for alternatives, and as you said, it may, it may have started at maybe only the elite could afford this decades ago, and now because of Bitcoin, because of remote work, because of these trends that we're seeing, it's, it's actually becoming more accessible to a lot of people, to more people. And so you talk a little bit about, in so, I think you have a two-article series where you talk about principles for predicting the future. We spoke about some Immobility is a key one, but some other key ideas you mention are this idea of communications technology and, of beliefs people hold in their heads. So do you wanna just expand a little bit, why is it important the beliefs people hold in their heads?" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "52:51", "start": 3170.79, "text": "Yes. So, I mean, it's a, it's a long subject, but to, let's try to make it short. if you look at the wars of religion in Europe in the sixteenth and seventeenth century, basically what happened is like, as we- I mentioned before, the Catholic Church was, has become a very corrupt, like institution, and, I mean, before, even before the, the 1500s, many Christians realized that and tried to, to create something different, but every time they were crushed by the Catholic Church. What made first Protestantism's success was a printing press. The printing press was the first, technology of mass replication that allowed the protest- And to spread their ideas before the Catholic Church could crush them. and when you look, so what, what, what we, we looked, we're looking at right now is like it was a battle for the story people were telling themselves in their mind, because the Catholics, the, the story they were telling themselves was like, \"Hey, the Catholic Church is very important, and the Pope, is, the representative of God here on this planet, and everything the God, the Pope says...\" says as a pope, it's basically God speaking through him, more or less, you know, and, we should listen to him. That was the stories they were telling themselves. So the pope and the Catholic Church, are very important for our faith. And the Protestants were, were like, \"Hey, actually, sorry, but, when you, when you can-- when you read the Bible, there are many things the Catholic Church, i-is doing that, isn't in the Bible, so there is a problem. And I'm sorry, but selling, indulgences is actually a big corruption of the, of Christianity, of our faith. It's completely, contrary to the teaching of Jesus, which is true, right? \" So the story the Protestants were telling then, then" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "55:13", "start": 3313.22, "text": "Do whatever you want, it's fine. pray the way you want, no problem. But a-back in the days, it was very important, and people were willing to sacrifice their life for these kind of stories. So, you, you see that we, we can deduct a few principles f-from this. And, I mean, the wars of origin in, in Europe were terrible, like it was like millions of death, millions of death, it lasted for, for a few decades, you know, almost one century. and where it happened was mostly in what is today Germany, but back in the days it was a Holy, Roman Empire, and it estimated that, From one fifth to one third of the population was killed, and this third, it was very bad, very, very bad. So we can, we can deduct a few principles from this. The first is a cheap and hard to censor technology is very powerful to change the story people, tell themselves in their head. a-and the principle before that is like the, the, the story people think in their head is very important for their allegiance. So we, we see the Catholics in like, the, in, in one, one thousand one hundred, for example, they believed so much that the Pope was, the God was speaking through the Pope that they were going to, to do crusades on the other side of the world because the Pope said you should do that. A few centuries later, well, the di- most Catholics after the Reign of Terror didn't believe the Pope enough to be willing to do all the atrocities again, because there was a piece of Westphalia basically that said, hey, starting from now you, you can choose to be a, a Catholic or Protestant, doesn't matter, up to you, okay? and it was a revolution, right? and if the story is I don't believe in you because, I don't think you, the Pope, is, God speaks through you, then they, they don't listen to you, they don't obey you, and maybe they will fight you. And we see that a, a, a cheap technology of communication can be very powerful in changing, the story people have in their head. So where I'm getting at is that when you look at nationalisms and patriotism Most people are completely blind to it, but it's actually very recent in the history that it exists. until recently, many people-- I mean, it's, it's part of our DNA, I think, to, to feel part of a community and to want to contribute to, to, to this community and to defend the community. But for most of history, the community was the direct community that people were in relation with. It was basically the tribe, the village, maybe the city. And that's it. So, I give the example in the article of, Francois, of, is a French guy, I mean, a French guy. Francois on the territory of France in, fifteen hundreds and two thousand. And they are both in Brittany, which is a region in the, the west part of France. And in fifteen hundreds, if, a city in the south of the Kingdom of France is attacked, the Francois of Brittany will not feel a sacred duty to go defend this city, even if it's part of the same Kingdom of France. Why? Because first, he doesn't speak the same language. He speaks Breton, I don't know how to say it in English. Breton. He doesn't speak French. If he's educated, maybe he speaks through lots of French, through lots of Latin, you know? His community for him is his village, his lord, the, the Duke of Brittany, and yes, above that is the King of France, but for him it's like a very fuzzy concept. He will never see the King in his life. Maybe he will see his face on, on, on a, on a coin Kingdom of France in his life, he doesn't even know what it is, you know? So if he goes to sacrifice his life to defend a city, a few hundred kilometers south, it's not because he feels he's part of the same community of, subject of the Kingdom of France. No, it's because his Lord asked him to join an army. And why