Albania’s AI Minister Delivers Speech to Parliament
Chicago’s Pension Funds are Nearly Insolvent – Incoming $28m Bailout
Hello, everyone, Welcome back to Fringe News. Mick. That's m am, and you were you as they say over it the things they don't want you to know. I guess I don't know whatever, but I suppose I need to start doing a call to action because kind of want your feedback on some things and maybe help us track down some stories that were maybe not covering that you would like to hear or we're not aware of, particularly our especially I guess are overseas across the pond, you know, Europe Asia. If you want to get a hold of us, we'll do it through email. Fringe News Podcast at gmail dot com. That's the best way to get a hold of us. And then I dare you, you know, make us go on socials because we are currently not on socials, but we could be. Yeah, make us. And then also wherever you're hearing our voice on your favorite podcatcher, you know, rate and review, that's the best way to kind of push us up the algorithms, especially Apple, if you're listening to Apple, that is the best way we'll actually start making a little more money off this podcast. Not to sound greedy, but you know, there's a lot of upkeep fees and such so, but that was very Uh, it was really done, but expect it a little more in the future pods. So we're going to start pushing that and treat it maybe like more of a professional podcast. So I guess we'll get into it and you got something. What do we want to do there? It is. Well, I think the first thing I found which was interesting off of Armstrong Economics. September fifteenth, Albani appoints an AI minister. Yeah, this is nuts. So we'll just read it because it's easier, I think to do that and then we can talk about it. So Albania has appointed the world's first AI minister in an attempt to combat corruption, so as we've talked about on the show many times, or government corruptions everywhere, so they think this is the every government. Yeah, they think this is the solution for that. But the name is Danella. I know, it's de n E l l A. The female voiced AI entity will be a quote member of the cabinet who is present, who is not present physically but has been created virtually. Prime Minister Rama said, I think that the robot would ensure that public tenders will be one hundred percent free of corruption. Since current government employees cannot be trusted. Microsoft helped to assemble Danella, a red flag number one that we know all the things. Microsoft's into rate go gates. The robot will receive access to one million digital documents, including sensitive government information. That's great for hacking. Right. The advancements in AI are ingenious, but not sentiment sent Sentient sentient Danella has been programmed and therefore is prone to biases. The irony is that in turning to artificial intelligence, people are acknowledging that human government has completely failed. I have said before that many have proposed replacing judges, regulators, and even politicians with AI, as if a machine will somehow be impartial. The problem, of course, is not the hardware, but the software, who writes the code, who programs the ethics. If the government controls the AI, then it is nothing more than an automated extension of the same corruption. AI becomes a weaponized bureaucracy, enforcing whatever the ruling elites rule. Rama's Socialist Party has its eyes set on the European Union membership, believing it can rid its nation of corruption. Ahead of negotiations in twenty twenty seven. It is unclear if lawmakers will have the ability to vote on Danella's post as minister, or what whether the public will have an opportunity to vote for AI driven politicians. Society has fallen to the point that robots are trusted more than human beings. People do people believe that a robot can properly represent them or lead? The prime Minister's buffoonery cannot be turned into legal acts of the Albanian States, said. Camp. He said bar Barney, it's br Dhi prelimitary group lead of the Democrats. AI is only as honest as its programmer, and if Microsoft is involved, I have little hope of Danella's moral coding. Appointing a robot as minister is an extremely desperate move by the Albanian government to restore public trust. This is not a technological milestone, but a glaring warning of loss and confidence in a failing political system. We all yep when I first started coming across. And I have something to add on this too, And it's from Martin Armstrong. He's keeping a close eye on this. I had no idea. Yeah, yeah, I don't see this anywhere else on the internets. I mean, I'm sure it's out there, but not the news services really need to get a better aggregator. You know, it used to be drudge but that ship sung. But I hadn't I I had no idea this. This this was actually. Even Yeah, he had talked about it here and there for a while that you know, but people kept saying, oh, it's going to be again the end all be all, because it can interpret all the laws and interpret because some people thought, like you said in the article, that you can use it for judges and other things because they wouldn't be corrupt because they would just interpret the law as the law is written, nothing else. But as he said, it's the software site. It's written by someone. And we've talked about. That a lot. That that really is the most important aspect a is getting rid of biases. I mean, because we've seen a lot of the art early on when de I was huge and they were pushing it like these companies that there would be Like Henry the eighth was an African. We talked about that, yeah, we did, or about. An Asian woman, you know, when it was actually a king in his historical figure that we yeah, it's from dudes from England. Yeah, you know, but but. We talked about that and how because with the AI, it's you know, goes out and it reads articles from you know, the Internet, and it's basically reading the bias of the every everybody writing the articles and assuming it's fact, and all it's doing is you know, basically you know, meshing it all together and saying this is what the truth is. And it's not always the truth, no, And you. Know, I always I was getting freaked out by the art where people were having problems with six fingers always showing up on hands and stuff. Which, yeah, if you've been like paying attention to the like gen six conspiracies and that whole, if you're into like the paranormal podcasts and supernatural type you know, Bigfoot and all this, which a lot of us are, it's used to be kind of junk food for my brain used to get into it. But yeah, so that that that certainly used to be a red flag for me. I'm like, this is not a mistake, you know, That's how I was leaning anyhow. But you know, I think there is a place for it, and it's certainly not part of anyone's cabinet, But I guess I'll take it a step further and kind of read another article by Martin Armstrong which was the nineteenth so a few days newer than what M just read. And it's Albania's AI minister delivers speech to parliament. So they're really they're really getting this thing out there. I want everybody to see they're proud of it. Albania is new AI minister Delia d I e l l A. That's I N D. I got d I E l l A. He spelled it two times in this article. On regardless, that's something like that. We'll call her AI. She delivered her first speech to parliament on Thursday. Quote. I'm not here to replace people, but to help them, the AI