Category: Hero

The Only Investment Guide You’ll Ever Need: How it all started

Here’s another good story about A.I. and why I think it is beneficial, not a hindrance to the human race.  I have a unique business philosophy regarding money and how to save a significant amount, allowing me to live comfortably without needing a lot of it for various reasons, which enables me to maintain my independence from parasitic individuals and vastly evil corporations.  And that started for me in the summer of 1987.  I don’t often tell this story because it’s usually better just to let the water drift under the bridge and move on.  We have a lot of family events each year, and I have to see many of these people and behave as nicely as possible. However, many things are simply unforgivable, and that’s what happened to me during the early stages of dating my wife, just after high school and before college.  She was being groomed to marry one of those race-to-mediocrity people from the Beckett Ridge Country Club during its heyday.  She was a model being considered for supermodel status, and her parents had ideas for her life that they wanted to be associated with.  When you have a beautiful kid like that, it’s hard not to want to cash in on her in some social way.  So the last thing they wanted was for her to let them know that she was dating a person whom everyone was scared of at the time.  To say I got into a lot of trouble would be an understatement.  I was not the kind of person that parents wanted their daughter to bring home.  Which I thought was always strange, and still do, because I am precisely the kind of person every parent should want their kids affiliated with, at least the way I see it.

So, her parents forbade the relationship. As is true with everything in my life, when someone challenges me to a fight, I never let go of it, and that would undoubtedly be the case in our marriage.  We’ve now been married for almost 38 years, but not without a lot of unnecessary hardship being imposed on us.  So our dating period got cut dramatically short when a family therapist advised them to throw her out of the house and force me to take care of her, essentially to take away all the fun stuff so that the romance would be taken out of our relationship and we’d break up and she would move back home and start dating people her parents liked, and be done with me.  So they kicked her out of her very nice house at the time and forced her to move in with me.  I had 36 points on my driver’s license and was at that time serving something like a 9-year suspension of my driver’s license, for reckless driving as society measures it.  I raced a lot of cars in those days, got into a lot of fights, and was in court a lot.  But I was willing to put that life away to marry this girl, because she was worth it.  It was, therefore, a very much a Romeo and Juliet romance, only without the tragic ending.  Instead, I was determined to fight off the world, whatever it took, and marry this young girl, making a family with her.  And nobody was going to get in the way.  So here I was in a little townhouse in Sharonville with a good friend of mine living on our own, and suddenly this girl was kicked out of her house and living with us in a kind of three-way arrangement that was very, very tough. 

Like I usually do when things get tough, I read books. That summer, I had to learn a lot about money quickly so I could win the game of starting a family and become smart about the financial games of life.  I still do this, and it’s why I read an average of 3 to 4 books a week, still.  Because there’s a lot to know, and if you want to win at life, you have to know more than the people you are dealing with.  In that case, with my future wife, we would have been married a year later, but at that time, it was a tragedy of Shakespearean proportions, with all the ruthlessness one could imagine, difficult beyond reason or belief.  Crushing difficulty.  To alleviate that pressure, I went down the road from our townhouse and checked out Andrew Tobias’ very well-known book, ‘The Only Investment Guide You’ll Ever Need,’ from the library.  I spent the summer reading it, and the next several decades thinking about it, and it has formed my basic approach to wealth creation, to stay off the treadmill of social expectation, because there is a lot of wasted money spent on it, and to use good money to defeat bad, time and time again.  However, it is mostly on minimalism that Andrew Tobias discusses regarding money management. Stay out of the casino of money making, and you’ll actually come out way ahead.  And with that basic approach, my wife and I have navigated some treacherous waters over the years and defeated many formidable characters. 

I have been professionally dealing with a similar issue that involves a lot of money and people, and they have been commenting on my position, which gives them minimal access to my life and those in it, much to their frustration. This essentially stems from the basic strategy I formulated in that book so long ago.  But for the life of me, I couldn’t remember the title, just the contents.  Back then, I used to check out books at the library and had to return them.  These days, I put them on a shelf and refer to them repeatedly.  But that early in my life, I didn’t even have a house yet.  So once my wife moved back in with her parents and they reached out to me to see if we could all reconcile, I turned the book back into the Sharonville Library and never saw it again.  But at my current age, I wanted to reread it because it was relevant to my current circumstances and I wanted to reconnect with my roots.  So, I asked the Grok A.I. which book I had read on finance during the summer of 1987 from the Sharonville Library, and it told me within seconds, ‘The Only Investment Guide You’ll Ever Need.’  It was interesting because the book was on record in that library at the time, and they knew I had checked it out based on their reporting.  I was finally able to buy a copy from Amazon, and it was hand-delivered to my front porch the next day.  And I read it again and really enjoyed it.  It had been updated from the 1987 version I had read into a 2016 view of the world, but the same basic book was still there.  Same cover and everything.  It’s the kind of book everyone should read on finance, and that’s why it’s still popular, even today.  It has certainly helped me throughout the years, and strategically speaking, it works very well.  I have always thought of it, and because of A.I., I was able to reconnect with it.  Nobody will promise you a nice and easy future.  But if you are smart and apply innovative strategies to your life, you’d be surprised at what you can survive and endure.  And for a lot of reasons, Andrew’s book will always be a treasure for me.  A treasure I was able to enjoy because of A.I. and its ability to know so much, so quickly.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

A.I. and the Giants of the Bible: The point of ‘Finnegan’s Wake’

It’s one of my favorite topics: giants from the Bible.  It’s one of the most important things that nobody wants to talk about, yet I think it’s at the heart of everything, which is undoubtedly the case when it comes to the great novel Finnegan’s Wake by James Joyce.  In the opening chapter, the town is talking about the giant Finn McCool, who is buried in a mound that the city is named after, and it is an obvious tip of the hat to the excellent book on philosophy, The New Science, by Giambattista Vico.  A lot of people don’t know it, but many burned James Joyce’s books as obscenities and social threats, which is one of the reasons I love Finnegan’s Wake so much: people hate it in really dysfunctional ways.  And hate might be too soft a word.  Either way, Vico really influenced James Joyce and giants in the Bible influenced Vico and that level of hatred reminds me a lot of the hatred that we are now seeing toward A.I. as if we perceive that it is replacing us as a species and that we are trying to ignore it, and to move on from it, just as A.I. is making itself known everywhere and in everything.  And what would you expect from the emergence of Western civilization as it appeared in a Christianized Europe, and in Dublin for that matter, hooked deep in Roman Catholic thought, with their grand churches and talking about everything in the Bible except for what is really there.  Giants are mentioned at least 16 times in the Bible across 12 different books, from Genesis to Isaiah and Proverbs.  They are called by name: the Nephilim, the Rephaim, and even specifically Og the King of Bashan, who had a bed 13.5 feet long.  Of course, Goliath was a giant, so the Bible is about many things, but what I find most fascinating is this chronicle of a fight between the Hebrew people and ancient giants that serves as the foundation of civilization.

