Well, good afternoon. Let's go ahead and begin this this talk on free trade and its enemies We'll divide the material into two parts first part We'll just make make a quick overview of the case for the market economy. So, you know, what do economists say? What's the basic reason why we should have laissez-faire? So we'll do that first and then we'll narrow the scope of the argument to also make the case for why one country within a world of Interventionist countries why that one country should still maintain laissez-faire what what the art what argument could be offered in that respect? So that's what we'll do at the beginning and then in the second part we'll take the we'll take the enemies of free trade or the enemies of laissez-faire and You know the it's impossible to give an exhaustive list of all the enemies, right? It's just like their name is Legion and so So I've just picked out some of the some of the more prominent ones and it covers the history of thought So I you know some are being advanced now and some some are old arguments and So that's how we'll proceed and maybe in the you know later in some of the We have the panels this afternoon that you know questions could be asked about other items that I you know passed over Now let me also make one Clarifying remark before we jump in and this is on the phrase free trade this phrase is ambiguous in the literature There's free trade in the narrow sense and this is the way you would find it stated most often in the economics literature free trade just means the unimpeded movement of goods across political boundaries, right? Whereas capital and labor seem to be immobile that they don't move between countries That's the kind of classic Ricardian case of what in the literature is called free trade I'd like to use the phrase free trade in the broader sense of just meaning free free free trade right free movement of you know all all things across Across borders so so in particular in other words, it would be not just goods, but also investment capital movements for free in In a free trade regime. So so I'm going to use that more expansive definition Okay, so let's quickly rehearse the case for the market economy. This will be I've been developing throughout the throughout the week And what you've you know read about and studied about and so on and the Austrians have a particularly I think convincing Argument that you won't really find Least not emphasized in the mainstream that centers around as we talked about on Monday this concept of economizing in Society we want to be able to economize the use of resources. That's why we have an economy We want to be able to direct the resources toward the higher-value Consumptive ends and we want to arrange the production processes in the Lowest cost way given given our situation and the way we value things and so Following Ludwig von Mises the argument is that this economizing decision-making about the use of resources can only be done in a market economy Because if we don't have a market economy then we're stuck with the problem of the impossibility of interpersonal utility comparisons And this week we simply cannot do and and so the socialist economy is literally impossible In its pure sense as Dr. Salerno explained in an earlier talk so in the market economy then we we have We have the entrepreneurs arranging the division of labor by making economic calculations of profit and loss for the different lines of producer goods and economic calculations of equity net income and from Investing in particular combinations of assets. That's how they know what assets to bring into their organization and and own or which to disperse right and sell off How each entrepreneur combines the assets into an organization and so both of those things can be done through appraisement by the economic calculations of net income and net worth so so this is the basic thrust of the argument So the market economy then if we have a pure market economy if we have an unhampered market economy then this process Proceeds to the greatest extent possible and then if we have any government intervention the problem with this of course is that government intervention moves the Control over resources away from the economizing decision-making the entrepreneur and into the hands of bureaucrats who can't economize All they can do is make decisions on on some political basis some other basis, right? And so we lose the economizing attribute of the use of those resources They come outside of our control right as consumers and they go into the control of an elite who is sheltered from the from our Consumptive demands dictating what should be used with those things And so they're used inefficiently according to our consumptive demands, right there They can't be used in an economizing way anymore So this so this is the basic argument for the for the market economy And then and again, I said we can make this very quickly and so then then let's go on to this a little bit more difficult question Well, what if we then don't have one like gigantic world unhampered market economy that would be the ideal? social arrangement of course From the economist viewpoint it would economy allow us to economize resources to the greatest degree possible But what if we had different countries different polities Right, and each polity then has its own Political decisions about interfering with this market process well It follows directly from what we argued before that The best policy for all of them to adopt if they all adopt the same policy the best policy for all of them to adopt Is complete laissez-faire right they should just do what what would be done if they didn't exist anyway as States, you know just leave You know let the private property order develop along the lines of the entrepreneurial innovations and then our ratification of these These lines of production and investment according to our demands And then then again, we'd get the same economizing result as if we had a world As we started at first with totally unhampered right we had no No central economy at all. So again, that's not a very difficult The point to arrive at the more difficult Point is this question of What should we do in the real world in our country when we're surrounded by by other countries that are Belligerent and the states are belligerent right and they're intervening both domestically and maybe then with with us in our country Is we try to trade or with them or invest in their country or allow Investment right of their citizens into our country and so on and so forth. What about that? What what should we do then should we retaliate should we you know, should we go to autarky and right these would various options that we have now Hopefully again, it doesn't to take you too much imagination to see that even in that world The best policy for us is laissez-faire the best policy for a for a country in a world of You know status Countries is still laissez-faire That's still the best thing that we can do because again, it means that Given the restrictions that have been placed on us by state intervention from the outside and given the natural restrictions, of course That always exists on human action If we adopt laissez-faire, we're still able to economize as best as possible Right, so so there's this is a generalizable argument. There isn't again a lot of work to do here theoretically This is just the same argument. We would make with respect to a domestic intervention in other words of the government intervenes and they create You know, they subsidize electric Vehicles and this then creates, you know a Suppression of the production of innovative activity in in internal combustion engines Like Volkswagen's great development of diesel powered cars something like this You know professor Terrell drives Volkswagen's diesel Volkswagen's He he has a little Passat He drove up the South Carolina told me he got 51 gallons miles of the gallon 2015 Volkswagen that was the year they were banned, right? He picked one up right before the you know, they got into all the big problems, okay? So so so we wouldn't say, you know, hopefully you can see right away that it would harm us if we then said Well, because you know because domestically we've got this This waste as we see it right as subsidies of the battery power cars that we then you know also Let's say subsidized diesel Engine production right this is that would be doubly bad that would just mean now that we have two sources of Interference with the economizing activity of of the government instead of just one Right it would to give you an even simpler kind of illustration if I'm running a farm let's say and I'm You know one of my suppliers cuts me off You know he says look we're not going to trade with you anymore because whatever you're too bourgeois You know, we don't like the way you dress or you know, whatever it is We're you know my my proper reaction to that would not be because this would just harm my interest right to Retaliate so to speak by saying well if you're not going to sell to me.  So forget you right? This is hardly conducive to my own economizing You know, I would only do that out of out of psychological spite or something. This is the point is that this would not be a favorable to my own material Activity right so so we can see this fairly readily. So of course we shouldn't retaliate. We should just be We should maintain laissez-faire in the face of this now Maybe if this by the way if this claim doesn't seem obvious to you that that's the point of going through the Counter arguments, right? That's that's the point of going through the arguments for protection You know, maybe one of those guys or gals who made arguments for protection comes up with a you know a good Rebuttal to this claim. So so that that's kind of the path that we're going to take Okay, so that's the That's the framework that we started out with okay, so now let's give a strict definition to what I mean in the talk by protectionist policies so the state in one country coercively interferes with market activity between people in that country and people in other countries so they You know they tax imports right They're sold by the by foreigners to people in the country or they put quotas on on goods that could be exported or imported This kind of thing and then as I also mentioned we want to include Capital controls they might place they might restrict investment from foreigners into their country No, no, no, we you know, we don't want any Chinese factories, right Chinese owned factories We don't we don't want that to Kia plant over in Georgia, you know, whatever right? We want that to be American owned That that would be the idea And and the flow of money too, right? We could have we could have controls on state intervention on the controls of money so this is what we mean by protectionist policies and as we we we're getting a first-hand experience with this of course With the Trump administration, we know that we know the rhetoric of this is always we're gonna by doing this by imposing these protectionist measures We improve our own citizens well-being And again anyone trained in any Economics whatsoever Knows that that seems not quite right at the beginning, right? It seems like something like this would only would initially at least only help one group And then would harm another that that again is pretty easy to see right But it doesn't seem like society overall is made better off by these kinds of impositions You tax imported cars or whatever and now you can see how that would help domestic producers, but the consumers How does it help them? Right? And so, you know, so you have to weave these apologetic arguments right you to weaves protectionist would have to weave some sort of Additional claim with respect to how this benefits society at large. This is the typical thing again as we've seen in several talks today Dr. Klein and And Dr. Newman You know oftentimes this is just rhetoric They know full well what they're doing and that they're ripping us off and and so on but you know We need to as intellectuals we need to penetrate We need to see the truth of it right the truth of the matter and not concern ourselves at least primarily with with the The give and take of the interests that are pushing one way or the other. I mean that that you know Professor Rothbard of course was great at that but that was sort of a secondary thing That was sort of his hobby right to write about this progressive stuff and history and that was