Background-01.png

our blog

Search
  • Josh Bolton

interview with alan lee


Unknown: 0:05The man the myth, the legend himself. How are you doing? I can't hear you. About now. Yeah, there it is. Okay. I thought I had everything prepared and you really did zoom before ever on my phone. Okay. So are you downstairs? Are you in your iPhone? hiding away from the kids? Oh, good. Okay. All right, Alan, let's get into it. So tell me about yourself and your goals. Well, before we do that, well, I guess I should, you know, flow with that. am I'm trying to run for president, believe it or not. And I think I have a heck of a lot more to offer and new ideas, innovative things that people never thought of before just to solve problems and make it work. Okay. Unlike your average Joe Blow, who just wants to run for president the fame and fame and fortune? I don't care about that. junk. I'm like, I'm way above that stuff. So I could have had a good upbringing. So that stuff is irrelevant. You know, money power. I'll give a damn about that. Two tickets. Okay, I think people what's the best the President's choice? Right, right. So that's, um, that's what I'm trying to do. I should try to in 2020, but I had no idea. The only problem I actually would have is just getting people to know that I'm alive. Yes. That's when I had no idea that was gonna be the problem. I it's unbelievable. The things I did. I wrote to senators and congressional caucuses and ex presidents and on down the list, you know, no concern science, you name it. You think of it, I wrote to him, who sent emails, and I got ignored, but every single month. Anyway, I learned a few things during that for now push it back to 2024. But I wanted to, before we get into any details, that's a little background. apologize to you right now, because it's a good chance that some of the questions that you're about to ask me for this, I'm gonna be able to answer more. All right. It's not a cop out. No. To me very relative reasons. Yeah. Which I'd like to run by you right now. That's okay. Okay. Well, the first one, you know, a lot of people call it their platform. I like to call it my core principle. Okay. See idea is central idea behind my whole everything I'm doing and what it is, believe it or not, that I'm planning on getting the people out there to choose and decide on the laws that helps them. Not Congress, not the President, not me. We the People supposed to mean something, right? Well, I figured out a way where we're will. It's on my website, it's a 10 steps long. But um, right now, I'm not going to position to ask 150 million people their opinion on texts, or, you know, health care or whatever, because their opinion will be my opinion. my opinions are irrelevant and pretty my opinion below and subservient. Everybody else out there because the other people account. Okay. That's one reason why I have to ask them, I can't ask that. Second reason. You know, Biden's in when I'm talking about Trump for a second, because Biden's brand note. If you go back to Trump, which isn't he operated in a vacuum. He didn't seem to care what anybody thought at all. On the exact opposite. I like to depend on people, especially people who are knowledgeable and expert, and know what the heck talking about. So I plan on having a team of more scientists, more economists, more doctors, lawyers, you name on down the line, specialists, advisors, consultants than anybody's ever had before. And it will depend on these people. Of course, I may be a Bayesian, but nine times out of 10, I will be guided by their judgment. And again, I don't have those people to pick their brains on right. So that's the second reason. The third one is, you know, doing this to win. If you're a lefty, right, he's gonna stop you. If you're writing the left, he's going to stop you. You have to be in the middle and go for what the majority of the people want. That's the middle. You know, it's a democracy, majority rules. So I'm not about to I'm not about to say what my personal opinion is on anything because like I said before, it's irrelevant. I'm gonna pick whatever most people want. And that's it. So that's why it may be hard for me to answer your questions, but I'll try and who is the least you're trying? So I do have a question on one of your statements, you would go with the majority of what people said. Would you be saying you couldn't have been to the mob? If they asked you to do something? Or would you consider their opinion, but not like fully been to them? I couldn't hear the first half of that sentence. Sorry. It's okay. So, essentially is like if the mobs like the Twitter mobs and the physical mobs come to the White House and say, We want you to change this tax for this reason, kind of thing. Would you bend to them? Okay, I thought I heard the word mob, I wasn't sure what you meant. Well, you know, small or medium, even a big sized mob, physical mob of people getting together is a small number compared to 300 million people out there. So I would consider it, you know, the vocal. Right. I still go with the majority of people majority rules. So what if the mob lead the faceless entity that's loud, and you can be heard, suppresses the people that you're representing, if they have an opinion, about let's say, I do. I haven't even figured out where you are on this. But let's say it is a greenhouse tax, like a carbon tax. And I don't know if we'll get there soon. But they know the big business like Exxon and concrete companies, they're like, no, even though we're few, we own them. And we'll tell them not to kind of thing. How's that? I'm not precisely sure what you mean. But again, it depends on how many people are are, as far as giant corporations are concerned. You know, like, the green New Deal, that kind of thing. For example, Republicans complain, for example, again, that you know, it's going to hurt business, something like that. It's just not true at all. If you go back to like, way back like World War Two, the big three car companies were making cars, all of a sudden, they had to make tanks, they retool the industry, and they did it. And guess what? They made a profit. They made money, right? The corporations that are now much bigger than they were back then much bigger, make tons of money, they can retool easily and make wind turbines and nuclear reactors and whatever it is geothermal, anything, carbon capture machines, wave machines, it's just an example. So I'm not going to be guided by corporations. That's for sure. Okay, so you said you, obviously, you say you're not one side or the other. So would you say you're an independent or a green? independent? Okay. I'm gonna expand on that just a second. Yeah. My whole life, I was never registered as a Democrat, Republican, anything, nothing at all. The only reason I recently switched to democrat was, again, when I was running in 2020, Trump was president is Republican, if I recall against him, you have to be a Democrat. Because I heard that they changed the rules, going back a few years with Bernie Sanders couldn't go in until he switched to democratic. So that's why I did all that. I'm not an independent thinker. So. Okay, so for independent, can you elaborate for the audience what their core value is? Well, again, my value is really just my opinion, doesn't matter at all. It just doesn't matter. You know, I'm not going to do something stupid. I think most people out there a smarter level, they wouldn't choose something ridiculous anyway, or anything extreme. They just tried to get ahead in life and catch up to the 1% that have been zooming ahead like crazy and they're slow slide down. It's been that way for decades. Right? So this is like my thing I say, and I don't mean it in like a derogatory, I'm learning trading. And I'm realizing there's a lot of tax implications when I trade because of funding for whatever. But I'm the one that's on the slippery slope down, but I realized if I change and I'd go what the corporate America is doing, I can at least make a decent living for like, but it's the Why would I get taxed for trying to do what they do. At least heavily. I understand taxes, tax is inevitable life, death and tax kind of thing. So, but it's the will make a sliding scale prorated scale, just like with regular income taxes, it's the same thing. More people make. Individual or small businesses or giant corporations more human All up. Okay, so would you cap it at like, say for our current President Biden, his tax plan is to cap it at 400,000. After that, it scales up about whatever percent more till it pretty much hits like 90%? Or would it be more just universal by? What's the random number? If you make a million dollars a year, you're you're just capped at 50%? tax kind of thing. Yeah, I prefer a sliding scale. But again, I would speak to the economic experts on that. Okay, I would, I would pick their brain just like I was talking about before. So I can't give specific numbers in anything right now. Because that would have, you know, consult with them. Right? Right. Then mineral slugging skills prorated better, of course, it's just fairer. Right? So one thing as I've picked up on learning business is a lot of executives. Yes, they're worth billions of dollars. But they didn't actually collect that money. It's all stock. So how would you because like Bezos, before he left, within the week, I think of Amazon or CEO, he only got paid 880 K a year. But everything