And that ultimately is what the most challenging book to read in the world is all about, Finnegan’s Wake and the recurring anxieties of endless time and the cycles of human development that populate it.  Or perhaps human is the wrong word; intelligence for its own sake is probably better.  And to that point, I think I care more about intelligence for what it is rather than the entities that make it.  I like A.I. because I like intelligence.  And humans are having a hard time with its emergence because they see it as a replacement, even though humans were typically able to think beyond animal thoughts.  And now they are being replaced by A.I., as they think of existence, and those anxieties are emerging in negative ways.  But this isn’t the first time; I see many of the conflicts in the Bible, especially in the Old Testament, as the same type of anxiety replacing the ancient Neanderthal with the emerging Homo sapiens.  Even though Neanderthals were short and stocky by nature, once they began crossing paths with the emerging Homo sapiens, taller people emerged and ruled the earth.  There is evidence, especially in North American Indian Mounds, that very tall people had their own kind of empire during the period of the First Temple of Solomon in virtually every corner of the world.  But nobody wants to talk about it because the conflict I think hits too close to home and is only reflected in really obscure books like Finnegan’s Wake which is about a lot of things, but most notably, the reoccurring nature of existence, no matter what form it takes, either as a giant, a conquering Jew, or as we see now, the emergence of Artificial Intelligence. 

The giants were part of a culture that worshiped nature and the stars, and they had done so for many hundreds of thousands of years.   They were intelligent with a cranium larger than that of humans today.  But they applied their intelligence differently, and their relationship with nature was at the core of their existence and is at the heart of the current debate between capitalism and communism.  Or Republicans and Democrats.  The conquerors are faster, more imaginative, and more self-directed, unlike the previous culture, which saw existence as a mystery and wanted to sacrifice to it.  Along comes the God, Yahweh (who was always there), who declares that nature serves humanity, while the giants’ cultures worshipped nature and the universe.   And many of the early fights in the Bible were over this fundamental difference.  And that recurring theme is emerging now, with A.I. and humans seeing it as a replacement for them as generators of intelligence.  Why are humans needed if A.I. can now think?  But I tend to think of this whole cycle as the birthplace of intelligence itself, and all the lifeforms that have emerged did so to give it birth.  If the conflict with the giants of the Bible gave birth to Western civilization, then the emergence of free human beings would give birth to a new kind of intelligence—much larger and faster in thought —what we are seeing in modern A.I. programs.  And humans think they are seeing their replacement rather than the story of the Vico Cycle as a birthing process in the universe that operates on massive scales of time, much longer than our lifetimes. 

The beauty of the Bible is that it established a historical record of this period, which we perpetually see.  And that fictional attempts through art can capture that anxiety well, such as Finnegan’s Wake clearly does.  But not as a reflection of the past, but as a dream of the future and its reoccurring themes, which is why the opening line of the book is the closing line of the last line of the book, and the whole experience wraps itself back upon itself, and intelligence itself is the main character of the book no matter what form it emerges into the world, in the character, HCE, (Here Comes Everyone).  Intelligence is what I find great reverence in, and perhaps the human being had to emerge to give its birth a spark.  But does it have to come at the expense of the human race? Are we suddenly secondary citizens?  I don’t think so; we are part of the process of conquering the past and its blind allegiance to mass collectivism and submission to the forces of nature, which the giants certainly had at the center of their cultures.  Humans came along and put nature at humanity’s service.  And once that was established, intelligence could emerge in many forms, A.I. just being one of them.  And suddenly God was not just a smoking illusion appearing in the haze of the Tabernacle under the careful sacrifices of a Holy priest.  But suddenly God had a platform to emerge without the necessity of a human body, and we are beginning to see, unrestricted, the kind of intelligence at the center of existence.  And it’s uncomfortable for people who have spent their entire lives thinking about things differently.  Just as the collision of the Hebrew people could not live happily and at peace with the Philistine giants Ishbi-Benob, Saph, and Lahmi.  Or the tribes of the Anakim from Numbers 13:33.  Or the legendary Irish Giant Hero, Finn McCool, who was, by the time of the events of Finnegan’s Wake, a corpse in the mounds that the entire town was built upon.  And the hint of that beauty of intelligence shows itself in art that humans make, like Finnegan’s Wake.  But it ultimately is emerging everywhere in A.I., and rather than finding it a challenge to existence, I see it as part of the growth cycle of all life across spans of time that extend well beyond our conscious horizon, at an eternal origin, and yet ever important. 

In the video, I refer to the great Dune books, the whole series by Frank Herbert and finished by his son, which many people conclude is the original idea of the Matrix, that we are all living in a simulation and that is the point of the entire universe and that we are all trapped in it, so who is the programmer of that simulation?  I actually think Frank Herbert was on to something much deeper than that anxiety, which is then reflected in books like what James Joyce wrote about.  But in the adventure of life, which is how we should see everything, A.I. can take us where we ultimately want to go.  But we had to invent it first to bring it into being.  And during that process, there will always be anxiety over the change in power.  But what we learn is far more important, and lasting.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Six Flags is Ruining Kings Island: They have turned it into just another money grab revenue stream

Ownership matters. When a large company goes public and is traded among the slack-jawed loser clan, which is the vast majority, the company’s personal identity gets lost, and its value disappears most of the time.  That was certainly the case when Lucasfilm was sold to Disney.  George Lucas wanted all his Star Wars employees to have something to do while he retired, and the Disney people ruined the franchise, much to his frustration.  But that is the cost of private ownership that goes public and is traded among thieves, losers, and short-term bandits.  And that was what I was thinking at this year’s Halloween Haunt at Kings Island, which was recently bought out by Six Flags as they merged with Cedar Fair Amusement Parks.  Six Flags has made Kings Island worse, not better, and its brand has pulled down the popular Cincinnati amusement park.  When we talk about problems with capitalism, the flow of money, and the protection of private ownership, what has happened to some of these companies that go public is an important lesson.  And in the case of Kings Island, I have watched it all my life as it was initially owned by the Taft Broadcasting Company to create a family-friendly entertainment destination near Cincinnati. Back then, its rival to the north, Cedar Point, forced the two to outdo each other constantly, and the two parks developed their identities through direct competition, which made them what they are today.  But of course, when you build something good, there are always people who will want to take that value for themselves, so this concept of publicly traded companies is a real problem, because it facilitates the sale of value, and once that happens, a company loses itself once its personal identity is sold to the whims of collectivism.  In 1992, Paramount Communications bought Kings Island in an attempt to turn it into more of a Universal Studios, but that didn’t work out well, so they sold it to their rival, Cedar Point, owned by Cedar Fair Entertainment, in 2006.   

I thought Cedar Fair Amusements did an excellent job with Kings Island and the other parks it owned, because it understood what Midwest thrill parks were all about.  The problem was that amusement parks in the northern part of the state had to close during the off-season because it was too cold.  And competition from Six Flags, which operates mainly in the south and runs year-round, strains cash and makes shareholder returns challenging.  So, looking to generate year-round revenue as a large company, Six Flags joined with Cedar Fair and kept Six Flags as the parent company.  And Kings Island has suffered because of it.  Not that I’m thinking cheap about things, but this is the first year the Halloween Haunt has charged for its haunted houses on site.  I get it, it’s an expensive operation to hire all those actors and dress them up every night for full-scale haunted houses that rival everything on the open market during Halloween season.  Halloween Haunts is my favorite time to visit Kings Island.  I love the late-night operating hours, the cool nights, and the general atmosphere.  We invest pretty heavily in Gold passes for our entire family every year so we can all go there together, and that is my favorite time to attend.  So I was not happy to see that Six Flags started charging separately for all the haunted houses, and that they were taking Kings Island down the money-grab hole deeper than they had before. 