you know Made him laugh and what gave him fun in life was to smash all those people But but the actual intellectual work was to do the economics right to do the economics or to do the political Philosophy to get the get the truth right we want to get at the what's really real and and so on so So this is this is our approach Okay, so anyway, let's jump in If we want to start with the historical case at least in the Western world we'd start with mercantilism And this has been mentioned a few times And as Rothbard points out mercantilism which was the policy of Royal absolutism in Europe From about the 16th to the 18th century is what the British classical economists overturned Quite dramatically with with their work and will mention their arguments here in just a minute and the the protectionist element of this came in the wake of the success of the Spanish Mercantilists who you may remember Exploited the gold and silver mines of the New World by conquering and enslaving the natives And they had this steady production of gold and silver coin going into Spain From the New World right you had this money inflow and It was coming a court since this was a government production operation Slavery and right and the the ships were all owned by the state and they took the stuff or contract subcontracted By the state and they took the gold back and silver back to back to Spain. There's the crown got to spend the money Whoop-de-doo that seems great right and then they built their armada and this didn't end well, right the Spanish the Spanish You know they had this empire and Where have they been lately? I mean But when this was going on it looked great to the other countries I had to France to England to the to the monarchs of these countries now Spanish had already gotten the mines Okay, so they probably couldn't replicate this very easily this this particular system, but they thought hey look we can just arrange International trade we can just interfere international trade to create money and flows. That's not that's not hard to see how to do that Right. So so this is where we get a protectionist policy That's designed to do what the inflow of money was doing for Spain to enrich them to generate a boom at least Temporarily so all you do is subsidize your export industries right and tax imports And then you'll be able to render a favorable balance of trade as professor Salerno was talking about Which means that money will flow in and then well you're you know, okay? So this is this is We can replicate what's the prosperity of the Spanish crown by doing this And so that was probably the first sort of protectionist mercantilist doctrine Now as I mentioned this was smashed by the British classical economists And leading the way here was David Hume if you remember Studying anything about the the anti mercantilist Points that were made by the British classical economists Hume was just fantastic on money and Adam Smith was just terrible on money But Adam Smith was really good on other stuff or other anti mercantilist stuff, right? But not very good on money. It was and maybe this was just because Hume had already done this work But but what what Smith should have done of course is said Okay, here's my little section on money see David Hume, right see David Hume's pamphlet on money Now this says it all that's but he had to go his own way and invent some crazy stuff but anyway Professor Salerno has already explained this about the the so-called price-species flow mechanism If you artificially create an inflow of money that isn't being demanded by people in your country It's you're not bringing in more money because money demand is greater by people in your country than it is in other countries But you're just you're just skewing exports and imports through protectionism As soon as people get the new money in the country, they'll spend it They'll drive prices up when they drive prices up then your exports will fall right because they become more expensive and Imports will increase and and so it's self-reversing This this is the first example. Well, maybe it's not the very first, but it's a very prominent first example of a self-reversing process the state intervenes in some way and then it It actually sets in motion a dynamic that reverses the The effect of the initial intervention the business cycle is another prominent example of this, right? Governments, of course, can maintain certain physical expenditures Right so they could prop up a big, you know military industrial complex. It's just by taxing us and spending the the money the tax revenue on Airbases and so on and so forth. Well, we know this right we see this ongoing. That's not self-reversing That that's a government intervention that can be sustained right at least in some degree But here's one that's actually self-reversing nothing the government can do about this as long as they allow trade They don't shut trade off completely that this process will in fact occur and it's just itself Refuting it's there's no point in doing this even from the perspective of the government officials Hume also added a second argument here where he pointed out that Money is not like any other good in at least well a couple respects, but in this one respect If we have more labor or more Usable lands area in society or you know more and better capital goods or if we have more consumer goods That's socially beneficial this convey, you know, some people will be better off and none worse off You know depending on how the new goods are distributed, but if we have more money in society It conveys no overall general benefit to people in society to put the point a little bit differently Any amount of money is sufficient to perform The entire medium of exchange function in society at any moment in time, right? So if we had twice as much money, we'd make exactly the same number of trades It's just that prices would be twice as high if we had half as much money We could make exactly the same trades it as long as prices are half half as high And so you could see right away that having more money doesn't really convey any improvement in the social function of money as it does with other goods and so so Hume is cutting undercutting this argument that hey if we bring in more money through this protectionist policy It'll benefit society No, no, no, it won't benefit society because any amount of money is sufficient to perform the entire social function of money And so we can't you know, this is a this argument doesn't get started Very well The other thing to point out here is we'll spend just a little bit of time reviewing Balance of payments accounts. This is an important point in this been stressed by Professor Salerno in a couple of articles not not so much in the international trade area, but He's even shown that this is a the application Can be extended from international trade where this idea arises? It can be generalized and applied to other areas So as he points out if we think about aggregate aggregates of spending like all consumption that we do together or all investment we think in the Keynesian way about You know total consumption spending and so on as he points out these are not causal factors in the real economy These are effects of what's already happened in the cause-and-effect chain Right, so what happens is we we have a you know our property ownership and we have our social Arrangements and right our division of labor and so on and then we we make expenditures we have demand and we buy things and The effect of our buying is an expenditure Just like it's a revenue for the Entrepreneur right and so on So everything has to be kept in the in the proper cause-and-effect sequence To see what the cause-and-effect character of expenditures is They're not they're not the first step in the causal chain, right? Expenditures do not cause the array of production We have to put them in the right Place in the chain of reasoning this is what Salerno has pointed out so it's the same with balance of payments accounts So let's just quickly think this through Let's suppose we receive goods This is in any setting we receive goods from the sale of thing or if excuse me funding from the sale of things So we sell something and we receive Funding in exchange then what are our options in terms of? Dispersement of this income that we've earned by selling something Well, we can buy goods and services from other people with our income that we've earned We could buy real assets to buy a house to a farm, right? We could buy financial assets So we could buy bond stocks And so on or we could just hold the money So these are our options, right? Categorically these are our options and then as we engage in the particular actions that we prefer I go out and I buy let's say I buy Matt McCat I mean Patrick Newman's new book I'm I don't need to buy Matt McCaffrey's new book because I get a free copy So I probably I may not buy one one of those but yeah So anyway, you know, I buy that right by that and then and then I that would go You know, then when I'm sort of doing my personal finance I put that under my consumption expenditure. Hey, I spent whatever $75 on books and Then, you know, I spent a hundred dollars on gas last week or you know, whatever it is, right? I can keep this journal of my expenditures and I could do the same thing on the income side, you know I don't uh, the the action that I take is I prefer the job that I have I prefer the prefer the compensation I get to the job that I have right so I take this job That's my choice. That's that's the primary thing. I have a preference that I act upon it And then as a result I earn income Right, that's part of what's going on, but it's not the primary thing, right? It it moves in a chain So so this is the idea of doing a balance of payments accounts So the first thing to notice is a balance a payments account is like a journal of my expenditures, right? It's not a form of economic calculation by which I, you know, do appraisements and make make decisions about production or or You know buying things in particular or something like that You know, I'm not claiming that it's vacuous. I'm not claiming that I don't use it for anything that it can't influence my decisions I'm just saying it it influences my decisions at the end of the after I've done all this stuff You know, and then I've tallied the result then I can reassess by looking at this bottom line I can you know say oops I Maybe five thousand dollars on books this month was too much And we had a read, you know reassess the particular things I'm doing me That's yeah, I drew the bank account down a little too far or something like this, right? So you get the basic idea. There's a there's a sort of logic to how these things Proceed and then how we use them in decision-making So what so the main use we have of you know The main use you would have of a ledger of my expenditures or of a balance of payments accounts would be they reveal something about our preferences You know, so you look at my ledger of expenditures and you know that I like books, you know relative to other things You know, I'm I'm I'm weird or geeky in that way, right? Compared to a what other people's journals would look like my skewed heavily in this way and you know not in that way So did it reveal something about my preferences? So so this is the idea The other thing to notice about balance of payments accounts and this is the same about income and expenditure accounts, right? They always have to balance these are these are accounting devices that always have to balance, right? So that's what we call it a balance of payments accounts is a balance of payments accounts So if we're you know, if we have a merchandise Deficit in our balance of payments, we have to have a capital account surplus to balance it out, right? And the difference between those two things isn't arbitrary or you know Doesn't it's not a bad thing to have it one way or the other just reveals our preferences That's the idea. So if we run a bounce Payments surplus with I mean if we run a merchandise trade surplus with the Chinese We import more from them than we export to them in goods That just means that we we like their goods Relative to our own domestically produced more than the Chinese like their investments relative to ours And so they invest more in our economy than they invest in theirs and that that's what So it's always in balance, right? The monetary sums are always in balance So there's nothing there's no way that the balance