Hey guys, thanks for hopping on. If you're ready to start, if you guys have any questions,

you can go ahead and raise your hand and, oh there we go. Now I'm a little new to that guys guys I did a Twitter spaces with Mike Green the other day and he kind of

Kowvos that I think I've got it so turbo I know you had your hand up. Let me go ahead and invite you to speak. Hopefully that worked.

Okay, Turbo, can you go ahead? Okay. Let me go over to the request here. Okay, so Entropy Dynamics. Can you go ahead and

Can you speak? Hey, what's going on Jordan? There we go.

Hey, yeah's going on Jordan? There we go.

Hey, yeah, yeah.

Yeah, for sure, I guess I'll just hop straight into my question then about,

sure, you know, would money lead to smaller government?

Um, yeah.

And just quick disclaimer, I've been following your work for years.

I have a ton of respect for what you do.

And I've really tried to better understand your thesis in way you're coming from this.

My point that I'll make here is that I think

we're just getting the causality a little bit backwards,

right, in terms of government would only be able to operate with the resources that they have.

So if there was, and let's not even go to the extreme and say like a full-on gold standard but if there was something more of a limit or a

restriction that it would it would slow down on government accesses everything from everything from all the extra interventionist wars, all the way down to, you know,

congressmen having an eight-person staff. So let me just go ahead and pause there. Yeah, well it's a great question and the more I think about this topic, I think we need to separate limited government from small or big government.

So I agree that sound money can limit the size of government, but that doesn't necessarily

mean that we have small government. Right?

To your point, if you go back to, let's just go back to 1862 with the Legal Tender Act,

...