the Lord asked him? Because the Lord of the Lord asked him to join the army. And why it happened? Because the King of France asked the Lord of the Lord to, to, to do an army to defend His life for honor of the promise he gave to his lord. Or maybe if the city was attacked by, an army of a different religion, he could go to defend this city because he wanted to, to defend his religion. Right? And five hundred years later, it's completely different. The Francois from Brittany, he feels more like a French from Brittany than a Breton that is also French. And, if this city in the south of France is attacked, you will feel a sacred duty to, to defend the city. And why? I mean, it's, it's very long, I'm sorry, but it's like, it's so, so complex that, yeah, you need some time to explain. But, what happened between the, the two, these five hundred years? Why the Francois of two thousand feels part of this community? It's what we call the Imagin Community. A country, a nation is the Imagin Community Of a community that of people you will never meet, and that, that is not in direct relation to you. And why? One of the reasons it's developed is, actually the printing press, which is surprising. The printing press, made b-before in Europe, many countries had, many, many regional languages. For, in France, there were dozens of, regional languages, and someone from one region couldn't talk very much with someone from another region. And one met French, which was Parisian at the time. The name was Parisian of Franc, Francien. What met Parisian the French is because, the printing press at the start, I like in the fifteenth century, they went to these, to the, to, to the cities that were, were the most wealthy, usually the capitals, right? Where the kings were. And when they started to, to, to spread, the books in the local language, they used the language of the city, and it helps spread the language through the territory. And so s-suddenly, you had this common language spreading in the, in the country, and the people who could read, first, they, they had a common language with someone from another region of the same kingdom, and they also imagine, it was also the imagination of like, oh, this book, that I-I-I'm reading was printed, there are thousands of people throughout the kingdom reading it right now. And it's, I mean, it's complicated, right? But it's like, it, it was starting to create this notion of Of this community of people, sharing the same behaviors, sharing the same belief, sharing the same stories basically. And I think, so it's-- I mean, I, I just brushed off the subject, it's, you, you could go for hours and hours on this, right? But basically, patriotism and nationalism is a very recent invention. Until the seventeenth or eighteenth century, most armies were a form of professionals or mercenaries, and people didn't fight really for, for the va-for, for the values, right? sometimes they did, but more often than not, no. And I think the internet is going to have the same kind of effect, meaning the printing press basically destroyed, regional languages and regional patriotism, and I think the internet is going to do the same to, to nationalisms. Because as the people will be-- will become more and more mobile, first, as, as I said before, they will, tr-- start to compare the different system in different countries and realize sometimes it's better, sometimes it's not, and also they will feel less and less attached to their country of origin, and they will become more and more attached to maybe the idea of becoming a global citizen, but I think, and then we, we can connect this to, the book, The Network State, by Balazs, right? they will feel more connected to another imaginary community, which, a- another or another, you know, communities, of like-minded people connected by the internet. Today, some people feel more connected to one or, or more communities on the internet than to their neighbor, because internet makes it very, very easy to find like-minded people who share the same passion as you, even if your passion is very esoteric, like forty years ago. if you had a, a, I don't know, if you were, passionate by, role-playing games, if you lived in a small village in the middle of Kentucky, good luck to find someone who, who liked that too, right? And today it's super easy to, to, to connect to, to a community, online community of people who like that, right? and Balaji is there, in the network that is like, all these communities are, some of the, of these communities are proto-network states, meaning people who feel more, attached to themselves and to the other, their fellow, countrymen of the same country, you know? So it's just a start, we're just starting to see this, but for example, I'm a digital nomad and I really feel part of the digital nomad community and I feel more close to a digital nomad living in Japan or in Brazil or in Mexico, whatever, than, I don't know, a plumber living in France, in France. You know what I mean? So you can s- you can, I mean, it starts to shift a little bit the allegiance and the story you have in your head of, of what community do I belong to?" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:04:53", "start": 3893.08, "text": "Yeah. Right. So one thing I would just add here, I think, like while I kind of broadly agree with a lot of what you're saying, I think there's also some element where we've seen people over the last few years lose their minds with all the COVID crazy stuff, right? Like they just, they lose their minds, you know, whether it was COVID hysteria, climate hysteria, you know, you name So in some cases it wasn't just a matter of getting the information out, right? Because most of these people, they have a phone, they have the internet, they could, they could read about this stuff too. so I think there's gonna be a big segment of the population who just take whatever narrative they're fed, right? Maybe they're just too far gone, they're not really open-minded. But I-- where I do agree with you is that I think there's a small segment, I don't know what that is, maybe it's ten to twenty percent of the population, they" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:05:42", "start": 3942.85, "text": "To, let's say, connect more with people based on shared interests, and not necessarily feel such a strong tie that they're gonna go and die, for, you know, the government of some particular state that they don't necessarily care about, right? So I think, I sort of, I agree with you, but I think it's, it's a subset of the population who are going to do that, and I think, sadly, a lot of people will just sort of go with the tribe of, you know, the state and what the, the narrative that, you Push out there. So I'm curious what you think there." