B (3:27)

So, yeah, if you look at Ukraine, we're, we're still trying to do that. If, if you want our help in Ukraine, give us your minerals. You know what I mean? It's like, sure. And that's not typically something that I think you see as much in a Democratic administration, but definitely Republican. And I'm not saying it doesn't happen in Democratic administrations, but if it does, we don't see it like, it's not thrown right in front of our face. So.

A (3:54)

Because I think that I, it from Wilson onward, I think that administration after administration has done it. I think the, and maybe count me wrong here, but I feel like Trump is the only guy just saying it.

B (4:10)

He doesn't care.

A (4:10)

Yeah, he doesn't care.

B (4:12)

He'll just say it out of it.

A (4:13)

He's like, yeah, that's what we're doing. That's what we're trading here.

B (4:16)

Yeah, no, I, I agree 100% as far as the, the oil in Venezuela. And it's something else I think we should touch on, since you're from Canada, is this oil is so similar to Canada's oil.

A (4:32)

Yeah, that's what I heard.

B (4:32)

And this, this would be. I don't think it's a stout competitor with Canada, but it will be a competitor with Canada if Donald Trump achieves what he hopes to achieve. And it makes me wonder what kind of leverage or pressure he would try to apply on Canada if he did achieve this in Venezuela. And I think that is, there's a lot of unknowns there, but it's something that's been in the back of my mind the whole time. Like, is this really a play sort of against Canada? Because he's still pissed off at whoever, whether it's Trudeau or, or Carney, you know, I, I have no idea. He's so unpredictable. But it is extremely similar to Canada. It's it's heavier, it's more sour. But Canada has all of the legit rude.

A (5:22)

I. You just called us that. And we taste bad. I don't think that's.

B (5:25)

No, I'm talking about the oil. But like, logistically and commercially, Canada has all the advantages over Venezuela. All the pipe runs running right into. US Companies own a ton of Canadian resources and vice versa. Like Canadians own a ton of equity in the US Refiners that refine their oil. So it's, it's, it's really interconnected. The only difference between when it comes to oil in the US And Canada is that there's an imaginary line there. It, it's literally the same thing. Yeah. It's so interconnected.

A (6:04)

I guess the only way Venezuela is a good play too, because it's so far and there's no interconnections that are all going to have to be established, that there's going to have to be new transportation lines, which I don't foresee being easy, quick or inexpensive. Am I wrong?

B (6:22)

No, you're not wrong. And, and Canada is also not a large sort of highway for trafficking of different illicit things. You know, even though Venezuela themselves. Yeah. You know, fentanyl may not be made in Canada and other substances, or, I mean, Venezuela, but other substances may not be made there, but they can and are trafficked through there quite a bit. Right. They're. They're run through there a lot of risk in Venezuela. It's an unstable country. Know, it's, it's. You can't even compare Canada and Venezuela. It's silly to even, to even try. But to your point, I, I don't know if you had seen, but the US Companies have told Donald Trump we don't want to go back to Venezuela.

A (7:10)

Oh, of course they have. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

B (7:13)

Now, I don't know if that's true.

A (7:15)

It makes, but it makes perfect sense from a business standpoint. The. Even if, even if. And there was a part of my TikTok where I, I felt like installing Maria, paving a way for her to take over. Made sense. If she's willing to make all sorts of concessions. I still hold true to that. I still think that that's the play. But even if, even if he does that, even if she steps into power, the notion that everybody else will settle down in Venezuela and never, never try on that power structure seems silly. Right?

B (7:50)

Yeah. There's, there's so much corruption in Venezuela that is not attributed to who's in power. Now. That's not going to change if you Change that one person. Yeah, I've read that. Every time I've researched Venezuela, I have read that exact thing. Like it's written with corruption far beyond the leaders of the country.

A (8:12)

Right. Well, I mean, there would be. It would be like anything else. Everything else becomes systemic. It's not just about who's sitting at the top of that mountain, it's about how the mountain was built. So in order to really shift that, we're talking, and this is why I do still think it's a play, but we're talking, it's way, way, way down the line when Venezuela as a nation, which I do think is possible, you know, handling its. Its own country and moving towards more of a. Of a legitimate democratic state. But what I thought was interesting. So I think your biggest question about my TikTok, and I want to come back to this, is how we trade oil and the connection to the petrol dollar. Because it's something that I've tried to become aware of, but I definitely think I'm a little bit limited, so if you could explain that a little bit.