of payments account should look They just reveal our preferences. There's no good or bad way in which they should look So so that's the idea any more than we would say, you know in consumption You see the journal of my consumption that it's it's good or bad We're not speaking about in an ethical sense. We mean for for my sustaining my activity It's not good or bad that I spend a lot on books. That's just my preference Okay, so this is what a kind of stylistic balance of payments account would look like There's the current account, which is as it sounds, right? It's a short-term things immediate or short-term transactions cash related kinds of trades and then there's a capital account, which are investments and You can see in this example this country has a merchandise A trade imbalance right the merchandise trade deficit. They're importing more than they export So Trump would say wow, I got it, you know, let's quit with it Importing so much is awful. Let's put a protection as barriers against these rotten Chinese and keep them from selling their stuff We got to get these jobs to the we'll get to the jobs argument in a minute We got to get these jobs back to Americans. It's good American jobs, right? He would say that's a terrible thing What economists say especially Austrian stress this it's not it's not a good or terrible thing It's just our difference in preferences Now again in our world if this were a real balance of payments, of course in our world So this is all messed up by various government interventions, right and then we'll try to grapple with that problem too as we go Okay, so if we if we add up all the rest their service Services that can be traded and they have to be balanced and investment income that's paid right. These are cash payments Unilateral transfers But on the capital account side Whatever imbalance exists up here this 200 imbalance has to be balanced the other way with errors and omissions, right? It's balanced the other way So if there is this Trade in merchandise imbalance there has to be a capital inflow And so once again, we don't think on the face of it that it's bad for our economy It's bad for the you know system of the division of labor that we have a Korean owned auto factories or right or You know new new new plans for Mercedes to build another factory in in Alabama or whatever We don't think it you know how is that harmful to the operation of the division of labor doesn't seem like that It follows somehow that just because the person has a different Location where they live or something that that that makes a difference to the rest of us with respect to the economic activity Okay, so this is the idea Okay, so let's go on to the Employment argument. So this is the one that Trump harps on quite a bit, right? Let's subsidize exports And then and then we'll you know, run it this will be good for our domestic workers, right? We'll generate more employment domestically and So so we'll cheapen our exports, right? We'll we just like giving subsidies to Tesla and so we'll make the price of the Domestic we produce good go down and maybe foreigners will buy more and they'll stimulate, you know These good jobs among Americans and will tax imports, right? And that helps employment also domestically the argument runs because then domestic Producers will have to step up and you know produce, you know She will shift our demands toward domestic producers and they'll have to step up and they'll provide jobs and so on Now again, this is a very old argument against free trade at the classical economists dealt with and In sequence it went to this way Adam Smith first pointed out that no no no wait a minute wait a minute If we want to get a social benefit out of production, we need to have production done by the efficient producer Doesn't do any good to have production done inefficently, right? That's not that's not helpful for you know The success of people's real incomes if they're producing things, you know, we give them jobs, but their production is inefficient That would not seem wise policy. It would be wasteful This is what Adam Smith, of course was focusing on in the wealth of nations, right? He said look the wealth of nations is in real Production it's in the real production processes in the real consumer goods that we enjoy It's not in the monetary sums, right? It's in the real things and yeah, okay, so that's a good first step here Ricardo came in and then strengthened this with his with his law of comparative advantage where he says We can go one step further than this Not only is it the case that we should have efficient producers doing things, but we can show that Each person or each area would have you is the efficient producer of something So so we can't so one country could never you know put all people out of work in another country just by being physically more Efficient in all the production processes that the two countries engage in even that is is incorrect So this was the law of comparative cost or comparative advantage that Ricardo Advanced and then and then Ludwig von Mises made one more Advancing this on this line and what he called the law of association Where he showed that this is actually a law that applies to each individual person And each individual factor of production if we could apply the law or do the analysis for Capital goods or land sites or what have you but if we want to do it for persons then we see that applies to every single person and Then Mises adds this other so in other words every single person is the efficient producer of something and So can find a position of employment and So you're not really changing overall employment when you impose these protectionists Measures you're shifting employment around and as Ricardo said you're shifting it from efficient producers to inefficient Let's you know give another four point nine billion dollars to Tesla Right this is the size of the subsidy so far This is supposed to be healthy for the overall account, you know, it's good for Elon Musk It's good for his workers. They get high wages, right? But they're but they're not efficient and so we shouldn't it's not good social policy to do this It doesn't it doesn't help the social order to do this right even though it's just a it revolves down Just then to a special interest Okay, so that's the that's the employment argument and then Dr. De Lorenzo dealt with this the infant industry argument which was advanced by Alexander Hamilton these again are sort of 18th and 19th century arguments. They're still repeated today, right? Economist work is never done but but they're old arguments and This one is of course the protection permits, you know infinite these new emerging industries to mature Otherwise it'd be squashed by the greater productivity of the the foreign producers So, you know if the auto industry starts in the US And then we become, you know, big and efficient before the Japanese Let's say start an auto company or the Koreans then they could never they could never compete with us Right the government has to step in and shelter them By the way, there's wrong on many levels. Hopefully you see already that with my example that that doesn't seem quite historically plausible, right but anyway, the the the points that economists have made against this of course are that Only entrepreneurs Can use economic calculation that is can be efficient in the selection of what industries to to You know invest in and which one's not right only they can tell when a emerging industry is going to be viable Not government bureaucrats government bureaucrats. I think Dr. Klein gave a few examples in one of his earlier lectures about this it had to do with whether the government back in the late 70s or early 80s would have subsidized Bill Gates in his garage right would they've done this You know as opposed to IBM, of course not, right? They're not going to pick Winners and losers so to speak places to invest in in a economizing way Now the other thing to point out here is that world, you know, sometimes the argument is made that well You can never have a new auto company because the capital requirements are so vast to be efficient It can never happen. This is just nonsense. This is like nonsense on stilts, right? What where example exactly does the capital funding come from? For for any investable project and the answer is world capital markets How big are the world capital markets? Well, the latest figures from these are from 2011 If you add up the GDP of the whole world In dollar terms, you know, I wouldn't put too much stock in the accuracy of the number, but it's a rough approximation, right? 70 trillion dollars if you add up world capital markets all the bond markets all the stock markets all the Derivative markets all the bank loans the capital value of all that 216 trillion dollars Now I dare say that any particular business can have adequate capital. There's no lack of capital funding, right? There's just lack of convincing the capitalists that you got a good project. Yeah, that's okay Well, that's a problem. That's it. But that's a problem every every entrepreneur has right if they go to the capital markets They're all in the same position They have to be able to say to the capitalists lend to me not to those guys because I can generate this great product earn this rate of Return, you know oftentimes the you know, they talk a lot in the economics literature about the first mover advantage But in a lot of industries, it's the late comers that have the advantage Because the newcomers have 20 year old technology and you're coming in Right with brand-new technology and you're gonna push them all out again on Do a little bit more bashing on musk? I've read and I don't know anything about the technology of this So it could be just bogus, but I read a story that oh, no, it must have been true because it was in the New York Times Sorry. Oh, yeah. Yeah, so this has got to be gospel truth. But anyway, the story said that by the time Tesla's Giga battery factory gets actually producing The battery technology for doing the assembly process where those batteries will be antiquated That there's already just a dinosaur and and he's going to be put You know, he's going to be pushed aside by the newcomers who come in the next five years with this new technology Or how you assemble it's much more efficient apparently. So whoops Right, it's not again. This doesn't seem to be much here in terms of the argument Of course, we could point to numerous examples already alluded to this in the auto industry of infants developing without production Protection is a famous example of Honda in Japan. That was not only not subsidized They were a little tiny motorcycle company when they first got started in the late 50s But they were expressly told not to go into auto manufacturing by the by the government cartilized You know Japanese system which favored Toyota and yet Honda is one of the great car companies of the world, right? So so it's easy to replicate these examples What about the level playing field so protection can allegedly level a playing field so that the benefits of free trade can be kind of Evenly fairly distributed or something of this sort As Mises points out the market economy is not a game This is the basic point. It's not a game. There's not we don't need umpires We don't need level playing fields. We don't need you know rules or whatever of playing a game We're not what it's not a contest. We're trying to outcompete the other person and you know winning a trophy or you know Showing that we're faster or it running or you know stronger at wrestling or whatever that that's not that's not it The competition that exists in the market is always Competition to cooperate with other people to satisfy their preferences more fully than your competitors are cooperating with other people Right the market is a system of social cooperation as Mises like to emphasize. There's nothing is nothing like Gamemanship in it at all except in the psychological sense. That's fine, right? So in the psychological sense people can think of it this way but the actual reality of what the market is is Categorically different from a game and so obviously we don't need level playing fields whatever that might mean, right? We don't need fair rules or whatever these terms might mean Because it isn't a game and so it doesn't make any sense to apply these terms these like concepts to social cooperation So so this is the first point and then as we've already alluded