Okay, so today we are here to talk about writing and structuring your affirmative LD cases. How many of you have learned at least a little bit about debate or LD at this point? Okay, so a few of you. One of the things I have here for you is packets of evidence. So you'll get to see a sample case that you'll actually be using later on in the day. But before we do that, I want to talk a little bit about the basics of Lincoln-Douglas debate. So first of all, just some basic background on it. Where did the name Lincoln-Douglas come from? It actually came from a series of seven debates between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen Douglas in the 1800s. And they were obviously through campaigning and the core of their debates was really about the ethics of slavery. And so traditionally Lincoln-Douglas debate has been value-based. So looking at those sort of deeper, more basic beliefs. But later on it evolved to emphasize policy. So a lot of the resolutions you'll hear will be about taking specific actions, usually at the federal level. The way LD works, you get one policy resolution for the academic year. And it's generally specific, so you all have to talk about the same topic. But it's broad enough that you have a lot of room to interpret and bring your own unique cases to the round. So this year the resolution is resolved. The U.S. federal government should increase its development of the Earth's moon in one or more of the following areas. Energy, minerals, and or water. So sometimes the resolutions are mouthful. But as you can see, sort of guides you as to what topic you're going to talk about. But you have some room to interpret there. The way the LD round looks is that there's two debaters. One affirmative debater and one negative debater. And you have specific time allotments and you take turns giving your speeches. So the times are up here. There's going to be five speeches total. The first affirmative constructive is six minutes. And that's where you lay out your case, which is what we're going to be talking about today, how to build that. The first negative constructive is a seven minute speech in which they respond to the first one. And then you can see it goes back again. So then you have your first affirmative rebuttal, which is another six minutes. The first negative rebuttal for six minutes. And then the second affirmative rebuttal for three minutes, which is the last speech in and around. The other thing about Lincoln Douglas is that you have set times for asking one another questions. So you get three minutes after the first affirmative and after the first negative to ask the other speaker questions about their case. So the other thing you get in a Lincoln Douglas round is four minutes of prep time to use however you like. Generally people will take maybe two minutes before their second speech and another two minutes before their last speech.  But you can sort of break that time up however you like over the course of the round. We're doing good so far. So when it comes to LD, there's a couple of things that as the affirmative you are solely responsible for. These are called your burdens. So the affirmative burdens include the burden of proof, which is that you need to provide arguments that justify or demonstrate the need for change. So generally the way resolutions are worded is there a call to change from whatever currently exists. So as the affirmative you can't really defend the status quo but you need to sort of justify that need for change, that call to action. The other important thing you need to do is have a prima facie case. And this means sort of at first look or on face that your case is complete enough to persuade a reasonable person at first glance that those changes are needed. And what prima facie really means is do you have all of your stock issues. So stock issues are what we're going to talk about today. There's two different ways we're going to talk about constructing a case. The first one, the affirmative is hips. And that's because you lay out, first of all, harms. So you give examples and explanations as to what the need is for change in the status quo. So identifying problems that exist that need to be fixed. The second component is adherency. What prevents those harms from being fixed in the status quo is there's some sort of roadblock that keeps them from solving themselves. E.g., why do we need your plan to put this into action? And there's your actual plan. So how do you as the affirmative think that we should fix those problems? And then solvency is the last component. So this is an explanation of how your plan will solve the harms that you started out talking about. And you want to know or you want to make note if additional good things will happen. Yes? That's why I want to interrupt. I think that I was supposed to go to the parliament to debate once again. Yeah, go for it. I'm sorry. You will see an additional sort of component to this when you're hearing other people use these structures where they'll have an entirely separate section for advantages or benefits to the plan that comes out of your song. We'll go over these in a little bit more detail. But this is sort of one of the first structures that you can use when you're putting a case together. The second type is an advantages-based structure. And this is a little bit different. It still includes all of the same components, but they're reorganized. So you can start with inherency, which is again that explanation of the roadblocks that currently exist. Move into your plan, so whatever your proposal is. And then you have different advantages and the sub points under there are an explanation of a harm, explaining how your plan solves that harm specifically, and then talking about the benefits of solving that harm. And you would do that for however many advantages you have, whether that's two or more. So it's the same information, just reorganizing it a little bit. You might see other variations on case construction too. There's not really a universal style that people use. But once you get more familiar with the event, you will definitely start recognizing which components are which and how to argue those. One of the things about LD is that it's an evidence-based event. So I want to make sure that you get these packets of evidence. These are a good example of how cases might be laid out, as well as the way to format evidence for that. This is the affirmative case here. I'm going to give you the negative evidence as well, just so that you have it for later. I assume that you can have more than two advantages, or is it limited only to? It's not limited. You can have more than two. Generally, you'll only be limited by the time constraints. So if you can fit it in for six minutes, you're good. So the evidence cards that you have there, if you open up the first page, you'll see what some of them look like. Basically, this is how you include your information. It's kind of if you were writing an essay and you were going to cite a quotation. How would you incorporate that into your overall argument? So the way that these are set up is that there's a tagline. You'll see at the top that there's like a bold sentence. And that's basically your topic sentence or your thesis statement for that argument. When you're reading this evidence in a debate round, that's the part that you would really want to emphasize and say clearly, because that's the part that people will be writing down. After that, there's the citation. And you can see both on this example and in your packet, the first part of it, so the author of the organization and the date are bolded. And that's the part that you would read out loud from that citation. And then after it, there's more complete information included in there, but you won't read that out loud. But if your opponent asks to see your evidence, they can see the full citation of where that information came from. And then in terms of the actual content of that card, that's the evidence that you would read. And there should be specific sentences that are bolded. Those sentences are the ones you'll read, but you have to leave the other information in for context. Again, if your opponent asks to see the card, they need to be able to see the entire context of where your sentences came from. So this is something that your coaches will probably work with even more in detail on. And a lot of teams also work together as a team to develop a team case and then once they're more experienced, sort of break off and develop several lines. Applying some of these concepts that we've been talking about for stock issues, let's say that our resolution is homework should be eliminated. What kind of harms would justify the need for an action like that? What's bad about homework? It takes too much time. Okay, it takes a lot of time. It's not fun to do. Not fun to do. They should be able to cover the material in class. Okay, do you use class time to cover content? Great, so maybe some of the things right, like if students don't have enough time to complete their homework and have a good life balance, maybe they're not getting enough sleep, not at their highest learning capacity during class. All of those things might be things that you lay out in the harm scenarios of your first affirmative constructed. And for each of those, obviously you would cite evidence, right? Maybe you want to say that after students finish their homework, the next class period starts too early in the morning and then you would cite things about how problematic the lack of sleep is for students. How about an adherency? I want to make a note about an adherency here. This can be two different types. It can either be structural, so something existing sort of is legitimately blocking it from happening. So maybe there's a law that prevents or requires something. Or it can be attitudinal, so that sort of appeal to tradition. Oh, we keep doing this because we've been doing it. So social norms, values, or beliefs can be attitudinal. So in terms of banning homework or eliminating homework, what in the status quo would keep that from happening? Yes? The lack of time teachers feel that they have in the classroom to cover the material. Okay, great. So there's that tension between wanting to finish the work in class but maybe just not having enough time to do it. And do you think that would be structural or attitudinal? That would be more structural. Okay. Because it's sort of that specific timeframe that you're working with. Is there anything else? A lot of times students have to pocket a lot of money out of their own budgets and some students do not have access to a lot of resources. And so that might be also financial burden upon them. Okay. So that might be kind of a structural tendency that can... Well, it might be attitudinal, but I think it's more structural because it's like if you're not affluent, if you're affluent then you have the advantage. Because then you can afford tools and computers and those things you might need. Okay, sure. Yeah. And if you don't maybe you have to maintain a job outside of school, right? You probably have more time for homework versus if you go straight to work afterwards. Okay, yeah. So we've got some external factors that are keeping policies like this in place. When it comes to the plan, this is also... There's some variations here, but generally the things that you as an affirmative want to have in mind for your plan are the mandate. So what is your specific course of action? So what are you specifically going to do to change the status quo? And that's called the mandate. There's also the agent which is the individual or the organization who enacts the plan. So who puts it into action and makes things happen? The enforcement and this is the person who enforces the plan. So maybe you have one organization pass a law, but