entity created by Microsoft, stated in a video displayed before elected human officials. Prime Minister Edi Rama has even opened a social media platform for her where the the public can allegedly engage with the AI minister directly. Hello, I am Delia. I'm going to say thanks to my hard work as your assistant. I was elected Minister of State for Artificial Intelligence in the new government. My mission now is to make the government's work easier every day. A Facebook video presentation on her account said. The Facebook comments show the people's discussed quote. One user ahahaha, laughter, even a donkey understands what you have in mind. Meanwhile, the people have no work, no food, no home, no medicine. Healthcare is for money, or you die and you make fun of the people. Come on, State, Come on live communism and dictatorship. One user wrote, you have found a sheep people who do not oppose you with your crazy experiments. But not anymore. Our children have the right to be elected and to choose who they know will represent them and who will answer to the law. This step is madness. Another commented Parliament was in an upheaval after her speech. Opposition MPs refuse to participate in Thursday's ballot as they cannot take the words of a programmed AI entity seriously or see its presence as anything other than an utter embarrassment. Delia is not a vision but a virtual facade to hide this government's gigantic daily thefts. Opposition Democrat Party MP gusemant Bardy rebuked socialists. Socialist MPs did not listen to the Prime Minister, nor to the ministers about their concrete objectives, nor to the opposition that might be made to them, but voted like sheep, creating an unprecedented situation in these three decades of post communism. Traditionally, new cabinet presentations often last for hours. Lawmakers left the building after twenty five minutes and nothing was accomplished. The people are furious. Delia is not viewed as a step toward ending corruption, but as a mockery of the constitutional republic. Boom. So there's that. I don't know. I'd love you guys shoot us an email at Fringe News Podcast at gmail dot com, and you know, tell us what you think about it. Got some comments about this hit us, hit us up. I find it, I know, one day and it just seems like we're just accelerating like this tech, this tech is developing super fast. So how many guardrails are there? I mean, you know, the governments, it's like the race to the nuclear weapon, the nuclear age. Who gets at first? Is you know the king globally this is and you know they must they surely must be further ahead, you know how they I I haven't heard of you know, any client clandestine nuclear you know, secret nuclear facilities to power, you know, power plants to power like a government you know black budget AI. But you know they have to be even further ahead. They have to. They're usually a forty to seventy year gap between current technology and what black projects are, so it just reasons to believe that they are much further ahead. I would say, even the the robots and you know, all these other things, they are surely so far ahead. And it's and you know a lot of sci fi and alien people they talk about breakaway cultures. I think it started with like that Admiral Bird and Operation High Jump after World War Two and the suspicions that New schwaben Land was where all the Nazis went and they have UFO technology and all this crap. You know. But future futurists are always kind of digging into these things, and you know, often times are very talented and kind of it's almost like sci fi, you know, you know, two thousand and one Space Odyssey and all, and you look at Star Trek and the things that you know, thirty years later, what we have flip phones and you know, and comments like the old president from Skunk Work saying, you know, in the late eighties, early nineties, he's like, we've got we actually have the technology to send et home and Star Trek is like, we're beyond Star Trek. Yeah, And I don't know if that was a flex to the you know, the world, like it probably shouldn't be messing with us, you know, the military industrial complex of the United States, or you're going to take them for his you know, his words at face value. So I would say that we're way beyond this, and now it's just a race for the normal civilization to catch slowly catch up to the breakaway civilization a military industrial complex. Agg and you know, I definitely thrown in pharmaceutical companies. Yeah, but I find it interesting and I certainly don't I know, it's going to be a tool. It's probably going to be a great tool. Like I said, the guardrails need to be in place, and I don't I don't necessarily know where it's going to end up. I know that. Well, it's just sad because, like like the article goes and says, you know, people have all over the world are so just disenfranchised with yeah, for sure, with their politicians and the fact that they're only about themselves and not about the people, that they have to turn to this as an alternative, thinking that because it's a computer, it won't be corrupt. But they again have to remember it's the coding that makes it corrupt, you know. I mean, with the examples we've already given, you can see that, you know. And again, and you have to worry about who's the ruling party at the time, Right, they'll hire a programmer instead of hiring somebody to be their treasury secretary. This that all the you know, all the basically the cabinet positions that are like, if we're talking us, they're hired by the president. They're going to hire the coder, right, who's going to code the laws this time? Who's going to do this? That will be like the one of the more powerful positions, because it'll be like, now we're gonna put our agenda in and we'll make these the laws, and the computer will have to tell you yes no. And so that's the that's the issue you have to worry about. Also with judges and if they say let's replace because we know judges are corrupt here in the US and probably everwhere through the world. But if you say, we're gonna just put this computer program in and it's going to do it for us, then we'll be without any corruption. Again, you know, I mean if you programmed it that would only read the law and interpret the law, and there's no level of escaping that that and then you won't let anybody adjust the code. Possibly, but that would be black and white. Like so if like a simple example is like speeding right, if you were over the speed limit, black and white would be okay, you speed limits fifty you were going fifty to fifty one. You were speeding right. But then you know you have that care Yeah. Because I was even going to say before you said that, I was going to say, what happens when it's in law enforcement. Yeah, it's a great point because it's it's medically it could be just a miracle for science. And you know, if it's used again, we were going to get to like what is it called Skynet or whatever, the terminator. We got to be careful because again, futurists talk about these things, you know, and how again you know Star Trek in two thousand and one Space Odyssey and all this. You know, comic books that are you know, sci fi orient and they kind of prognosticate and it comes they win the bets. It's kind of you have to be weary, Yeah, And so my examples, they be very careful if the law was just, hey. We programming exactly what it is. So if you were going fifty. One, oh, you voted Republican