was was gifted stock. So how would you approach that? Again, I would speak to the experts. I'm not going to get involved in details like that. I wouldn't be interested in that. I would, again, make a decision based on their opinions. Okay, I don't know enough about business or economics to answer that. So what they do. Okay. For EDI, I'm trying I'm trying to remember what you said earlier on different stuff. For your plan on let's say, global warming. What is your just your basics that you can say without referring to a scientist kind of thing? Well, were you? Well, it is an existential threat. That's for short, oh, yeah. would even be tempted to declare a national emergency emergency powers to do whatever is needed. because it'd be time the data is looked at, by a top scientist to climate analysis is worse than what they thought, you know, they're always trying to be conservative, not to scam people. But it's not the truth. The truth is worse than what they've been telling us sign off, they're actually hiding, again, not to scare people. Or they're just being conservative, because that's what scientists do. But again, every time we analyze this stuff, its followers, followers. So it is an emergency. You know, there's many things that can be done anything. Like I mentioned before, most people haven't even heard of wave machines, just a heck of a lot more power in a way moving at 50 miles an hour than a gentle breeze would get 50 miles an hour, because water is denser than air. Wave machines at work using them in Europe, you know, along the coastlines would line up with those things. That's just about all you need. But is geothermal, even nuclear for a short time if we need it? I just thought about it. The list goes on and on wind turbines, land, sea. Solar, of course, is endless number of things you can do and also capturing the carbon directly out of the atmosphere. There's machines that do that not too, right. Yeah, that one? Definitely. Didn't, would you be coming back to the funding? How would it be taxing the rich to afford it kind of thing or more of an indirect like a carbon tax? Again, I would speak to the experts on that there's a few ways you could do it. Number one, us is unique in that we, you know, can sort of pop money out we can almost make money out of a tree. Yeah, with the with the 4 billion stimulus, the original one, double what Biden's gonna do right now. And he's doing it again. With the money comes from nowhere. It's available. But even if you don't count that if you want to get it from more traditional methods. I developed a tech system to I have many of you probably haven't seen it but many, many posts I made on Twitter and Facebook. Okay, I'm extremely nothing extremely recent. We're talking hundreds in a very short time. I never even were on these platforms, intermission memories, not usable. But one of them. One of the ones I made up was about the taxes. And I don't remember the details Exactly. Something like if you're poor or lower middle class, we're not going to change your taxes at all. Of course, they can barely afford to pay what they're paying right now. People always talk about, you know, taxing millionaires and billionaires. Yeah, that's true. But guess what? Oh, my number is kind of a guy. I used to Numbers, I can smell them. Right there on the bench, I've run through the numbers myself, I did all the calculations. in rows, people have a lot of money, a ton of money, there aren't that many of those people. If you multiply it out, it comes out to a few 10s of billions of dollars that you get from from a source from that. It's not enough. And the regular income tax that people are paying, that helps again, corporations help again. But there's two other categories of people that all the politicians that don't worry about it, I think, if you're afraid of the voters, but you have to get the money from somewhere, and even the billionaires, I wouldn't plan on taking away 90% of the money not gonna put them in the poorhouse. I'm not gonna take half their money, they earned it, they deserve it. But a reasonable percentage, again, they would pay more than anybody else still helps. And they will pay more than anybody else on my plan if it ever happens. But again, like I said, it's not enough. If you go down, let's start from the bottom up. If you go to the upper middle class, I see people making 100,000 up, most people are always crying the blues, but they make three times as much as the average person does, including myself, three times as much. I don't want to put them in the poorhouse either. But quantity wise is a lot of there is about 20 million families making 100,000 you multiply that out times a small increase, like 3000 a year, that number remember, they paid 3000 a year more than what they do have, which is nothing 3% of their income, there's nothing that comes out to I forget the number like another 50 60 billion just from that. As you go up the scale, people make like a quarter of a million into that category. Again, increase it again, 10s of billions of dollars. And you add to the higher millionaires and billionaires. Now there's enough money, except for noisy operations again, they're gonna pay more. You know, a lot of people especially republicans always complain, you can't do that to corporations, it's gonna hurt the economy. I've looked at the data. I did this before. It's all on my, on my website. All the details are on the record, because I went through these numbers. Even during the big recession, they resuming they still made profits, even when Obamacare came along. And the upper middle class was tax funded. And people know where the money came from. That's where it came from. Guess what, they still assumed your investments to work, they're still making money. You could increase taxes on corporations, too. We're not going to pull them out of business. To do that. The world runs on corporations and businesses, big and middle. But they can pay more and it will provide more 10s of billions easy edelen It's enough, even out emergency powers. Okay, I was just thinking because I've recently been looking into getting LLC for this podcast, so I can distinguish my taxes to the podcast is income, but one of them recently I've heard and it ties into your tax scale, corporations get taxed more, but they also get more write offs kind of thing. So like, let's say all the stuff I bought for my podcast, I can write it off legally. Would you limit? Let's say, hypothetically, I'm not there yet. I'm making 450,000 a year would I my scale change because of that or, again, sliding scale just like an income tax. The corporations, you know, get very few idols that all they can afford not to have you as a small business in as many as you can get prorated again, it's the only way to tear progressive tax system. So okay, this is where I think I messed up on explaining it. Essentially what I was trying to aim for is a lot of people say the scaling and I believe in it too, but I think the execution wrong. And when you increase corporate taxes, yes, they pay the money, that's fine, but they'll just increase the prices of the product, which then would just cause inflation. How would you fix that? Well, we need oversight conditions, you know, what the watchdog agency is supposed to be doing? Which Trump got rid of a lot of them Biden's bringing on some of them back. I actually wanted to write a post just about that. But watchdog agencies and can't think of the term they call it for government agencies. You think of the word Oh inspector general's Okay. Well, I wanted to increase the power was really they look for people doing bad things, and illegal things and cheating and then dip out needs to be increased. That's that takes care of that. Basically, so, okay, so then I'm going to go down the internet privacy route, should they also be able to remove all encryption, so they can make sure people are not cheating kind of thing. Essentially like this, this call we have is encrypted, no one else can come in kind of thing. Should that that upower be gone kind of thing? Well, now you're, you know, coming down to the free speech, first amendment kind of thing. So, it's a little tricky, but I think I have to talk to your advisors on that one, too. Okay, maybe a middle ground that we can reach again, possibly, depending on income again, it probably would be worth it to dig into those details for giant corporations because they have the resources to cheat and the incentive to do so. As opposed to a small person like you, for example, right? Um, okay, can I get a clear definition of what you deem for cheating for them? Sorry, can I get a clear definition of what you perceive as a corporation cheating? Oh, if I can think of an example right now, which has been many, many, many lately. But it's okay, if you want to need to refer to an older one. Well, hiding information, for example, I'm gonna write where I live. There are water quality issues. From Grumman, for example, when Aerospace Corporation, I'm sure most of the old Tomcat 14, and they may have hidden some of that information, along with the Navy, because now they have to spend a lot of money doing the Superfund cleanup, the water, something that should definitely be overseen, for example, example exam, that's a private corporation. Okay? Pretty big, pretty big one. But, so one thing, what it like at the, sorry, my head's going too fast, the annual reports