to Even if we think of it this way it's kind of a game where we're losing out because the other country is doing things that are unfair to our You know, they're subsidizing their producers or whatever We've already seen that even if that's true the best policy for us in our country is still laissez faire Why because somebody, you know punches you in the nose. Why should you break your own arm, right? I mean what what's the sense of this we right? We shouldn't injure ourselves just because someone else injured us So this is the idea Here's another one that it I don't think is this one is it's There's some literature on this but actually We hope there's going to be some new literature on this So dr. Engelhardt and dr. Block and I are actually writing a paper currently on this very question of whether Whether laissez faire country can be relatively insulated from international booms and buffs so but the common view that the sort of standard conventional view is that if you if you If you have a country and it's embedded in other you know an international economy with other countries They're engaged in monetary inflation and credit expansion then you you want to put up protectionist barriers to prevent that From you know prevent the business cycle from being imported into your country You want capital controls and controls on Trade movements so that you don't experience get integrated into this right Now there are a couple of arguments that Stand against this and one of them has to do with this Pointing in that professor Salerno was talking about what if we had a gold standard country? What if a country stuck to a pure gold standard? that the argument will run would Insulate that country from certain dimensions of the boom bus cycle for example There could be no domestic credit expansion and therefore the at least this country would not get caught up in its own domestic Version of the international credit expansion Since it's a gold standard country the the foreign Currencies would devalue in exchange Markets against the sound money country and again this would provide some degree of insulation of the sound money country to To the booms and busts generated in other countries and then finally we another point and we're not quite By the way, we're not quite finished in thinking through all the arguments here This is a pretty complicated question, but another area where we're making a claim is that The the actual distortions then that will begin to come into a sound money economy will be Specific to the assets along the lines of the Cantillon effects of the boom in the rest of the world So if you had a country is producing producing let's say lithium they had lithium mines And let's say there was a big boom in battery production from credit expansion in other countries Then lithium there'd be a lot of interest in investing in lithium mines Right or buying lithium in this sound money country, but it's precisely because the the Business cycle effect comes along the line of particular goods that entrepreneurs in that line can sort of identify roughly that they're in a boom and Then they can just hold back right They don't have to mal-invest the price of the the price of the lithium is going to go way up And they're gonna learn a lot of profit in the interim without Over-expand you know mal invent opening up new mines that go bust later on this just becomes then an entrepreneurial question That perhaps they can deal with at least better than they could in other countries that don't have sound money So this is not particularly at least we don't think this is particularly problematic By the way, I should say it's just for full disclosure. We're not saying that no effect would occur, right? We're not saying that Certainly there can't there will be you know some distortion in the sound money economy saying to a large extent it can be avoided There's the national security argument So, you know if we integrate our production with other countries and we become dependent upon them and then whoops Now we got a problem if we go to war they'll you know Black male us and withhold their supplies again This seems like a problem on the face of it, but when you think it through in a general sense you see right away that this there This is not very This is not very convincing Because this is just a sort of speak general problem that we all have when we interact with each other in the social Nexus, right? We all rely upon each other.  Why isn't that my right reaction? Well, no, this is not the right reaction Of course we can depend upon each other because there's mutual advantage in these arrangements and and this creates a kind of Reliance some degree of reliance then that we can have upon the Plethora of other people who will supply us if one of them becomes our enemy right and says look I'm not going to give you your food, but there are other grocery stores in town Also free trade of course does not mean that people Well, it means that people are free to use their own judgments with respect to who is reliable In other words what we want is for entrepreneurs to do this not government officials Because when government officials do this is we're seeing played out in the Russian sanctions and so on this all just Resolve itself down to petty disputes personal grudges Right intrigue politics as to who our enemy is and who isn't and who we align with and where we get our supplies from and so On and so forth entrepreneurs don't make their decisions in this fashion They judge the reliability of their different suppliers and then they won't deal with these people I think are unreliable especially in times of trouble. They'll know how to switch They'll stockpile goods if they think you know they're gonna be disruption in the market They know how to hold inventory and so on and so forth. We just think it as economists We think it's a better way to deal with we don't deny the problem We just think it's a better way to deal with the problem to leave the market open And then let me say at the last this last point about politicizing, you know if politicians were really concerned about national defense Well, don't you think they'd be a little bit more efficient in the production of national offense I mean, what is the biggest boondoggle industry in the in the whole economy? It's the military industrial complex, right? and other government, you know big government projects like road building and infrastructure and so on the very things that Trump is Trumping right and should I say trumpeting trumpeting. Yeah, he's trumpeting all this stuff that we well We know it's super inefficient. I mean if they really if they really cared about us, wouldn't they you know? At least strive to be a little bit more efficient. It would seem that this would be You know some strike against giving up laissez-faire into the hands of Government government officials. Well, I had a few more of these but I've already gone over time So sorry about that. We'll quit here and then I take a break


This is covering the spread part of the Fandall podcast network Fantastic sports weekend coming up because on Saturday game one between the Golden Knights and the Panthers and the Stanley Cup finals And on Sunday game two as the heat tried to dig their way out of the hole against the Denver Nuggets We're gonna break down both of those games with Austin Swain for today get his thoughts on last night's game one Preview the Stanley Cup finals and I'll talk some baseball towards the end of the show This is covering the spread right here on the Fandall podcast network and number fire calm My name is Jim Saunas. I am a senior writer and analyst for a number fire Join here as mentioned by Austin Swain check him out on Twitter at a swing three check out all of his work over at number fire Common Austin fantastic weekend between the NHL and the NBA. How are you doing today? I'm doing great. This is the nirvana time of year where we get Stanley Cup NBA finals together and then we've got some baseball to kind of snack on in between so it's a nice mix now Do you have any conflict here given you live in Denver, but I believe you're a Miami Heat fan, correct? Yeah, so the heat are definitely my East Coast team. I Clippers what Clippers are your your West team? Yeah, yeah Clippers are absolutely my primarily team And then I you know, I've just had been rooting for the heat since I was a kid I have some family in that type of area. So I really do like the heat I am underneath my breath rooting for the heat here with cautious optimism because I know they're probably outmatched in this series But it's honestly really cool to see my city so excited first time the NBA finals has ever been here You got nuggets merch tents on every corner and it's it's really cool It's it's always cool when you got a championship in your city that you're gunning for so you're saying under your breath Which means you're not parading through the streets with like a Caleb Martin Jersey on no I don't have Caleb Martin Jersey yet after last night's performance I'm not sure I'll be getting one. I Definitely needed Jimmy Butler in my collection. I've got Dwayne Wade. I've got LeBron and I gotta add Jimmy soon No, Chris Bosh Jersey. How could you? I like Stevie. I definitely do. Yeah, the trail there. We're gonna talk about game two We'll talk about that second We'll talk about the NHL first because game one is coming up on Saturday there Then we'll talk some game to get Austin's takeaways from game one for Nugget Seats And then as mentioned I'll talk some baseball later on but first a reminder to make sure you're subscribed to Covering the spread wherever you get your podcast these shows also do go up over on the Fandle YouTube page If you want to watch a video version of the show check us out over on the Fandle YouTube page Subscribe there and if you like what you hear leave us a thumbs up on YouTube or a five star rating over on Apple podcast now before we talk about game one for the Golden Knights and the Panthers Austin I do want to talk series prices because we've seen some movement towards the Panthers here They were I believe plus 115 at one point. Yeah, they've now shorted to plus 105 So from a broad series perspective, do you think that movement is justified? Well, I've got money in that direction. So Justified I would probably have some serious soul searching to do and really for me It comes down to you when we really boiled down with the Stanley Cup playoffs become over time It's it comes down to what the hot gold tenders doing the hot goalie Almost always is the one that ends up in this spot from both conferences and this year's playoffs or maybe the most emphatic example in recent memory I don't know if anyone's discussed this on your show earlier this week previewing this But these teams actually haven't between the lines been playing very well Florida third from the bottom Inexpected goal differential for 60 minutes Vegas seventh from the bottom But really they kicked butt to get here both of them did in pretty uncompetitive series And that's because of the gold tending the two guys that lead the playoffs in goal saved above expectation per game by a mile I can't even believe I'm saying this Sergey Babrowski after what was considered a failed contract Givens years ago to come over from Columbus He's best in the playoffs at one point five one and then eight and he'll really the only one in the zip code And he's at point nine one still trailing him So these are the two best gold tenders in the sport the playoffs no surprise that they're here and Sergey Babrowski has been the best I can't believe I'm saying that but that's why I like Florida to win this series Was that the main motivator for you was the gold tending play that pushed you towards the Panthers series ticket for you Yeah, definitely and I I feel like that the scoring has also been more dependable from some of Florida's top line guys They tend to have a better organization on their power play Vegas gets contributions from a lot of spots So it's not quite as consistent with shot volume to protect but Florida's got guys like Matthew Kuchuk Brandon Montour has been killing it for them So I really like the package I get in front of Bob Robsky as well because I know if I'm going over time I've got Kuchuk in key shifts and I can lean on him for a potential goal I believe he closed out Toronto with that final goal as well So I definitely trust the stars and the hot key players on the Panthers more than I do Vegas at