B (9:05)

Well, basically, we agreed with the Middle east that oil would be traded in dollars, in US Dollars. And at the time after the Bretton woods agreement, the US Dollar was already the reserve currency of the world. But that agreement to trade oil in dollars was somewhat genius, not because of the oil itself, but because of all of the other places it sent the dollars. And that's what I was kind of alluding to, that. Now, oil is such a small piece of the dollar's dominance.

A (9:43)

Right.

B (9:43)

Because it, because it controls the global financial markets, which are a thousand times bigger than the oil market. And my, my thing is I honestly don't know if the Trump administration knows that. So, like, when you say, like. Yeah, like when you said this could be a play on the currency, and you know, what you're. You alluded to in your video. It could absolutely be that, and the Trump administration could be wrong about that. You know what I mean? Like, because I don't know that they fully understand, like, the currency thing.

A (10:25)

Yeah. Okay, so you're saying that it used to be. It used to be a very big upholder of that. My question is, could it be a bit of a domino effect? Or could people feel as though, or see it as a bit of a domino effect, meaning if the BRICS nations get together and just start here, just start with one thing, could that be a way for them to gain a foothold or negotiate and establish a trade partnership outside of using US Currency, that could eventually Snowball into all those other things that you obviously clearly indicated are a thousand times more dominant. My question is, could that just be the first step to the next thing that they might want to do? Because if I'm brics, that's exactly what I want to do.

B (11:18)

Yeah, it absolutely could be the first step. It could be a domino. But I think my response came from, so for years we've been hearing about the dollars going to go away and we've heard about bricks. And every time I hear that, I think of how all that started.

A (11:38)

Okay, how did it start?

B (11:40)

Well, that all started with crypto bros trying to get people to buy crypto. Like that literally started. And I'm not saying there's not merit to it.

A (11:49)

Sure.

B (11:50)

I'm just saying I don't think it's as big as it's been made into. During the not. It wasn't that long ago everyone was talking about, well, there's this date where this petrodollar agreement ends and the dollar's going to come to an end. And I'm like, no, that's not how that works. But so it's honestly so complex. We could have the best minds in the world in here and we wouldn't get the same two answers from anybody.

A (12:18)

That's just, I kind of got to, when I was researching it.

B (12:21)

That's the fact of the matter.

A (12:23)

So I think it's fascinating though to talk about, I mean, obviously when you're talking about oil, you have this spider web of, of impacts that, that feed from, you know, what oil is used for. Most people just think, okay, oil, gas, transportation, and then they, they stop there. They don't go into plastic production, they don't go into like all of the other things that, that that particular resource is used for and on mass. So I think that we, when we talk about oil, we really do. I think we're very limited in the, in what we think that resource is for. Because I know in Canada and I like to hear your opinion. I think we talked about this a bit last time in Canada, there's a significant debate about whether or not we put a pipeline across Canada, like east west to east coast kind of thing. And, and the, the proponents against it, obviously environmental activists and a lot of indigenous communities, because obviously that's the land we would use in order to place it. Right, of course. But I'm of the, the opinion, and I'd love to hear your opinion. I'm of the opinion that it's just like a lot of things, it's a necessary evil in if, if we don't want to have this consistent reliance, because we do. We rely on the United States for a very long time in many, many different ways for being our most significant trading partner. And you guys rely on us for that, as in a lot of aspects as well. But I'm just thinking, like, unless we're willing to take that on the nose a little bit, I don't see a way around the dependency. Maybe I'm wrong. If you can figure out another way around it, that'd be lovely. But what do you think, Dewey? You can send me a note later. So it's not like treason or anything.

B (14:25)

The problem with oil dependency, you know, not only in Canada, but around the world, is that it is. It has become such a big business that it controls so much that it's almost impossible to develop anything to compete with it because they control all of, like, you know what I mean? Like. Yeah. And, you know, I, I spent 30, almost four years in the industry, and I've been. I have never been opposed to any type of energy, and I never quite understood why people were opposed to it, but I wasn't, apparently. I was naive at the time, and I wasn't understanding that. It's not really about the type of energy. It's about who's getting the dollars from the energy. And it has nothing to do with the type of energy. It's all about who gets the control and the power. So it's much like ideology in the United States. You know, we, we say conservatives believe this and liberals believe this, and I think a lot of times even the ideology is just a front to maintain control and power.