and like the 10 case for Corporation where they do disclose legally, everything that's going on the good, the bad, and the ugly, whether they like it or not, but they do it tricky, where it's like a cliff note. So it's saying like this happened, Cliff note, check the back, and you'll get more details. Are you suggesting we alter that whole system where they're not lying, but they've also made it harder to find the information? Not sure information should be open? When I talk about the fine print? You know, one of the things that I wanted to do, which is relate to that, if I could ever make this happen as far as the press goes, transparency, you know, a lot of presidents have spoken about that. They have no idea what transparency is with the press, in my opinion, is my only goal should be the President's only linked to the people out there. And they are critical. They're critical. I need to know what the people out there are thinking, what they feeling, what they need, what they want, and a press can find that out. And vice versa. People know what I'm thinking and planning and feeling through the press. So they are priority one. Definitely. In my book, I would plan on making actual friends whenever you want. Okay, then let's go down the press route. How would you unify everything when it's usually divided between red and blue party? And we don't associate in between? combined combine? What is essentially I'm saying how would you fix the split nation of the press? Where like the fox news, you know, that's all red, CNBC. That's more blue kind of thing. They're private corporations, I can make them report differently than what they want to do as long as they're not lying. Which there has been done before too. So again, that could be overseen by some watchdog agency, Inspector General, whatever. But it's a free country. I'm not going to make them you know, red turn blue or blue turn red. Okay, I would just I would just speak the truth, evaluate in any way they want to. So the the so what I was trying to allude to earlier with the encryption and your inspector general's, is there's a bill in Congress right now called the earn an act. Have you heard of it? No. So very layman's term, I'm probably missing some technicals here. Essentially, they're saying all encryption is outlawed. But if you're willing to pay or earn it, you can have encryption. So everything you do is open. Everyone can see what you do and you can see what they do. Unless you pay for it. Yeah, I don't think that's fair either because a giant corporation should pay for it again. A little guys can't. Right. Okay. So fair Right. And that is actually I was telling that to one of my I do martial arts, my martial arts instructor, I was telling it to him. He's like, That's not fair. Like guys like you and me. We could barely scrape together 100 k total for us. And corporations get down to just like taking your shit. Like, how are we supposed to compete? That's right. So then Heaven forbid that that law passes within the next four years, would you go forward and change it? Or because it's bringing in so much income to the nation? Would you leave it be this organ in here and this organ and he has priority over this stupid thing? These two things use properly you get that anyway. You might get hurt in your mind. Okay? The buck does stop here. If I ever got to that point. Definitely. Money does talk. What solves problems and helps people that is priority one money. Okay. The big corporations will make enough trucks. They always will. I'm not worried about that I've from my Roth IRA, I've invested them because I know that these like, three m k is going to make money no matter what kind of thing we can stream ships, command strips. But it's the as now seeing both sides. It's the Well, I don't want them to suffer because then I suffer kind of thing. But I also see where they need to at least pay more. But then as an investor, I don't want them to pay get taxed more kind of thing. So now we'll figure out if you if you're pro rated along with the inspector general's and watchdog agencies, it'll work again because advisors on that. Okay, watchdog AMC that reminds me of 1984 in the book, are you thinking more of a big brother approach to everything or the kind of like the kid on the streets, calling in stuff. Independent agencies is supposed to operate independently and be nonpartisan, and that's the way I would prefer it. But humans doesn't have to be a giant bureaucracy. But I was gonna say humans in general, though, we have biases. It's just inherent who we are kind of thing. So how would we limit that? Would it be rules kind of thing? Sure. It's the only way to fly. But there has to be equitable, ethical, moral rules. And I'm gonna do this with the attorney general's office is supposed to do as well. So then I'm gonna play devil's advocate right now, what would be ethical and moral to you? relatives relative to policies, before monitoring humans. In collaboration with a guiding light, you could say behind everything that I would like to decide would help other people getting this helps the most people as opposed to what hurts the most people. Everything will be guided by will be judged by that. Because that's the purpose of the president to help people. Right? Correct. Operations while in corporations, even though corporations are run by people and let people also help you. But if it comes down to one versus the other people win. Okay, then let's say, I'm going to get going down this rabbit hole, let's say it was a matter of economic destruction. Or we leave it as is but like we accelerate global warming kind of thing. Would a complete collapse of the economy be worth helping the morality of people? No, because then people get hurt anyway. And it's unnecessary. It's like I said before, and as a scientist, I've said many things that can be done to help global warming. And there are funding sources. I was I was I was using global warming, it's more of an a one to the other kind of example. But yeah, it's just that's one thing I've been thinking I've been thinking is, we could technically fix the problem that we have by taxing, but then that would cause a complete economic destruction and we're barely recovering from the march crash kind of thing. So it's the do we just just completely destroy everything? Or do we leave it just status quo and let it keep going, even though we all know it's bad, but it's all paying us kind of thing. You mean talking about as far as fixing the pandemic? Um, no, it would be well, okay. Yes, and no, it's more the, the approaching everything the, your the green movement, the fixing the tax Corporation stuff. And now pandemic, I was trying to get ventually into that. How would you way that would it be through the people? I mean, yes, it's good to have advisors. But I mean, ultimately they advise you, but you have to make the proper decision. So how would you do it? Well, again, that goes back to the first. The majority rules have developed a system on website that's about 10 steps long to get can give you the general General, General rundown of it right now. Yeah, do that. To get the opinions of people out there. Yeah, go into detail, because there's multiple ways to get opinion, but they're not accurate. So how would you approach it? Okay. Again, it's about 10 steps along the 10 step is not listed, because that's firing on all tubes. I really don't want to let anybody know about that. Because I know it would be necessary. But you know, you don't want to let the opposition know what you're planning, of course. So yeah, the 10 step isn't listed. I know what we needed. And I would use it when a time came up. It's nothing that hasn't been done before. But I would push it through using the bully pulpit. But the first step four, that's one through nine, let's say. And you just give me super simple terms. So you don't give away your plan kind of thing. Yeah, it's on my website, just the 10th step is not listed. But you know, all the problems that society has every country in the world. All these problems have been analyzed many times, again, by experts, right, have come up with solutions, the solutions exist, the very first thing I would do is get our team, let's say it's taxes, or health care, for example, and do some digging, and find out all the places that have analyzed this stuff and what they say. Let's say it's talking about health care. And after if you look enough, you would find two or three solutions that are being repeated by independent agencies. Now they want to analyze these things, they all came up with the same answer, basically, I'm not talking about excruciating details, but in general, they came up with the same solution. So what I would do after finding that, let's say pick the top, pick the top to present them, to the public out there basically, meeting etc, with a simple to read charts, or graphs. And well, if we do this, this is going to go up like this. We do it this way. It's going to go up like this, but not as much. We think this one's better You tell me. And then we have polls and surveys to traditional media and also social media, we get a result with the people say they want to do it this way, I will formally present that to Congress. This is what the people who put you in your seat that you're sitting right now your big fat parents here with a big fat paycheck. They want you to do this. And I need to do that. And of