this stage And that's why I'm on it. So you took the plus money Yeah, do you believe the Panthers should be favored in this series or was it just a good enough price where you thought it Should have been more even than what it was priced out at the time I mean, I I've got it roughly as a pick So I I think that this price is totally fine If you want to if you want to have the Panthers sitting at plus 105 minus 105 minus 110 Because Vegas right now in terms of like expected shot generation is playing a little bit ahead of the Panthers Florida's playoff run is very interesting. It doesn't make a lot of sense They actually outskated Boston and then have been crushed in the second and third round since so it's a very odd series They did have like a plus four goal differential to get through Carolina in four games So they've just kind of had this habit of squeaking things out But the way the goaltenders are playing is really what would would lean me toward Florida in that pick is because of the Rob ski so you got the Panthers for the series. Let's talk now about game one is specifically this game is in Vegas Which does matter quite a bit The Golden Knights money line is minus 130 the Panthers money line plus one away total for this game is Five and a half with minus 118 on the over minus 105 on the under when you look at game one Specifically Austin anything's in there to use being good value bats at Fandall sportsbook So your opinion of this series whether you agree with me or not That's totally fine if you like Vegas instead But it should reflect your opinion in game one because not only is the obvious math You reduce the number of wins that you would need from four to three by winning game one But specifically in the Stanley Cup finals winner game one sixty three and nineteen when it comes to winning the cup that is a 76.8% clip so data's on your side that if you win game one more overwhelmingly you end up going on to win the Stanley Cup and Obviously Florida they are on road ice So they are probably on the favorable end of that trend of still having a chance that losing tonight wouldn't lose home ice particularly Especially it's up 50% probability that they win. So I Mathematically I would also like the Panthers in this game at plus 108 But it's more of a lean because I think my primary action and it'll be on the under Which was sitting at minus 104 last night. I mentioned that these two had poor expected goal differential data, right? It's because they're not projected to score a lot when I'm just using playoff numbers to kind of roughly project What these teams would be expected for three point eight three goals When factoring in how Bobrovsky and Aiden Hill have played so far, but obviously those are just expected goals They're not real goals and Bobrovsky and Hill played well above their regular season standards So there's your sign for a path to failure on the under But I still really like the way that these teams not getting a lot of high quality chances on net And I just mentioned the two best bull tenders in the playoffs in these series I have to lean to the under especially when it said sitting right around even money. It was minus 104 I'm not sure where it has gone today But I really do like the under in this game for sure. It's so 104 right now So still getting that same price there and you mentioned not sure what people had said on the show earlier on this week But synergy because Tom Vecchio was on Wednesday I this week is weird with the Monday being off But he was on Wednesday said you like the under goals for the series at 33 and a half part of it because you know There are a lot of routes that happening But also because he thought it'd be a low scoring series so under five and a half minus 104 you and Tom Synergy love to hear it as always Let's talk now about the NBA before I dig into game two specifically awesome I didn't want to go back to game one and outline What you saw there because we're numbers people, you know, that's how we live but watching that game Were there any key takeaways any key surprises for you that will impact the way you view this heat nugget series going forward? So the personnel mismatch in the front court was not something I was surprised by in that It seemed like Miami felt too small inside the broadcasting team made that comment in the first quarter as Aaron Gordon was having a ton of success But the game was actually more competitive than I was expecting to be honest with you which is you know What we want to hear we want to see a back-and-forth series if you don't have a dog in the fight And I feel like Miami won a very key area to me They kept Nicole Yocuch off the offensive glass They had a 22% offensive rebounding rate as a team just 15.8 percent for Denver that is huge And luckily there's not really a schematic adjustment You could match up differently on in rebounding assignments But that's more so about personnel and it's about effort and Miami's done that very well the entire playoffs despite being poor at it In the regular season and I think you see you saw that come out in game one My own Miami also didn't turn the ball over it's on and by the way all those series previews We did talking about what Denver had in their category what Miami had in their category Well, we talked about Miami having the better coach with Eric Spolster and what he's drawn up so far That this is where it has to matter right heading into game two Miami held Denver to just 29.7% from three They'll have to do that close now. What is the personnel adjustment? How do they stop some of the interior onslaught between Gordon Yocuch? Michael Porter was attacking the rim more than he was last night Do they move Kevin Love into the starting lineup? Do they lean more on Haywood Highsmith is kind of a longer guy at that four position than Caleb Martin? That will be the question for me going into game two Yeah, and I think that the question always is Did your prior change from what you saw entering game one? It sounds like based on what you said Your thoughts in the series heading in still applies. We had to game two. Is that a correct summation of your thoughts here? Um, I actually feel this way I did not feel before last night that Miami could get this to a six or seven game series I absolutely feel that way now There's more that there's a much more obvious path because if you're keeping gut You know the offensive rebounding and the turnover thing that is more tangible and predictable game-to-game within a series shooting Can fluctuate so I actually saw a lot with Miami that I really liked it where I thought they were gonna get bullied in this series Was on the offensive glass was in turnover battles, but they didn't and they played actually pretty well They missed a ton of open threes, which we'll get to here in a minute When talking about the total for game two, but I was actually impressed And I think Miami can actually grab a couple of games in this series Maybe extend it out and if you got Jimmy Butler, you never know what could happen So maybe some surprise optimism coming off of a game one defeat by double digits Let's talk now about game number two where we have the nuggets of eight and a half point favorites total for this game is 214 and a half and the spread is down a half a point from game one and the total at down two points I believe where it was for game one So any value for you with where things currently stand Austin? so When I say that I think Miami can prolong the series I am in a similar position for just specifically game two and Denver because in game one I wrote up in my betting guide over a number five. I don't lean toward Denver spread I've got the same lean here, and I think it's because Denver is such a hard team for me They break so many rules when it comes to play off basketball They would be just the second team with a defensive rating outside the top 12 in the regular season to win the title since 1980 only the 2001 Lakers were the exception which makes sense yet. Jack and Kobe You have Yoko Chajumal Murray a couple duos that don't play a ton of defense So makes a lot of sense and you know, they're losing on the offensive glass They're not really forcing turnovers But Denver kind of breaks the rules in that they don't really have to do those things They've only had an effective field goal rate below 50% once in this entire playoffs And by the way, they still ended up winning that game against Phoenix. They just don't have cold shooting nights So I can consistently count on them for above a 50% effective field goal rate If they get the looks they did in game one If Miami has a hard time getting to the free throw line like they did in game one That could be a real issue for Miami I think Miami can absolutely contend at home They get a more favorable whistle statistically at home, but at ball arena. I'm just not sure I kind of lean toward the nuggets, but no official action I'll be watching this number throughout the weekend and you mentioned the total in passing as well total right now 214 and a half any read for that one on you So I wrote up under 219. That was my big bet for game one. We just got a hundred and ninety seven total points Right, so I should just be all in on this under 214 and a half I do lean this way, but I do have a bit of a concern So I used a projected pace of ninety six point one to project the pace between these two teams for game one It was ninety three point zero So it was actually lower So I got even better of a slow pace than I would have expected betting the under But the problem is the open threes were a mess for both of these teams defensively Both teams took at least forty six threes and by the way in basketball Three point attempts is a better measure of three point defense and percentage because if you can can be kind of random But they took a ton of attempts and when you look at wide open threes which MBA comm their advanced tracking stats to find is six Plus feet between you and the defender Denver went twenty five percent in game one on those shots Which is very uncharacteristic Miami went thirty one point three percent Both of these teams in the playoffs have been in the forties on those wide wide open shots They missed a lot of them and so I feel good about the pace, but then I feel really badly about Yeah, the three so this is another number. I think I'm watching with great sensitivity I think it's more likely to see significant movement than the spread And if this total drops to maybe two twelve I think I might be interested in the over if it continues to rise people like to bet the over It's more fun to root for points than misses. I might actually be on the under again So I'm watching it with keen eyes, but I do have a tiny lean to the under right now Okay, that number as mentioned right now two fourteen and a half for the total tune the nuggets and the heat for game two Over at fangirls sports book any final thoughts for you, Austin whether it be on stand the cup NBA finals anything for you Send you off for the weekend It's weird the parallels in the series as I was thinking of myself last night before the game started You've got a Miami team and eight seed that everyone counted out They knocked off the best team in the league according to everybody in the first round and then you've got this seed Vegas had the most points in the Western Conference Denver had the most wins at the Western Conference We kind of forgot about them until everybody else kind of unraveled and here they were left and What's weird is I think the hockey series will be far more competitive than than the NBA series, but you do never know I think both of these series could definitely give us six or seven games and a good ride Well, the betting markets agree with you based on how tight that Panthers and Golden Knights Series prices are for sure. All right That is Austin Swain check out his work on Twitter at a swing three find all his other stuff over at number fire Dot-com Austin a pleasure to talk to you as always Enjoy the games this weekend enjoy some USC as well. We'll talk to you once again here on the show soon Sounds good Jim. Have a great weekend bud. Alrighty. Thank you once again to Austin Find him on Twitter at a swing three and check out his work over at number fire dot-com We're gonna dive into some baseball action for Friday here in just one segment first It is almost time to crown an NBA champion and fan dual wants you to be a part of the excitement because right now New customers get a