then a separate entity would have to make sure that that law is actually being enforced. Funding is an explanation of how the plan will be paid for. There's a couple of things that you can do here. You can say normal means and that might mean like either through taxes or through sort of grants that maybe like schools regularly get that's planned for in the budget. So normal means can sort of take care of your funding. And sometimes plans don't require funding. Other ones you might need to identify a specific source depending on what your plan topic is. And then the last component is the timeline. So when the plan will happen. A lot of times in LinkedIn Douglas you won't necessarily hear speakers go through all of these planks for the plan, but they're definitely something to keep in mind and if you are on the negative certainly think about asking the affirmative about these specifics because if they don't have those answers that might mean there's weaknesses in their plan. So with our sample resolution homework should be eliminated. What are the logistics of that? How would we actually implement that plan? It makes me sick. Yeah, so how, yeah. So what you do is you work with the, okay so homework should be eliminated by increasing classroom time for students to build complete tasks within the classrooms and to change the policy to, you know, the school's policy, the university policy to the work like that. Okay, so sort of working to make other adjustments to make that plan work. Sure. Yeah, and so part of it would just be even beyond like making those extra adjustments because that might sort of go beyond what the resolution is calling you to do. You might even just say okay well, you know, schools will no longer require homework and go through whatever that is sort of like a school board or whatever that might need to go through. Or maybe that they provide it homework. Okay, yeah, sure. Right, like maybe schools get like funding withdrawn if they're requiring homework or something. And that might be part of like the enforcement for that plan, right? Okay, and then the solvency is the last component. So how would this action, how would eliminating homework solve the harm to some of the ones that you threw out at the start? People would get more sleep, more time to work and do productive things. Okay. Yeah, being more aware during classroom time. Okay, great, yeah. So to a certain extent sometimes solving the evidence is just explaining like why those harms no longer exist. So it's not that difficult in terms of explaining why it's solved. And then additional advantages that maybe aren't related to solving those specific harms or sort of unexpected benefits, you can also include those as advantages of the case. Any questions about this overall sort of structure or process? Okay, if you look at your packet of evidence, you'll see that this one is set up a little bit differently, right? This one is set up like the advantage structure. So the one that we just worked through was the hip structure. But if you look at here, you'll see that it starts with inherency and then moves on to the plan and you can see that this one specifies some of those components. So timeline, funding, agent and enforcement. And then on the third page, you can see that it moves into the specific advantage. And like I said, the LD topic this year is about the moon and there's a separate session on that. But then you can see how it sort of goes through the different components of the advantages and sort of explains like how these actions are going to solve some of those harms. So hold on to that. So in our last few minutes, I think we're still trying to stay on schedule with getting out here by 950 or so. I want you to work through this new resolution, maybe partner up with someone and come up with a basic outline of that hip structure. So if your resolution was resolved, the U.S. federal government should legalize marijuana. Think about what are some of the harms that would justify legalizing marijuana? What's currently in place keeping marijuana from becoming legalized? What could you do to sort of change, actually legalize it? And then how would legalizing have solved on ours that you came up with? Take a few minutes. Maybe partner up or you can just throw your ideas out and we can talk about them. I think I have a lot of time. You guys want to get together? Yeah. Let's get together. So I'll sit here because if you want to hear what she means or I can go over there. Yeah, I'll go over there. Sweet. I'm going to make a little texture block here. Sweet. So what are the harms? The harms of having marijuana. So are the harms for legalizing it? Sure. Or for not legalizing it? It would be for not legalizing it. So as the affirmative current, what are the harms of having marijuana? So we're trying to be too non-legalizing. People are in jail. This is your job to prove this. So we're saying the harms of having a cannabis flow. Right. So what are the problems? The first thing I can think of would be the medical benefits. Okay, so that's not a harm. No, harms are like... No, it's not using it. Right? The lack of use of medical benefits. Of not legalizing it. You just reshape the way you're saying that. Yeah. So if you said like a harm is that more people can't be using it. For medication, because it's not legalized. There's none of the benefits that people cannot use. Because it's illegal. Yeah. Okay. What's the harm? Do you have one? What were you saying? Okay, we have prison overflow. Should we make people go? Okay, so should we make people go to prison over maybe a trifle thing? Yes. Okay, how about you? How about you? We lose revenue that the government can use through taxation and taxing corporations and those kinds of things that could get into development. We also lose touch with safety. The government can enforce safety standards over something that's not legal. You see what I mean? The FDA can't help to say, oh well, this marijuana is all full of heroin and meth. So don't use it. This one's like, you know, U.S. D.A. fruit. Yeah. It's another thing that's kind of sketchy by people. Right. Well, because you don't get it at a gas station. Well, yeah, that's kind of what I was going to say. Public health. Yeah, public health. It's not regulated really right now. That's right. So cartels and drug dealers, I don't know, it's like dangerous and can get out of control. That's right. Yeah, these guys are scary. Yeah, these guys are scary. They always bring guns and goons with them. Yeah. That's a great list of harms. So then what would the coherency be? So, coherency. Like what's preventing us from doing that? Government, man. Government. Definitely. So that's like a structural right? So government has a law. They got to figure out a way to tax it. And so, well, they have to figure out a way to rewrite the law. And how are you? I was very out of tune. People have sometimes bad impressions of what's going on. It's right on. Are you using drugs? Yeah, or are you using drugs with the, I don't know, what's justified and what's not justified? Okay. How are you? I don't know if that's different. Morals? I don't know. I would say something along the lines of that the government could potentially be critical if they reverse course. If they spend all this money to try to make it a leak, try to convince people if they can make them lose face or make you credibility. Although I don't think that's a very good reason. So the federal government, so this is not nationwide legalization? That's what this is like. Not states. Okay. Sometimes the federal government has it as a class one or class five, whichever is the most extreme. Schedule five drug. Schedule five drug. And so, and they're reluctant to remove the very dangerous drugs on that schedule five and like, you know, want to. Yeah. From the list. And other things like Clorox bleach and pneumonia are probably on that list of if you drink it or something. Yeah. Not really. This is a great list. And just to you don't necessarily have to include total structural and attitudinal. You can have just one in here. Whereas they'll want several hours. And there's also just the divide between people in general for and against it. There's not like an overwhelming stance in any over nationwide over its legalization. At least in some places there is. It's a plan. All the scholars are going to vote. Yeah. Well, that's what I think matters. So. Misconception maybe or prejudices against the use of marijuana? People are probably informed about like realistically the pros and cons of. Right. Everyone's different. So are we going to plan yet? Yeah, I just want to say one thing about this. So definitely this process of thinking of and researching all the possible sort of road blocks is great. And then you want to pick like the one or two things you can find the best evidence for and that are the most persuasive. So you don't want to you don't want to use too many in here and see that. Right. Because keep in mind that part of your job is to not only identify the in here and see but then overcome that in here and see. So you don't necessarily want to come up with so many arguments that it's impossible for you to get past. All right. Moving on to plan. So this is this. I want to do all degree. Or at least I have degree. So what are we going to do about it? That doesn't seem to do a lot for the national government. You know, vote on our politician tubing? Colorado. The vote for Colorado is present. You've got to put it on a bill or a ballot. No, no, that's so many statewide. The government doesn't do that. Well, yeah, that's true. It could either be like you could have a certain amount of lead or legalized growing it yourself or the government would regulate it probably and be able to sell it if they sell it out the whole. Okay. So then maybe lobby Congress and the president and state legislatures. Because the more states prove it, the more it makes it hard for the federal government to keep not approving it. So lobby has entities to maybe put it on ballot initiatives on the state so that it puts pressure on the federal government. Can the plan be like two-fold of multiple things, like change the schedule of the drug and then put it under state classification and alcohol, like two steps? Yeah, so a couple of things. One thing that you're thinking about is like what can citizens do to sort of make the government do this other thing like voting or lobbying.  You get to wave it once for your plan and say that this plan will happen. So instead of needing to rally the voters, you can say we'll legalize marijuana. Like that will happen. And that's sort of your prerogative as the affirmative because that's what the resolution is asking you to do right. So the plans we will legalize marijuana and have it be classified under similar laws to those rather than regulating alcohol. Except for alcohol, we'll also be changing the age of 18 because I don't know why it's the only thing in the country that's aged 21.  That's illegal and we're going to send you to an adult prison if you do it.  