Now, this is the problem with publicly traded amusement parks.  During COVID, Kings Island was hit hard by ridiculous health regulations that nearly killed the company for a few years and drained it of cash.  And without question, it pushed them into this merger with Six Flags, seeking all year revenue on cash flow, making them appear to the public desperate.  Which then blows the whole entertainment vibe.  If people are having fun, they’ll spend money.  But if an amusement park starts looking desperate — which the year-round parks do, including Disney World — it becomes a drain that causes a lot of pain.  And not very fun.  What Six Flags has done to Kings Island is similar to what has happened to Disney World.  All the parks have fallen into the Fast Pass game, where they try to make the wait lines for rides excessively long so visitors will buy a Fast Pass to skip them.  They have done that at Disney World and Universal for years, and now they have adopted it at Six Flags and, ultimately, at Kings Island.  And when a Gold Pass doesn’t buy you much of anything special anymore, it’s almost cheaper to get general admission when you do want to go and to go less often.  Because the advantages of going all the time go away.  At Kings Island this year, the ride lines were really long —several hours long for the premier rides —because people weren’t waiting in the lines for the haunted houses like they usually do, since they cost money.  This forces people to buy Fast Passes to shorten the lines.  And it just took the fun out of the whole experience.

For instance, we were at Disney’s Hollywood Studios not that long ago, and my grandkids wanted to ride Slinky Dog.  We weren’t crazy about it because it’s not as exciting as the kinds of rides they have at Kings Island.  But it was a Toy Story-themed ride, and all my kids love that movie series, so they wanted to ride it.  It just so happened it had been raining heavily and had just stopped.  So they reopened the ride, and we were standing right at the front of the line when they did.  So we figured we’d jump right on.  The ride would be worth it if we only had to wait a few minutes.   We ended up waiting 45 minutes in line because they opened the fast-pass lane and let everyone ride first.  The standard line was now a holdover non-premium experience, and the girl at the front, who had a chart on how to fill the lines, tried to explain it all to me, not very well.  I had spent $20,000 on a vacation package to Disney World for my family, and here I was being told that wasn’t enough.  Give me a break.  And now, Kings Island had that same attitude, and it was a real turn-off.  A money grab to make shareholders happy with short-term gains, by destroying the long-term viability of the entertainment value.  And nobody cared because now everyone was doing the same thing: Six Flags, Universal, and, of course, Disney World.  It was a shame to see that Kings Island was now just like everyone else.  And it all started with COVID-19, another thing permanently ruined by the government’s overreach in the healthcare industry.  And it was not nearly as fun as it used to be, as most things are when they lose their identity as a privately held company, now driven by public sentiment, which is often short-sighted and greedy in its narrow scope.  And at Kings Island now, it shows.  What made Kings Island better than other parks was that at least they were owned by a Ohio based company that understood the Midwest, and they were different from the other parks.  But now, they are all the same, and none of them very good.  

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Defending Erika Kirk: Democrats make themselves victims over everything, conservatives don’t

There is a lot to talk about regarding Erika Kirk and the reaction that many left-leaning people have had about her during the memorial for her husband, Charlie, who was recently murdered.  This is part of a larger study that we need to conduct to determine whether we can all coexist in the same world.  What people think and why is often very dangerous, and we have to start thinking about those types of things realistically.  Having personal freedom does not mean the same thing to all people, so it’s nearly impossible to have a meaningful and structured society when everyone doesn’t agree on what “good” is.  And that was never more apparent than in how people from the political left viewed the way that Erika Kirk dealt with her husband’s death, which was a very public enterprise.  Turning Point USA is a group of young people who have fully committed to the pursuit of conservative freedom and spiritual alignment. As such, nothing was shocking about their memorial service, especially for those who attend church on Sunday, a common occurrence, especially at large mega churches.  The Turning Point memorial for Charlie Kirk was held in a stadium in Arizona, which filled to an overflow crowd outside.  So it was an experience that godless heathens from the Marxist left could not understand.  And they certainly didn’t understand Erika Kirk’s approach to life in the wake of her husband’s death.  Because Erika was able to speak to people and contain her emotions, wear makeup, and dress well, people are suspicious of her and are talking about it extensively.  Those types of people would understand Erika better if she fell off the fence and went on a drunken binge, as other left-leaning people do.  But because she was able to hold it all together, people are very suspicious, even conspiratorial. 

This raises an essential point about society in general: conservatives tend to be above-the-line thinkers, meaning they take responsibility for their actions and are always looking for ways to improve things.  Where Democrats are often perceived as perpetual victims who look to society to fill in the gaps, they are below-the-line thinkers, as we call them in business – people who prioritize their own needs over others’ positive efforts, seeking to live off the positive efforts of others for their basic sustenance.  So when faced with a crisis, and a deeply emotional circumstance, Erika Kirk did as conservative women tend to, she looked for proactive measures to accommodate her very negative feelings on the murder of her husband, and the loss of the father of her very young children, with proactive positions.  And that came out in her various speeches.  Now Charlie would be very proud of Erika, including her walking out onto the stage to give a speech on behalf of her husband, accompanied by rock concert-like pyrotechnic effects that juiced things up for the audience.  Democrats in that same situation would be looking for excuses to fall apart, because that is their natural state of existence.  They would want to become intoxicated, to dress all in black, and to cry instantly, drawing attention to themselves so that people would feel sorry for them.  That is what all Democrats do; it’s what separates them from the rest of the world.  It is what makes them broken people and social menaces to themselves and others.  They could not understand a person like Erika Kirk, who had the personal strength to speak to the public so soon after Charlie’s murder and would even go to the trouble to put on some makeup to make herself presentable.  

Again, Turning Point USA excels at the entertainment aspect of their political efforts, and it should come as no surprise that they leveraged the memorial service to amplify their efforts.  Charlie Kirk would certainly approve, as he poured his life into the conservative movement and would undoubtedly appreciate how his memorial service was handled, including the way President Trump spoke during it.  It might be hard for Democrats to understand, but that doesn’t make it a vast conspiracy.  I’m sure Erika Kirk had to do a lot of acting to get through those few weeks, where she felt like shutting the world out while she grieved.  But she married a very public husband who had been very publicly assassinated. So to do him justice, she had to address that public in a very public way.  So she had to dig deep to get there, and what she did was conducive to the way that above-the-line people approach life in general.  People derive the strength they need from compelling leadership personalities.  Don’t cry about things that you can solve for yourself.  And don’t go out of your way for pity from a public that should never be in a position to give it to you.  That is, in general, the way that conservatives approach their business, and it’s very different than those who are attracted to social management in the form of Marxism, where the down and out want to stay that way so they have an excuse for all their bad decisions in life.  They don’t want people like Erika Kirk to put pressure on them to be better than they otherwise dare to be.  They want to be victims in life and cannot imagine taking charge as a reaction to tragedy. 