course, Congress will vote and usually they won't do it. That goes to the next step. And it just continues. So. Okay, so that was step one. Is that all 10? Oh, no, it was only like one or two. Simply minister, and like I said, Don't give away your whole plan to the opposition, just for the average listener who's been listening is like, what is this 10 steps kind of thing. Again, I just listened for a couple of weeks, you would then get the information presenting information to the people that people vote, to not have formal voting, just surveys and polls, just to see which one they want to do I present it to Congress. If Congress pushes it through, okay, CASE CLOSED, the Congress doesn't. I would pretty much make a black list of other people. You know, it's a public record how Congress people how they vote, senators and congressmen how they want every everyone should have a list, just to make it more presentable so that people say, Well, this guy didn't vote the way you want it. Let's get rid of him. Okay, so I agree with this mindset. But I'm also thinking of it from their point of view, that they will do everything public. No, no, not the public. I'm talking about the Congress. Like how, how they would not want you to explain what they're doing because they're trying to hold power. There's a couple of there's a couple of things going on with Congress. I can't like firm, which source but essentially, they all they treat everyone equal but then like five days later, they're essentially like, yeah, if you're a Democrat, you only vote Democrat. If it's a good republican idea. Fuck him. You're not doing that kind of thing. How would you explain this without completely flipping the table because I agree that kind of transparency we need, we need the money. know their motives, but they're deeply rooted and they know, they know, ways to suppress kind of thing. That's right. Well, one of the things, one of the first things I would do with Congress, and I would actually put them unnoticed. Okay, I tell them all higher level effective, elected officials, including myself, including the Vice President, are supposed to do the will of the people. He's supposed to represent them, what the heck does represent me in the definition, and any other any of those people who do not will be fired, including myself, I would actually tell them it to them. And again, as they vote on things, if they don't buy by the will of the people, I will help the people fire them. If it turns out to be myself, which obviously it wouldn't be, it's my plan, I would resign, they wouldn't have to impeach me, I would just leave. I'm not about to do anything stupid like that. But I am going to single out the people who do and they will be fired. It may take some time, but they will be fired. I don't even pick on their friends. Even I will even pick up on on their friends if they are up for election yet. But the best part is we're gonna go after him. And then you're next. You do what the people tell you to do, or you will lose your job. They put you in this seat, they're going to take you out of the doghouse. And I'm going to help them. Okay, so then let's I want to pivot a little instead of firing people would setting a term limit be more reasonable for Congress and in all them possible. That probably requires passing a law, which again, Congress would that gridlock, you can't pass anything. That's the whole point, getting rid of the people don't vote by the will of the people. So we have have enough people to get things done. Right now. Nothing gets done. It's late. It's good luck, it's getting worse. Then the system that I invented, again, does not require any constitutional amendments, no changes in laws whatsoever. This can be done through the White House, and by outside media again. So changing Lars is ridiculous. There's no way you can you're gonna get that done. Right. And that's where I was, I was gonna allude to would declaring martial law be in the book to get things done for you? Yes, in fact, I would do that for the pandemic. I think it should have been done years ago. But of course, Trump didn't care about that. It wasn't making any money. I didn't care about the pandemic. But as far as infringing on people's rights, for example, like forcing people to wear a mask, well, what's more important, your rights? Well, breathing, take a pic. We're trying to keep you alive when this was stupid. This was handled properly from the beginning. The whole thing could have been done in a month, a month, instead of years. Now you can't shoot people soccer wear a mask, but they can be fine. Or, depending on the situation, many times that happens. possibly get arrested. I don't know. Again, have to talk to the legal expert experts on that. But that's not so nice. You that You go to jail. You get Corona. Right, yeah. So like for me, back in early December of 2020. I got Corona. But I followed all the rules, I wore a mask. But these people came in where I work to do a remodel, there was like 100 of none the ones who actually had grown chose not to wear it because it was also shady practices. And now they fixed it. But I got it. And still it's the six two months later, my lungs are screwed up. Actually, I don't wear a mask anymore, because I can't really breathe anymore. Like I can't I used to do cardio all the time. It's the hardest thing now, for me to do. So let's say for you, in your instance, would it be a blanket rule for mass. But in like my case, I'm being saved, but it's hard for me to read. So when I'm alone, I take it off kind of thing. Well, again, is medical conditions. And we're really sorry to hear that about you. Sorry to hear that. Oh, um, it was just a rough. It's just rough to breed now everything else I'm I'm doing okay. But again, there are also always medical insurance for things, but in general, healthy people, of course, would be required. Then. So what would be your plan? Let's say I can wave a magic wand and you suddenly switch a button. You have free rein of this the country for one week, but you have to follow the rules. What would you do the moment you are given that opportunity? Right now I would do similar to what he's doing and do whatever, acquire whatever resources are necessary to get into the defense production act also to help fight dependent that's right now let's origin to climate change and global warming. That's happening too fast. It's killing people right now. I mean, the other thing is too, but this is far worse. Yeah, I probably would go a little further than him and then declare martial law just to make things happen faster, just people die. It's like 4000 a day. It's ridiculous. Yeah, it's something like that. But I think it might be more. I don't have the stats in front of me to provide correctly if someone's gonna get offended, but I think it's averaging around 10 k a day now. Which, okay, in this game, I'm gonna play devil's advocate not being trying to, like put you in a bad spot. But let's say between a pandemic we're like, again, I don't know the data, but like 50,000 people have recovered, but only 2 million have died. That's a very small fatality rate kind of thing. Or we ignore it. And we focus on global warming kind of thing. The pandemics? You know, to me, one life dying is too much. It's like the worst thing in the world being dead. What's worse than that? Actually, what's unnecessary? So, priority one is the pandemic, that's for sure. And it's fallen very shortly afterwards by global martial law, it gets things done faster. Nothing is perfect. There's no 100% solution to anything as you know, whenever is the things that work better than other. Okay, Marshall would get things done faster. So, let's put it in this perspective. You we've fulfilled it, you're in for a week, you have declared martial law, who is going to come in and stop you because you're essentially now king of everything, no one can contest you. How would you really be willing to give up that much power? If the people said, you're doing too much and you're hurting us stop? Look for some proof of that, that that saving lives, because that's the purpose, why I would be doing it. I don't see how it would be hurting people. Not gonna stop it from going to work. You have to pay your rent, you have to pay your mortgage, you have to buy food, etc. But again, if the funding is available, all the pines doing right now with the 1.9 trillion, same thing. So would you also be printing within your level of the magic week? If I said, anything can go you have one week? Would you immediately be slamming out stimulus to? Of course, people can't afford to live right now. They're out of work. There's all kinds of exemptions. exceptions where they can't get a job for one reason or another. And everybody needs help. Of course, they will do whatever is necessary, again, consult on the experts, again, the advisors to consultants, from what I read. Even Biden is said, the 1.9 trillion still, isn't it? Often I agree with that. It's probably should be triple that. percent back to normal. I remember listening to a podcast A long time ago with Janet Yellen. And he essentially said, this is like a 21 trillion mistake. So if we just print up to about $21 trillion would be easy peasy kind of thing. Do you think that would be fair, or should we more? segregate the people the ones who are actually unemployed get the benefits but those like someone like me who's working, they