or you voted Democrat. You know, And that's things I worry about too, because Trump's doing I mean, the technocrats are all common to him. He seems to be like working with all the techie people, right, the big shots. But my point was, so if you're going fifty one and then you just interpret the law exactly as it is, right, so you would be getting a ticket, but a cop of poopols you over would be like, they're only going a couple miles over. I'm gonna let him go, right. So those are those are those descriptive. Those are the things that you have between common sense and what would be dictated right fully based on what it reads. So you could definitely hit hit your quotas. Yeah, the paperwork, the tickets will be written up instantaneously. It will already be written up by the time they give it to you. I guess they're just going to take it out of your bank account when everything. Yeah, so I don't know, there's some things to consider here and can't be nonchalant or cavalier with this stuff. And this is just yeah, as you said, they're the people do not trust their government at all. I just that's so so odd. It really is who's in power when this stuff? You know, it's just it's just bad for everybody. I think. Yeah, the bias you'd need like a vulcan star trek again, you know code this just totally neutral, not emotional, none of that, just straight up facts and science. And yeah, you're just never going to eliminate the human factor. It's just impossible. So yeah, so it'll be interesting for everybody. Should just be watching the events here and see what happens. I mean, yeah, it's probably pretty highly guaranteed you're not going to see a change in corruption because again, you know who wrote the code, Microsoft helped, So you're probably not going to see any any improvement. And you know, I often think, you know, we save it for another time. But so post Charlie Kirk assassination, you know, so many people around the world have been affected, and evidently has been more orial service people are coming from around the world. I just read, But how's it affecting our politics here in the States. There's another article a national divorce. Excuse me, a national divorce. And this firebrand, you know, I don't necessarily always agree with this Rep. It's Rep. Marjorie Taylor Green voiced a harsh truth. America's divide is a divided nation. These differences appear irri in reckless Oh my god, irreble ah got you too. And Green is proposing a peaceful national divorce, which state will DeFi will file the papers first. This is pretty interesting because there's been so much talk about not until intellectual civil war. People have been talking like Tim Poole's been talking about it, a lot of the these other commentator political commentators that are social media you know, superstars, super super smart people. But they're saying, I mean, we're about to go kinetic in this country. And I do think and no pun Intendant Charlie kirk. Kirk's assassination is a turning point. And I'm not trying to be cute when I say that. But let's say it's a spike. If you look at a timeline, right, there's always spikes, could be civil unrest, could be financial breakdowns, whatever in a political uh well, a country's timeline, and to me, this is one of those spikes. I mean, and I worry a bit. There's a lot of angry people both sides of the aisle, and I do not think that we're that close to kinetic civil war. Eight years ago, six years ago, ten years ago, I thought the probability was higher, and not because Trump was elected, you know, in sixteen or I just thought the probability was higher. But now they're obviously talking about it because this is a civil war. It's the breaking up of a country, and it could just be you know, paperwork, and it's just that no shots fired. But the computer, this is Armstrong's computer system. Computer System warned long ago that the United States would not remain as one country indefinitely. The cycle of political disintegration is in motion. The question is not if, but when history repeats. Because human nature never changes. People assume the United States will last forever because it has existed for nearly two hundred and fifty years. But no empire, no republic, no government in history has ever escaped the cycle of political disintegration. Rome divided, the British Empire collapsed, the Soviet Union disintegrated. The United States will not will be no different. Decisive politics have created a crack in the union that cannot be united. Each side believes the other wants to dictate how they must live, and therefore each side believes that the other is a danger to democracy. The unified culture that was once the United States has vanished as extreme beliefs on both sides cannot coexist. Civil unrest has turned it in to a looming civil war. Each state has its unique culture and customs. We cannot compare Washington state to Texas, or Florida to Colorado. California believes it is already its own country. Make sure do you act like it. The law varies drastically from state to state, and those policies are now coming to a head. The Supreme Court no longer reigns, as it starts to interpret rulings independently. The founding fathers never created a democracy. They created a republic where the states were sovereign and the federal government was a creation of the states. That balance has been destroyed. Washington has usurped the role of the states and nearly every matter taxation, regulation, trade, health care, and even education. This erosion of states' rights is precisely what lies what lays the groundwork for separatism. Decentralization has begun. Our economic confidence model has targeted twenty thirty two as the final political collapse of confidence in government. This is not limited to the United States. The European Union is destined to fail, as are other governments throughout the world that are propped up on perpetual debt and in decisive politics. The total loss of confidence in government will be a global event that will not begin in America, but once it spreads like age in two America, we will see states demand secession as they fight against federal power. Green believes this can be done in a peaceful manner, yet history says otherwise. So and he states he's discussed this matter in depth in the report How Empires and Nations Divide, which is perhaps one of the most fascinating pieces I have penned. That's Martin Armstrong. Now, and that's so true. I mean, because again, when you've talked about this in your Civil War buff you know, we know, yes, slavery was an issue of the Civil War, but it wasn't the only issue, and it was states' rights that was the really big factor in that Civil war. And he's stating that again, you know, and you see it you see certain states who are more aggressive and pushing back against the federal government overreach and they're like, no, no more, you can't do that. And as he said, yes, they've taken over. And that's why we had the Department of Education that he's the props trying to get rid of. Right. I mean, that's a new construct too. I think it's like nineteen seventy nine, yes, something like that, But that's a federal zone and it's like one of the most funded black holes in our our government. Yeah, but it's a federalization of education, which it used to be at the state level. So that's what you said. So all these powers of the state are being usurped by the federal government, right, you know, and then it's going