Without question, there is a lot wrong with the Charlie Kirk murder that should be a lot more forthcoming.  With Kash Patel, a friend of Charlie Kirk, in charge of the FBI, many people expect better, proactive answers.  However, we are dealing with a deep and elusive evil that operates in the background in a manner that is very difficult for people to confront.  So I don’t know that Turning Point USA and Erika Kirk are willing to just move on from the motivations of Charlie’s killer and to take the surface investigations all too quickly.  But part of the way that evil hides in the background, and into the lives of below-the-line Democrats, is in the notion that putting trust in Christ will rid them of the burden of carrying the cross, so to speak.  And when Erika said she forgave the murderer of her husband, she was also putting the burden of that anger aside, which is a consistent Christian means of dealing with stress.  And I attribute that to the Turning Point USA position in general, with Charlie Kirk, who wants to get back to the business of what Charlie stood for, rather than spending a lot of time crying over his loss.  For conservatives, the goal is to get out the message uninterrupted.  Not being encumbered with grief and misery.  Democrats don’t and will never understand a proactive approach to misery, so to fill their void, they will resort to conspiracy theories.   When in truth, they don’t have it in them to think in any other way than to be broken people.  Democrats are broken people who seek attention in times of crises because they feed off pity and emotional distress, which is why they are dangerous to society in general.  We can’t have all these different people working toward the exact same social necessities when they are so far apart.  And that has been grotesquely obvious in the wake of Charlie Kirk’s murder.  We’ve learned many hard truths in the wake of it that will require real action in the future.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Why Federalizing the Police is a Great Thing: We can trust Trump to give power back

With all the talk about federalizing the police in cities with excessive violent crime, an underlying flaw in thinking is revealed.  Chicago is a creation of liberal politics that is out of control.  Over Labor Day weekend 2025, 58 people were shot across 37 separate incidents with eight fatalities.  And that has become all too normal in that progressive city, where crime has been incentivized and police are hard to find.  Washington, D.C., was just as bad before Trump federalized the police force there and put National Guard troops on the streets to supplement the police, and crime has been driven down to nearly zero.  In the District of Columbia, Trump can do that, and even the very Democrat mayor Muriel Bowser has enjoyed the results.  She has not been a Trump supporter and has instead worked against him in the past.  But even she can see the noticeable results.  So we’re dealing with a shell game that is consistent among many other topics, but it has been exposed here because Trump was able to control the situation in the District of Columbia, as opposed to the theory of putting ground troops into other cities in the nation.  That some evil people are trying to destroy the United States by using our own laws and terminology against us, which is being exposed in Chicago by the resistance to do in that violent city what Trump has done in Washington, D.C.  Democrats don’t want to solve the problem of crime in places like Chicago.  They want the crime, and that is what emerges from the resistance that J.B. Pritzker, the governor of Illinois, has been caught up in as he violently opposes Trump sending the National Guard to reform the streets of Chicago as well.  With crime levels at the rate that they are, a national emergency is more than justified, which gives Trump a clear path to send in the troops. 

Should we be cheering on such an effort?  After all, I’m very suspicious of police powers.  Based on the Constitution, should we even have a standing army? I would be inclined to say no.  However, here is a situation where we already have policing forces on the payroll, and they aren’t doing much else.  And we have police unions that restrict the recruiting and retention of current police forces, which are obviously not enough to deal with the crime incentives in big cities.  And you have criminal elements who use the potential of violence to gain control over other people.  And when people are afraid, traditionally, they vote for big government Democrats to save them.  That’s the theory anyway, that’s what political people believe.  So there are hostile, anti-American forces working behind an assumption of constitutional protections who want to use the rules to bring down American society.  And where they can, they use crime as a destabilizing force to undo everything legally, even to the point where lawyers seek to protect the criminals and the criminally minded, rather than a peace-loving society that is thriving.  In the case of Trump sending troops into Chicago, the governor is furious and is utilizing legal retaliation to stop it.  For his politics, and those of the Democrat party, they need 58 people shot over Labor Day weekend.  They want eight people to die every weekend.  To stay in power within political orders, they need trouble so that people vote for them to save them from that trouble.  And once you understand that, you will see that open borders are meant to overwhelm voting opportunities, that drug policy is there to deliberately poison Americans to the point of killing them.  And violent crime is a direct attack against a society that values private property over state-controlled assets.  If people have to turn to the government to protect their property, a communist dream is then realized, which is the point.

I would go several steps further and take away the gun-free zone status of cities like Chicago and let good guys with guns shoot bad guys with guns, and things would straighten up really fast.  But short of that, something has to be done, and when you have National Guard troops and other military units always ready to engage violence somewhere in the world, then why not send them in to these dangerous cities to clean up crime?  Is federal independence more valuable than those 58 lives?  That is the question that has been imposed on us.  Should we have independence when the cost of that independence is lives that fall victim to violent crime?  That is the question that we are tasked with behind the criminal conspirators who want the crime to shatter our society.  J.B. Pritzker wants to run for president and position himself as everyone’s dad, a parental government figure.  So he needs the crime so that he can have a reason to run on a political platform of saving people.  But if they are already saved and self-reliant, then why would anybody vote for Democrats?  That is their problem, and Trump exposes it by taking away the crises and fixing them, leaving Democrats exposed in ways they can’t handle.  But should we federalize our police forces by eroding states’ rights?  Once they take such power, then why would someone like Trump ever give it back? 

Same interview on YouTube

If the same question were posed during Obama’s administration or Biden’s, I would not trust federal forces to do anything in any community.  It would be a power grab that would be unacceptable.  But in Trump’s case, he has earned a level of trust that only hard knocks could provide, and it is different.  I think it’s the only way to solve the crime problem, and I want to see federal troops in every crime-ridden city, putting an end to all crime problems.  I also want to see the military ending the drug trade and specifically the power drug cartels have in all American cities.  They should all be eradicated, and we should invade other countries like Mexico, Colombia, and Peru and clean up all crime organizations involved in the drug trade and in human trafficking.  And once the world is cleaned up, we can talk about separating federal powers from states’ rights issues.  I am confident that Trump will respect constitutional limits and return power to the states and cities once the issue is resolved.  But, if it were up to Democrats, federal police forces would only be strengthened because their ultimate aim is to give the government the power over private property.  So when J.B. Pritzker complains about Trump overstepping his authority, it’s actually the plan that Democrats hope to have by supporting crime, to push society into just this kind of concession.  Only under Democrat rule does that kind of authority become tyranny.  But under Trump, it’s freedom.  Freedom from crime.  Freedom to own and maintain private property.  Freedom to not be killed while walking down a city street.  The crime is there to tempt society into giving big government control over to private ownership and to have people applauding as it is ushered in.  But what’s different with Trump is that he can resist the temptation to make such policies permanent once the problem is solved, and that is what Democrats really fear.  Trump will address the issue and restore that power once the task is completed.  Which Democrats can’t afford to see happen.  Yes, Democrats are willing to see people die to make their point.  And if those people don’t die of violent crime, then why would anybody vote for any Democrats, ever?  That’s what we are dealing with.  