don't get the benefits of the stimulus check kind of thing? Again, prorate it. Even the Congress right now it's 1.9 trillion. They're trying to do that right now. They're trying to show you if you're above a certain level, sorry, well, you're not gonna get it. Of course, that's right. Just like the Texas is prorate progressive people, people that can't afford it more, they don't need it. In fact, if you knock off enough people like that you can, you can do it at the other end, the people the extreme lower end. Now you're not going to get 14 or you're going to get 25. For example, because the people at the top are not going to get anything at all because they don't need it. Okay, so then let's go down that route. I know a few friends who have not gotten their check. And it's mainly because they don't have a bank account. The IRS never sent them the check, or they sent them a check, but they don't have a bank account. So they can't cash it kind of thing. Yeah. How would you approach that? Because I noticed debit card one, literally people are throwing 1000s of dollars into the dump right now. Because they think it's just junk mail. How would you better approach it? I talk to the experts on it, and see what's the best way to distribute it. Maybe to the SNAP program, which a lot of people that to which I also am on. Okay, 10s of millions and 10s of millions of people on food stamps used called snap just add along to their card possibly to cash version of that I've heard which I don't have I only have two part portion. That's another way to do it. Right, sir. So So then, from that point of view, I because I work, and I live with my parents alone, I don't need the benefits. So what if you were to have the power? Someone like me who's not enrolled in snap? Because I don't need it? So let leave it leave it for other people? Would I be out of the stimulus check kind of thing? I don't know the specifics of your situation, the exact numbers and a lot about too. So I can't answer that question. But again, a sliding scale would be made by the economist. And in general, the more you make, the less you get, as far as stimulus goes, anyway. And the more you make, the more you pay in taxes, exactly the same. Okay. So then, back to I can't put numbers on it depends on each person's situation. Right. So what I was just saying is like an average Joe, like, because where I am, I work in a grocery store. So I've never had to stop working during this lockdown. So someone like me, who even though I'm making minimum wage can still poverty level. But would I be excluded? Because I'm not on snap or unemployment kind of thing from your greater planet, excluding the advisors, because I've gotten all of them because they listened to them. I've put in my direct deposit and all that. But future steps, we How would you approach someone like you from but again, I don't know the exact your income, but it sounds to me that you still should you still should get something? Maybe not to 2400 to the bottom line, people will be getting something in between? So for the bottom line? Okay, um, I'll look that up on your site after this. The so what would be your definition bottom? Like the the poor of the poor? kind of thing? Well, there is a legal definition of poverty level, I don't know what it is, is also, it's also different per state to Yeah, yeah. Well as it should be, because the situation is different in each state is different. But again, that would be prorated, depending on all the variables on your income and where you live. I can't put the exact numbers on. If you have people that are destitute, that are homeless, obviously, they should get them. Right. So, okay, I'm in California, I don't know what state you're in. I don't want to be too rude and be like, tell me but in California, we recently passed a law where we feed the homeless, like everything they get, they're going to get better meals than I will essentially they're going to make them pancakes, bacon, etc. But it's the Yes, they're poor and poverty, I understand. I'm not trying to diss them. But to have someone rolling around in a big van just hadn't you gourmet pancakes, doesn't give you initiative to come out of poverty, because it's like, well, why are they guys giving me free food, I don't need to leave being poverty. That was the pandemic is over, that should be adjusted. And those people should be required to go to school or work or both. Again, depending on the situation set of rules could be drawn up, similar to what could be done for immigrants, as far as making the legal, like symbolism. So when it comes to schooling, like for me, I could not afford college, so I didn't go kind of thing. I'm teaching myself now different stuff. But how would you would it be like the Bernie Sanders free college for all as long as you can do it kind of thing? possible, I haven't delved into it in excruciating detail. Again, I would consult the advice as far as that goes. But in general, if you look at the country's past has been problems that were made many decades ago. Similar to help people in similar situations, I don't know the details of them, but they could be we Institute and expanded upon and modified a little bit. jobs program patients programs. So I remember it. Again, it's not detailed like you but it was like some back in the 30s. When they had their financial crash day government literally just pumped money directly into like industrials, making bridges kind of thing. But that was a very direct source of income, why it was going out because you help one person trickles out. Just the way to go. But then, okay, on that, let's say, the helping one person is giving them a check again. But if I have like, just in general, if we have an extra $1,000 is like, Oh, I'm just gonna go buy something on Amazon, which makes the rich richer and keeps the poor poor. Would there be contingencies with the money like, Oh, you can only use it for food kind of thing. Probably just like, but SNAP benefits are very similar. Okay. Again, I wouldn't draw up the details myself, consult the experts on that. Something moving along those organs. Okay. Then just the idea of well, then here, let me put it this way, because I was just what came to my mind. Like back in the 1930s, when when the crash happened, they were paying construction companies. So that's why everyone went to construction. And the owners of the construction company were filthy fucking rich, even back then. But it was justified because they were also helping the economy, how would that work different almost 100 years later, with your plan. I don't know if it would work difference. But again, again, I'm not giving you a cop out, I'd have to consult the experts. As far as the details go. I'm the I'm a generalist, in general. I know about all different topics, but the details unless I delve into them myself, which I could like to do with the taxes, for example, I would be guided by their judgment. So I couldn't give you exact details on that. Give you some generalities how I'd like it to make it work. But okay, infrastructure is a good way to do things that need fixing in the country, that's for sure. And it makes jobs. Right. So a little expression about giving a guy a fish as opposed to teaching them to fish, the same thing. You want to keep giving fishes fishes for free forever, it's ridiculous. It's a waste of time waste, the money was the results, he has to learn how to fish, because the fishermen is making the money that's given it the person to free fish kind of thing. So how so supporting the economy, you know, getting stuff for free forever and contributing nothing? I wouldn't want that. But there, okay, there's a big portion of the mob, the the general people, as you call them, that would want that they would want the government to payment extra $100 a month, so they can get their Netflix, HBO and all that free. Like they're essentially it's nice, we can get our streaming services free to governments covered us kind of thing. That wouldn't, that wouldn't have been talking about necessities, necessities, food, shelter, housing, transportation, that kind of thing. But I think so then, would you think the cure for that would be a type of open ledger, like a block chain? logging of, we essentially just get a digital currency. We're like China, you see every transaction we do kind of thing. And you can say, Oh, you've done this? No, you can't, you can't buy that. Now. I don't want to infringe on people's rights. Again, as far as I could make a set of rules where again, it's just not allowed to use it for anything other than food, for example, or guests get to work. If you have a job, something like that. Okay, then let's elaborate on that. Because it's like me, I have enough income from my job to pay for gas and food. What would my mysterious $100 check before? Or would I be only told you can only buy like, Burger King today? Because that's food. And it's a necessity? I'm not sure. Again, I have to draw up a set of regulations with the consultants. I couldn't give the details on that right now. Okay. What we're looking for, is again, you know, after the logo would take way too long, at a certain point, when there are very few people that are actually living in poverty anymore, then you can move up to the next level, possibly until Okay, well, that was like giving people so they can get Netflix. I don't even know if I would agree with that. It's not