WBD413 Audio Transcription
Fighting for Bitcoin in Congress with Aarika Rhodes
Interview date: Friday 22nd October
Note: the following is a transcription of my interview with Aarika Rhodes. I have reviewed the transcription but if you find any mistakes, please feel free to email me. You can listen to the original recording here.
In this interview, I talk to Democratic congressional candidate Aarika Rhodes. We discuss financial literacy and education, universal basic income, and broken incentives in our political system.
“I would do a great job in Washington and I would serve my constituents well, but I’m also at a disadvantage in Washington because I’m not corrupt.”
— Aarika Rhodes
Interview Transcription
Peter McCormack: … so, it was something unique your dad gave you?
Aarika Rhodes: My dad gave me a unique name, Aarika Rhodes. I went a month without having a name, because my parents couldn't agree on a name.
Peter McCormack: A month?
Aarika Rhodes: A whole month. And then finally they agreed on Aarika Simone Rhodes.
Peter McCormack: Wow. My son went a day without a name.
Aarika Rhodes: What did you name your son?
Peter McCormack: Connor.
Aarika Rhodes: Oh, that's a good name.
Peter McCormack: So, what happened is, I wanted to call him Axel after Axel Rose, and my ex-wife wanted to call him Bailey, which I didn't like. She didn't like Axel, she thought it was horrible; I thought Bailey sounded like a dog. So, we didn't have a name for a day. And my dad's Irish and his grandma's Irish, so he had an Irish surname, which was McCormack, so we went with Connor, Connor McCormack.
Aarika Rhodes: Nice.
Peter McCormack: Yeah.
Aarika Rhodes: I hope to be a mum one day.
Peter McCormack: It's got its own challenges!
Aarika Rhodes: Yeah, I'm a teacher, I definitely know about that!
Peter McCormack: What age do you teach?
Aarika Rhodes: So, I teach K through 6th grade science, but I literally taught kinder through 12th grade. But I'm in my sweet spot. I love teaching science to elementary school kids; it's the most extraordinary thing.
Peter McCormack: I can imagine.
Aarika Rhodes: Yeah, because you just see the "A-ha" moments and their eyes light up and they get really excited about all the different experiments.
Peter McCormack: Burning magnesium; do you set fire to magnesium?
Aarika Rhodes: No!
Peter McCormack: That was always my favourite thing in science, just burn magnesium.
Aarika Rhodes: No, we don't do that!
Peter McCormack: So, 6th grade is what age?
Aarika Rhodes: 11, 12, depending on their birthday.
Peter McCormack: Okay, so that's my daughter's age.
Aarika Rhodes: Okay, so you have two kids?
Peter McCormack: Yeah. I've got a 17-year-old son and an 11-year-old daughter.
Aarika Rhodes: Nice.
Peter McCormack: Each with their own unique and individual challenges, both age-based, gender-based, attitude-based, personality-based. They are completely individual and I love them both.
Aarika Rhodes: That's good, and let them be their authentic self.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, that's something I've learnt. You know what, you mature as a parent. I was 25 when my son was born and I was 31 when my daughter was born and I think I was too young to be a parent at 25; I wasn't ready. I didn't have the maturity yet to raise a child and teach them right. I probably still don't! So, you love being a teacher?
Aarika Rhodes: I do love being a teacher. It's actually why I've filed to run for Congress, is because when the pandemic hit, even though we knew this, but it really exposed the disparities in education. Because, when we had to go on Zoom, we saw so many kids that didn't have access to internet, didn't have the devices, that weren't able to have a learning environment that set them up for success. And, when you see those disparities, to me, I can't just sit back and accept that.
So, it's a huge reason why I filed, and I really want to serve on the Education and Labour Committee in Congress. And more importantly, not more importantly but equally important to that, I've really seen that a lot of kids don't have personal finance and so something that's very near and dear to my heart is teaching financial literacy, making that mandatory in school; that when kids graduate from high school, they understand financial literacy and they're able to make wise investments and just know how the banking system works, they know how to budget, save and all those kinds of things.