After a country, I get the pressure on you just don't go have a coffee. That's true in the military. You can't drink alcohol. You know that if you're under 21. Is that bullshit? Okay. Anyways. And then what was some of those like some points of plan B? So in terms of the, this is the mandate. What about agent and enforcement? No agent. The federal government would be the Congress with presidents and the president because they have to assign it would be the agents. Okay. Right. And then would we need separate enforcement? Probably just be like police officers. Yeah. Yeah. The same entities that you just expand those entities that would be good alcohol stuff and make them do the marijuana stuff too. Okay. We already have probably too many of those in place already. Right. But you know, you just use it say once. Why? Why have you made the will? Right. Sure. There's already like an organization in place to manage that. Okay. Seven. Funding. Would you need money to do this? We wouldn't need much money because once you change the laws kind of done, you would need some money for to expand maybe the agency so that their staff appropriately took care of it. But wouldn't that be normal? Do it? Because it's a bill taxing it. It would be, it would be normally, that's right. And so the, that was part of the plan. It's like you need money. But the, how you get the money is to in the same way you do for alcohol. Alcohol is a tax applied to it when you buy it. And so too would marijuana. Great. So as the affirmative, all you have to say is this will be taken care of through normal means. And then if someone asks you that information, it's great if you're informed about it and you can explain it. Okay. Tax. Yeah. Awesome. Okay. And then timeline. Within one week. Okay. I'm kidding.  Maybe as soon as possible. Yeah. Well. That's a common one that you'll hear. That's actually an answer. Yeah. That's it. It seems like a very common answer. It seems to be a very convenient answer. All they see, everything you do will do as soon as possible. As soon as possible. And then what about solvency? Which is what happened. How does it get rid of the wrongs? Yeah. How does it solve these harms? So, well, with more marijuana, with, you know, going through the proper channels, you know, a safer product that people who need it for medical purposes will have access to. People would not, it'll reduce prison overcrowding because people would not be put into prison because of marijuana related possession and use loss. Right. Or possibly even sales loss. We would gain tax revenue because we're taxing it. As far as safety standards, those would be more regulated. Yeah. I would assume there's probably more safety around informing people about how to use it and what it might feel like because alcohol is legal. And I think that schools, there's just more information on it. Okay. When it's legal, because it's more publicly understood, it seems like. So, if it was legalized, then people would probably understand it. Okay. So, more informed public? Yeah. Okay, great. Yeah. So, sort of going through and explaining how this simple act of legalizing marijuana can take care of all these bad things that currently exist. So, this is a great example of the structure that you can use, especially for when you're first getting into debate. This is often sort of an easier structure for people to wrap their minds around than the advantages structure. Obviously, play with it. Work with your coach to see what's going to work best for you all and your team. But this is one way to include all of those components and make that logical argument. You can see how each element is related to the next in terms of working through that process. Any questions about any of the things that we've talked about so far? Okay. Well, you all did a really nice job with that. Remember to hold on to your packet. If you do have questions later, feel free to come find me. Other than that, that's all I've got for this session. And have fun in the other ones. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry if we're done. Oh, thank you.


Welcome back to Think Tech. I'm Jay Fidel. This is Community Matters. Our guest is Gerald Jensen. We're going to talk about the banking system and how it's a ticking time bomb. This is very important to get to the fundamentals of our society and evaluate. It's a time for evaluation. It's a time for reform, for correction. And Gerald, who is an engineer, will help us do that. Welcome to the show, Gerald Jensen. Thanks, Jay. Thanks for having me. To get all the details of what we're about to talk about, pick up my book, The Big Solution, Deactivating, Taking Time Bomb of Today's Economy. And yeah, let's talk about it. Let's talk about the changes we need to actually get to the next stage of a society, of evolving society. And the banking system is the fundamental problem we face today. Okay, let's talk about the problem before we talk about the solution. What is the problem with the banking system? Well, fundamentally, the banking system hasn't evolved in about a hundred and 10, 20 years. The basic principles of our banking system were put in place in 1913 with the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. And this is where the banks basically created or bought the rights to money creation from the federal government. And there's a story behind it. JP Morgan, that JP Morgan, the largest bank in America, bailed out the federal government in 1907. And six years later, as a direct cause of that, the banks created the Federal Reserve, it's a private corporation where they can print money, and then the banks like JP Morgan can actually use that printed money to make loans to businesses and people, mortgages and so on. And that is the fundamentals of how our banking system and our finance system works, that money is fundamentally credit. Was there a time that it did work? Well, initially, there was the gold standard and the gold standard created quite a lot of restriction behind money printing because you could only print as much money as you had in gold. And so it was kind of constraining, and that worked for a while, basically up until World War II and the Great Depression. And they started very quickly, even just after World War I, but right in that range between World War I and World War II, they started doing basically where they did not have to reserve as much gold as they had issued in credit. So basically it became a fractional reserve. And now that expanded the money supply and which helped grow the economy. Well, you know, move forward to Nixon. Nixon realized that, or under Nixon, he was put under a lot of pressure because foreign governments were flooded with US dollars and they started buying gold for dollars or they took the dollars that they earned and bought gold and the United States was losing all the money in Fort Knox. And Nixon said, wait a minute, I don't want to lose all the gold. So I'm not going to sell any more gold, which basically decoupled the dollar from gold. And from there, you had the massive inflation of the late 70s and early 80s, where a Volcker came in and jacked up the rates to 18, whatever, 20% very high rates, and basically crushed the economy because nobody wanted to take out a loan or expand credit supply with that kind of interest rate. And what that did was it put the inflation in society, put that on the backs of the working man. Inflation was no longer controlled by gold. Now the working man was to control for inflation. So anytime the economy cooks up a little bit like it is right now, it's kind of hot. What do they do? They raise interest rate, reduce the money supply, and guess who bears the brunt of it? All the people who get fired because the economy has to slow down in order to control inflation. Now, well, that's problematic in and of itself, but when you get into it, the real fundamental problem is that money, because banks control money supply, is defined as credit. JP Morgan himself said, and he's quoted as saying, money is either gold or credit, and everybody still believes that today. And the problem is it's false, and the reason is as an engineer, I know that there's something called first principles. First principles are like the laws of thermodynamics, their universal rules and laws of the universe that are always true no matter what, even for dollars and economics and banking systems. Fundamental principles of the universe are just true always. So when JP Morgan said that money is either gold or credit, he was wrong because that is not true according to the laws of the universe. According to the laws of the universe, information, which is what money is, right? And how do I know money is information? We know that because on the serial, on every dollar bill, there's a serial number. That serial number goes into a database or is controlled by a database at the Federal Reserve. So in other words, money is tracked by a serial number information. And we also can see it in action, right? We can wire money across the world, data across the world, that you can basically digitally create money everywhere, and then we learn that from cryptocurrencies, that it's just information. So here's the problem, and here's that universal principle that needs to be applied so we can start engineering the financial system, and that is this. Everything in the universe is engineerable. In other words, you can control the variables into a process to create the outcomes you want. This is how we create better cars, computer systems, anything that is engineered. This is the fundamental principle that is being used. We control the inputs into a process, and we can therefore can control the outputs. This is the fundamental principle. The problem with our economy and the banking system and the global economy is that the only input into our financial system is credit, and that causes a very specific type of work to be done and only that type of work. That work that has to be done has to be credit worthy. If it's not credit worthy, banks won't loan the money, and that work doesn't get done. Well, we know from our own households that there's a problem with not doing the work that has to be done. For example, nobody pays me to clean my house. If nobody pays me to clean my house, then why should I do it? Well, if I don't do it, what happens?  All of a sudden it becomes toxic, and all of a sudden if I keep living in my house, I'm going to die. It's just not livable anymore. Well, think about our planet. Well, why is it we can't clean up the oceans from all the plastic and pollution, and why is it we can't clean up our atmosphere from all the carbon dioxide and pollution in the atmosphere? Same reason, there's no money in it. In other words, the banking system prevents us from doing the work we need to do. Let me jump in. So he was wrong when he said it's only gold or credit. No, but he has to think. He's not fundamental principle that is right. What is the fundamental engineering concept that we have to see here in order to understand the problem and thus create the solution? What is that principle? That principle is that money is credit or gold if you're a banker. That's what money is to a bank. No doubt about it, right? However, money is also information, and information can be anything. Information can be money wired across the internet or money can stop looking at it the way he looked at it. Correct, because the way he looked at it was from a banker's point of view, but we should look at it as information. Yes, and information we can do anything we want with. And then we apply the rules of engineering, engineering processes, and we can control the money supply. That's what it is, right? We can control the money supply, but we can also start fixing the environment. We can start increasing how much money people earn. We can also, through engineering, control the cost of living. Today, the cost of living is out of control. Engineering allows us to apply principles that can reduce the cost of living going forward. Okay, well, let's start with the money supply, and we'll go to the other guy. I like to understand the relationship. So the money supply, it's information. So somewhere, and I'm thinking computer programming, you say engineering, but I think it's really computer programming when you're dealing with information, it's information technology, right? So, okay, I have a little black box, okay? And this black box is going to control my money supply. And we'll get to other control points later. But what do I put into the box, and what do I take out of the box? How does the box affect my society? What