to lead further and further to this discontent among the states. I mean, how do you see it. I mean, we're Ohioans, and I think even in states, the regions, obviously, city centers are totally different than people who live in rural communities. Absolutely. I mean it's night and dale. I mean when you look at those election maps and you'll see like even like like like you can look at Illinois, which is close to us, right, it's only Chicago that's basically was blue. The rest of the was ready. And you have similar things in New York, right, So yeah, you have this this divide like. Pennsylvania East and West are totally different, Yes, totally yeah. So you're so, I mean, and you and again you see it with all of this ever since Charlie Kirk. It's I mean, it's been going on for a long time, but it's it's getting more heated, I guess. And then the other side, I mean, just like we noted on the last show where that representative said I'm not going to take it anymore. So people on the right are saying not taken it anymore. You know, you've been beating us up and lying about us for so long, but now is the time. I'm done. And so that divide, So now that the other side is more willing to fight back and stand up, that's going to even increase these tensions. There's less likely to be let's sit, let's get to the table and discuss and try to figure out a common commonality here. It's just going to be like nope, as that guy did said, I've given up. I've tried for ten years. I'm done there's no more trying. So that means the left hasn't been trying now the rights saying I'm not going to try. So that means that the divide is going to increase as we head further in time, in my opinion. Yeah, and I think this is part of the reason the founding Fathers wanted more than two political parties. Yeah, means obvious. Unfortunately, you know, America is split into team sports right now between these two parties. And you know, sometimes I even fall for it, like, yeah, we got them that time, and I'm not really a Republican. It's just you know, they align more with what I believe, Yeah, some of them, But I think that's part of it. You know, we don't think we don't read enough my news. I think you know, the internet's kind of flinging us all at an uncontrollable rate towards the end of this country. Yeah, I mean. It can people don't spend time well. Because people just look at the news, the news bites right those real quick thirty second and they don't dive into it. And then and especially if you are leading in one direction or another, of course, you're going to tend to watch or listen to the things that are closer close and more closely aligned to you. Yes, Chambers, Yeah, but then if you're only going to listen to a sound bite and then not actually take the time and dig in and try to figure out, you know, both sides of the store. Because again, like they say, every argument is is basically takes two to tango. Right, You're not going to have an argument with yourself, you know, have somebody you know, so you both have something driving your belief system, and both could have things that are incorrect on you on both of their sides, right, So, but then they're not willing to back down and say no, I'm right. But then maybe you need to listen to the other side because we might have missed something along the way. But yeah, you're not seeing that. People are just saying nope, it's my way or the highway, and either you accept it or you don't. Right. Yeah, it's a lot of hijacking of ideology, but a lot of words that people really don't know the meanings, like fascist, you know the biggest one. They don't understand fascism. And you don't go don't go to freaking Wikipedia. Yeah, please look up the source. I can't remember the Italian's name, but that's the most academic he created the term fascism. So you might want to go read his papers on this, his writings, because that's the he's created the little literal definition. Yeah, so there, put yourself a favor, you know, up up next? Are you you all right? Yeah? Am I babbling too much? Am I own a coffee rush? Yeah? Okay? Maybe? Oh screw you? How dare you all right? Fine? Let's hit Chicago's pension funds nearly insolvent. Okay, yeah, we saw this again on Armstrong Economics. It was September nineteenth. Chicago's pension funds are nearly insolvent in coming twenty eight million bailout, so he said. Chicago's money trees are shredding or shedding their autumn leaves. With the new multi million dollar government payout package for unfunded pension public pensions. City officials approved a short term bailout of the Fireman's Annuity and Benefit Fund in the tune of twenty eight million to avoid forced asset sales. That's merely the tip of the iceberg at Chicago's pension debt has risen fifteen percent in the past five years and to utterly unsustainable thirty six billion. Property taxes currently fund eighty percent of the pension the city's pension fund, but they are not enough to sufficiently meet payouts. The average pension fund ideally has a funding level around seventy percent. Funding beneath forty percent is considered nearly insolvent. In Chicago, the top four public pension funds, the fire, police, Municipal and Laborers, along with the teacher's pension fund, have a backing ratio between twenty four and forty three percent. With the combined debt now exceeding fifty three billion, all of Chicago's public pension funds have gone Reform measures have been bypassed for years to the point of new return. Chicago's pension system carries a debt larger than forty four states in this country. There's only fifty man exactly. Seven Chicago area pension funds are among the top ten worst funded plans in the country. The city already allocates up to twenty percent of its annual budget towards the pension. Taxpayers are expected to meet all shortfalls, but again, the current level of taxation is not enough to cover the gap. Lawmakers claim there was a mere system error. Property tax bills were expected to be sent out in June, but will not reach taxpayers until October. The twenty eight million is intended to act as a temporary bail band aid Sorry, but the city's almost guaranteed to ask for additional loans and bailouts because the frozen funds are not the problem. Uns are a Ponzi scheme, robbing Peter to pay Paul, but the jig is up. Mummakers recently passed a bill to provide additional pay to Chicago's retired firefighters and police officers. Politicians are permitted to pass bills to secure votes without actually having a plan in place. The city's pension bill will rise by two point seven six billion by twenty twenty six. There is no money for other public services. Chicago has lost bill its ability to remain competitive as capital is fleeing increased levies. Chicago's overall property tax levee more than doubled in a decade, expanding from eight hundred and sixty million in twenty fourteen to one point seven to seven billion in twenty twenty four. Pension costs directly have risen sixfold over the past ten year span, from four hundred seventy eight million and twenty fourteen to two point seven billion seventy five billion in twenty twenty four. The city has redirected every penny collected from property tax since twenty fourteen into these failing funds. Wow, but the pension obligation has surpassed one hundred and sixty percent of the annual property tax income one hundred and sixty percent. So you can't tax people more than what their property's