Speaker 1: This is a clip from Raised by Giants. You can
Speaker 1: access the entire episode now on our website and all
Speaker 1: podcast platforms.
Speaker 2: The headlines are saying, like all kinds of different stuff, right,
Speaker 2: especially when it comes to China, and the headlines are
Speaker 2: seeing that Trump wanted to put a tariff of one
Speaker 2: hundred and forty four percent on China. But what I
Speaker 2: suspect is going on because that doesn't make any sense, Okay,
Speaker 2: one hundred and forty four percent tariff, that would mean
Speaker 2: that China would be giving away all of their goods
Speaker 2: and products and also losing forty four percent of their revenue,
Speaker 2: So they would be taking a loss on the product,
Speaker 2: a loss on the revenue to create that product, and
Speaker 2: the revenue for selling that product. That's a stupid deal,
Speaker 2: which I think is fraudulent. Right, the one hundred and
Speaker 2: forty five percent number or the one hundred and forty
Speaker 2: four percent number depends on what article you're reading. Seems
Speaker 2: like it's fraudulent because when I suspect that they've done
Speaker 2: is they've just added up the increases of all of
Speaker 2: the sectors of goods, so they've taken the food imports,
Speaker 2: the technology imports, whatever else China is importing, Dave, you
Speaker 2: know more about what China imports in the United States
Speaker 2: or other services imports, and added all of those together,
Speaker 2: and then that lands one hundred and forty five percent number.
Speaker 2: You get what I'm saying, But it seems like it's
Speaker 2: happening is certain sections of imported goods and services are
Speaker 2: all being added together to get that one hundred and
Speaker 2: forty five percent terraff increase. The actual overall number is
Speaker 2: much lower. For example, you can add a fifty percent
Speaker 2: tariff increase on for just an soap imports, right, But
Speaker 2: soap isn't the only thing that you're importing, and that
Speaker 2: would only affect the overall imports by like one percent. Right.
Speaker 2: It's a super sneaky way to create like industry headlines,
Speaker 2: right and blow the wholding up like, oh my god,
Speaker 2: Trump wants to put one hundred and four twenty five
Speaker 2: percent increase on tariffs on China. No he doesn't, And
Speaker 2: no article says one hundred and forty percent total increase
Speaker 2: on China. You have to read those things carefully and
Speaker 2: listen to the sentences that they're using, because they're only
Speaker 2: they're using magic, okay, and the ten percent increase, it
Speaker 2: would really rough out to around ten percent overall increase
Speaker 2: on China importing goods, which is what he is now seeing,
Speaker 2: and that's what it was from the beginning, and that's
Speaker 2: more likely what he's going to get if you were
Speaker 2: to see the actual numbers of the increases on tariffs
Speaker 2: on imported goods from China into the United States, which
Speaker 2: you can't because that's the information really isn't available. And
Speaker 2: if you were to add all of those percentages to
Speaker 2: every section of the goods, you're probably going to land
Speaker 2: on that one hundred and forty five percent number. But
Speaker 2: the one hundred and forty five percent number is fraudulent
Speaker 2: because it's the highest percentage rates won't reflect the overall
Speaker 2: percentage rate of everything that's being imported, know if that
Speaker 2: makes sense or not.
Speaker 3: The only thing I can read here, like I'm reading ONYX,
Speaker 3: is that they're presenting it like a back and forth
Speaker 3: tip for tat war, Like China raised THEIRS from eighty
Speaker 3: four to one hundred and twenty five percent, so now
Speaker 3: Trump's raised it to one hundred and forty five percent,
Speaker 3: And that seems to be a narrative that they're going
Speaker 3: with that this is a form of war.
Speaker 2: Well, okay, let's say let's say that I have you know,
Speaker 2: twenty Let's say I have twenty different industries, right, all
Speaker 2: making different products, and I have it all under the
Speaker 2: same banner. Like Okay, let's say writer industries, right, and
Speaker 2: I owned and operated all of them. And but three,
Speaker 2: let's use an example of David. You hit me, You
Speaker 2: hit three of my industries with and you put a
Speaker 2: thirty percent tariff on three of those industries. Right. I
Speaker 2: could write a headline and say that you hit my
Speaker 2: entire company with a ninety percent tariff increase.
Speaker 3: Right, because you're adding them all up exactly.
Speaker 2: I could publish all kinds of articles and news stories
Speaker 2: about how Dave hit my company with a ninety percent
Speaker 2: tariff increase, which seems like a lot, right, And it
Speaker 2: technically is true, but it's not really true in the
Speaker 2: overall total increase, because seventeen of my other industries didn't
Speaker 2: get hit with any tariffs overall from my company, we
Speaker 2: would be looking at like roughly around a four or
Speaker 2: four point five increase overall, you see, But the ninety
Speaker 2: percent is way more shocking, and the ninety percent is
Speaker 2: the illusion. And if you apply that strategy to like everything,
Speaker 2: then you see that it's all like trickery. It's trickery
Speaker 2: in magic numbers. Like what are you rather going to
Speaker 2: make a headline about that it's a four point five
Speaker 2: overall total increase, or you're going to put that it's
Speaker 2: a ninety percent increase. You're going to put that, You're
Speaker 2: going to.