instructions is it giving my society so that everybody buys into the money supply as established by the little black box? Well, today, money supply is very consistent, actually. It's at about a trillion dollars. So money is paid towards debt, and money is given out as debt. And so basically, there's this constant coming and going of money, creating a pretty consistent one trillion dollars in the money supply. And it's all done through credit payments or credits being paid out. So when we understand money as information, well, then there's a whole bunch of new ways of controlling the money supply. And through engineering and logic, you can understand and look at the society as a whole, and you see all of a sudden, all of these opportunities to improve efficiencies and improve society and improve outcomes, which is what we don't have today. We don't have any way of controlling outcomes. This is why they're always saying, well, what's the economy going next? Who knows? Because there is no control over our economy. I totally agree. But what comes out the other side? Suppose you put in lots of data about how things are doing, selected data, if you will. And what comes out the other side? Is it interest rates? What would it be in order to rationalize the whole system and do it better than the banks do? Right. Well, we look at the very big inefficiencies in society today. And the biggest inefficiencies today is actually the social safety net, three quarters of the federal government spending. So you're talking about $3 trillion approximately is towards safety nets. This is a tremendous amount of money, and it's highly inefficient. But on top of that, you've got states and cities spending on top of that on homeless shelters and food banks. The spending is unbelievable. Why is the spending so great on safety nets? Because I go to the home situation because people can usually relate to that. Well, if I have five kids, and I say, well, nobody's paying me to take care of my kids, so I'm not going to take care of them. And then what do you do? Well, you hope for the kids' sake that the government steps in and starts taking care of the kids. I don't know. We're bringing them somewhere to get food and take care of them. Well, that's exactly what happens in our society today. Well, their economy isn't taking care of the poor. So, well, who's going to take care of the poor? Well, I guess the government's going to have to take care of the poor. And that's exactly what happens. What we want is an economy that takes care of the poor, where everybody is included. So how do you do that? How do you do that efficiently, way more efficiently? And it's easy to be more efficient than have you ever been in a interrail in Europe or cross-country traveling. The amount of money you actually need to live on a daily basis is very little. Like five, 10 bucks, you can actually get by, right? Today, the city of San Francisco spends $25,000, this is just the city of San Francisco, spends $25,000 per homeless person in that city per year. So it's up to, billions of dollars. The spending on safety nets is incredible, and it's an incredibly wasteful. So fundamentally, you understand, if you have multiple ways of injecting money into the system and pulling money back out of the system, and we can talk about both sides of the equation in your black box scenario, that the first and most important principle is actually getting rid of the safety nets and just making sure that everybody in the world has five bucks a day to spend. Because this way, they can get the food they need and they can get the shelter they need if the economy is structured around that scenario. How do you feel about Andrew Yang, remember him? Well, okay, so now this is the mistake that everybody does when they first start reading my books and principles. They say, oh, you're talking about basic income. It's not basic income. It's very different because money that comes from the Federal Reserve is printed. It's printed out of thin air. Nobody owes. It's not credit. It's money, but it's information. It's not credit. You see, the problem with basic income is it's credit. Either the federal government has to borrow the money, or whoever is issuing the basic income has to borrow it from somewhere. And this is the fundamental problem with the banking system that money can only exist as credit. Now, as soon as you realize, hey, money's just information and we can issue money to solve social problems, societal problems, well then, oh, wow, boom, I just solved poverty, something they say that will never be solved. In fact, as long as the banking system controls money supply, poverty will never be solved because it's cooked into the system. Poverty has to exist because otherwise they couldn't control inflation. This is what they're doing right now by raising interest rates and doing reverse quantitative easing. I'm with you, Charles, but I don't know how this family, the hypothetical family, the case study, if you will, how are they cared for? Say five kids that might have been a mistake to have as many as five kids. He doesn't have a job that'll support that, but we don't want it to be poor. And we want to have this new banking system that you're talking about, this new money system you're talking about, actually take care of him so he is not poor. Isn't it Andrew Yang where you give him a guaranteed income? Or is it something that is calculated by the black box? And what I get so far, and you can correct me if it's not in line with the book, is that we have a federal system where the federal government for political reasons gives money away when people are squawking about poverty and homelessness and the like. We have state systems and 50 states that give money away for also political reasons in those states. And we have duplication of effort, redundancy, all over the board. We have irrational inconsistencies between the programs in state to state and state to federal. And there's a lot of money dropping through the cracks that is wasted. I get it. And I'm thinking this black box is, it's about six inches square. And it makes critical decisions that affect everyone everywhere. And it makes them on the basis of all the considerations that would apply to federal and state. And you take the politics out of it. It's mechanical. It's engineered. It's programmed. Yes. Okay. So the question is, how does my family, whether a fellow doesn't have much of a job and maybe his wife works, maybe not, and there are five children, what does the black box do for them to keep them out of poverty? Well, first of all, several million kids go to bed with not enough food every night in the United States. So whatever we're doing right now, the food stamps, whatever, it isn't working. They're kids that are losing out on their potential because they're not eating enough in the richest country in the world. So think about all the other countries in the world where it's much, much worse, but even in America, millions of kids every night. Now, well, first of all, we have to understand that if the kids are getting $5 a day, that is actually enough money for a nutritious meal. So how a kid doesn't have $5 in today's society to get a decent meal is just mind-boggling. So yeah, if you're poor and you're deciding not to work, yeah, you're going to have to work just to take care of yourself. But that's the key thing here is that there's so many people in homeless shelters, unemployment lines or on welfare, you name it, whatever safety net you want to call it, that are perfectly capable of taking care of themselves. And this is really the problem. We don't want government doing anything, period, but especially we don't want them taking care of us because that's a double-edged sword, right? It might be great when you get that welfare check, but all of a sudden, you've got Ted Cruz saying, hey, before you get that check, you got to pee in this cup or you got to do something else for me because I'm paying you. Meanwhile, it isn't the poor people's fault. It's the economy that doesn't work correctly because the banking system has the reins, the controls to the economy, but they don't know how to use them. So we've basically, out of control economy, doing who knows what, going who knows where for what purpose, none, right? Because we're literally in a car going faster and faster because the economy has to keep growing without a steering wheel. We can head off a cliff into some kind of dystopian future or we can head into a wall with global warming or pollution in our food supply. In other words, we can't control, we have no way of knowing or where we're going, but one thing's for sure, if you're in a car that's going faster and faster, eventually you're going to crash if you don't have a steering wheel. Oh, I agree. I think we're seeing that now and the cliff isn't that far away, but let me ask you, if I made you Congress, Charles, and President, both. Yeah, I solved the world's problem in like a month. I literally, I didn't know exactly what to do. It's in my book too. What would it look like? What would the bill look like, the statute? I think I could get away. Well, if I could control Congress, but especially with presidential powers, you can literally do an executive action to go into Federal Reserve because it's a corporation with executive action. You can literally change a single document. It's called monetary policy, which has been essentially the same for over 100 years. You change monetary policy away from this credit principle and into information and engineering society. Boom. It's a brand new world and our troubles are now solvable. And I can tell you how to solve global warming, pollution in the oceans. We can solve all our problems if we get rid of our current monetary policy in the Federal Reserve. Okay. What would it say, though? You want to make a change? What exactly would it say in the change? Well, in my book, the big solution, there it is. I do. You wanted to buy the book to know the change? No. Well, it is, I think by reading the book, and it's a bit of a long book, but it does explain to everybody how we got here, the history behind it, but also all the problems it's causing right now from poverty to pollution. There's so many problems, and it shows the reader how it's solvable, why it's solvable, and why it's not really complicated to think about. It's a story so everybody can understand it. What is the change? What is the magic change that I need to do to get rid of the burdens of the existing banking system and go on to a moral efficient system, economic system, economy in the United States? So it's to solve these problems. There's got to be one core point. One executive order, as you were talking about monetary policy, or Congress has to pass a bill, which Congress has trouble doing these days, especially if it's profound like this. What do we have to do in order to reach the other side here and avoid the problems in the existing banking system? Well, I mean, I actually think, I mean, you can call me a conservative or a Democrat or a liberal, you know, I'm both because the truth is outside of current politics. Politicians are really fighting inside of a box that the banking system has put them in. So yeah, there's no good solutions. Wow, only five minutes left. Yeah, I mean, so there's, I may come in with eight tools, but fundamentally, the thing that has to change inside the Federal Reserve is that you got to kick the bankers out. The bankers cannot control money supply. Engineers, scientists, mathematicians, perhaps, maybe perhaps some, you know, some economists, but basically a new, in the long term, it would have to be a new part of government, a fourth part of government, kind of like the Supreme Court, where engineers and scientists get elected maybe a lifetime position like the Supreme Court to go