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "01:06:15", "start": 3975.58, "text": "Oh, I, I completely agree. I don't think, it's gonna affect most of the population. But when you look at history, all these kind of movements, it was always a minority. But it was always a minority that was leading and that was important. When you look at the heretics, quote, quote, before Protestantism, it was always a small part of the population, right? and I mean, when during the War of Religion, many people were like, \"I don't care, if just tell me what I should believe and I will believe, you know, just don't kill me, right?\" but it doesn't matter. Ten or twenty percent of the population, I don't, I don't even know if it's gonna be so high But I would argue, argue that even five percent of the population doing that is already very disruptive, very, very, very, especially since, probably many of them will be part of the wealthiest population and it's gonna also, affect the budget of states. But even five percent, I mean, the, the stories are gonna spread, is gonna convince more and more people and, i's, i's gonna, i's gonna create some, some conflict. So in history, unfortunately, where- Where, when, when you see like, there is a battle for the story in the mind of the people, there were many times there was a, a war or wars. I hope it's not gonna be, the case this time because now we have, other new technologies, right? Which is like, freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Basically, freedom of religion and freedom of speech is like, hey, you don't need to fight physically, just can fight verbally to, to see what ideas are winning, right? Which I think is really, really amazing innovation Situations, and we have them, and I hope it's not just gonna be at, at this level, but because it's also going to affect physically some states with their money, right? it's possible that we, we see some, kind of, real, Berlin walls being built at some point in some countries, I mean, in one way or another, And when you look also at the history of protestantisms, it also won because some princes and kings of the time supported them, and I think we'll see also a battle, hopefully, I, I don't think it's gonna be a war, but like a real battle of, you know, influence and jurisdictions of, of countries trying to track like these, new people and, and countries trying to restrict them for, for, for living. Also about, cryptos, we, we can see it already just the start of El Salvador making Bitcoin, legal And you, you see that in the US, the Congressmen is not happy about that. I mean, some, Congressmen and women, right? Not everyone, they did an investigation on this, and the president of El Salvador, Nayib Bukele, he said, \"Hey, we aren't, sorry, we aren't, your colony, we can't do whatever you want.\" But you can see already that it starts to, you know, it's not a war, but it's a fight that is starting, that is going. We, Stage, right? Maybe there is pressure from the US government, towards Ecuador, like this, I will say, I don't know, we, we, we cut your- Yeah. Potentially" }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:09:23", "start": 4163.71, "text": "like the IMF, right? There's, the people have spoken about that, the IMF trying to pressure them. These kind of international organizations that are really just government-funded organizations. But anyway, I mean, certainly I take the point, like that we are seeing, I think the point is that we are seeing competitive jurisdictions. That's going to be really interesting because it's gonna change the game because Maybe we'll take that option, but as you said, even if five percent of the population start doing this seriously, yeah, then it'll cause big shifts. And so I think that's a really interesting spot to finish up. Before we let you go, Olivier, where can people find you online? What's the best place? I think i-is it, disruptive-dash-horizons dot com, right? Absolutely. Fantastic. Well, I'll put all the links in the show notes and, Olivier, do you have any, indication of when" }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "01:10:15", "start": 4215.4, "text": "I'm, I, I wrote more than one hundred fifty thousand words already, and I don't feel I finished to say everything I have to say. So hopefully it's gonna be published. I, I'm writing it in French actually. so my, my blog, I mean, I use AI for my blog because I write all the articles in French, and I translate them using DeepL, which I think is an interesting, case, right? so hopefully it's gonna be published, in twenty twenty-four in French, and I hope that it's gonna be Maybe twenty twenty-five." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:10:46", "start": 4246.42, "text": "Okay, great. Well, I'll, I'll, get everyone to check out your, your blog at least and, check out the articles there. And, thanks for joining me today." }, { "speaker": "author", "time": "01:10:54", "start": 4254.81, "text": "Thank you, Stefan." }, { "speaker": "stephan", "time": "01:10:56", "start": 4256.54, "text": "Now, a quick announcement, just as we finish up, I'm going to be a speaker at Nomad Capitalist Live in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. This is coming up September sixth to the ninth. So it's coming up soon, but this is going to be very relevant for those of you who are interested in the topics discussed in this episode around international wealth building. So this is interesting for those of you who are looking at things like second passports or offshore banks or residencies, best places to live, and there's an awesome lineup of speakers. Andrew Henderson from Nomad Capitalist is going to be there. Obviously, as well as many other speakers like Jim Rogers, Mark Farber, Mark Moss, Zubi, and so many more. So go over to nobadcapitalist dot com slash live and you can get your tickets there. And of course, you can find my show and details over at stephanlivera dot com. Thanks, and I'll see you in the citadels." } ] }