Discussion on Business Liability and Nationalization

people who think the way we do. Uh, that's why you can't work with the

military,

that's why you can take the IP from businesses and put it in your model.

That re- that model would require

severe liability protection, and there's only one institution

that can do that, the US government. And then that's before you get to the

danger.

So what, what's really happening is

the investors loved when he was migrating all the value of everyone

else's business

to their business, 'cause they're investors.

They don't realize, it's like, it's like every mark.

They don't realize they're the mark.

Because now, you first you migrate all the IP to your

business, and then

because you need uncapped, you need capped liability,

both vis-a-vis the business and vis-a-vis the dangers,

you've gotta migrate the

business to the government. It has to be nationalized.

So what's actually happening is, this is reported as regulation, non-regulation

movement.

Yeah.

That's actually not what this movement is.

It's like the view that I believe they have is these

businesses have to be nationalized because if you don't nationalize them, every

single one of my clients is gonna sue.

It's a-

Now, you think that's what they want?

I... Well, obviously. Like, if you have a business that

presupposes unlimited risk, both

vis-a-vis liability risk, vis-a-vis the clients-

Mm

... 'cause I don't think any of our clients

realized their IP was migrating,

vis-a-vis the world, because you're saying, what

is the liability risk for

destroying 10% of the company? 10, 10% of the world.

High.

You discount it into the present. Okay, but there's only one institution.

And by the way, that's not actually what's happening.

They want three institutions.

It's gonna be like Europe, Canada, and America.

We migrate all the IP of America from our businesses to this

institution, then the institution is going to get full liability protection

because-