a necessity. But we're giving money to start a business. That would be that's very good. that contributes to the economy. Okay, I agree with that mindset of giving people a, like maybe like a government grant for a business that would be inspiring me to do something, and I could hire people who could help everything grow. But there's a majority, there's still that 80% of people who don't want to be an entrepreneur who don't want to go out, they just want to work their 40 hours, get drunk over the weekend, call off Monday, continue there. So how would you encourage them because they would not want to be an entrepreneur, you could pay a million dollars, and I can be like, screw you, I'd rather drink and do whatever kind of thing. But I wouldn't be entitled to anything. If it if they've reached a certain level, socio economic level, and maybe they don't need anything. Nobody has to be a millionaire. So then, how would you monitor this? Would it be through data through phones through? I mean, we banking in general, the government sees everything because most people don't believe it. Would you be tapping that more and be like, oh, Josh has this much income. Therefore we're going to pull from him to foster what else possible Oregon, putting restrictions on say the snack bar, we're going to do useful, which was what would you say then like for a snap card would be like a like a Google pay, you get your card and you just have it kind of thing. Yeah, sure. or actual physical card? I have a physical card snap. Okay, it looks it looks like it looks like credit cards. Right? Then the logistics of it. Again, I'm just I'm pushing because I'm not just trying to be nice. A lot of the questions I've been wanting to ask him like know, a lot of people would say how What gives you the right, it's my money. I worked hard for it. Why should you tell me? Oh, you can only buy burgers kind of thing? Because it's a necessity, or I'm just saying burgers is first? Because in my mind. Because if you're getting it for free, then you don't have a right. As far as that's concerned, the government does, we're the one giving it to you. So we're going to determine what you can use it for. Well, then there's the freedom of speech. It's like, I use money as my form of speech, why would you tell me what I can and can't do with it? Because you didn't earn it. It's been given to you for free. Unless you want to pay it back as a loan with interest and go go go load on Burger King. Something like that. Again, I wouldn't be involved in those details without talking to the advisor. So am I trying to cop out? Oh, it's just it's this seems like a logistical and it just security problems. In my perspective, that's what I'm trying to get to. It's like, well, how far is too far for you? Where it's the you can achieve everything you want. But at the price of like, anything you do on your phone the government truly sees now compared to so we can better monitor you for like people, people, people, people. So you know, even government watchdog agencies, Inspector General's wouldn't want them to have too much power. But then would possess this thing. Where's the limit? What's too much power? Because some say they don't have enough power? at the mercy today too much. I think it's better to put restrictions initially rather than having the government monitoring your every move. Okay, then, right? I'm just I'm trying to think of a, a double up with that. So say, No, I'm gonna spin off on one thing to come back to the government. for social media. It's a great platform, but it also encourages people to continue their whatever lifestyle unless they're doing it like me where they're trying to make something. How would you because of the the ability of social media to alter minds? What would you tell? Let's say, within your week that I waved my wand for? How would you tell social media to stop? To stop doing what precisely? I'm using their algorithms to alter young children and even adult minds to a way of more? Try not to say without saying it, but essentially more of a socialist mindset where the government just pays for everything. I don't have to worry. Well, then Facebook, and some of the other ones have been brought up already by the government for violating ethical codes, for example, or just stick by that and maybe increase them. I would def, you know, in my system would with getting people's opinions, surveys and polls, I will be relying heavily on social media to do that. traditional media, and I would make a deal with the beginning. Sorry. So for your social media, would it be like a Twitter poll kind of thing? Yeah. Okay. So I know all of them, including traditional media, okay, then I want your perspective on this. Because I know website if I pay 100 bucks, some guy in Thailand, can spoof himself in America and vote 100,000 times for me. But it's technically only one vote, how would you look at it again, to get the you know, the it goes to work on that. So that can happen. But that's within the rules. I grew up with technology. That's as long as it registers within the coding. Okay, then the coding has to be changed, so it cannot register. But then you're excluding, let's say, it was not done properly. It was done unethically. That has to be weighed to stop the party. I was trying to get out the ethics. Because let's say I'm in Japan, I'm world traveling, but I was like, oh, President hours on I'm gonna go vote on Twitter. It won't let the code says Oh, screw you. You're in Japan. You're not allowed to vote. But I'm a legal citizen. I'm just traveling right now. How would that work? You guys should be able to fix that. The department recoding or algorithm or whatever? I don't know the details. I'm not into that. But it definitely could be done. I'm sure it can. And even if it wouldn't, that your situation you described yourself and you'd be in the extreme minority, as far as polling is concerned, that's for sure. But so but that one situation, the results wouldn't affect the results, minuscule, nothing. So that that's the one situation where, like I said, I can hire some person in Thailand, pay him like 100, and maybe 200 bucks, and use that situation to their advantage. And get around it, it has to change, it has to be changed. And I thought of that, too. It's also in my, on my website, one of the first things that we do also have a meeting with the social media giants, explain them when we're about to do and explain to them the necessity of pure, unadulterated data that cannot be altered. So that would be a tailor to suit a certain need, it cannot be changed. So sorry to cut you off. But so for data that can't be altered, that is that's blockchain, once it's entered, it's there. You can't alter it as much as you want kind of thing. So would you say that she should not be interviewed? Well, that is not the truth. That's where I was going to get to is, So would it be a type of tokenizing of humans? We are? It's not that I'm Josh and your owl. I am. I'm human number 12345. And your 123456123456 has done this action. It is permanently now on his coin kind of thing. Is that fair? Is it fair? Because then that would achieve everything you want? As a president, again, doesn't there's no perfect solution to anything. But pure unadulterated data is necessary? No cheating. No cheating. With trying to solve problems, you can solve problems if you have incorrect data. Okay, check the things I would tell my Cabinet members, for example, or just as a statement to the general public, I would tell me, there are only two conditions where people were I would fire people. Number one, if they're not doing the job, not helping the people they're supposed to, or if they lie, because it's life and death decisions are supposed to be made based on information. If we're not getting the correct information, everything's all messed up. So, okay, so how do you make accurate and so talking, because I know this from listening to different presidents, I was on a huge, I was on a huge binge. I want to be president too. But then I realized, oh, wow, that's too much shit for me. You were inundated 24 hours, seven days a week, for the next four years of terrible information. You know, I've just remembered from bush doing an interview and someone commenting, like he was inundated about how Iraq had nukes, and they were ready to launch. They never told us because they're like, there's no reason to scare the people. But from what I'm hearing from you, you want transparency? Would something like that? Be more whatever you're going through, you would tell the people kind of thing? Well, if it's a national security issue, or something that's going to cause mass riots, obviously not otherwise open and transparent, even bad news, they deserved to know. Okay, then let's talk about what good and bad is for that. What What do you deem as bad news that not even the public should hear about it? Well, if we just push the red button, there's no reason to tell anybody. But what if we only have 20 minutes kind of thing. And it's like the lights to tell it's not gonna make any difference, no matter what you do. may cause less pain, people are not going crazy trying to figure out what to do, rather than you know, getting disintegrated 20 minutes. So would then you say, opening up the floodgates of data from all the phones so you can see what's going on? would be the better appropriate thing even if you gave them