worth. But that's what they that's where their obligations lie one hundred and sixty percent of the tax revenue. The blame falls on the people rather than the failed politicians. Mayor Brandon Johnson proposed increased property taxes by three hundred million for the current fiscal year, which will marked the largest spike in property tax in the city's history. The measure was shot down by the city Council, who instead plans to generate one hundred and sixty five point five million with addiction additional taxes and fees in other domains. Yeah. Yeah, look who you've been electing. Yeah, people get the government they deserve. Yeah. In twenty twenty one, Mayor LORI like eight Foot. Remember her demanded n binks. Yeah, remember she demanded ninety three point nine million increase in property taxes. Johnson actually campaigned against the measure fun and Lightfoot was pressured to drop the tax hike to forty two point seven million. In twenty twenty three. Johnson was elected over Lightfoot for pretending to care about constituents and promising the lower tax burden. Ah their approach has failed. Forty one percent of property taxes were injected into these broken pension funds in twenty fourteen, and that's increased to eighty percent in twenty twenty four Property taxes more than doubled in that timeframe, but is now nowhere near enough to cover the To solve this crisis, politicians will continue to rob the people with excessive levies to maintain the Ponzi scheme for as long as possible. It is only a matter of time before the city is unable to pay retirees. The Illinois constitution does not permit cities to file for Chapter or nine bankruptcy. Wow. The state has historically blocked any cuts to payouts regardless of liquidity. The city may one day be forced to beg for a federal bailout, which will force all Americans to pay for decades of recklessness management by financially illiterate politicians. Figure out, No, I mean. This, Martin Armstrong's been talking about this for like a deck. I've been reading it for so long, and he's been warning about this and saying, you know it's coming, it's coming. People aren't paying attention, and nor do they care because again, no politician wants that. They don't have the guts to overhaul the system because it would make them unpopular and they wouldn't be re elected. But so they just could continue to kick the can down the road. But they know and they they're just hoping and praying that it doesn't blow up during their term. It'll be the next guy's or girls turn. Right. But as he said, it's it's been coming to a heading. We know, population is just fleeing out of Chicago, so that makes it worse. So they're losing those tax dollars, which you know, but they are also unable to fund these pensions. And that's you've mentioned in the past. But most people don't understand is that this is not only in the US, but it's globally a lot in Europe as well, because of. The socialist programs. Right, well that. Is a socialist kind of program ring, but I mean no, but it's it's just the methodology of how they are funding it, right. Most of them are required in Europe to require most countries by by government regulation. Here, I don't know if it's necessarily required, but it's just they consider imprudent to invest in what they called safe investments, right, so that would be government bonds. Because here in the US it's you're backed by the full faith and credited the United States government. So they consider like all the rating agencies like standard or powers, say the S S and P Moody's, Fitch, those guys will rate investments, right, they give them a rating, and so the govern it debts usually higher rated. So then the pension funds feel safe, like, oh, I'm investing in a secure investment. But so that's why they're heavily invested in government bonds Europe as well. In Europe, I think they're required, like I think seventy eighty percent of their pensions have to be in government debt. But then if you go back a little bit in time, remember when we had zero percent interest rates, So these bonds were paying nothing. So these all these pension funds have money invested somewhere that's giving them zero return. So they would have had years ago, would have had people trying to project how much money would be in there versus how many people need it. But most of them had a actual had tables essentially that said they would get an eight percent per year return. They went over a decade with zero what. So the negative was over in Europe? Right, it was, but they weren't going to pay you negative. It's just in the market to show the rates for negative. But you had to like, that's why banks were forcing companies to spend their money because otherwise you would have you'd be paying the bank for keeping your money in the bank. Right, So it was a way for them to keep the economy going by saying okay, because then people are like, I'm not going to pay money to keep my money in the bank, so they would decide other things to do with it, right, and they're pay down debt, invest whatever. But the whole issue that I'm trying to mention here is the fact that it's okay. So they were expecting eight percent a year for over a decade and they got zero, so the money wasn't growing. Well, the analysts are going, Okay, historically this is what we can look forward to, and that's conservative. Yeah, but it was so far the other direction that. Yeah. So then every so if you had a whatever a million dollars in your pension fund for your local city, it's still it was less than a million dollars ten years from now because you were withdrawing from it. Every year. You're paying out the current retirees, and the money you had sitting there is making nothing because the hope would be like, Okay, as I pay out, I'm making interest that plus I'm getting additional receipts. So we're covering our pensioneers people that are currently getting pensions, and we're still increasing because of the ground the value, so we can cover the ones that are going to hit the books next year. In the year obviously there's still is money being deposited. Every of active members. Yeah, but it just is not enough because you know, one example I heard Armstrong give in an interview years ago, and it's I think it's the cleanest, easiest example. He's like he's like, it's third grade math, right, so that he calls it a Ponzi scheme, because by definition, a Ponzi scheme is taking money from somebody like a new investor. Like if I was running the pension and I said, hey, I'm giving you know, I have twenty percent returns, he'd be like, that's great, So you give me whatever, one thousand dollars and I go, I take it. I'm like, I'm going to invest that. But then I take that money and I give a portion of somebody who's already given me the money. Yeah. Right, So they think they're getting this twenty percent return because I'm giving them their one thousand dollars and an extra twenty percent. But all I'm doing is taking money from a new investor and giving it to an old investor. And that's essentially the way most of these pension funds run. I mean, you put money in every month or whatever whoever the cadence is, and then when you go to retire, you start taking money out. But the problem with it is his example was, let's say you have your small town and you have a fire department and a police department that employs ten people, and then all of a sudden, you fast forward like ten years and five of them