A (15:32)

Right.

B (15:32)

They, they know people want to, to see a politician that opposes abortion, so they're going to do that because it keeps them in power. I don't think they. Abortion. I don't think they really care about immigration. So getting, you know, the oil dependency is tough because it is almost impossible to develop anything that can compete with it.

A (15:55)

Right.

B (15:55)

You. You cannot convince me.

A (15:58)

I wasn't necessarily talking about our dependency on the resource. We can talk about that. That's something different. I meant Canadian dependency on the United States. Oh, yeah, yeah. The, the only way we get around that, again, we're just talking geographic proximity. It just makes sense for us to be partners. It's always made sense for us to be partners on many aspects. But when it comes to this, it's like this is going to be. This could be one of those pressure points that any administration, whether it be Trump or anybody, could Use from the United States and in all fairness, from Canada, too, because I, I don't think the United States is unheardable. Like, I don't think they're, they're, like, just sitting there, perfectly protected. I think Trump likes to talk like he doesn't need Canada and who cares? And could your army walk in? Possibly. I think you do that and the whole world changes. I genuinely think you walk in, the whole world changes. And I think economically, the United States still does need Canada. We're a huge, huge business partner for many things. But, oh, yeah, that pipeline from east to west, would you not see it as essential?

B (17:16)

So here's what I've always. Here's what I've always said about it, and I've been rooting for Canada ever since the first time Donald Trump put your country in his mouth, because I thought it was so distasteful. And I've always. I get asked this so many times from people in Canada because I think about, believe it or not, probably 30% of all of my followers across all social media is actually Canadians.

A (17:42)

That's crazy.

B (17:44)

That is huge. Like, I have a lot of Canadians, and it was because I was going to bat for them so much in those early days when Donald Trump was running his mouth all the time. I would never now, if I was Canadian, and you know it. I think Canada should broaden its ability to trade with all other countries around the world.

A (18:07)

Well, yeah. Which is what we're doing.

B (18:09)

I think they should. I think they should. But I would say that about anybody. You can't have all your eggs in one basket.

A (18:16)

Fair. Absolutely.

B (18:17)

The pipeline that you're talking about is a very sensitive thing. And I'm, I can tell you as many positives, as negatives as I can about it. And really, both sides that thing to death. I think the question they need to ask themselves is, is it worth it for this presidency right now? Can you do what you need to do without doing that? Because I'm literally like 50, 50 on that. I really am. Huh.

A (18:48)

What are your top three on both sides? Pro pipeline, anti pipeline.

B (18:54)

Well, so my number one thing is, what do Canadians want? That's. I, I, maybe I'm too American, but I'm always like, whatever the people in that country want is what should happen. That's. I believe that in my country. I believe it in your country.

A (19:09)

Yeah.

B (19:10)

And that's why I've even, even myself, I feel a little uneasy. Like, I don't want to sound like I'm telling Canadians what they should do.

A (19:16)

Sure.

B (19:16)

Like, so. But of course there's a ton of environmental concerns and with the, the landscape and the terrain that that pipeline would be going through.

A (19:28)

Right.

B (19:29)

That to me, that's a huge deal. I've always been, you know, I've always been the guy that's like, we shouldn't have pipelines running through any waterways.

A (19:39)

Okay.

B (19:39)

Period. Like, that should never be a thing. And I say that as an oil and gas guy. And people are like, that's crazy. You can't do that. Like, yeah, you can. You can go around the water. You can figure something out.

A (19:49)

Like, you know, is that because if something goes wrong, it's so incredibly disastrous and difficult? Yeah.

B (19:56)

Yes, unbelievably. And you really. I don't know even if today, in 2025, we understand the full impact of what would happen if a massive pipeline burst in Lake Superior. You know what I mean? Like, we think we know because it's happened in the ocean, but the ocean is much larger than a river, a creek, a stream, even one of the Great Lakes. Like, and it's so hard cleanup. And it's just, I just think it's gross. Honestly. Pipelines through waterways, I hate it economically. The, the biggest question economically that I can't decide is a positive or a negative is every time an oil company or the oil industry is going to provide something for the people, it always seems like they're the only ones that benefit from it.

A (20:44)

Right.