into the Federal Reserve and properly run and construct our society for a sustainable future for an equitable present where we eliminate poverty and things like world peace are possible if the economics are right. Any place in the world where there's peace is because the economics are right. The scientists and the engineers who are somehow selected for this would have the power to change money supply and it wouldn't be the bankers anymore. I mean, am I right to say it wouldn't be the free market of the bankers anymore? It would be a careful plan using the best engineering and programming principles they can come up with and it would be centralized in Washington and it would apply to all the states. Am I right so far? Yeah, we can even keep it in the Eccles Building. That's what the Federal Reserve is today in Washington DC. Okay, a couple of questions flow out of that. What happens to all the bankers? Are they going to be employed or unemployed? What happens to all the people in the NGOs and the charitable organizations that help people with this very inefficient system we have now? Are they out of a job? Well, I'm no fan of charities. I don't think charities should exist. So charities are super inefficient, even the best ones. So, you know, yeah, sorry, if we live in an inefficient economy, you don't need charities. I mean, it's almost by definition. If the society worked correctly, well, then you wouldn't need charities. Charities are a solution to a system that doesn't work and it's a bad solution and so is government taking care of people. Banks do actually a fundamental role and it's an important role and that is sometimes you want to borrow money in order to get something done because it's a good idea. So banks don't go away, but they just don't have this role anymore and banks could still go to the Federal Reserve to borrow freshly printed money. There isn't a problem with that. The problem is only when it is the only way to get money into the economy. When it's the only way to get money into the economy, you constrain what's possible and then you wind up having all of these problems and you wind up not being able to engineer society for a sustainable future. It is, once you really get what I'm saying, and this is why I wrote these books, and by the way, your readers can pick this one up for free on Amazon, Optimizing America. That was my first book, my first crack at it. And this is my second one. You can also pick this one up for free on some platforms. But the point is, is that once you get this and once you get dialed into it, how bad our world is today. See what people don't realize is that as humans, we are so adaptable. We're adaptable to put mass on our face and hide in our houses for years. We're so adaptable, we accept almost anything that's thrown at us. And the truth is, in today's world, society is so bad. It is awful once you look at what's happening.  Poor people are literally being eliminated globally by the millions every year. And that includes millions of kids too. Every year. So if you're poor, you're on the list. I don't want to reference that list, but you get the idea.  But why don't they want to solve the problem? Yes, we could, we could, we could solve, we could solve poverty globally, easily, nationally. And not only that, it actually makes us richer. Our economy will go gang bounced busters once we gain these efficiencies. We'll have more work to do because there's actually infinite work out there. You know, the only reason why we have trouble with automation, taking our jobs and artificial intelligence is because the banking system puts artificial limitations on what work we can do. Once we release those limitations, there is so much work we can do. And we can make this world so much better. Well, make me an entrepreneur. Okay. I'm an entrepreneur and I want to start a shoe factory. I'm just picking that out of the air. And I don't have the money to start the shoe factory, to hire people and build a building and equipment and whatnot. How is the new system going to make it easier for me to build and operate my shoe factory? Well, do you live in America? Uh-huh. Well, I mean, we can say that in today's system, that would be a really bad idea, because you're competing against China and Vietnam, where people are making a dollar a day or something. And so making shoes over here, unless you have a fully automated concept, it would be really not a good idea to build. Let's assume I do. Let's assume I have a great concept and I have a patent on a machine that will make shoes better than anyone else can make them. Let's assume that. How can I start my company in the new system that you're describing in a better way than the existing system? Well, so the difference would be that in the big solution world, which is what I call it, you are going to have a massive middle class, right?  So the entire market space is much larger, right? So there's more people buying shoes, new shoes. So that's the potential, is that you can actually engineer a massive middle class where today you can't. It's just up or down with the interest rates, right? This is the lever. We've got a hammer and we use it. The new system, the up or down in the interest rates would not happen. The new system, if I go to a banker and I want to make a loan of a million dollars for my shoe factory, I can still get it, right? Except there won't be so many guardrails on it. There won't be so many controls on how I operate. What's the difference in the new system in terms of my opportunity to fund the investment I need? Well, I think fundamentally in the new system, you're definitely going to have to deal with higher interest rates. And again, this will be engineered. Today, you have basically zero interest rates because in order to grow the economy, we need to keep issuing credit, even if it's for really, really bad purposes like building a 55-bedroom mansion for Elon Musk because he's the new richest guy in the world. So what happens is if you start issuing money in other ways of credit, well, then a way to restrict the amount of money in the supply is to raise interest rates permanently. So you would have a permanent higher interest rates, but here's the caveat. Now, is your shoe company totally green? Are those shoes biodegradable? Are they recyclable? Do they have something that makes our society more sustainable than the Chinese shoes or whatever shoe you want to buy? Does this matter in the new system? It does matter because- That advised me to do that. Because in today's world or in banking system, we have one interest rate. And that is also, again, restricting society for, you know, in an engineered bank or engineered financial system, you would have variable interest rates. So if your shoes are particularly innovative and they are particularly green for the planet, well, then you get a lower interest rate. Now, if you were going to build a tobacco factory for a highly addictive cigarette that is going to be financially sound because of its addiction rates, well, you might have to pay a much higher interest rates because you're literally costing society some massive medical bills, right? So variable interest rates are actually productive if you know where you're going. If you have the bank or the current banking system where we have no clue where we're going or how fast our car is going or if there's a wall 10 feet ahead of us, right? Well, then variable interest rates don't make sense because you don't want to pick winners and losers. Well, sorry. Will this all be delegated to that committee of engineers? Yes, variable interest rates delegated to engineers. So that would really take a lot off Congress's plate. And I'm not saying that... Yeah, smaller government. Yeah, smaller government. Yeah, for sure. Much smaller government. And maybe... What the founding fathers intended. Yeah, okay. But it is. No doubt about it. We're about out of time. And I wanted to ask you one last thing, which I think is very important. Let's assume that I go out and get my hands on both of your books. Let's assume that I... Three, three books. Three books. Sorry. Two more free. Okay. And I understand that the banking system is not doing a good job, that we have redundancies and inefficiencies all over the lot with our federal system, federal and state system. And I want to rationalize this and make this a more efficient economy. Okay. So my name is Jay. I live in Hawaii. What... Here's my question for you, Charles. What do I do? Where do I go? How do I make this happen? Well, first it's awareness.   You're crazy. Well, lots of people talk about Federal Reserve. They're called crazy. And I think, you know, there has been many people who've said, what a weird, mysterious thing the Federal Reserve is. Well, I'm here to tell everybody, this is why the Federal Reserve is a damned thing right now and it's causing all kinds of trouble. And I'm trying to do it in a very simple way that everybody can understand. Once everybody understand what's going on here and the politicians start picking, believe me, even politicians can understand this. This is not complicated, right? So once we get the knowledge out there, the information out there, start talking to people about it, we need to start talking about the Federal Reserve and the banking system and how to do things properly. That's the quest. That's why I do as many shows as I can. I try to get the word out there, but people do understand this. They would vote for politicians, candidates, who would understand it also. And the platform points for those politicians, candidates, would be to modify the banking system, modify the role of the Federal Reserve and create a sort of a unified, new, engineered, programmed banking system. And that means an awful lot of people would have to get off an awful lot of less rational platforms and do this. But here's the thing. This serves conservatives, pure conservatives. Obviously, you can't serve somebody who's completely crazy, but from liberals to conservatives, this serves everyone because this is not inside the box. This is outside of the box thinking, which is obviously what we need. This is an out-of-the-box solution. And with it, utopia is actually possible. World peace, the end of poverty, all of these things are actually possible. And not only that, it will make us wealthier. The elimination of poverty will make us richer. Efficiencies are always better. What we're talking about is putting modern science on, what do you want to call it? The wing of the government. Right. And changing politics. That means changing the entire structure of our country, really. And we get a long way to go. And that road that we have to go down is a political road to change our society. So keep writing those books, Gerald. We're going to need more of them. Thank you, sir. And I'm waiting for the right opportunity to write my next book. This has to happen. It's not like there's a choice. We literally have a gun to our head, or we're literally driving in a car faster and faster, well over 60 miles an hour, and we will hit something that will end society as we know it. It isn't a matter of if, it is when. Elon Musk put it at 12 years, and he wants to start a colony on Mars. Well, I've got a better plan. Let's save the planet by just changing one single document, monetary policy. We can literally save the planet and create world peace. It's crazy. Let's go ahead at a time, Gerald. Thank you very much. Gerald Jensen, author. And the proposition is to examine the international banking system and identify, you know, what the problems are and change it. Thank you so much, Charles. Appreciate your thoughts and your books and your appearance here on Think Tech. Aloha. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn, and donate to us at thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.