like, sorry, by the way Poon like hit the red button. I kind of pissed him off kind of thing. So, but you can see how people react to you can see what they're moving because phones give the government so much information. Would you be monitoring that or would you give that to the NSA just to do their thing? A little bit of both the experts again, but I want to be appraised at what's happening. So then, would you let's say for your watchdog that you keep saying throughout this whole thing with NSA, the National Security Association Be Your watchdog? Or would it be kind of like the jack and jill neighborhood watch, like the, we see something we call the one 800 number, we tell the government anonymously, something happened. Both. In fact, she's watching each other, then that becomes a very complicated chess game. How? It's, it's because it was the cheaters. But here's the thing. So let's say there's two parties, these two pens. And there's, you're saying they both have to watch each other. But then who's going to watch them to make sure they're watching it? Well, because there's a lot more pins into that's for sure. Well, I'm just zz example, I can hold it up, because it's right here. Let's see, there's no parties. And you're saying both of them have to watch each other and both have to be transparent. But who's gonna watch them like a supervisor to make sure they're doing it? Then who's gonna supervisor watching supervisor? Well, the analogy doesn't really work with too, because there's so many components of the giant bureaucracy called the government that this one wouldn't know what this 150 miles away is doing. Even though he's watching you. There's too many parts in between. So, if I'm coming off rude, I'm not trying to this is actually something I've thought about a lot. It's the, let's say, certain departments are not talking to each other. And yes, you know, who would be? Who would be the manager? As much talking as possible. Oh, okay. Watch it. Okay, it's just I don't, I do feel like I'm being a little too harsh at times. But the the scaling, you're saying it's like a management and hierarchy there. So it would go back to the corporate scale, where CEO calling everything because the CEO is monitoring all the branches going down? Would you consider an hierarchy like that, or more of like a community pool where just raw information is going in, like my phone would be blowing up every five minutes with like, data coming in is like, oh, Johnny would be better. It's more complicated, but it's more fair, because the CEO could be bad, too. He shouldn't have total control. It could be one of the bad guys, and half the time they are as we know, right? So was back to the community one, I realized that works better when it comes to different things. But like I said, I don't want to get like 15 messages every like two seconds, like my so and so's ring doorbell just went off. Here's the picture. It's like, well, that's not my ring, why do I need that kind of thing? So that's the kind of thing I'm saying was like, would you inundate the people with all this personal information? So they're, they know, and they're safe? Or would you know, no, only what's critical only what's important? You know, like, as far as example, as far as like voting on issues, I wouldn't ask them every 10 minutes when you want to do it, but just be very limited. That it would be a little bit complicated to make this thing work to only be done to critical issues. Okay, so then back to the voting with social media, let's say, hypothetically, I just don't have a social media. How would you get someone's opinion from that, but like I said, it's also compatible with traditional media, CNN and Fox News and MSNBC. So I know a few. Three. Okay, so I know a few people who don't own TVs or cell phones, because they believe for whatever idea that it's bad. So how would you still approach them? Again, there's no perfect solution, as long as you can get the majority what most of the people want to do. It can also talk to each other. But get people's opinions. Even if you couldn't get their vote, you may influence somebody else. So then how would they talk to each other? Would it be strictly just online email kind of thing? Anyway, they can't even the old fashioned way writing letters? Not anymore. No. So okay. There's no perfect, there's no perfect solution as most of the people let's just say I can begin like putting you in bitin. Earlier, let's say I wave my wand. views and politics are not a problem. How would you approach fixing the communication amongst people? And what what do you mean fixing? The way you've been saying there's no perfect solution. So let's say there were no limitations. I could just say, go you got 24 hours. Here's how anything you do will stick. No matter the rules in our hierarchies? Well, as far as getting people's opinions like voting and referendum, listen surveys, I don't think there's any reason to change anything. I don't, between modern social media and the traditional media, you can reach most of the people that way. Would you also consider snail mail, like for ballots? Or no? That's it's a branch of the traditional media, but it's different. Yeah, even newspapers running, it's possible in actual print. Sure, you can reach more people that way, that would be more fair action. Okay, but like for me, I try to get it must be verified, just like when you vote. Okay, so for the ads, like for me, I don't have like a subscription to the LA Times. So like, let's say, President owl just said, check your new york times, but it's like, I don't have a subscription. I don't want to pay five bucks for it kind of thing. How what is then like that final layer you would go for? I'm, again, going along with there being no perfect solution may not be another layer. There's a limit to what you can do. So then we can't reach the homeless guy on the corner. Okay, we can't reach him. But we can still reach 95% of the population. That's good enough. So then for majority, what counts as majority for you? I wouldn't put a number on it. I'm not sure I have to talk to the advisors on that job. Well, if we're just gonna go off numbers, technically 51% majority. So would you put? Would it be more towards deciding? Um, yeah, I would do that. As far as actually reaching people I can reach. But 51% of them wanted to choice A. Okay, then choice i. So then, okay, this is where I'm trying to get it. Let's see, though. Is that close, though? Sorry. Because that close, it may be worth doing it again. Okay. 39 is too close to call. But so then that's what I'm trying to get at what is what do you do majority? Is it like 60%? Or more? Is it 75% or more, because but then, within that majority of the deeper layer is the people you're contacting through the polls on like the column polls on CNN, twitter, facebook votes, your only your main target would be maybe not what you think it's more the like I was trying to allude to earlier, the mob mindset where it's like, oh, if we all gang up on this, he will see the data. And he'll do this for us kind of thing. And then people like me, I just be like, what the hell is going on? And I think like, Why is everyone now able to do wear zebra hats kind of thing when there wasn't a rule before? Well, again, like I said, that's one of the first things we do is have a meeting with the social media companies explain to them we're going to do and explain to them that they have to do it properly. And it will be severe consequences if they screw up the Veer. Like break up your company really go up into him and say go into detail. But then what you're also talking about is using social media as it is to talk to them, which is the monopoly. YouTubes. And so you're saying for, so you're saying we want what you currently have, but we're also going to break you up and expect you to do the same thing. No, no, no, we'll break you up. If you don't do it correctly. If you screw it up, then we're gonna break you up. But then maybe within the contract, they have the definition of like, exactly what you see, say as screwed up. They say it's under those gray area can't hurt us, when you sign it with them, because they're gonna make you sign a contract. But there has to be a point, you know, where overstep that red line, that's it, you're in trouble. I don't want to hear about you it problems, we have billions of dollars, you should be able to do this the correct way, the first time. If you don't, he'll be broken up is too important. Their lives at stake. It has to be done properly. You have the resources, you have billions of dollars, your top company on the planet, you can definitely do this properly the correct way. So kind of what I'm hearing and correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying to let's say Google, Amazon, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and all them, but Instagrams Twitter that you do, as I say, if you don't, I'm cracking the whip, and I'm going to destroy you. And also, I will do their biggest spokesman if they do error promoting a business. But they'll do your best and as far as advertising goes, you can get a better acid resident. And I would, I would, but then the doodle almost almost to commercial is getting people to go on Facebook. Look how much they're helping us. Okay, good company. You should sign up. But then let's say in six hours, Across you, would you be running ads and saying screw