B (20:45)

So you have to answer the question. Does the country of Canada actually benefit from that or is it 95% of the benefit go to the oil industry?

A (20:55)

And if 95% go to the oil industry, how interconnected are they to American investors and American companies? Where's that money going to anyways? Who's really benefiting from that cross Canada pipeline? Because it sounds like you could be saying, listen, this will maybe help in some way, shape or form, but it might be drawing tons and tons of money really, to American companies. That's not helping Canada economically. Or, or even when it comes to some sort of economic or resource based independence.

B (21:31)

Yeah. Because one thing I've seen my whole career, oil companies, they come to town, they deplete the resources and then they leave and everyone's sitting there with a mess. And that is simply something that cannot be denied. It's. You cannot deny that. That's the thing. And someday somebody is going to have to pay the price for that pipeline.

A (21:51)

Yeah. No matter down the road, eh?

B (21:54)

Yeah. No matter how much economic prosperity it gives you today, eventually someone's going to pay for it. And it's going to be really bad eventually. I don't know when that is, but that is a concern. I always try to think about future generations when we're having these conversations. So there's definitely huge potential economic advantages for Canada. You know, just getting sort of off the tit of the United States. So much is. Would be huge for Canada because it gives them so much leverage against the United States as well. So that's a huge advantage. And then there's all of the economic disadvantages. And you know, typically it's. Unfortunately, we see it in the United States. We would see it in Canada, too. It's the people that live there that would get screwed. That, you know, no matter how great it is for Canada, it, it. I just don't feel like that ever trickles down to the people.

A (22:50)

Yeah, true. And, and whatever. Backyard. I made this. This joke. It's not a very funny joke, but I made this, this statement the other day where I'm like, my students like to ask me all the time, where do I stand on that? Because obviously it's been huge conversation, especially because of Alberta and the push from, from. From that particular government. And I always say I'm. I'm cool with it just as long as everybody's cool with it. Going through the backyards of Forest Hill or the backyards of the Bridal Path. If the Bridal Path people, which for those who are listening who don't know, that's an incredibly affluent part of Toronto, if the rich people are fine with it going through their. Their waterways and their backyards and their, you know, their cottage lakes, then let's have a conversation. But I'm real tired, and this is true in the United States, obviously. I'm real tired of the only place these pipelines ever going through is through indigenous land or the less affluent societies who have no power. I mean, I'm assuming for those who remember or listening, that's exactly what Idle no More was all about. I mean, that's. It was supposed to go through a rich neighborhood. They said, no, thank you. They shifted it to go right alongside an indigenous reserve. And then this, you know, everybody's like, oh, well, now you're just going to shift where it is. Obviously, you know, it's a problem. So I like to play that game if it's going to go through Forest, you know, Forest Hill, or if it's going to go through Bridal Path, and they're like, cool, I'll get on side with it. Danielle Smith's backyard. Cool. I Just don't think that that's where anybody's willing to put it.

B (24:34)

Which sends them a lot. Yeah. Consider the fact that if, if not for what you're talking about right now, we wouldn't even be looking at Venezuela at all. Right. We, we have vast oil deposits on both sides of Florida off the west and east coast both. We're not allowed to drill there because all the rich people with their beach houses don't want to see oil platforms. So like we're literally going to go invade another country. So the resource that we have, but the wealthy people in Florida don't want to see it. And so what you're talking about has a ripple effect that impacts whole other countries.

A (25:16)

Yeah.

B (25:17)

Because some rich guy didn't want a pipeline in his yard. Well, that's fine. We'll just go invade this little country over here and steal their resources. That's how much power that the rich have. That I think people don't realize.

A (25:28)

I also didn't realize, and somebody pointed this out, I obviously did a bit of research in it that Venezuela was one of the first countries to sit down and negotiate and sort of create. Be the architect of opec. And I love the way the United States talks about OPEC because they love to call them a cartel. But what I understood when I was doing the research is that Perez, one of the architects again president of Venezuela pre Chavez, learned this from Texas and a railway sort of beef that was going on down there which I. There is something so beautifully ironic about it that you're condemning and calling cartel and pointing fingers meanwhile, that's where a bunch of your boys got rich.

B (26:18)

Exactly.

A (26:20)

It's amazing to me.

B (26:22)

Yeah. The U.S. oil industry in itself is a cartel in itself. And yes, it absolutely is.