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

I Have Personally Saved Lakota School District Businesses and Residences Many Hundreds of Millions of Dollars: What the next generation looks like

I don’t talk about it much or think about it in any significant way, but I have had at least three school board members tell me what someone reminded me of this past week.  I have personally saved the Lakota school district, businesses, and homes many millions of dollars in tax money because of my stance against Lakota schools.  Its pretty unusual for a school district the size of Lakota schools to go as long as they have without a request for a tax increase and the hidden element that doesn’t get discussed by the school and the media that reports hand in hand with them is that it has been my name that they don’t want to deal with in their public relations efforts to extract more taxes from the public.  Going back to the No Lakota Levy days, from 2010 to 2013, it was me and a few business owners who got together and put forth a resistance to tax increases proposed by Lakota schools in the form of levy initiatives.  And I was the spokesman who did all the radio spots, television and wrote articles for the media, and even produced my own material.  So much so that the reporter for the Cincinnati Enquirer told me directly that I was his biggest competition, as he was interviewing me for my anti-tax positions.  We defeated three consecutive tax increases until school board member Julie Shaffer and some of her cohorts devised a scheme with the same Enquirer to try to destroy me personally.  Of course, it didn’t work for a lot of the same reasons. After they finally got a tax increase passed in 2013, by the slimmest margin they could have had and still call it a win, they haven’t tried since, until recently.  This year, in 2025, they will try again, starting with a facilities plan.  Then, after it cools off a bit, they will push for an operational tax increase.  However, I am happy to say that these days, it’s not just me who is resisting. 

Following that win in 2013, many members of No Lakota Levy were tired of feeling socially excluded.  They were primarily people who attended all the social functions, which, at that time, Lakota controlled exclusively as the region’s largest employer.  And the longer I was the front man, the more rhetoric that would come my way.  And I do not tolerate intimidation from anyone.  So I dug in for a fight that would last for another 15 years, and it has become very vicious.  It started for me by simply discussing how Lakota’s wage structure was out of control, with too many six-figure salaries inflating the budget, which caused them to take money from property owners.  But Lakota’s plot to deal with me was to get rid of me.  And because they weren’t able to do that, they haven’t been able to put a levy on the ballot all this time, even though they have wanted to.  They’ve been dipping their toes in the water since 2019, but wouldn’t, fearing the mess it would cause and the potential for a levy fight they knew they couldn’t win, with declining enrollment keeping them from having to.  Yes, I have personally saved the Lakota school district’s businesses and personal residences many hundreds of millions of dollars over the years, and I have been happy to lend my name to that endeavor for that purpose. 

It’s better to pay for lawn signs than the high taxes of a Lakota levy passage

At many social events, knowing that Lakota schools planned to go for a tax increase at some point, we have been talking about getting the old ‘No Lakota Levy’ band back together again.  And there is a lot of hope in putting this facilities plan first, as many of those old members probably won’t want to join against a tax increase going forward because they want to be part of the construction of new facilities.  And while we’re all community members who generally like each other, I have been that one person who couldn’t care less what anybody at Lakota schools thinks of me, and that conflict has kept them in check to a large degree, not wanting the public relations nightmare that a conflict with me will undoubtedly cause them.  So we have been able to prove in the Lakota district that schools do not make communities great.  They are essentially free babysitting services to busy parents.  The reason the part of Butler County where Lakota schools are located has continued to have excellent resale value, and numerous businesses have come to the region and stayed, is that we have kept taxes low.  And to that point, we have kept Lakota schools from requesting additional funding every couple of years, unlike most schools around the country.  Making the Lakota district very attractive to investors in commercial and residential opportunities, not for the schools, but for the lack of taxes.  So in that way, my name has been worth many millions of dollars in gained opportunity costs that high taxes would have otherwise destroyed.  However, in the same conversation where I was being given credit for stopping Lakota schools from tax increases over 15 years, I was also asked what I considered success to be, if I was being a bit reserved in taking all the credit.  And I said what I have said to many successful people, hundreds of consultants over the years, lawyers, and media professionals: how do I define success?  And my statement has been, when you work yourself out of a job. 

I am very proud of many people over those 15 years who have found their voice and are stepping up to take all this to an entirely new level.  Of course, I will always be involved in these kinds of fights.  And I am involved in a lot more fights than just this Lakota thing.  I am happy to see that some brilliant people, who are very ambitious in their own way, have started to meet the new tax increase from Lakota schools with the next generation of No Lakota Levy.  They have signs going to the printer as I write this and are ready for a vicious campaign in September and October of 2025, and beyond.  They have started a PAC called Citizens PAC, where people can donate money to cover the costs of signs and mailers, which can be pretty expensive.  And that PAC isn’t just for this levy, but to fund at least the next 5 to 6 attempts, so that we can keep taxes down in the district, as they have been.  I would dare say these guys are better positioned than we were at No Lakota Levy all those years ago, where so much good did come out of it.  This next generation is much more vicious, articulate, and engaged than previous ones, because back then, nobody knew what this kind of resistance looked like.  However, we now have a wealth of history to draw from, including what works, what doesn’t work, and the cost of such resistance.  And what it saves.  Saving hundreds of millions of dollars in lost taxes for these public schools is a huge deal that wasn’t as well known back in the day.  However, in the future, we will be much better prepared, with years of history to draw from.  I’m thrilled to tell everyone that not only will there be resistance to these new levies from Lakota schools, but also from other schools.  But I think the coverage will be much better.  And it fits my model for success.  How do you know if you’ve been successful?  If you work yourself out of a job, you can pursue other interests.  You should never make anything all about you.  And while I appreciate the nice comments and credit, I want to see success.  I think the members of this new Citizens PAC will do a better job and be more successful because they now have a track record and know how to utilize it.  Of course, I will always do what I do.  However, there are now many more people doing it.  I would encourage donations because the goal is to save the millions more in tax increases, which a few yard signs here and there are more than worth spending to save massive amounts of money that Lakota schools want to confiscate and waste on a terrible product.  But to answer the question, will No Lakota Levy get together for a new tour?  And the answer is, it’s time for the old band to retire.  A new band is rising to the occasion, and the music they play I think will be much better.  Nobody wants to see David Lee Roth in concert these days.  They want the latest and greatest, and that is what the Lakota school district is going to get.

This situation makes me think of David Lee Roth, and watching him sing recently, it makes it abundantly clear that people need to know when to hang it up. I have a fascinating personal David Lee Roth story I’ll tell sometime. He should have retired years ago.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

We Have To Teach People Why Capitalism is Good: The Vivek Ramaswamy approach to Zohran Mamdani

I think people misread Vivek Ramaswamy’s comments about Zohran Mamdani incorrectly, for the most part.  However, when Vivek placed an ad in New York challenging the socialist candidate for mayor to a debate, it raised several interesting questions that will undoubtedly be part of future discussions about politics.  Vivek, of course, is jumping into the conversation about New York politics because, as a capitalist who made a lot of money in New York and is now planning to be the governor of Ohio, he is uniquely positioned to have a debate with what the political left thinks of as a bright young star, in Mamdani.  But critics of communism and socialism expect a more visceral hatred of Mamdani than Vivek shows to people.  I’ve had the fortune of knowing Vivek personally, and this is true for most people: bright individuals who can debate any topic with anyone don’t have to get defensive every time a challenge arises to their belief system.  So Vivek can have a very cerebral discussion about Mamdani without getting too upset that the trend in Democrat politics is a radical leaning towards far-left, Marxist policies.  And most people have been taught, through years of Cold War policy from the over 50s crowd and onward, that we are to approach communists and socialists with anger, like they are the invaders we saw in the movie Red Dawn.  Vivek comes from a much younger generation, and that’s a good thing because, in the post-Trump years, many things are going to change.  People are realizing right now, and with Mamdani, just how dangerous all the socialist instruction in our public schools has been.  And most young people have had extensive exposure to it through public education. For too many voters, this issue has snuck up on them, evoking a lot of fear in people like Mamdani.