no-sweat first bet up to $2,500 that is $2,500 back in bonus bets if your first bet doesn't win There is no better place to bet all the finals action than on America's number one sports book fan dual Official sports betting partner of the NBA must be 21 plus and president select states first online real money Wager only $10 deposit required refund issued is non with trouble bonus bets that expire in 14 days We're strict to supply seafold terms at fan dual comms sports book Fan dual is offering online sports wagering in Kansas under an agreement with Kansas Star Casino LLC gambling problem call 1-800 gambler or visit fan dual comm slash RG in Arizona 1-800 next step or text next step to five three three four two in Connecticut one eight eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven Or visit ccpg.org slash chat in Indiana one eight hundred nine with it in Wyoming in Kansas 1-800 five two two forty seven hundred in Kansas pay as gambling health comm Louisiana is one in seven seven seven seven zero stop in Massachusetts gambling helpline ma.org or call eight hundred three two seven fifty fifty four twenty four seven support in Maryland empty gambling health org in New York one eight seven seventy to open wire text open wide and in West Virginia Go to 1-800 gambler.net Pretty limited card for me in baseball for today, but still so that's I do like to which occur in the same game That is for the Braves and the Diamondbacks I like both the Diamondbacks money line at plus one oh six and Merrill Kelly's strikeout prop Which we'll get to you in a second Let's start things off with the Arizona money line again at plus one oh six I have Arizona as the favorites in this game So I will take the plus money on the money line here Merrill Kelly again The key cog for both these bets has pitched really well this year He's been leaning more and has changed up and it's led to a three point six four skill interactive e r.a. Across 11 starts that that skill interactive e r.a. Is good I think the key component that strike out or in that skill attractive e r.a. Is the strikeout right obviously if I'm on the strikeout over as well, but The reason I want that here is because the Braves when they make contact They tend to do so with a lot of authority and I want to mute that and getting more strikeouts can better allow You to do so the Diamondbacks Solid bullpen not phenomenal by any means about a league average defense Not on the same level as the Braves in terms of their their bullpen, but it's not bad I think the Braves the better team the Braves at one point in this spring were the number one team my power rankings They're not there right now, but they are still pretty far up there Arizona not quite there But what we get here is equal I think starting pitching between Charlie Borden Merrill Kelly Borden does have some or has had some pretty extreme Home road splits in the past not as much here recently this year, but I think that's an edge there and you get Arizona at home I think that's enough to make Arizona the favorite in this game So plus 106 on the Arizona money line definitely enough for me to dive in so I will take that and go with the Diamondbacks at plus 106 on the money line the Kelly strikeout prop right now at Vanduels sportsbook The over is a plus 114 over five and a half strikeouts I talked about the strikeouts before more change-ups this year for Kelly and he's hit six plus strikeouts six times in eleven games So more than half his games He has hit the over on this number and he's done so in form is past five now That's not the sample. I'm looking at because I haven't seen a major change in Philosophy velocity anything like that for Kelly in this five-starred sample So I am not putting it to the smaller sample leaning on the full year data Still looking at an over here on Kelly Definitely not a fun matchup here facing off of the Braves because they are a team with a lot of very dangerous bats But also not a low strikeout team their active roster has a 23.1% strikeout rate against righties so far this year so about the average in that regard So you get Kelly at home pretty elevated pitch count. I've got him projected at let's see here I believe a hundred pitches for today. So decent pitch counts Decent matchup as far as strikeouts go at home where he does get a boost as well. I think that's enough to make Kelly Pretty attractive in terms of the strikeout prop market for today My strikeout projection for Merrill Merrill Kelly 6.7 strikeouts that may seem kind of high, but it's there for a reason So Merrill Kelly over six five and a half strikeouts plus 114 is a good bet As always with this being vandal sportsbook you have the opportunity to same game parlay those as mentioned the caveat is I don't tend to do this most often I think this is a situation though where the bets do correlate well because if Kelly hits the over here That implies he's pitching. Well getting deep in game suppressing the bats for the Braves and the same game parlay price here Would be plus 259 given we are getting plus money on both overs I think I'd rather play these independently and go Kelly over five and a strikeouts at Plus 114 the Diamondbacks money line at plus 106 I think that's a better route than the same game parlay, but if you know you want to have some fun It's a Friday night I get it for sure do so responsibly plus 259 the same game parlay price there, but for me personally I will go with independent bets With the Diamondbacks money line plus 106 and the Kelly strikeout prop over at plus 114 Only one of the bet that stands out to me a bunch for tonight that is in the Giants and the Orioles game I like Logan Webb strikeout prop the over for him at five and a half strikeouts is minus 106 facing off here against the Orioles Orioles offense to great love them. This is not about them This is just about Logan Webb web has hit over five and a half strikeouts in 8 of 11 starts so far this year so well over the 52% you need to get to value at minus 106 So that's one thing But six starts ago. He also increased the velocity on his slider a pretty decent amount I'm not sure if that was something he like planned to do or if it's a altered pitch for him in any way, but Since then his strikeout rate is 24.8 percent. That's actually down from where he was earlier on this year I still think that's most relevant sample given that it is a pretty tangible shift in the way He's throwing his slider, which is a with pitch for him So even if I lop off the first five games for web this year and focus on that more recent sample I still get web projected for 6.5 strikeouts tonight So the over here minus 106 on five and a half strikeouts even if I go again with the lower strikeout samples I think is a better sample for Logan Webb. I still show value in the over here again This is not about Baltimore. I adore their offense. They've been very good to me so far this year It's about web web is at home Temperatures are cool as always in San Francisco. That's good for pitching for sure So I will take web over five and a strikeouts minus 106 even being conservative. I think in his projection I do still like the over here. So full MLB car for today Logan Webb over five and a strikeouts minus 106 Arizona Moneyline at plus 106 and Merrill Kelly over five and a half strikeouts at plus 114 If you want to pair them together go ahead, but not for me personally for today That's all we got here for this Friday show on covering the spread got to give a big Thank you once again to Austin Swain for swinging by breaking down his thoughts on game one in the Stanley Cup finals and game two in The NBA give him a follow on Twitter at a swing three as always. I'm on Twitter at Jim Soddus JMS a NNES who wants the thoughts on some NASCAR and Formula one went through that on yesterday's show find that in the Covering the spread podcast feed and over on the fan dual YouTube page want to thank you all for tuning in Good luck to you with your bets across this weekend. Enjoy all the fantastic sports We'll talk to you once again on Monday for some more betting action This has been covering the spread right here on the fan dual podcast network


Hey, what's good everyone? It is behavior here This isn't a reaction This is going to be a review for something that I'm a fan of that I've never given a review for before This is going to be for the Dragon Ball Super episode episode number 104 title revenge F the cunning the revenge trap Been a fan of Dragon Ball Z ever since I was a little kid Of course when Dragon Ball Super was announced a few years ago I was excited very excited to start watching that series. Is it as good as Dragon Ball Z? No, but it is better than Dragon Ball GT and I really do enjoy it But now we're in the tournament of power and it is episode 107 we're getting closer and closer to Goku in German's fight and I can't wait for that But let me let's just go ahead and talk about episode number 107 that I did see last night Now at the very beginning of this episode there are 36 warrior Oh, and I will be talking spoilers So if you do not want to be spoiled, I suggest you turn the video off right now But at the very beginning of the episode yesterday We find out that there are 36 warriors left in the tournament of power the best and are the best warriors and all of the multiverse and We get to see Xenosama the current present times in Osama and future Xenosama and the Grand Priest Talk about how many warriors are left and what universe? to so you got universe to they have Six warriors left. I believe that's the universe will rebrand that fat girl and the the yard rat They can do the instant transmission and talk go cool. Then you got universe three, which is the the robot universe They have seven warriors left. Then you have universe four Well, I think the I think the God of Destruction's name is Catella or something like that The God of Destruction is like a mouse or rat or something like that They have four warriors left and when I was watching episode you see immediately the Beerus is concerned because it's like wait a minute They have four warriors left. That's what the Grand Priest you said, but they have six eliminated But before the tournament first started we only saw eight So we don't know where these other warriors are or whatever like I don't know if they're hidden and I'm getting my warriors My mom not my warriors, but my universe is mixed up because I know there are I know there's one universe that has like these two small warriors like the little bugs or something because I was watching this Other guy's channel and he has like this chart that breaks it all down like I saw a few weeks ago But on that chart those are also Oh No, okay. Well, I just realized I was about to bring up the two Namekians But those come from universe six or whatever and they have seven No, they were the very very beginning of episode. They had seven left. So I think the warriors from universe four The two that we haven't seen are like these little small teeny-moony bugs or something like that universe six and universe seven You know universe six of course is chomper and with the rest of the sands and frost and all that they have seven warriors left Universe seven our universe will go cool. They have a I mean they have universe eight had eight Universe seven our universe has eight warriors left and then universe 11 has three Has three warriors left with Jiren Topo and Dispo the supersonic speed warrior And just the very beginning of the episode, you know, it's just so crazy It's in the Zen Osamas or whatever the Zen Chans is goku cause them That's so freaking powerful, but their children and they're stupid.  I mean just blows them the hell out of there Just literally knocks them into the specter to see I was blown away.    This is the greatest coming. I mean, I I love that.  I'm like, okay go Roshi I'm just so excited because I was not expecting master Roshi to last as long in the tournament. I thought he was going to be Uh, one of the first people to be eliminated. But of course, I was killing the team But master Roshi is holding his own and he had that uh, the uh, the mafuba the evil containment wave Like how many jars of that does he have but he tried to get frost or whatever and he missed and You know, that was so unfortunate because it was so close I mean that is this a hell that is a great technique to have because I mean you have to have strength to Um to do the technique but no matter what if your enemy or whatever is more poverty It doesn't matter if you're able to catch them with that mafuba the evil containment wave You can really mess some stuff up and he missed he almost had a frost and he he had one I open with just breathing I mean he was exhausted. He was draining. He had nothing left and he he missed or whatever and uh, You know that that was pretty intense.  