A (26:29)

Yeah. It's all about price fixing. Right. I mean that's, that's you, you've talked about it very, very well. You've talked about how it needs to be a certain amount per barrel. If it's not a certain amount per barrel, the ripple effects are 2 grand. And if you start to play with that a little bit, then those OPEC countries are going to set you straight anyways because they don't want the whole thing collapsing. Now. Do you really think, number one, do you think he's really going to invade? Number two, what do you think his end game is? Or. And I'm terrified for this answer. Do you think he just doesn't have one?

B (27:07)

I actually do think he's going to invade. I. With the amount of stuff we have down There, you know, military assets. For him to have all that there and not invade, like, I just, that just doesn't make much sense to me. I think Donald Trump, I don't know if you saw the part of my video where I was like, you know, Donald Trump's pointing at Venezuelans like, oil good, go get it. Like, I literally think that's all it is. I, I don't think he can, has the capacity to think about anything beyond that. I, I, I'm, I'm dead serious in that. I don't think it's some grand thing. I think he just wants the oil. He doesn't know why. He just thinks, whatever. And nobody says no to Donald Trump. So that's what I think it is. I really do. I have a hard time crediting him for being much of a deep thinker on these issues.

A (28:06)

But there's no way, okay, so even gaining access to it and trading it, I mean, I'm assuming what he wants rather than, because he, I don't really see it supplanting the Canadian supply side because there's no way that happens in his short tenure. No way. Like, it's, it's, it's not physically possible. Now, do I see him or do you see him trying to mess with either out of ignorance or apathy? Again, equally terrifying, can you see him trying to mess with the cost of those barrels to destabilize something like an opec, even though, and I know what you're going to say, it's going to cause horrific ripple effects for his oil industry in the United States because all of those guys don't want him doing what he's doing either, but doesn't seem to be stopping him. So then the idea that the big oil guys are the ones in the driver's seat, obviously not. Because they've all said, whoa, whoa, whoa, this is a horrible idea. So do you, do you see that as a. Because I see that in his character, the notion of I can do whatever I want. You think I can't charge $30 a barrel and then put gas prices? And again, not going to happen, but I'll put gas prices back to 1992 levels. Watch me. I don't care what anybody says. Like, do you see that as his goal?

B (29:42)

It's possible. And, and there's something that I, I think a lot of people maybe miss, and that is when oil crashes, that is not bad for big oil companies. That is not bad at all. Exxon became Exxon because of every single oil crash. These massive oil companies it's, it's horrible for the mid sized companies and the independents and you know, the big oil companies, you know, they'll say publicly it's terrible. This is how they got to be that big. Every time there's an oil crash, they buy up every competitor. They either buy them in bankruptcy. This is consolidating all of that money within a two or three companies at the top that are, that are the biggest oil companies in the world. This is, this is what this is. So let's understand, there are no bad times for big oil. That's not a thing. There's not a bad day when you're big oil.

A (30:39)

Mid size oil, sure. Yeah, big oil.

B (30:44)

I do wonder if, if Trump's push for OPEC to increase production so much as they have is because he had other plans to go after Venezuela to put sanctions on Iranian oil. Like I, there could be a play there. You know what I'm talking about? 800,000 barrels a day of Venezuelan oil off the market right now. Doesn't matter because he got OPEC to increase production. Right. And one thing you'll notice is we always do this stuff when oil prices are low. Our politicians will come out and say Iran is funding terrorism, we have to stop their flow of oil. But they will do absolutely nothing until oil prices are low enough that it's hedged because they're not willing to pay the political price for that.

A (31:28)

Right.

B (31:29)

So stopping terrorism, the funding of that is really bad, are really good. We need to do that. But we can't do it if it hurts my poll numbers. And that's why Trump initiated the stiff sanctions on Iran after the oil crash of 2018 instead of before. And that's why we're seeing what's happening in Venezuela right now after oil hit $56 a barrel and not when it was 70. All of these things are timed to dips in oil prices. If you can look at dips in oil prices historically and there's some type of intervent or sanction or something against an oil producing nation. It's, it's literally how it works to not upset the market.

A (32:11)

So there's two things there. It's like the more I learn, the more I don't really want to know.

B (32:19)

I know I tell people that all the time, like, you don't want to.