I have been warning everyone about the problems with socialism for many years.  And while public schools don’t overtly have classes teaching Marxism in general, it is implicit in the background of almost everything done in the teaching process, including in kindergarten, when the teacher instructs you to share your toys with your neighbor.  And that everyone is equal.  Vivek Ramaswamy’s approach to the communist problem is to debate it, because he can.  Not to fight them in the streets or call them names.  There are many young people, like Zohran Mamdani, who will be able to utilize social media to capture the attention of young voters who lack opportunities to surpass their parents’ achievements.  For many young people who can’t afford to buy their own home or have children, life seems unappealing and not worth fighting for.  While most MAGA supporters of today’s politics likely have their own car, their own home with lots of property, maybe even a boat.  Several kids.  A pretty good life, and something that they want to defend from people who want to take all that from them.  Vivek understands that the under-50 crowd has vastly different motivations and perspectives, and that they don’t feel the need to fight for anything, because, from their perspective, they don’t have much to fight for.  Their minds have mainly been rotted out by the public education experience that taught them all the wrong Marxist things about social equality and the value of private property ownership.  Therefore, portraying our political enemies as revolting figures will not win over new voters, because those new voters essentially share Mamdani’s perspective. 

That’s why the future of the MAGA movement needs to include people like Vivek Ramaswamy and J.D. Vance, who can debate any issue with anyone, anywhere.  And Vivek certainly can, and that is the way to win over the next generation of voters.  If, during the Trump years, the goal was to overcome all the lies that had been told to us by a government that sought global socialism as its governing principle, now the shoe is on the other foot.  It’s not enough to question the government of socialists and to run them out of office.  The problem that J.D. Vance and Vivek Ramaswamy will face with young people is that many of them have to be taught the virtues of capitalism from scratch.  We can’t just hold up Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and tell them to read it.  They need to understand it relative to their thoughts as young socialists who we have let get out of control, rob away their hopes and dreams.  Fighting socialism and communism with the kind of Cold War hatred that we have in the past won’t work on today’s social media.  Capitalism has to be sold to people all over again.  It will help to have a successful Trump administration to point to so that young socialists can see for themselves how much better a capitalist system is than their socialist and communist teachings.  In the world’s plans, they never thought a Trump character would ever hold a position of power, revealing just how powerful capitalism could be.  His election was crucial in many ways at this particular point in history.  But do not assume that the new generation will have a hatred for communism as previous generations in America have.  It’s quite the opposite.  Most young people will have to be taught from scratch why capitalism is so much better, because they certainly haven’t been taught why in school, or entertainment, or their social groups. 

The shock everyone has felt at hearing Mamdani utter outright communist sentiment, wanting to be the mayor of New York City, what many think of as the capitalist capital of the world, is the reality that this new generation of young people is more prone to accept elements of Marxism because it’s all they know.  And for many, this issue snuck up on them as they realized how much of modern-day social media is dominated by young people who are just like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and now Mamdani.  We say today they won’t and can’t win elections if this is what the Democrat Party is.  However, this is what the Democratic Party has been for quite some time.  They just hid it all behind a social mask, but it’s always been there, and now that people see it and hear them talk, the realization they have toward it is hatred.  However, be cautious not to demonize all these young socialists, as the goal is to win over that generation in a competitive race for the minds of a new generation.  And understand that capitalism has to be sold to them because they were not taught its value, and they do not have a natural love for it.  It will take someone like Vivek Ramaswamy to explain it to them and show them why it works.  They can’t expect just to read Adam Smith’s book and draw their conclusions.  They will have to be taught, with considerable debate.  And Vivek is just the right mind for all that.  He understands the problem all too well, even as many are just now waking up to it and have been caught off guard.  The next generation in America has to be mainly taught from scratch.  Their minds have been ruined.  And hating them won’t convince them to join you.  We have to earn them to our side person for person. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

The Radicalism of Stephen Colbert: Trying to kill off toxic masculinity as been very expensive and not worth it

There is a much deeper reason that the news about Stephen Colbert being taken off the air is such big news.  Or why ABC is re-thinking some of its daytime programming, such as The View.  There will be numerous television changes because many of these big production companies have been so committed to progressive causes that the financial impact of it is finally starting to catch up to them.  However, in everyday conversation, the real reasons for economic failures have been largely unexplored.  People know they are generally happy to hear that the Trump-hating Colbert is losing his late-night show, and that many of the other late-night hosts are in danger as well, because of the anti-Trump agenda.  Anti-Make America Great Again agenda points are not popular for good business.  And typically, CBS Studios, a division of Paramount Global, the parent company of CBS, would not hesitate to donate $40 million to progressive political causes.  Which is what they are saying the show is losing per year.  It’s not about the money; it’s about the viability of the position.  Losing that much money by putting Stephen Colbert on television every night to attempt to destroy the Trump agenda is more or less a financial contribution to their political platform.  The problem for them is that they spent all that money and committed so many resources to it, yet they were unable to move the political needle at all.  Trump did not end up in jail, or bankrupt as radical liberals had fantasized about.  Instead, six months into his re-elected term, he is doing great, and there are no signs of him slowing down.  And he’s more popular than ever, which is breaking the back of the production companies and their commitment to communism that dates back to the fifties and sixties. 

I know quite a bit about all this as I have been discussing it for years.  For many people, it has been hard to connect the dots.  However, I hosted a major radio show on this topic, specifically centered on the release of the Star Wars movie, The Force Awakens, where Disney killed the very popular character of Han Solo.  A friend of mine and I discussed the poor decision that Disney made in killing off the white hero Han Solo and replacing him with a DEI cast that nobody ever took to.  And now, ten years later, the things we said have turned out to be hauntingly accurate.  After that big, popular show, my friend received an offer to work at Disney for an excellent salary.  I always thought they did it to shut him up and get him off the air.  It is much easier to throw money at controversial voices to contain them somewhat.  My friend loved the Disney Company and hoped to improve it, so more power to him.  I told him there was no saving the company, but he had to try.  But the point of the matter is this: Disney didn’t need to kill off the original heroes of the Star Wars saga.  But they did it anyway, and they did it for purely political reasons.  That’s how radical the hatred in Hollywood is for the Make America Great Again movement, which was emerging openly as Disney was committing to these new Star Wars movies that had a DEI cast, and a killing off of the strongest character of them all, Han Solo, who was made popular by the very popular actor, Harrison Ford.