I'm recording I'm recording on the camera, but if my mic wasn't on I was gonna be super pissed. That's happened to me Uh before I don't want that to happen again. Anyway Vegeta come over over there going super sand I don't know if it was level one or level two probably level two to fight mageta and to uh You didn't even he didn't even go super sand when he punched frost across the room or whatever.  I really did like it. It was a lot better than the last episode It's really right there on par with the master roshi's episode where he got to shine. I really did like that And a lot of times with these episodes, they really only focus on one or two characters at a time But I really like this episode because it was able to focus on multiple characters and give you a little bit From everyone we got the very beginning of the episode with the zen Osama and grand priests You know giving us a recap of how many warriors left like that Then we got a brief glimpse of universe 11 with taren a taren jiren topo And dispo and they're got a destruction the clown guy and uh their kaioshina or whatever We got to see a little fight with that with a maji kaios.  So that's you know, that's great The only characters that we need to get out of there that I don't I mean I love everybody left with universe 11. Of course. I'm down with universe Six and universe seven or whatever Because now there's 33 33. There's 33 warriors left with 30 minutes left Universe six and seven has 11 warriors. No, I'm talking about universe six and seven have seven warriors left So that's 14 universe 11 has three so that's 17 and then universe Two has six So that's 23 And then universe or universe Or universe two Has six people universe three now has six people left and then universe four has Four people left or whatever. So 33 uh, 33 warriors left. I can't wait for the next episode Looks like it's going to be frost and freeze the teaming up And looks like they're going to be ganging up on gohan I do know a little bit of the spoilers for that, but i'm not going to I'm only going to talk spoilers for this episode. I'm not going to talk about spoilers for the next episode But we got an episode next week and then another week after that We got an episode and then uh, august not august october 1st There's going to be a break, but then october 8th. We're going to get a double episode where it's going to show um Goku and jiren first fight, but you know, I can't wait guys.  Um You know, this is one of the better episodes. I'm not going to rate it, but you know, I really did enjoy it And guys, let me know if you are a dragon ball dragon ball z dragon ball gt or dragon ball super fan Let me know in the comment section below Um, you know, uh, let's get this conversation going and keep it flowing That's just my opinion guys if you like this video Go ahead and give me the thumbs up if you don't like the video That's perfectly fine. Just leave me a comment below why and still give me the thumbs up since your Why is this video on youtube go ahead and subscribe to my youtube channel so you can get all the content that I have to Provide you can also click the bell so you can be notified when I do Make uploads you can also go to my website check me out there I have written reviews from movies and stuff like that. You can bookmark it also look me up on social media Uh, you know, and if you're just now turning in for my channel for the first time, this is dragon ball super I normally cover, um Movie reviews. I just started doing trailer reactions a few months ago I'm also going to start doing like original shows like I'm going to be start doing box office reports And also just like movie news and things like that. So subscribe Check me out on social media facebook instagram twitter all that good stuff a link So all that is in the description box below or you can look at the bottom of your screen guys And um, you know, I just want to thank you again for tuning in for my opinion slash review For a dragon ball super episode 107 and before you go don't forget that my name is brennan kithavery And this is just my opinion peace


Hi, I'm Melissa Ceperez with VAQ One For One and I'm from Jamaica, Queens, New York. Some of my responsibilities are working in the post office. Serving in the Navy gives me opportunities that I never had in New York, but I wouldn't be here without the experiences I had growing up in the city.


Thankfully, it's November and Appalachian Wireless is offering the Samsung GS8 or the GS8 Plus for $100 off the regular price with two-year agreement. Better service, bigger savings. That's today's Appalachian Wireless, an East Kentucky network company. Dozens of kids will have a more merry Christmas thanks to the Jenkins and May King volunteer fire departments. The two departments came together this year to hold a haunted mansion event at the old Jenkins Country Club to raise money for Jenkins' shop with a firefighter event and May King's Santa Fire Truck runs, both very worthy causes. But a co-organizer, a Jenkins volunteer firefighter is paying the price for the event. More than $2,000 worth of his personal tools and pieces of equipment were stolen in the days following the conclusion of the haunted mansion. Either early in the morning or early Halloween night, a low life or a group of low lives. And I say that because they broke into the old country club here and took some tools from a fireman that was here doing a charity event. Jenkins Police Chief Jim Stevens said an assortment of tools and equipment was taken out of the old country club building. He said the individuals responsible took advantage of others who were hoping to help a group of deserving children. He said the investigation into the theft is well underway. It blows your mind to think that somebody would actually do something like that. That's why we call them low lives. We do have some leads. Last time we had some problems up here, some hunters had come to me and had mentioned that they were going to start setting up cameras to not only look for the game but to help us out because they're community minded people. We usually don't hear from them until Mondays because they check their cameras on weekends. So hopefully Monday we'll have an idea. But Stevens also said there still may be an out for those who took the items. The victim of the crime was one of the Jenkins firefighters. His thought is as long as he gets his stuff back, he's probably going to call it even. So I would say as long as we get the stuff back, he'll call it even. If we don't hear anything from these people and get the stuff back, then we'll call it a felony and we'll follow the procedures and we'll eventually get them. But regardless of the outcome, the event and the victimized firefighter still managed to help some kids have a more merry Christmas. You can think that you've played a Halloween trick on this firefighter who's working for these kids, but in reality the treats going to come when that firefighter sees these kids, firefighter, shop with a firefighter morning, get in their presence that they might not have got. Anyone with information on the thefts is asked to contact the Jenkins Police Department or Jenkins firefighter Matt Anderson who was the victim of the theft at the number on your screen. In Jenkins, Chris Anderson, EKB News.


All right, I'm Raj Vains. I had products at Clusterix, and I'll be talking about no SQL, not only SQL, using write tool for the job. The agenda is very simple. First, I'll tell you that SQL scales, just in case you've been living under a rock. And you actually won't know it from the previous talks. And the second thing is about some rules of thumb on how to pick the write tool for the job. So first, SQL scales. So for example, Clusterix has a client that has a 336 code deployment. It looks like a single SQL database to the application. It does transactions, real-time analytics, everything. They don't do any ETL. And they've been running on Clusterix for over 2 and 1 half years. So if we go down, the business goes down. So they rely on us. They write terabyte a day. They've got 100 million users, actually 15 to 20 million active. So SQL scales. If anybody tells you something else, you know, they're lying. OK. This is the second thing is rules of thumb. So the question is, which tool are you going to pick? So first is, what data do you want to store? And then what questions do you want to ask? So the world is kind of relational, for the most part. You have customers in e-commerce who place orders for products. Customers then write reviews for products. When you pull up products, you want to look at the reviews. And the customers who wrote them, that's a natural join. So a lot of your data is naturally relational. And in things like orders, all the orders are going to look pretty much the same. So relational makes a lot of sense. On the other hand, in some cases, the product catalog can have products which are very different. You might have flowers, and you might have a car. And they might not share that many characteristics. So use Mongo. It works really well. Or another document store, right? So that's the right mix. Pretty much nobody uses Mongo for the other part, and it might not make sense to use relational for that part. Second, how simply do you want your questions answered? This is off the web. That's a MySQL query, and there's a Mongo query. As you can see, the MySQL query is much simpler. It does the same thing, sends code to the data, does massively parallel processing, and you do not have to jump through hoops. So if you can use SQL for your case, for whatever you're trying to solve, use it. You don't have to do that. Third, when do you want your questions answered? So if you're doing reads and writes near real time and simple reads and writes, any database will work for you. That's not a big problem. If you want to do next-day analytics, you can ETL into Hadoop, use that. That's not a problem either. If you want to do real-time analytics, then it gets more interesting. But that's where the big data is moving too. If you have a SQL database, it can do real-time analytics as well, because SQL has that. No SQL will say they do aggregates or top tens, but, you know. And then you can use streaming analytics or something like that. You'd have to put a solution like that. Moving on depends on what size and flexibility do you want. So if you've got tens of terabytes of data, SQL will work just fine. You want the petabyte analytics, use Hadoop. Then is the question of flexibility. As you get more flexibility, you lose your ability to query. For example, if you're using SQL, you have a relational schema, but you can make changes to it online, right? You get joints, complex analytics, based on statistics as you add data. The query planner will choose a different plan for you. You can get more flexibility, and in some cases that is good, but remember what you're losing. You can't do any of that stuff. You can only do simple or index lookups. Then is the question of what guarantees do you need? So we were kind of in the space where we said, all right, use transactions for everything. You didn't need them for everything. Then we moved to like, all right, noSQL is great. Use noSQL for everything.  And then you're like, ah, you know, transactions are kind of good for some stuff. So use what you need. If you need transactions, use transactions. If you don't need them, but you know, don't use noSQL where you need transactions. Then is geographic requirements, right? If you are setting up a multi-master, you might need to give up asset properties. And if anybody tells you otherwise, it's not right. So, you know, then you can decide what's the right solution. I'm running short of time. So summary, SQL and noSQL both work. Art is in getting the combination right, okay? So a single SQL database will do reads, writes, inserts, analytics, scale to tens of terabytes. And please don't do sharding. It's a waste of human effort. And it will be poorer than using a database. On the other hand, you'll use noSQL help for caching if you need higher flexibility or if you need petabytes for analytics. That's the perfect time.