A (32:21)

Know this, but this is because, yeah, number one, number one, the dip, the lower gas prices, like when, when the average person goes cool, gas is whatever, a buck fifty, whatever, gas happens to be under two bucks, under three bucks, whatever the going rate is whatever is impressive. That that dip and that savings for me at the pump means something significant is about to happen in the international community. A play is about to be made in order to take advantage of that to jockey strategic importance in the international community. And horribly enough, this is all starting to sound like the oil version. Correct me if I'm wrong, please. The oil version or the oil like extremity of the 2008 mortgage crisis? In a way, we right people with boatloads of money love 2008. You lost your house. Amazing. I can buy them all up and I can get. Right. Yeah. So is that what's possibly going on here? Are there really big oil guys sitting in a room going, no, no, no, keep going, keep going. Because if you crash it, I can buy up all of these around me, I can solidify a greater level of monopoly and in essence they become closer and closer and closer to the countries that we love to trash talk all the time about having sort of state run oil. The reason why state run anything is bad is because they have a monopoly. That's, that's what makes it bad. It's not just because the government are doing it, it's because it's only one person. But we're pretending as though capitalism isn't getting us to the same end result just with a different guy driving that ship. Am I? Please tell me I'm wrong.

B (34:35)

No, you're not wrong. And so there's, there's one thing that, that will differentiate. Okay. If you see an oil market crash that was instigated, right. In 2018, Donald Trump got OPEC to flood the market and crashed the global oil market. That was something he did directly for a purpose, right? Now he's doing it directly for a purpose. And that purpose is exactly what you were talking about. If you see an oil market crash, that is a natural market thing where the economy fell off a little bit and we had too much oil, where it's a natural piece of a free market, then that's not what's happening. But when you see an oil market that is intentionally crashed, that is exactly what's happening. It's, it's to go after someone else when they're weak and when we can afford it in polling numbers, basically, that is exactly what it's for, right?

A (35:35)

So when he hikes up, you know, he's shooting at boats that are never making it to your shore, advocating for invasion, attack, taking back our oil, right? I love, I love that. I love. Wait a minute. That was ours. It's so funny because after I spoke about Venezuela, even though I did it imperfectly, everybody's like, cool, do Guatemala next? Do Guatemala do well? Not when it comes to oil. Just the, the idea about how the United States has been incredibly tactically powerful of allowing their companies to infiltrate markets, control economies and control whatever natural resource Guatemala might be. You know, the United Fruit Company or whatever. It doesn't, the company doesn't matter. But I do think that there's, everybody's interested in seeing that sort of, that backstory. But the funny part is, is that they think it's backstory. But what you're saying is it's just the prequel like it, this is just, we're, we're in, you know, we're in the last nine Star Wars. But don't worry, more are getting written. Like, it's just, it's a never ending story here.

B (36:52)

Yeah, I mean, it's, it's a win, win for that politician. You get to drive down gas prices in the United States and Americans are very sensitive to that. They're always for. No matter what they do to the oil industry, the oil industry always forgives them. So that doesn't matter. But then you get this opportunity to stop the flow of oil out of whatever country you don't want to be flowing oil right now. Like, and it is a huge power play. It's like a move in the game of risk. You know, it's, that's literally what it is. But, but nobody like, realizes that. Like, people don't understand that for exactly what it is. And that is exactly what it is. It's not just about gas prices.

A (37:35)

Why do you think. And this is, this is obviously a part of it, but why do you think there is nobody articulate enough, intelligent enough, and let's be honest, charismatic enough to have this conversation in front of cnn.

B (37:52)

In government.

A (37:53)

Yeah. Or on the other side, on any side. I don't care who it is.

B (38:02)

I think they're out there. Maybe they're afraid to talk about it. I don't know. I, you know, people that I know in my circles that do what I do, we have these discussions privately. But you're right, like, nobody ever talks about that in public spaces on cnn. Just, you know, it's just not a thing. But I don't know why. I wouldn't have any problem saying it on cnn.

A (38:26)

This is what I'm saying. And I also think there's this vested interest about it being incredibly difficult to understand. You know, last conversation we had, you did a fantastic job about Talking about the regions and the zones and who is connected to what and how. And then. And then again talking about Canada and what the investment is in here and what Canadians have invested in there and how it's all so incredib. Intertwined. And you make it that way and you make it confusing and nobody's willing to. To put it on the line. Because my worry here is it doesn't matter who's driving the truck or the boat or whatever metaphor you want to use, because they all are irrevocably tied and linked to those power structures that exist. So nobody's. Nobody wants to unwind any of that.