want to retire, and then you're like, okay, well I can't run my city on five people between the police and fire department. I need ten. So you end up having to replace those five with another five. But although here in the US you don't get one hundred percent of your income when you retire, you do get a good amount. But just to keep it simple, let's say you do. You get one hundred percent of your income and you get full better fits. So it's just like having a full time employee. So essentially what they have is ten years later they have fifteen employees instead of ten, and it goes and then you fast forward another ten years and the other five that's were the original ten they retire, So now you have twenty employees and your tax base supports ten. And that's what happens because and then people are living longer, so they're paying have to pay pensions out longer. You have all these factors that are coming into play. But then you're you're exponentially growing your staff full time employees because they no longer work. They're retired, but they get the benefits and pay as if they're a full time employee. Now maybe it's not one hundred percent full time. Or one hundred percent. But yeah, I understand. So that's why he's saying this eventually is like that classic and that there's a hockey stick curve where things grow exponentially and they'll double in a week, then double in one day, and then double in hours. You know what I mean. So just speeding up. Yes, it starts speeding up because you get to that point where and we're getting there. And that's why he's saying historically, because of the way these things are set up, and again the length of number of people retiring versus maybe people coming in. Plus you've got to remember, the younger people coming in to replace the older people leaving make less money, so they're also depositing less into the fund. So that's why again it's it's basically a Ponzi scheme. And that's not just here, it's globally, you. Know, And that's maybe some of the reason we see Europe rattling sabers wanting to get war going. Well, yeah, because how would you, as a politician tell. All a macro level. Yeah, just just expand it to a macro. Level, That's what he was saying, because it makes logical sense, because are you going to go, as the prime minister of the UK or any country go, you know what, sorry, we just mismanage pensions. You get nothing, right to all the retired people and the younger people that are paying into the pension scheme. Now you're basically saying you get nothing. And we've historically seen that happen. Like used to tell me about the veterans, I don't know if it was after World War One, Yeah, where our government actually slaughtered a bunch of them because they were marching on Washington demanding their pensions that they never got. Yeah they were promised them and yeah, yeah, yep, and they opened fire on the citizens, they pulled out the army or whatever. But that's what he's saying. So if again, knowing that we have this worldwide pension crisis and a debt crisis basically a dead crisis. Right, but it's just a portion of yeah, all the bad things that are happening in economics around the world right now as far as governments go. So he's saying, which I strongly believe that you know, no one's going to say, hey, we don't have your pensions anymore. So what they're going to do is if you go to war, you're going to be like, we have bigger things to worry about, you know. Yeah, rally around the flag. Yeah it sucks you're not getting your pension, but we have bigger things. But here in the States, so we're talking here in just a city in Illinois, right, but here, and the way our structure works, like you know, cities and states can only they can impose taxes, and that's why it's property taxes, right. They can impose income taxes as well. But you know, and they do issue they can't issue debt like as they're called muni bonds at the city level. Right. But if you're looking at the city of Chicago and you're an investor, are you gonna want to buy ammuni bond from the city of Chicago that's got this kind of money problems? You wouldn't, right, So there so there's less and less options to raise money because people are looking at it going, oh, I'm not buying Chicago debt. So then they can't raise money. So the only thing they can do is raise taxes and they're not going to be over raised them to a level where there again you saw that it was one hundred and sixty percent, right, So you can't raise it that high, you know, everybody will leave the city. So is that a factor when we talk about what Europe's been doing for so long with the refuge I guess we'll call them. Were they expecting some sort of It didn't work out quite the way they thought, but they were expecting some sort of financial increase from these potential taxpayers that are actually the opposite. Yeah, because of their social programs. They don't work, they don't I don't. Know about everybody, but I think some pension or some politicians did think that because they because just like America, just like Europe, we had any like Japan's pretty one of the worst. But demographic wise, there's less you know, not having babies, Yeah, there's less new taxpayers. Yeah, So so they thought, yeah, we can have an influx of these foreigners coming in to become a new tax base. And then they're having more children on average than the local natives. So then those are future taxpayers that we can then, you know, drain. But the problem is, like you said, a lot of them aren't working. They're just taking and yeah, they still might be paying taxes because if you go like here in the USU sales taxes things like that. So they pay some taxes, but they're also drawing. They're probably drawing more from the system than they're paying in taxes. So you know, you're making it worse. I mean, because we all hear about replacement theory, and it's got to be a number of factors, just not for voters, you know, just not it's all these things voters, taxes, they think, population taxes again, yeah, you know, all these things, economic engine Yeah, they're making money, they're spending money. But you know, but again one of the big things too is like why it's going to be probably worse on a state and local level than federal is because the federal government here at leased in the US can print money. Yeah, so they can print money to pay their debt. I mean, it's not going to be good for the economy because it will cause inflation and hyper inflation if they print too much for the debt, because no one will buy the new debt. But local and state cannot do that. So the only thing they can do is raise your taxes. And you see it all over the country and you're going to continue to see it because they are bankrupt, and as he said, nobody's taken the initiative to make the changes necessary when they had the time to do it, and they didn't pay enough attention to the low interest rates and what it was going to do, and the demographics and the high population or basically an uneven scale, right, more retirees than workers, and the retirees pulling out more than the lower level entry workers putting in. So you know, that's why these you know, that's why socialism doesn't work. Like Margaret Thatcher said, eventually you run run out of other people's money. So as the end of this article noted, you know, they may then beg for a federal bailout, which means we Ohio and we live in Ohio. As you said, why should