them? Like, I'm sorry, I said that earlier, blah, blah, blah, possible, depending on the situation. But then let's say within the day after the two incidents, they are good again. So would you be constantly just talking to people? Oh, none of this back and forth? I forget again, they have the resources to do it properly the first time. No, school. No. But then, but like, what about if they're, they're coding it for you. They're you're they're working away for president owl. But there's a bug and it's one of those. It's small, no bugs, no bugs, they have it. The top guys on the planet, they should have no bugs. That's absolutely love, no backdoors, everything's done properly. They have the resources. Wow. Because I know for COVID I know a few coders, they've told me it's impossible to be bug free, the bugs are small enough that it doesn't hinder the customer 90% of time kind of thing. So it's, again, the human aspect, where we can tweak that to 95%. And it might be higher, but that was back in like early 2000s when I was talking to them. But they even said like it's around 85 ish, and I added an extra 5% to make a 90. Let's say just like even for Facebook, they have bugs. Can I think YouTube has a huge bug, but it's built into their system? Yeah, are you saying that they would have to completely remove it? Well, if possible, but even if they couldn't, believe it or not, doesn't matter, because I'm not relying on one source, just what Facebook says. They use different procedures than Twitter, and Snapchat. And again, we're going by traditional media too, which has nothing to do with that. Going by CNN polls, calling up people doing phone calls, running it would combine all these things and see what the net result is. We're not depending only on one one organization, definitely not dozens of them, many dozens would all be compiled. And we'll average them. So for bugs, over here, a little one over there, it doesn't matter. Even what you just said earlier that no bugs at all, make it work per percent. If possible, as possible, I would try to push them to do that to increase what they have already. But again, it wouldn't matter. Not depending only on Facebook, or not depending only on YouTube. It's a compilation of everything. All averaged out. Like I know, for certain rules within the government, he has the right to tell companies what they can do in an emergency. But how would you tell a tech company, Amazon, Facebook, Google, etc. Y'all have to come together, suck up your pride and fix this? Well. We're humans. Like, that's ego overrules a lot of stuff. As long as you could be as logical and explain everything, but it's like, Apple could be like a well screw Facebook, cuz you're trying to help me, I'm not gonna work with you. How would you fix that? Well, I will promote all of them initially, as long as they're doing the job in good faith. good faith that will continue to promote them if they screw up your ad here. But what if they don't exist? They do. What if they don't agree to your terms at all? They're just like, nope, we won't do that. And you know what happened? I don't think I really know what happened with Trump. You mentioned his one word and the company stock goes up. Well, the President, what he says what he says matters. It affects economics. It affects company's bottom line. They would want the president as a spokesman for that person. Why the heck would they wouldn't? Why the heck would they not have but that also plays applies into the mom mindset that I've been trying to allude to this whole time is you president al says, Hey, I really like Facebook. Great, but you just also gave Xbox? billions more dollars, kind of like GameStop where everyone earlier in the weeks, we're all piling into GameStop? Because everyone said pile in there kind of thing. How would you monitor that? Because you just you just said you have the power to influence. But you don't want executives gaming the system but that you that would be the system you build? Not sure if I follow you when I find me again. Okay, so you're saying as the president I would be the biggest spokesman or their biggest whip cracker? Yes. Right. So but you would also saying earlier in the podcast, you don't want crooked executives getting ahead? Well, in working with the company, I mean, you would be Oh no, no perfect solution. Again, if it makes the the CEOs and board of directors richer, okay, so be it. But then you will be taxed, they're going to be taxed more anyway. Like number one, the owners, they're going to pay more taxes Anyway, you can pay makes more, your company will pay more and you will pay more. That's what I was trying to get to earlier was like Bezos, before he stepped down, I think he still gets a salary, but he gets 85,000 a year. But he gets free stock options, which technically is worth nothing unless he sells it. Right. But that's how the executives know how to bypass the tax rules. So how would you directly attack that? Because those have to be changed? then would you also be open to completely eradicating the 401k and Roth IRAs, because people are not paying their taxes because of it. I have to consult the experts, again on that I couldn't give the details. But that alone about it, because that's what a lot of a lot of higher end executives use now I wouldn't say C suite but like, supervisor, district manager stuff, they use their income and put it in the Roth IRA to avoid growth taxes. Of course, well, it's a legal one within our own country, but it's would you would you be removing that? Because the majority because I don't match that district manager income that has a Roth IRA and 401k, but I opened one, would you be coming in to take my money because I'm hit the majority. Again, it would go by sliding scale, because paying more because you have more restrictions, because they have too many loopholes already. But as far as the details, I have to consult the advisors on it. Okay, we're definitely gonna have to get you on in the future because like, I have a call with my union rep in like, 20 minutes. So would you be up for a narrower one? And maybe a month? Sure. Brilliant. So any information you want the people to know, websites, links, I could put in the description. You know, I think I sent you my link, you could put that in. But as far as, as far as verbally goes, to find my website, it's pretty easy. Being a tech guy, you may know why. I don't this happens to other people or not. But if you just put in a few key words, it takes you right to my site. Okay, yeah, that's SEO, Search, search engine. And I didn't choose the words of course, I didn't make it happen by itself. But right to recognition, I go. Anyway, if anybody wants to find my site, just type in Google search or whatever, Google works better, but the old dude just type in the words honest. wheel and poor guy, and then the number four. And then it would president so it's honest, real and poor guy for president to type that in and click on Google site. That's me. Okay. Anything else like a Twitter or Instagram for them to look up? As far as getting to it quickly, in that type of you just cut out? Yeah, you're still cut off. You muted yourself out. There you go. Sorry. The phone rang, though the audio. They still hear me? Yep. Okay. I don't know any other method to get to those links, and a Facebook page just devoted to this. Do you know what your Twitter handle is? my Twitter handle is at Alan Lee a Li n le 1701101701. All right. I'll look you up and I'll link up your Twitter. Sounds good and definitely look up the site. Yeah, I did some reading I did just was real quick. 15 minutes so I could just see what you were thinking and then we go at it. Okay, I'll finish reading it now. It's multi pages long. Trust me. I like reading now. So it's all good. Okay. You're welcome. So there it is. I appreciate you coming on. Hope you stay safe and well during these current times. And again, for people who didn't pick up on it, my name is Alan Lee and I am the honest real and poor guy for president running for president in 2024. As an independent and where you will you will decide on the issues like Congress rather well, the President that me you will decide. Alright, well, thank you have a good one.

Episode is Scheduled Publish: Mar. 15, 2021 @ 3AM Edit (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)Publish NowTranscript is LiveDelete this transcript. Unpublish Add Chapter MarkersListeners can tap through & see what’s coming up. Create a Visual SoundbiteBest way to share to social media for engagement. Share Episode On FacebookTwitterLinkedIn More Options Email Link to Episode Copy Direct Link to MP3 Copy Download MP3 Embed this ONE Episode

0 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Interview with Sarah Andrew

Welcome to the Josh Bolton show. Interesting and inspiring conversations. And now your host, Josh Bolton. Are you worried about the virus? Or is it something Hey, it's falling on and, you know, it'll

Interview with Paul Reeves

For some reason you're coming through on my computer instead of my headphones. I'm not sure why. Oh, okay. I'm not hearing feedback from me. So sounds good. Okay, just sound like I'm coming through th

Interview with Eric Almeida

So, would you Is there anything in particular you want to talk about? kind of thing? Um, we got up, we can go with it a lot of different options, depending where you want to go. Okay, um, if, because