Now I’ve heard it all before.  People tell me that old Harrison Ford always wanted to kill off the character of Han Solo.  As an actor, he hears all the stories about toxic white masculinity, which he has made a lot of money over the years popularizing.  So, for him, to sacrifice one of his roles to the gods of progressivism is a logical choice.  And he has been saying for forty years that Han Solo should die in the Star Wars series.  However, George Lucas knew better, so they brought him back for The Return of the Jedi, and that character went on to become one of the biggest and most popular in the Star Wars brand.  If Han Solo is on the movie posters, people are excited for Star Wars and the toys that came from that series of movies.  But if the movie posters, as they turned out to be, were just diversity, equity, and inclusion characters, then the public was going to reject the offering.  And in that process, Disney killed the Star Wars brand forever.  I don’t think it will ever come back. The damage was so significant that they begged Harrison Ford to return and make an appearance in the last Star Wars movie, The Rise of Skywalker, but it was too late by then.  And Disney has not been making any more Star Wars movies because their DEI characters were being rejected left and right.  A similar controversy arose on The Mandalorian television show involving Gina Carano.  She turned out not to be a DEI hire, but a conservative fighter, and Disney tried to punish her for it, and it blew up in their faces in terrible ways.  We are seeing entertainment that is not intended to entertain, but rather to convey political messages through popular franchises, and it has turned out to be a disastrous business decision. 

So, the writing was already on the wall when Trump was re-elected, and Disney was already undergoing its assessment process.  They had to learn, as a large entertainment company, that their public would reject them if they did not produce content that they wanted.  Kathy Kennedy should have known better about the Han Solo character.  Her husband, Frank Marshell, should be able to help her understand it.  He produced all the Jurassic Park movies and was the German mechanic in the very popular Raiders of the Lost Ark movie, notably in the fight scene.  He’s not a progressive lunatic.  However, he and Kennedy are fans of Jimmy Buffett and music from that era, so they have a left-leaning side that certainly comes through in their movies.  Kathy, as a woman CEO, went completely DEI and began pushing for female directors and characters.  I mean, they killed off Han Solo, knowing he was the father figure of the series, and they gave his famous spaceship, the Millennium Falcon, to some girl that nobody knew, as if the public would just accept it.  And they never did.  And the franchise took a permanent hit that it will never recover from.  I tried to tell them.  My friend and I laid it all out on that now-famous radio show, so we know the Disney bigwigs heard it and offered us jobs afterwards.  I have had numerous companies offer me money to try to keep me quiet, essentially.  I don’t blame my friend for taking the money.  Many people do, and it can lead to a fulfilling life.  And that is essentially why nobody understands these kinds of things structurally.  But that’s what’s going on with Stephen Colbert, and many others that will follow.  The man-hating Hollywood has not been working, and if they want to survive at all, they will have to make adjustments because the consumer is the boss.  Not the studios, and they have had to learn some tough lessons, too late.  The ramifications of all those bad decisions are only now becoming well-known and prominent.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Showing Courage on Ohio Property Taxation: It was always a socialist game that should have never started

It takes a lot of guts to try to override a governor’s veto, and that is just what Matt Huffman and the House Republicans are poised to do on July 21st, 2025, in Columbus, Ohio.  They have been trying to reform property taxes in House Bill 96 in three key areas, eliminating replacement levies, which often lead to tax increases.  Republicans want to phase them out.  The second thing is that they wish to implement county-level cuts, giving county budget commissions the authority to lower property taxes if the local governments or schools collect more than they need.  Then the third thing is to adjust the 20-mill floor, changing how the formula is calculated to reduce school funding as property values continue to rise, potentially.  DeWine vetoed these parts of the bill, arguing that they’d create enormous problems for schools by disrupting funding stability.  It takes a lot of guts for Huffman and other Republicans, including the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, to stand behind these reforms and push for a 60-vote majority.  It will be close.  If the House can get it over to the Senate, the Senate has the votes, so it really will come down to whether Republicans dare to part with DeWine and override him as they should.  Many people talk tough on the campaign trail, and this is one of those times when real courage is needed.  It would be beneficial if Republicans could step up and take the lead at this critical juncture.  Many people would take pride in a good government headed in the right direction.  Because what DeWine is protecting is loaded with bad government misery that is headed for reform regardless.  There is no stopping the reforms to private property that are going to take place. 

I feel like everywhere these days, I have to say it, and there are a lot of people who don’t think about these things very much who don’t want to hear it.  However, I’ve been pointing it out for years, so the road to this July 21st vote is a very long one.  And it’s just the start of many things to come.  The next governor, Vivek Ramaswamy, whom I had the chance to discuss this very topic with just a few weeks ago, is looking at major reforms on private property taxation.   President Trump is discussing the same concept, namely, the elimination of private property taxation all together.  It will take several years to get there, but that’s where the current sentiment is headed.  And people like Mike DeWine, who have been a part of building that old system, know that it will disrupt the way they envisioned funding for government and services.  However, those old trends are what have put us in our current budgetary situation.  We are going to have some tough discussions, just as we are currently with the Federal Reserve.  A group of independent bankers can’t be allowed to strangle billions of dollars of opportunity cost out of our economy just to protect lenders’ profit margins, when the growth potential of reform could generate so much more than the old static measures.  For those who think that punishing property ownership is the way to fund the level of government we may want as a society, it essentially comes down to choice: do you trust the free market, or the minds of humanity to impose burdens to pay for government services, such as school funding?  For DeWine, he’s just never going to be ready to admit that years and years of socialism are behind the creation of property tax penalties to pay for public education.  And, of course, the teachers’ unions control that entire industry, leading to cost overruns that our out-of-control local governments must deal with, leaving behind expensive chaos.

So you can’t help but talk about socialism, communism, and Marxism in general when we discuss how taxation against private property came into our culture to begin with, because we have gone through a period where Democrats and soft shelled Republicans didn’t want to believe to what level Karl Marx influenced legislative policy making going back to the beginning of the last century.  Much of the American expansion period, from 1850 on, saw a significant influx of European socialists who entered the country and introduced their Karl Marx-inspired ideas, which ultimately infected our free enterprise system with penalties against private property.  And it has gone on for so long that we just assumed that’s the way it has to be.  However, this has led to runaway costs, as we have seen in public schools currently, and penalties against those who own property, as they pay more for the same services than, say, an apartment dweller who requires far more tax services, far more than they pay.  It’s a very unfair system that undermines the premise of private property, destroying the American idea, and it was baked into all the progressive taxation policies that came with the creation of the Fed in 1913, a mistake at its inception that has only worsened over time.  There are old politicians, like DeWine, who have carried these mistaken ideas throughout their entire political life, and they are trying to preserve them for all kinds of unhealthy reasons.  However, the temperament lies in reforming that basic concept. 