I pay the pension of somebody that lived in Chicago because they're going to increase my taxes to cover that. You know, well, you saw what they You know, we're covering the pensions of workers in Ukraine, which is ridiculous. I don't know if we're doing that or just a way that it wasn't. That was an excuse they say, we're sending money to cover the pension of the people in Ukraine or they just money laundering it somewhere. I probably believe the latter, but you have to take it on face face value, especially the uninformed voter that's not jaded and suspicious. Yeah, you know, so either way, it's ridiculous. I know. So, I mean, so this is again all everything comes down, like they say, follow the money, and this is following the money from a you know, state, local, federal level, because again we have this contagion everywhere. We have it all over because of the amount of debt we have and because of these long dated you know. I mean, like you said, look at the Department of Education, they had the biggest budget because they have all these pensions and different things they're paying for as well as just other things as well. But that is a large because people don't talk about it. But there's between there's a difference between funded and unfunded liabilities. The unfunded meaning pensions. I know I have to pay this in the future, but I don't have the money right now. It's unfunded. Is the is the elephant in the room. You know, nobody talks about it and you always ask, like I always say, well, what's what's your amount of unfunded liabilities. How much do you have to pay? They won't tell you. You know, they're hoping they can make it work, or maybe the interest rates will come back up, or something's going to happen to make it all work out. But it's just not. And so we've already like discussed replacement theory. We're getting into some conspiratorial grounds, I guess Gray. So when we talk baby boomers in this country, you know, post World World two, World War two berths some of the largest booms. That's why they're called the baby boomer. It was a booming population. So we know, you hear people when they die, things will get better because of a lot of these factors we've just discussed now. And we talk about vaccinations, then we talk about pharmaceuticals, and we talk about comorbidities and all these crazy meds you have to take. You take one pill and then all of a sudden, you gotta take two. Yeah, diabetics need to take insulin than a pill that's like a I don't know if it's a blood pressure pill or cholesterol pill that helps protect their organs from the harshness of insulin. So it just expands, And are we trying to kill them quicker, eat processed food, you know, poorly every day, have a McDonald's three times a day. I mean, it's a conspiracy. Out, but people are living longer and they're saying that, you know, I mean, not only are they draw on that sold security system, they're drawing Medicare. You know, that's Medicare as well, right for healthcare. So we're paying so much out And I'm not saying I mean, they paid into it and they deserve their money. But the problem is that they put their trust in these people that don't know how to management. Because Armstrong has always said that because you know, you look at the people in politics, a lot of them have degrees in law and most of them have never worked in the real world. So and you see it everywhere, like but you see it everywhere when somebody runs for politician, like usually their wife's their treasurer or usually this or a family member that doesn't just because they're your family member doesn't mean they're qualified to run these things. So if you had a professional money manager managing this money and these pensions, then they would be like, you know, this is not making me any money. I got to put it money in a different investment, right, But then when laws require you to invest in the government in government debt because it has to be triple A rated because it's hard to find triple A rated companies, so that means your alternative is government debt. So basically they're basically forcing pensioners to fund to support the government and get no return for it. You know, because if we were allowed because I think who was it, I think it was Bush Junior or whatever was pushing for like individual retirement accounts, and I was off for it and to try to talk to people to get hey, we should do this because I know sold security is going to be broke. But we were supposed to get individual accounts where we could then direct our investments. But he even Armstrong has talked about it numerous times on his site. He goes, look at the way the stock market has gone up since the eighties. It's like the straight line up essentially. Right, if you were to put all the pension money in the stock market, we would not have a problem today, no problem, because it grew faster then the withdrawal rate and everything else, and our pensions would be fully funded. But we weren't allowed to take advantage of capitalism. We had to stick with socialism, and we also had to stick with They forced the pensions to buy government debt, which then funded our government for another year, but it funded this corruption. Right if we weren't, if we didn't have to fund the government, then you know, maybe we'd have less of the problem. We would definitely have less spending because they think they had this endless money train. We'll just keep issuing new debt, and the social security will keep buying it, right, and other things will keep buying it. So if you had to compete fairly and say I'm going to buy a government bond versus I'm gonna buy a stock, and you look at the two and say, which one's gonna give me a better return. If you're buying stock and you had the choice, the government would have to be a little more conservative because they knew they wouldn't get the fund they have. Just imagine if they just dumped it all on Apple in the eighties. Yeah, I know, that's what I'm saying. That's what you said. So if you had that option, it would be fully funded. We would not be in the position we are in today. But we weren't. Given that, we weren't allowed to do that. So and again that's what because of the thing I was telling you about about the ten employees, now you' all of a sudden have twenty. That makes so much sense and so but people don't understand that. It's so basic. Z nstood. Yeah. When I first heard it, I'm like, wow, I never thought about it that way. But you are totally right, and that's the way things are, and most people don't know that. And because again it's it's so simplistic. You just don't think it's that simple, but it is, so don't provide. That's why in the private sector they got rid of pensions a long long time. In the eighties they got rid of pensions. Yeah, I was going to say, pensions are rare nowadays. Like I mean, remember it took down several airline companies in the eighties because their pensions were so big and they had to fund it. And back then, I think I may be wrong, but I'm pretty su sure the companies ran their pensions themselves and they paid for it and they managed it. But they did the same thing the government's doing here is they didn't they mismanaged and they weren't paying enough attention, it was underfunded, and then when they when it came time to pay the piper, or they had more people withdrawing than they had money coming in, they couldn't do it. So then laws and laws changed. So that's why