Okay. A pure gaseous substance is cooled as indicated in the heating cooling curve shown on the board. Let's answer some questions associated with this. Okay. On which portion of the graph is only a liquid present? Okay. So, well, why don't we just label the portions of this graph? Okay. And what they're actually saying here. So, what did the problem say? It said that we had a gas that was being cooled. Something like that, right? So, we would expect it probably to go to a liquid then to a salt, right? Something like that. So, if we're starting out up here, that's effectively what it's saying, with a gas, then hopefully you would expect that this portion would be the gaseous portion. Okay. So, I guess the first question said, well, which place is the liquid associated with? Only. There's only liquid. It's from here to here, right? So, in this C region, only liquid. Okay. So, this is where the liquid is. Gas B, well, it would be here in A, right? Only gas, A. So, and then hopefully you guys would expect that only solid would be down here. Other questions. It says, where is a solid present? Okay. So, not only solid, but where else on the graph could you find a solid? Okay. Well, you have to understand what's going on in these portions of the graph B and D. Well, in this portion, right, you're going from a gas to a liquid. So, here is where you've got that gas-liquid equilibrium, okay? And here you're going from a liquid to a solid. So, in here, you've got the liquid-solid equilibrium. So, what it's saying here at D, what this curve is saying, is that you've got both a liquid and a solid in equilibrium at that point. So, if it's saying, if it asks like that question did, where is there a solid anywhere on the curve? So, solid, not only solid, but anywhere there's a solid, it's going to be, then, of course, if you wanted to say where is there a liquid, where is there a liquid, guys? B, C, and B, right? Because we've got, here we've got this gas-liquid equilibrium. So, gas-liquid, so there's a liquid there, a liquid there, and a liquid there. So, solid, if there's a liquid, it's going to be B, C, and D. And then gas, of course, A, and B. What is the name of this portion here? Yeah, this one's called, this is showing the enthalpy of vaporization here. And here, showing the enthalpy of fusion. What it's saying, what it really asks is which part of this gas is, I mean this graph is showing the melting point. Where's the melting point indicated on this graph? D, right? So the melting point is D, and the boiling point is B. So, in other words, we go from a gas-cooled to a gas-liquid equilibrium, which is further-cooled to a liquid, which is further-cooled to a equilibrium, which is further-cooled to a solid. Okay, so that's what this heating-cooling curve is showing. Are there any questions on this one? I think we kind of beat this one. Heating-cooling curve, yeah. Or a cooling curve, yeah. I mean this in particular would be a cooling curve, but I think they're, you know, in general called heating-cooling curves, yeah. Well, so you can call it that, but usually people will say vaporization put a negative.  So vaporization is the more common way to say it, with a negative sign. Okay, any other questions about that? I'm sorry.


I always found comfort in that old window. Not only had it been there, resting against that same old tree since I was a child, it always seemed to have a warm vibe to it. I never knew who the window belonged to and why it was just set against some tree out in the middle of a small forest behind my house. I discovered it back when I was seven as I was playing hide-and-go-seek with my favorite cousin, Mecca, in that small forest. A glimmer of light caught my eye near an old pine tree in the dead center of the forest. I walked over to see a broken, dirty, abandoned window gently resting on the tree's base. It looked a total mess, of course, but something about it seemed beautiful, soft, and inviting. I even told it my name, Liam. I was so drawn to it, I can't explain why it gave me that feeling, but it just did, and I have visited it at least once a week ever since then. Don't even get me started on all the memories I've shared with it. My first heartbreak, the first and only argument I've ever had with my best friend, all the way to my first car, first job, and most recently, the death of my cousin. Yes, Mecca died. I know that's a heavy load to lay out, but it's the truth. She passed away earlier today, the same day as my 19th birthday. Her and the rest of my family had thrown me a surprise party, cake, dancing, Wii sports, all that good stuff. Mecca told me she wanted to get away from the family for a moment and breathe. We went outside and rested on the back porch, looking out into the small forest that we had known for so long. By then, it was turning dark as the sun set in the orange-hued sky. Mecca suddenly had the idea that her and I should play hide-and-go-seek again in the forest, just like old times. The idea was silly to me, but I went along with it. She went to run and hide in the woods while I counted to 60. After searching for her, for what felt like hours, and the sun had completely set, I was super worried. I don't know why, but I felt compelled to visit the window. I looked at it and jokingly said, Eden happened to see Mecca run by, did you? I gave myself a small pity laugh. However, my grin quickly changed to wide eyes in a dropped jaw as my eyes focused in on something behind the tree the window rested on. A dark silhouette standing amongst the trees. I immediately knew it wasn't Mecca and didn't dare call out to ask, because the silhouette looked nothing like her at all. It was tall, probably eight feet, thin, and seemed to have a tuft of frizzy hair growing from its face. I slowly took a step back, not moving my eyes to make sure the silhouette wasn't moving or following me. Another step and another whatever the silhouette was, it wasn't moving and didn't seem to notice me as far as I could tell. I took the chance to turn around and quietly, but quickly head back towards the house. As I walked, sweat was literally dripping from my forehead to my lips in my mind raced with fearful questions. I was so freaked out that I wasn't even thinking about Mecca anymore. Suddenly, I heard an inhuman howl from behind me. It sounded like the howl of a wolf twisted and warped into a grungy call. I froze in place, the sound of the howl paralyzing me with fear.  It took every ounce of courage within me, but I managed to turn around. The silhouette was right behind me, only about 30 feet away from where I was standing. It was closer now than it was when I first saw it. Had it been following me that whole time, I noticed that, this time, it was looking at me with piercing yellow eyes. The eyes had no pupils and seemingly no eyelids, just glowing yellow dots. It just stood there, watching me with its unblinking eyes. I didn't know what to do, bolt and make a run for it, scream for help, try scaring it off, play dead. I didn't even know what I was dealing with. Suddenly, a figure emerged from the darkness to my right. It was Mecca. She was intensely gesturing at me to come to her. I stared at her, wide eyed, too afraid to budge. She leaned forward and aggressively whispered, it came and it wants you. You need to get out of here now. I stared at her, then turned my head to look back at the tall silhouette. It was gone. My heart dropped as my feelings of anxiety heightened farther. I looked over to where Mecca was standing.  I nervously started to tiptoe over to her, but picked up my pace as I got closer. It was then that a bony, white hand with incredibly long claws reached out from behind Mecca and grabbed her by the throat. The claws pierced her throat as she was pulled away into the darkness. I ran. I ran and ran and ran faster than I ever have in my life. Tears streaming down my cheeks, adrenaline pumping, sweat dripping. I finally exited the forest and bolted into the house through the kitchen sliding glass door. I yelled for help, screaming that Mecca was taken by something in the forest. It took me a few seconds of hysterical yelling to realize that no one was answering me. In fact, no one was home. The house was dark. I yelled for someone, anyone, but no one was there. I had never felt so alone and afraid in my entire life. I suddenly heard a whisper from outside the sliding glass door. It was a deep, haunting whisper that said, I was so numb from fear at that point that I didn't actually run or scream or anything. I just turned around, the voice coot again. I walked towards the sliding glass window and looked down. There the yellow-eyed silhouette was staring at me from about 30 feet away. I'm not sure if it was the one whispering as there was no way I could have been able to hear it from that far, but then who wasn't? I just stared at it as it stared at me.  