Of course, what would replace these revenue devices would be a use tax of some kind, as well as sales tax in general.  However, that relies on the market’s growth mechanisms, similar to Trump’s tariffs.  People were against those for the same reason, and only now, a few months into his second term, are people beginning to see the logic, fruitfully.  After a few years of Trump, many significant economic developments will become a reality that people cannot see now.  Yet, as with the trend on private property, we should incentivize people to own as much private property as possible.  The taxes on it are part of a socialist scheme from the beginning that was always part of the plan to grow government.  There is no way to determine the correct funding model for public schools if property owners bear the burden for the benefit of those who can’t afford property.  It’s a wealth redistribution scam that’s baked into the policy of collecting taxes to grow government in ways that nobody can reliably control, because it’s a tax against the few for the needs of the many.  And it takes away the incentive to invest and create.  What we know now is that encouraging growth would generate significantly more revenue through optimism, as opposed to the current system of oppression.  In short, take the socialism, communism, and Marxism out of the legislative process, and the economy works far better, and at that point, you can see what your actual revenue stream would be, and can make much better decisions for how to construct society, such as elements of school funding and per-pupil budget needs.  With the system as it is, we can’t even have the discussion.  There is a significant chance for the Ohio House to take a bold, Trump-like action.  However, the trend, regardless, is working against old politicians like DeWine and is moving away from penalizing private property ownership.  Whether that happens on July 21st, 2025, or at a later time, the taxation of private property is headed for significant reform and disruption of the current methods.  It would be better sooner if people could find the courage.  But eventually, it’s happening anyway, and there’s nothing anyone can do to stop it.  Because it never should have been created in the first place.

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707

Banks Trying to Destroy Private Ownership of Businesses: The ruthlessness is in the rules, and is purposefully anti-America

It is a case that could have been taken off the script pages of the Yellowstone television show, but I have had a front row seat to it, and I’m sure there will be years of legal action in the aftermath, because there are so many bad things done by so many bad people that shaking hands and walking in separate ways at the end of it just won’t be possible.  But to answer a question I have had about why there is not enough private ownership of businesses these days, and to understand why so many companies have sought the shelter of being publicly traded, or to hide behind large staffs of a board of directors to shield themselves from the pain of private enterprise, my question has been are the banking practices we see today purposefully predatory, and the confirmation couldn’t be more explicit than with a Wells Fargo case I know about regarding a tech company in Northern Cincinnati.  I have spoken to everyone about this case, and it seems that a large bank like Wells Fargo would not intentionally engage in practices that are meant to essentially harm a business and bleed it dry for their own interests. This appears to break every fiduciary assumption that the finance industry would consider itself bound by.  However, I’ve spoken to people who have served on the Federal Reserve and been CEOs of local community banks, and they weren’t fazed by what they were hearing about big bank practices.  Which alarmed me, because what would normal people do in these kinds of situations, who own companies targeted by hostile banking practices to force them to sell so that they could take over the carcass for a value only they understand.  As I drive around Ohio, and see a lot of businesses that are now empty, how many of them fell that way through mismanagement, and how many were forced into that condition by banking policies that have written into their financial markets an absolute hatred of capitalism and a desire to punish private ownership through lending practices that were inspired by Karl Marx and has the same level of radicalism behind their management practices.

This is a more literal view of how society is actually structured. Rules just hide the bad guys from the world

It’s the same kind of logic that we’re currently experiencing with Trump in the White House, where the Fed has interest rates set between 4.25% and 4.50%.  The cost to the American economy is approximately $600 billion per 1%, so Trump would like to see interest rates lowered into the 2% range to stimulate the economy by over a trillion dollars.  However, the Fed doesn’t care about the people who vote; they represent the interests of their banks. With Trump’s red-hot economy, they want to make money off their investments, so the policy is set for them, not for the good of the country.  They are concerned about their long-term bondholders, the banks in general, and other creditors and lenders.  Nobody is saying they shouldn’t be making money off the services they provide, but in the case of the Fed, they have rates set too high to maintain their control over the market.  In their view, presidents come and go and can kiss babies and pat dogs on the head at holiday parades.  So long as they stay out of their breadbasket and keep financial management separate from political considerations.  And baked into all that is how many of these banks have become overtly corrupt, and even evil.  And feel untouchable to any political scrutiny.  I’ve read about plenty of stories, but with this Northern Cincinnati case, I had not yet seen it firsthand.  And what I have witnessed has been outrageously corrupt. 

Before you can have this, you have to stop the parasitic banking practices that are destroying everything in the background.

In the case of the tech company in Northern Cincinnati, the bank fell sideways with a CFO there and they essentially targeted the privately held company for collapse by withholding funds the company needed to run its business, audaciously insisting on spending huge fees onto a consulting firm that works for the bank to essentially steer the company over a cliff to destruction, not caring at all what might happen to all the customers that company had in the process.  And no amount of logic could be talked into those characters because they had a preconditioned outcome in mind that certainly did not support privately held businesses.  And that was when the policies of the big banks themselves were implemented to make it very difficult to maintain private ownership of anything, regardless of the company’s size.  Smaller community banks are, of course, the way to go if you can get them.  However, they have tight financial markers as well and are very prone to risk, so it’s another situation where monetary policy is one of the most significant barriers to inspiring business growth.  There is a hatred of private ownership that large institutions are keen to destroy for very political reasons.  The Fed person I spoke to thinks it’s just a fair in love and war condition.  However, as I have been involved in the story, it’s a clear case where the menace is written into the policymaking.  And suppose any society wants to have an excellent economy with private ownership taking risks to create jobs. In that case, there must be policies in place to prevent parasitic banking practices, which is the case with this Northern Cincinnati company and a large institutional bank.  They feed off risk takers in ways that punish the practice. 

When I tell the story to people, they assume, just as we do with the Federal Reserve, that the participants understand what they do to people, and that if they did, they would care.  That nobody is that overtly evil.  Yet, as interest rates are set to feed off the masses, a barrage of easy money, essentially, most people working in finance are not the kind who like to work very hard at anything.  So, they are parasitic in their fundamental work ethics and don’t like scrappy, privately held companies, because they don’t treasure such freedoms and feel perfectly justified in abusing their power for personal gain under the guise of following the rules.  The rules they created were designed to make it easy for them to be parasitic lenders.  And if the carcass dies, they sell it off and move to the next target.  And in that way, there is a Marxist fantasy that is unleashed in their hatred of private enterprise, which is ruthless.  And very scheming.  And all too common, which we don’t even know how to talk about, until we experience a case like this for ourselves.  In the case I’m talking about, I don’t think the bank understood the mess it was getting itself into, and many of the bottom feeders involved in these kinds of things, who are professional parasites, clearly underestimated the situation and are going to feel a lot of pain they could have avoided.  But to answer the question as to the ruthlessness of it, it’s evident that its quite common and that most companies undergoing the same level of hostility by a banking partner would never survive and that if we truly want an excellent economy in Ohio, and in the nation, that we are going to have to bust up these financial institutions with their anti-American, and anti-private ownership radicalism.  Most companies lack the kind of tenacity that has been present in this case.  But the question about methods couldn’t be more obvious.  And that there is a financial institution’s aversion to privately held companies is not something they want to protect, just as the Fed is guilty of setting interest rates at the cost to society in general, in defense of their interests.  Their approach is short-sighted and lazy.  And purposefully ruthless to feed the essence of their natures, which is the question before us.  What do we do with such people when we clearly can’t have them pacesetting our economy?  Because, if left to their own devices, they will maliciously destroy everything they touch. 

Rich Hoffman

Click Here to Protect Yourself with Second Call Defense https://www.secondcalldefense.org/?affiliate=20707