Speaker 3: Put your eight number alert alert danger danger Yeah her, no,
Speaker 3: go ahead, say go ahead, No, you go ahead, No worries.
Speaker 1: Now, just says swinging back to that point of it
Speaker 1: sort of seems planned. I don't know if you're familiar
Speaker 1: with the Lima Declaration back in the nineteen seventies, nineteen
Speaker 1: seventy fours, when they staying there they've ratified at ninety
Speaker 1: seventy six. It was the plan to de industrialize Western
Speaker 1: nations and shift all that technology and investment money capital
Speaker 1: to all these you know, post World War two, really
Speaker 1: third world countries and bring them up to sort of
Speaker 1: a level playing field. Where now the new twenty twenty
Speaker 1: five to twenty fifty a dentum to that that continues
Speaker 1: from this point is regionalization, continentalization. So they're coming back
Speaker 1: and all these factories that are coming back in are
Speaker 1: going to be three D printing on demand type of
Speaker 1: things run with AI and robotics, and the factor is,
Speaker 1: you know, bringing back these jobs are not going to
Speaker 1: be as this you think they are. But it seems
Speaker 1: like there's a firewall going across the ocean to facilitate
Speaker 1: this new breakup and this new plan to move it
Speaker 1: by everything back to regionalization. And then with the food
Speaker 1: as well. You know, Europe said no more be from America,
Speaker 1: no more seafood. That's great, and all the fishermen in
Speaker 1: America can start selling back into America. So for US,
Speaker 1: it seems like food prices are going to drop. Now
Speaker 1: where is Europe going to get its excess food needs
Speaker 1: from That's another one unknown. But it seems like all
Speaker 1: these markets are going to start working together where there
Speaker 1: were not opportunities before. In the continental regions that are
Speaker 1: going to start feeling themselves and feeling the vacuum and void.
Speaker 1: But I encourage everybody to look at the Lima declaration,
Speaker 1: and it was by some of the same players you've
Speaker 1: heard of in terms of organizations, but some of them
Speaker 1: sort of drifted off the wayside and been replaced by others,
Speaker 1: right now, but they all still involve the World Bank.
Speaker 1: And that was that purposeful plan to look the world
Speaker 1: we know before where it was like super giant industrialized
Speaker 1: nations controlled the planet and everything else was third world.
Speaker 1: At that time, they realized that that's not going to work.
Speaker 1: There's going to be too much chaos if we continue
Speaker 1: this way. So that fifty year plan to move that
Speaker 1: into what we see today in terms of globalization and
Speaker 1: a lot of countries coming up in terms of economy
Speaker 1: and whatnot. Now the next phase starts. So this next
Speaker 1: phase also is going to involve, at least in my
Speaker 1: opinion here the uh change of systems in terms of
Speaker 1: debt based FIAT. So that rolls right back anyway. You
Speaker 1: talk about tariffs like they need to shake it apart
Speaker 1: where people stop trading and they roll back in continentally.
Speaker 1: And then at the same time they need to have
Speaker 1: an excuse why everything collapsed and the money need to
Speaker 1: be restructured. So you know, there's there needs to be
Speaker 1: excuses in believability built into this change all along the
Speaker 1: way here, you know, So teriff's a great way to do.
Speaker 1: Oh the class China couldn't sell anything. Oh they firewalled
Speaker 1: the ocean, and like China has huge demographic problems anyway,
Speaker 1: Like you put three hundred million people or four hundred
Speaker 1: million people out of work, you're gonna have a big problem.
Speaker 1: And they can't really go to war because they only
Speaker 1: had the one child policy for so long and if
Speaker 1: you start sending men off to their deaths and you
Speaker 1: wipe out entire family lineages. So they caught themselves in
Speaker 1: a huge trap here. So where does it go? Like, look,
Speaker 1: everybody can kind of go smoothly in the night and
Speaker 1: we reset everything and continental wise, and I don't know,
Speaker 1: but look at all the excuses that are right in
Speaker 1: place at the rate perfect time, and then things make
Speaker 1: a little more sense once you realize. Part two begins
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty five for this Lima Doctor or Lima
Speaker 1: Declaration Part two.
Speaker 3: Yeah, And I've always seen China. It's hard to tell
Speaker 3: what their economy is because it's hard to know whether
Speaker 3: they're telling you the truth about it or not. And
Speaker 3: a lot of people call them like a paper tiger.
Speaker 3: And like you said, that one child policy, although many
Speaker 3: of their children are male. Now they have an excess
Speaker 3: of young men just they are suffering from too many
Speaker 3: aged people being in their population, like it should be
Speaker 3: a nice pyramid, right, it gets smaller as it gets older,
Speaker 3: and there's this like more like a skyscraper going straight up,
Speaker 3: and that's bad news for them. Ours is not looking
Speaker 3: as good United States, but it's not quite as bad,
Speaker 3: and that's bad news. I don't know, maybe even less
Speaker 3: than ten years. And so I don't know if Trump
Speaker 3: is seeing this as a weakness with China, where he
Speaker 3: can you attack this and get jobs. I don't know
Speaker 3: if it works to get all the jobs back in America.
Speaker 3: I don't know if we have all the people to
Speaker 3: do the jobs.