most pension funds in companies, private companies, not government run. They have to source it out to a third party. So when they say, hey, I've given you a match on your four oh one K, like the company doesn't hold it anymore. They give it to the third party because that's where you decided to put your investment or where you decided to put your money, because they are not allowed to have it because of these other problems that happened in the world. So I guess next question. I mean, somebody would have to do this. But if we get away from the soak like you were bringing up, if we went into capitalistic philosophy with government pensions, the city pensions, like every all these entities, social security, and we grab like the biggest hot shot off Wall Street fund manager, pay this dude to run this stuff. I mean, would we be able to recoup I mean, it depends on the markets and the decisions, but. Yeah, you could. But you could also just make the public the public. Mind, you could get a Bernie Maddow. Yeah, you can make the public follow the public pensions follow the private pensions mean like a four to one K. So if I work for exercise company. Yeah, if I work ex fight z company and they say I'll give you three percent of your salary into the pension whatever it is then or six percent whatever they do. Then they take that every month and they take it from your paycheck and they give it they put it into whatever. You know, the third party provider is right the same way here. If the governments just run it like a four to one. Yeah, they just say, you work for the city of XYZ. I say I'm gonna give you a retirement. It's no longer a pension. It's retirement. Just like the private sector. I'll give you six percent of your pay every paycheck into x y Z fund. Now you can decide what to do with that money. Like you if you want to be safe and say I don't want to deal with it, I just want to put it in bonds, then put it in bonds and they'll buy maybe government bonds or company bonds, whatever it is. Right, you make that choice. And then but they've they've made emerging markets. You could go blue chips, you can go just like your normal for a one. K yeah menu, and they make them easy too. Now where they say, oh they have plans or basically on your year, they'll be like, I've got a twenty to fifty plan, and it's basically saying, based on your age, you'll tire around twenty fifty, and they'll they'll do the allocation of how much is bonds or stocks or whatever. So you could do that if you don't want to, if you don't want to pay attention, right, But then your money, well, there's a well, I mean, yes, you can always have at defaults, and you can have stock market crashes and all these things. But the theory is as you get closer retirement, you go to safer investments, less risky. So but there's a higher probability you're going to have your money than if you put it in let the government run it for you. Yeah, for sure, I mean that. I mean, I hope it's not too late, and maybe somebody will do something about it. It sits too late, because that's government, you know, they're just not they would be happening. There's going to be a vote all these things, while the politicians get the golden parachute and they get the best healthcare. Well, and also to most of these people that like if you think about it, mayors and you know, all the politicians that are running either at state, local, whatever level, they are also participating in these pensions. So they don't want to cut them short or shy because when they leave, because they get what do they call it the golden parachute, right, they get everything they get. That's why, like when Obamacare passed, the politicians didn't give a crap about how crappy it was because they had their own health care plan that was separate. They didn't have to engage in Obamacare. We did, right, So they didn't care. So you know, that's another thing they had. And they get the insider trade and they get to do this, and then they're just. So whatever they vote for for us should apply to them as well. Yeah, they should at least get some shitty healthcare and they have to pay for it. Yeah, but they you know, but yeah, I think in many cases it is too far down the road. I mean, like with anything, it's kind of like a company going bankrupt. Even if we could just right now, go like that and switch it all over. It's too far down the road. Well, I mean at least, but it's kind of like bankruptcy. Because the politics of it, they're just not going to let They're not going to do it. Well, they won't do it, and nobody has the. If a Republican comes up with the dams are going to be like nope. If a dam comes up with it, the Republicans are going to be like, nope, it does. You know, medical will for it. But I think like, if anything, you can still do it. Just like a company going bankrupt. Are you at the point of getting two cents for every dollar or are you at the point of getting fifty cents per every dollar? So if you're at the point of getting fifty cents per every dollar, at least you can salvage half of your investments. If you make it wise choices, you can you can maybe grow it back right, yeah, but if you just but if you they're going to all get to the point where it's like one cent for every dollar because they're going to run it out so it's nothing. And then what sucks is they're not going to be honest with the current pensioners. So all those people that are relying on this because they you know, paid into it for how many decades and now they're sitting there in retirement and they're like, sorry, we're broke. You have no money, you have no health care, and you have you know. I mean yes, once you get here in this country, once you get sixty five, you can get Medicare, but you know, and they maybe then provide the supplement to it because it's like eighty percent coverage. But regardless, but the pension part that pays your if you still have a mortgage or even if not, you're paying your utilities and for your car and your food every month. If that went away, how are you going to do that? You know, that is your only source of you know, retirement. I mean yes, most people still do get soul security, but we know that's nothing pretty much. It's not enough to live on, so you need this other thing. But a lot of people that work for government, they don't get soul security. Some of them may not because they already have a plan. Yeah, so they don't give you two plans. So I guess we'll leave. It's such a interesting thing to dive into because from when we were taking first discussing the micro, then you expand it out to the macro and globally. It's kind of the same thing. And then you're talking about geopolitics as opposed to local politics and national politics. It's just another cog in the wheel of I guess war right now pushing forward anyhow. But yeah, pretty interesting subject. You can do a whole show on it, I guess. All right, Well everyone, that is the show for today. M is taking off. She's out of the studio, she says, goodbye. But hey, if you're listening to this Fringe News on a swapcast with some other affiliated affiliated podcast, come over here and check us out, you know, and give us a rate and review. That would be super helpful on your podchasers, podcatchers, whatever, Apple and hit us up at Fringe News News podcast at gmail dot com. It's been a crazy day for crazy people. We love You'll talk to you next time. It is. As it is about the way Lady isa U