The whisper sat. There's my family. What happened to Mecca? I whimpered quietly. They're all gone. You didn't need them, Liam. You just need me and only me. Did you kill my family? You just need me. What are you? You've known me your whole life, Liam. You've shared everything with me. And I listened. I always listened. Did you come from the window? I'll show you. After it whispered that last sentence, the sliding glass door gently opened by itself. The silhouette reached forward its hand, the ghostly white bony clawed hand that killed Mecca. I had no clue what was going on, but suddenly I felt like I always did when I was around that old window, safe and warm. I walked forward towards the silhouette. It floated backwards into the forest and I followed. I ended up at that window, of course, but the silhouette was nowhere in sight. I looked down at the window, feeling an eerie sense of relief and happiness, despite the crazy things that were happening. The more I stared into the window, the more deeply I looked into it. I noticed a reflection in the window's glass. It was the ghostly hand of the silhouette resting on my shoulder. I stared more and more deeply into the window. It was as if I was in a trance. Before I knew it, I was looking up. I was surrounded by a silvery blank void. There was nothing but shimmering silver substance squirming in the distance all around me and beneath me. I was suspended in air. As I looked up, still fixated in the trance, I noticed the window was above me and was far bigger. It had become the size of a door and no longer looked old and broken up. The silhouette seemed to be nowhere nearby. As I looked at the window, I could see the glimpse of an outside world, what looked like the view of a small house in the middle of a large field. And this is where I am now, staring up at the window, peering into this outside world that looks eerily similar to my own. I can't move. I can't speak. I can't look around. I can only look up. Wait, I see a boy? Yeah, I can see through the window that a young boy is running through the backyard of that house. He's got to be only five or six. He seems so happy. I want to get to know him. I want to be happy with him. He's running up to me, or wait, the window. He's staring into the window. It looks like he's staring right at me, but I can tell he doesn't see me. I hope he stays. I just want to be his friend. He's smiling. How precious. Oh, his name is Brent. Well, hi, Brent. I hope we become good friends over time. I'll be all you need.


What is going on guys welcome back to the channel and I appreciate you being here today I want to talk about the nerf to the worm host clan the hunter exotic helmet Which as you well know we change your health upon dodging now our people looking too far into this nerf because it's changed It necessarily mean it won't be a viable option anymore Especially when the forsaken drops and the big changes to PvP all I've seen is the worm host has been ruined Why won't you why people basically looking too far into what was stated in the trap in my opinion But before we discuss this if you guys would like to show your support to both me and my channel And if you enjoyed a video hitting that thumbs up button truly helps me out Also, if you are new around here subscribe for those daily forsaken videos Okay So what's actually happening to the worm host crown while the trap states and to be honest I can see why people are jumping to conclusions as although it's kind of clear as soon as people reading this Benefit has changed they think all doom and no gloom now seeing a new way PvP will play within the forsaken Everything is so much quicker getting and being killed seem so much faster even play styles and so forth So why are they quote unquote nerf in the worm? Host well, let's see how the worm host works now So reading the exotic intrinsic perk it states dodging begins half regeneration small bump to half when dodging So at the moment it does just two things as soon as you initiate the dodge you get a small initial bump to your health And it also begins half regen while the dodge is taking place and after that she's complete It takes roughly two to three seconds to fully regenerate health and shield while dodging because the initial bump to your health Though isn't that great one more shot at a low health will kill you and it stops that health regen now for me I'll use the dodge when I low health mid-battle I'll dodge hopefully get my health back get the advantage and land the kill But what happens to me most of the time is I get shot again as soon as I dodge and normally end up dying straight away Because it takes a few seconds for your health to actually regen and the initial bump in health isn't that great I normally end up dying instantly. So with the worm host change There is no dodging begins healthy generation anymore. This is gone But instead of a small bump to health when dodging we get a larger bump to health and shield as soon as we initiate the dodge Now obviously we don't know how big the initial bump is but it is a larger bump to health and shield So this bump will instantly give us health and shield instead of a small bump to health on the initial dodge and start a slow Health region what they are doing here is changing this exotic to match the newer faster style of play with four seconds new style of PVP This in my opinion is certainly not a nerf to the exotic if anything guys This is a buff to match the way PVP will play with the four second due intrinsic perk on the worm host crown Won't offer health regen when the four second drops But instead will give you a larger bump to health and shield as soon as you initiate the dodge This will allow you to even more so get the heads up on opponents in battle Especially with a faster time to kill coming So if you're playing Destiny's PVP as it is now using the worm host crown you are in a close quarters battle You get dropped to real low health and you use your worm host to regen your health You still initially have to take cover for a few seconds because the small bump to your health Isn't that great and one more shot like demonstrated in this video will kill you So you have to take a few seconds out for your health to regen then you go back into the battle and land a kill on your opponent The way the worm host will be pulse forsaken is as soon as you initiate the dodge You will get a larger bump to your health and your shield Meaning you won't have to take them few seconds of cover although you still will be vulnerable during the dodge You still won't have to wait a few seconds behind cover for your health to regen You will get a bump to your health and shield which in my opinion will be enough for you to land a kill instantly So the way PVP will be with the forsaken and everything being so much faster including time to kill this change to the worm Host crown in my opinion certainly is not a nerf if anything guys It's actually a buff which will help us with the new time to kill with the forsaken So to all the people out there saying it's going to be a useless exotic when the forsaken update comes No, no it isn't at all. I mean obviously we don't know how much of a health and shield bump we do get But I'm certain it's going to be enough Especially with the new buffs to other exotics like the warlock gauntlets the con steam arm That's whatever they're called then things are ridiculous and there's so many other things Titan and warlock subclasses offer which allow you to get your health back They're even buffing the warlock's rift to give you more health quicker and they are doing this because of the new Way PVP will play things are going to get a lot quicker You will die much faster and change is like this to the worm host crown and a nerf in my opinion But let me know what you think about this Let me know down below in that comment section guys By that note just a quick video I thought I'd make cleaning things up if you enjoyed it leaving a like truly helps me out and I do appreciate the Support also guys before I go every single month I give away a fully customizable controller for either Xbox or PlayStation sent anywhere in the world to be with a chance Simply drop a like on this video leave a comment down below and also make sure you're subscribed to the channel Then follow the Gleam link at the top of the video description. It's fast simple and legit guys But thanks as always for stopping by and hopefully I will see you on that next one