B (39:27)

Yeah, and another thing, you know, people not talking about that, I think they fear sounding like conspiratorial. But also, if I was to say Donald Trump crashed the global oil market to stop the flow of oil out of Iran, people would say I'm an Iranian sympathizer or something. You know what I mean? Like they can hit you in the face with that. And, you know, I personally don't have a problem stopping the flow of oil from Iran, you know, but when you're talking about doing it to seize a nation, that's a different story. When you're talking about Venezuela, that's a bit of a different story. So, you know, I think there's a lot of stuff there that gets into why people don't really want to talk about that, because especially if they're viewed as an expert or an analyst or someone that knows something, the minute you start sounding conspiracy, editorial, you're done, you know.

A (40:26)

Administration, you get a cabinet post.

B (40:29)

Yeah, no, yeah, you're right about that. I could be the Secretary of Energy, possibly, but say the right thing, Mr.

A (40:34)

Global, just say the right thing.

B (40:38)

Because people will say, well, is getting rid of Maduro a bad thing?

A (40:42)

Yeah, sure.

B (40:43)

You know, yeah, that's.

A (40:45)

And that's what some people came at me with, right? It's like, I'm like, yeah, but you're missing the point. Like, I never once said, yay, dictatorship. That's not the point. And, and if you think for a minute that any level of any government, to be honest, any government, any. I think it's hysterical when people believe that any head of state of any nation is doing something because it is right, not because they're going to get something right. I think that level of. There's no conspiracy about that. It's simple. I'm not going to spend money if I'm not going to get money, and I know all the justice in the.

B (41:26)

World.

A (41:29)

Isn'T going to drive me to do something that I don't see. I'm going to get something from. And by the way, that includes civil rights activism that goes on in your own country. Nobody's ever doing it. Never. You're never changing laws ever preemptively until it's costing you something now.

B (41:50)

Right.

A (41:51)

Just not. Nobody's doing that.

B (41:53)

Yeah, and that's my thing. If someone said, is getting rid of Maduro a bad thing? I would say, well, it's not. It's. It's the reason why, like, you're not getting rid of Maduro because you have a problem with Maduro. You're getting rid of Maduro because he has something and he's in your way and you want it. If he didn't have that, you would allow Maduro to be there until the day he dies, and you would allow the next person to be there, too. It's just like North Korea. If North Korea had a vast amount of oil, what would we do with Kim Jong? Right?

A (42:24)

Like, right.

B (42:25)

That him and that family, however, all that will work, will probably remain in power because they don't have anything that anybody wants to go kick him out of power. And that's the only. You know, this isn't some, oh, well, you know, we don't like dictatorships. We want democracy. You know, it's not that it's, you want somebody's oil. It has nothing to do with freedom or any of that, any of the buzzwords. It's, they have something you want and you're using that as an excuse. That's the issue I have with it.

A (42:54)

And I think what the. The problem here is, you know, is that both sides of the aisle have to admit they've done it and they continue to do it. So in order for them to name it, they can't name it because they've all done it in one way, shape or form. And so, you know, my students will talk about the Cuban Missile crisis, We'll talk about Castro. We'll talk about who was in power before Castro. And they'll be like, wait, wasn't he a horrible dictator? Like, more research? Batista doesn't seem like a good guy. The United States liked him, but he was a dictator. And then they said they didn't like Castro because he was a dictator. I'm like, well, that's not really the reason they didn't like Gastro. Right? Like, they didn't like Castro because they took away all their money and all of their. All of their land and resources. But when kids are just genuinely confused, they're like, we don't get it. I'm like, yeah, you do. You just don't want, like I understand not wanting to get it. My question, I mean, unfortunately, again, I know the answer to this, but I there, this can't stop. It won't stop on any, anybody's watch. It just takes a different form and a different PR statement and you know, talk from the Oval Office kind of. And I don't having people know me well enough to know that I'm not trying to make space for Donald Trump here. But he just, he just says it with all the crass and stupidity that makes it easy to point to and say that's disgusting. But many a president have said the exact same thing with a better cadence to their, to their messaging.