Welcome to the video abstract of our work, Efficient Nistics and Signatures from Commit and Open Protocols in the Q-ROM. My name is Jelle Don. This is joint work with Serge Svir, Christian Mayans and Christian Schoffner. I'll start by explaining the words in the title of our paper. Commit and Open Protocols are a subclass of the three-round interactive proof systems, also known as sigma-protocols, where in the case of Commit and Open Protocols, the prover in the first round commits to a number of messages via a hash-based commitment scheme, which we can model as a random oracle in order to do a security reduction. And then, as a next step, we may apply via charming transformation to obtain NISIX, non-interactive zero-knowledge proof systems, or digital signature scheme. Now, to prove that such a scheme is online extractable in the quantum random oracle model, what we do in our work is adapt an existing framework of Q-ROM simulation to construct an online extractor, where online means that the extractor is given only black box access to the prover, then runs it just once, so no rewinding, while at the same time simulating the random oracle in order to answer queries of the prover. Then if the prover is successful, the extractor produces a valid witness, all in such a way that the distribution of the output of the prover while interacting with the extractor is close to the output of a prover in the normal run. Using our technique, we obtain a tight reduction, tight in the sense that if the attacker has success probability epsilon, our extractor also succeeds with probability epsilon up to a negligible additive error term, whereas the generic reduction that applies to any type of sigma protocol has a loss of epsilon cube over Q to the sixth, which in the previous work we managed to reduce for this specific class of commit and open protocols to just epsilon over Q squared, but now getting rid of the Q squared factor, we obtain the first tight reduction of a Fiat-Shamu-based NISIC or signature scheme in the Q-ROM. That's the main result of our work. We further show that this reduction also works on commit and open protocols that use a merkle tree for the commitment that allows for a special so-called octopus opening, which is just a more clever, more efficient way of opening multiple values at the same time. If you want to study this in more detail, I invite you to either pause the video or read the paper or come to our talk at the conference. And as another extra result, we show that the Umru transformation, which is comparable to but less efficient than the Fiat-Shamu transformation, but it was the first NISIC that was provably secure in the Q-ROM. It's also online extractable. It has the advantage that it can be applied to any Sigma protocol, but the proofer has to commit to a single response for every possible challenge, making it quite a bit less efficient than Fiat-Shamu. Especially when the commitment scheme is required to be a length-reserving hash function. And that's exactly the thing that we improve upon. We show that this requirement using our reduction is no longer needed. So summarizing, we managed to give the first tight Q-ROM reduction of a Fiat-Shamu-based NISIC for the subclass of committed open protocols. This reduction also works on merkle tree-based CNOs with octopus openings. Among other things, there is a tight Q-ROM reduction for the picnic signature scheme. And finally, we give a more efficient version of the UNRU transform. Thank you for listening. I hope to see you all at our presentation, which is on the Tuesday slot from 1350 to 1530 in the Latte-Liemen Hall. Thank you.


Hi everybody. Welcome to my talk. Upgrading from CF release with CF deployment. The other way. My name is Janik. I'm from Iwala. And so which one of you is still running CF release? Quick hands up. Two guys. Somebody knows anyone who's still running CF release. Okay. So the talk is still relevant. Okay. Some quick disclaimers. This talk comes from a project we did in the beginning of the year. Back then the transition repo was not as good as it is now. So we came up with our own way to upgrade from CF release to CF deployment. The second disclaimer is every deployment is a bit different. So you might need to adapt some of the points. I will talk now about and all the guys who still raise their hands. Now it's the time. So it's CF release is deprecated since February. So slowly you should come to a point where you upgrade. Okay. Let's get started. Our environment at this customer was a vanilla CF open sec. We had a staging foundation only for testing purposes and two production foundations. They ran at the time CF release with the RP version 280. And they had configured an external blob store so non-internal which is a bit necessary for how we did this. You may also do can do it with an internal blob store. But on this talk I will have the requirement that you have an external blob store. So the customer had some requirements during the update. There must be a zero downtime for all apps. So the apps, the customer should not need to intervene in any case. So no CF scale, CF push the apps. They don't should have to switch their services. So they also wanted transition to Cretab which they didn't have at the time. And they wanted a possibility to roll back the upgrade if the upgrade fails. During the time the CF deployment transition repo was not that good as I said. So it wouldn't check all the requirements for us. So we developed another process. We wanted to keep the blob store so we were just in dependency so we can switch back and forth between our two deployments. We might create a databases and deploy a new CF foundation from scratch. First we have to do some preparations. We upgraded the Bosch director which was also outdated, deployed a Cretab, created new networks for the new CF deployment and also adapted the security groups. Then we had to extract some properties from the old deployment like the decryption cipher and the BBS key. And we also started on Cretab because now we have Cretab and everything is secure. Yeah. So we started with this. This is a schema of the CF deployment. And at first we wanted to disable the Cloud Controller API so we have a change freeze so nobody can push on your app or scale the apps. Mainly we wanted to prevent any changing in the blob store because if the blob store IDs change and we have a database backup with an old IDs then the container won't come up in the new deployment. So we have many possibilities to disable this access. We can kill any local answer or DNS. We can disable the Cloud Controller itself. We can also ask our devs not to push any apps during the time. What we did, we disabled the load balancer for the system route so nobody could talk to the API. Next we made our backups for the database and we also did it for the blob store in case anything goes wrong. We can always restore our blob store. So then we had to deploy a new database. The customer provided a managed database which we could use but you maybe could also deploy the internal database so you would at first deploy only the database and scale all other components down. So we would deploy a new database. As I said, you maybe also could deploy an internal database if you scale up down all other components during the first deployment. Restore your backup and after that deploy the rest of the CF deployment which was the next step. So we deployed the new CF deployment and enabled the API access to this deployment so we could check and monitor the containers on CF. So now we have a running second system and we used, for example, CF top to check if all our containers came up back again and could div between the old CF release and the new CF deployment. Check our monitoring in Prometheus and if everything came back up we could switch over. So now we would disable the app domains on the old CF release and enable them on our CF deployment. And now we basically did a transition from CF release to CF deployment. At any time, if we now recognize something is wrong, we can always switch back to CF release because except of the load balancers we changed nothing with our old release. So we have the raw back functionality, some up and downside of this method. For once it's very easy. You can make mistakes and don't have to fear that your production goes down. It's easily testable in production. So what we did many times we tried to visit different domain. So we spun up a new CF deployment and checked if all the containers came up again and could repeat this process until it got perfect. It's a CF downtime upgrade and we always have the functionality to roll back. On the downside, it's very resource heavy because you have to deploy a second foundation for the platform you already have running. It's not an officially supported way. And as I said at the beginning, you might have to make changes for each cloud. So that's all my slides. Do you have any questions or yeah? So the question was just because I have to repeat it. If you had to do it again, would you do it the supported way or this way? It depends on the platform. If you have the resources, as I said, it was very pleasing process because we could test the production upgrade without any fear of breaking anything. So I would prefer this way, but as I recognize when I prepared this talk, the transition repo got better. In fact, it got very good. So I think both ways are okay. But I would prefer this way again. Hi. We are in a similar situation, but I saw in your screenshot there are 84 applications in this cluster. We have a cluster with 90,000 applications. It's a bit bigger.  Okay. The screenshot was from some of our test platforms, what not actually cloud from the customer. Something that we did run into which we did not think of first was once the BlobSides. So even if we, the first time we didn't disable the API access, though some developer or some pipeline found a way to update the app and we had apps that didn't come up after the upgrade. We also had some trouble with changing the domain names, but it was a dependency of the customer. They lost some of the secrets for their certificates. But other than that, we did not have any bigger major issues. Maybe one addition to that, the cool thing was they could retry and retry the upgrade because they made always a new copy of it. So they could look, is the copy okay? Are we fine with the process or do we try to repeat that with another solution? Any other questions? Thanks.