Using a common combinations of locally harvest vegetables and wildlife, the Sue Chef is able to make ordinary into extraordinary. For this week's in focus, Mal Meyer met with his team, which recently stopped in Bemidji to dish out some of their best work yet. Sean Sherman has worked in steak houses, Italian and Spanish restaurants before creating his own pop-up restaurant and food truck. Specializing in pre-contact indigenous food, you won't find any dairy, flour, processed sugar, beef, pork or chicken in any of his food. We've been really strict about using only indigenous ingredients to reflect the flavor and the history of the regions that we're working in. Today's menu consists of rabbit, wild rice, forced mushrooms, leeks and cedar tea. He hopes that the flavors will be able to speak for themselves. We just try to really keep the food clean and healthy the way it used to be and not add too much stuff to it. Just kind of let the food be what it is. Using her biology degree from Bemidji State University to Shea Hart will go out to scavenge for some of the plants that they need. My passion is really being outside and gathering that stuff but it's also really fun to see how things kind of come together I guess in the kitchen. Brian Yazzie calls this micro regional indigenous food using the culture of the native people in the area to direct the meal. When people say indigenous food it's more of an electric term as in what is it you know it's just it depends what region you're in and what food is available in that area. Over the past year the sous chef launched a wildly successful Kickstarter campaign which had more individual backers than any other restaurant on the site's history. It's with this momentum that they've been able to host guest chefs to cook with them during the pop-ups. We're moving on to the different levels of where we're educating and not just cooking and bringing back forgotten food culture. Later on the food was ready to be served for the Niagara fundraising dinner for American Indian student success at BSU. It's really good it's really delicious I like it something new. All things really good it's really unique the way that he creates like the indigenous food a pre-colonized food with like a contemporary format. In Bemidji with this week's in focus I'm Al Meyer, Lakeland News. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News please consider making a tax deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Uh-oh boys, uh-oh, it's a nighttime wheel of mud it's demon hours. It's FBI catch-a-case hours Everyone in this room is now dumber so that's what I told her right and she's like I award you no points. I'm like And may God have mercy on your soul and she's like no Matt you can't put it in my That's when I left the day care Can we talk about last game, I'm sorry I want to keep going my intro Can we talk about last game bro? I played a sweater 99 times out of 100 is gonna clap my cheeks, but I beat him It was bonkers. I know he blocked me at Xbox. I guarantee it. I woulda too I'm blocking me at Xbox for that. Sheesh, you know, this is why we play wheel of mud to get Super heat bangers like that. Honestly, you haven't seen that episode go watch it Literally one of the funny shits on the channel. What I will tell you is just time to spin the wheel five and two Let's get it. Yeah, I mean, I don't really know what I could work on a new detact list that a Steve Hutchinson might be nice I guess I can't do much bro. I really can't roblox Okay, man. Okay, we're going into roblox football. This is after my first three attempts So however many yards I have in three attempts on roblox football, that's three actual catches Okay, any player that's how we're doing this We're back baby. I'm so glad we're back Johnny X sins dude. We're running the rounds right now I hopefully they just give me the ball ASAP. I just need you to put the ball in my hand, bro Right here, bro, right here. Feed me.  Yes I could get that I could get that No, nope God all these bums bro place You just give me the ball an interception counts as a catch. I guess I just gotta pray I can get the interception I guess. Oh my god.  So I got 20 I got 20 times 5k dude He should know I'm good now.  You're joking, bro. You're actually joking.   How could you possibly miss that throw? I guess I gotta get another interception. Come on, buddy. Come on, buddy.  That's the game All right, so blaze completely sold absolute bum. Although he's the best rusher and mess receiver I'm still pissed about it. We'll just say I got 20 yards on my interception. So a hundred K for one player What's a really good kicker that I can get?  Oh Brother by gotten two more yards on my return But 91 overall kicker Tyler bass 70 K and I think this is what everyone uses because he gets focused kicker So it's still a good wheel spin. I think instead of acrobat. I think Jamal Adams might be better with enforcer deflator I want to just hit so hard with him, bro. She's gonna put reach elite on chase young So let's get a secure protector on each side. I'm gonna go for offensive linemen abilities I feel like that's what everyone I've been playing is doing I'm gonna try around reach for it on Tyreek and reach for under Sean Jackson. Everybody reaches for it. I'm happy That's awesome. Those wheelspin one. Oh my god. Maybe I'll get a punter now. Just kidding I don't want a punter unless I can do like an out of position punter for like fakes or something I don't really know the new 98s. Oh my god.  This is so good It's an insane 98 overall player on every single team. Okay, so it's a guaranteed 98 overall player But it has to come from the not the Eagles Dolphins Cowboys No idea what this is Cowboys. No, no, no, no, no, it's 95 Jump 95 catch 98 catching traffic. Oh my god. Talk about a red zone threat. Hopefully Dez will actually catch it You know what I mean Let's make it six and two after this game. All right, of course our challenge wheel Let's see what it lands on here. Um five receptions. Wait, do it do it do it do it do it Let's get Dez to have this five receptions a hundred yards one touchdown. Dak Prescott Legerious Snead William Jackson. Dude, our top three is so different now Dez into Sean in there I was starting on offense every game. I hate it, bro I want to start on D and we're playing a Cowboys fan. I kind of love that dude He's gonna be hurt wait wait snap it snap it get that the tiger. He's stumble. He's stumble. He's stumble do it His corner stumble Marcus Peters. Oh my god. It's time to kill. It's gonna go all the way in on the first play We might have to do five receptions a hundred yards in a touchdown with Tyree go back and look at it Marcus Peters He stumbled. I just started a drive. I didn't throw an interception. I didn't turn it over I scored on my first opening drive.  It's a Cowboys theme team. Okay. Okay I'm joking. I'm joking. Listen. I'm joking TJ wide off the edge looks like this guy does not have secure protector up front. What did that just do? Did you see that back just flop? He's trying to bust my main coverage. He's trying to run straight past my dude. Oh That out routes open wait. He did wait. He did though. He did though That's why I like to call it a good old-fashioned bailout. All right. We're gonna go double blitzes here and I'll take Adams to the right side Oh Okay, got his redemption got his redemption first in ten. Let's see if we can lurk him to throw left side Or bait him I mean, okay.  I'm sending that manual Jamal Adams blitz. Let's see what happens.  I gotta pull off wait Did he get that? Oh, he did if I'm gonna send it. I gotta commit.  Let's get in there, bro. I'm gonna get in the back feel so fast breath. Ooh counter. Don't matter. Let's go Wow, he's gonna run it again Sorry Fritz you're in a box my friend third and a we keep making stuff happen, but he just keeps returning to sender Take it back. I take it back. There's the real turnover, baby. I use the rage But I think he kind of wants to see how I actually play on offense I did get a cheesy super quick touchdown. Let's see if Tyreek can get his challenge complete here. Yeah There was stuff. Let's just throw some small ones to Tyreek All we need is 20 yards and four more completions to Tyreek doesn't really matter the formation We'll just send them underneath. Yep. There's Tyreek easy money easy money. Okay. Hang out to that ball mister It's between Desbra and Tyreek Hill. Who's gonna get this ball? Ooh, okay I Actually lost yards off of that, but I'm getting closer to my challenge fourth and two so I need two more catches six more Yard, let's get this fourth and two come on down come on down. Yes, sir So close bow Tyreek underneath again. Let's see how this sets up. I have to throw that. It's so open Dishon Jackson in the open field Dishon Watson four for five hundred eight. Ah, he knows I want to throw Tyreek every play Hopefully he'll take something high Damn it Wait Dishon you're actually goaded. I'm gonna try to hit Tyreek Hill here. I'm third in gold down then up the middle Let's get that tutty Oh We ran suggest the plays at no time I really hope it doesn't reach it now because we are one catch away. Oh focus kicker. Wow that gets me horny What I've never had that all year literally the first time all year I've done that We're probably one catch in like five yards away from Tyreek right now Surprise motherfucker Do you rage quit? Well, I was taking a piss. Are you kidding?  I reach quickly what you got for me, man That was the easiest way to lock in some huge players. That's right is staying. It was huge last time, bro Huge last time. What do we got? What do we got? What do we got? Okay Okay, it's the same as the other one except it's the 95 that's still really really really good. All right So it's the same as what we just did. I mean All right, so last one we got cowboys this one's a no I got oh, oh, thanks Cameron Jordan. All right. We'll just have to see what he looks like at the tech So Cameron Jordan definitely has better stats. We'll see how he does. It is what it is. All right boys I like a lot what we're doing doing really really good right now We're six and two. We just need one more way to go to playoffs. I will see you guys the next episode We got a brand new top three two the shot played amazing. Oh wait wait. I'm so sorry Hold up wait a minute next episode will be after Easter And that's when I get to open my grand eggs get pumped for that episode that episode. That's the next episode. I'll see you guys then Peace out