B (44:45)

Yeah, more well spoken presidents. And as long as, as, as long as we are dependent on oil globally, we are going to go take it from whoever has it until the end of time. Like there's, there's no stopping that. No matter who has it, someone's going to go take it. And that's sort of the, the, the issue with us not being able to develop something to replace it, you know?

A (45:16)

Right.

B (45:17)

But yeah, as long as we're on oil, whoever has it is eventually going to run out and we're going to have to go take it from somebody else. Like that's just, that's how it's been since the beginning of time and that's how it's going to be until we're not on oil or until we're not on oil at the extent we are and we're using a lot less of it.

A (45:35)

Do you see? And I'll, and I'll, you've spent tons of time with me today, so I really appreciate. But do you see an, an end to when we're on oil considering the reserves we have? I mean, you hear some people say, you know, it's a fin night resource, we're going to run out, we're going to run out. I don't, every five seconds everybody's like, we're going to run out. And then they're like, Venezuela has more oil than ever been seen before. I'm like, are we running out soon or was that not true?

B (46:04)

So here's the thing. We're not, yeah, we're not running out of oil. What? So in the United States. Right, Unconventionals, shale oil, you're familiar with this, right?

A (46:14)

Yes.

B (46:14)

When, when we drill and frack and complete a well at the end of that well's life. We've probably not even recovered 20% of the oil that's there in the ground. So the technology will be developed to go get the rest of that oil. So when you see a huge oil field that's dried up, it's not dried up. Our ability, our ability to get it has run out. And I never discount the ability of technology to just change the whole game. And I've seen this throughout my whole life. Every time, you know, well, we're about to start running out of oil, peak oil before you know it. And the peak oil people were exactly right. Except they discounted the new technology.

A (47:01)

Right, right.

B (47:02)

Like peak oil would have happened exactly when the doctor said it was going to happen. But he didn't know horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing was going to be a thing. If he would have known that, he would have said something else. So I think technology is always going to lead us to the next thing. But at the end of the day, like I said, we're always going to go get someone's oil as long as we need it, until technology gets to a point where nobody has to worry about it anymore.

A (47:29)

So, Mr. Global, there's too much. Can I ask you a light hearted question before we go?

B (47:37)

Yes.

A (47:38)

Okay. I have a question.

B (47:40)

Okay.

A (47:41)

If Armageddon was actually happening and a meteor was coming towards Earth, would you be in the top five guys to go as the astronauts to that thing drill down so you could blow it up? Are you Willis? Is the question I'm asking.

B (47:59)

I don't know if they would pick me, but I would absolutely go. I would. Yeah.

A (48:05)

Bruce Willis level game is what I'm asking you. Or that guy that drives the Bobcat. Like I'm just asking, like play around.

B (48:12)

Steve Buscemi was there too, so if he can do it, I can do it. Like, I'm not trying to compare myself to Bruce Willis, but I would certainly stand next to Steve Buscemi.

A (48:22)

Perfect. Just, I just need to know, and you did mention earlier that if you moved, you know, you said something like, I'm not a Canadian, but just so you know, you're an honorary Canadian with me. And anytime you want to roll up here, we'll, we'll carve out some area just for you. Maybe give you a cabinet position.

B (48:46)

Oh, I get emails from Canadians every day.

A (48:49)

This is what I'm saying. You'd be very much loved and appreciated. But thank you so much for coming on and on such short notice too. So this is going to drop on Tuesday. I appreciate you. I appreciate your intelligence, your intellect, your drive, your platform and tell everybody where they can find you before you before you log off.

B (49:10)

I'm Mr. Global on tick tock and Facebook and YouTube and I am Mr. Global or I am Matt Randolph on Substack. Where else am I? I'm on threads. I'm on Instagram. I'm Forbes, Forbes contributor. I write energy articles for Forbes. So if you're interested in reading about energy articles, search Matt Randolph, Forbes. You'll find me there. That's pretty much everywhere I'm at, so.

A (49:39)

Well, that's pretty much everywhere. That's all the places there are as of right now. But thank you so much for hanging out.

B (49:48)

I loved it. I enjoyed it.

A (49:49)

It was fun talking me through. And anytime you want to correct me, hon, you can come on and correct me. I'm 100 fine with that. Everybody that's listening, thank you so much for hanging out with us. And I will see you next Tuesday. Same bat time, same bat channel. Dismissed.