It was heart-breaking to hear high school students, seniors, didn't even know the difference between a debit and credit card. I wrote a whole article about it to Bitcoin Magazine.
Peter McCormack: Bitcoin Magazine, yeah.
Aarika Rhodes: And I really appreciate them also caring about financial literacy, because it was just the craziest thing to me, that they couldn't even decipher the difference.
Peter McCormack: Well, there's a lot to unpack, even on that starting bit, and I'm really glad to meet you. I've been following you on Twitter and I saw your engagement with Jack Dorsey, and I just knew I had to try and find a way to talk to you. A lot to unpack there, especially let's start with the pandemic stuff. I know there's that disparity; we had the same in the UK. I'll tell you another thing it taught me, is much higher respect for teachers, and I'll tell you why.
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you.
Peter McCormack: I specifically remember that first morning, being sat down with my daughter and we were doing maths. And as I said, she's 11, and I was trying to help her and talk her through this, and this is a one-on-one; I'm not in a class. How many kids in your class?
Aarika Rhodes: Up to 30.
Peter McCormack: Up to 30. So, this is a class of one, and I was trying to explain it to her, and then she wasn't getting it and I got frustrated, and then she ended up getting annoyed and I got annoyed, and then it just broke down. I was like, "Jesus!" and you have to do this with a class of 30. I think we massively undervalue a lot of people in society, and one of those is teachers, massively undervalue them.
Aarika Rhodes: I agree.
Peter McCormack: There's a really interesting thing within the Bitcoin community, where a lot of bitcoiners talk about home schooling, because they struggle with ideas around the topics which are being taught as well, which is another thing I want to ask you about, about the pressures you or your colleagues have within the system. But let's talk about the disparity, because my kids had to work from home, they had a computer each, they had a laptop connection. I work from home, so I could be there and look after them. We had a fine scenario.
I know in the UK, there were additional problems, not only of having devices and connections, parents who maybe had to work, also parents who actually relied on the school lunches as a meal. That was a new meal they had to provide, and already financially struggling, had to think about that as well. There's a footballer in the UK, called Marcus Rashford, who campaigned to ensure that there were meals being provided, that as well. So, I'm aware of the topic. Talk to me about your experience as a teacher doing this?
Aarika Rhodes: Yeah, so a lot of the things that you mentioned is why I was really frustrated that none of our leaders were advocating for these things. And just because kids can't vote doesn't mean that they don't deserve representation, so it really set me off. So, with the food, for example, that's one really good example. Another one, we, as educators, are mandated reporters, so if there's child abuse happening in the home, no one's there to detect it. And there's all these different things that just kind of got swept under the rug during the pandemic, and I feel like kids need a champion in Washington.
Again, the internet, we had kids, high school and college kids, trying to study in a parking lot so they could access Wi-Fi. You had parents that had three or four kids in the home, maybe with one or two devices. The internet's slow, it's cutting in and out. It just shows that we just took a dynamite, threw it in our education system, and widened the achievement gap. And so, the kids that couldn't afford the nannies to sit there, or have a mum that sacrificed her job to be able to sit with their child; not every family can do that. And so, we need to make education a priority, and that's why I'm running.
Peter McCormack: Okay. Kids are now back in school?
Aarika Rhodes: Yes.
Peter McCormack: Okay. So, what has the impact been on the lockdown on those kids. Have kids been able to get back up to speed? Is there now an educational disparity that you're dealing with; what's that like?
Aarika Rhodes: Writing. I think the writing is significant. I've seen kids that can't even write a complete sentence. There's a lack of literacy, being able to read at grade level. Many kids are reading well below grade level, which was already a problem. I would say just pretty much every content area, there's relapse in that, and just critical thinking. I think just being able to think about things deeply, or to ask meaningful questions, we're not seeing like we would see before.
The social or emotional aspect of just socialising; think about kindergarteners who started their education on Zoom, and they didn't have those social interactions. I mean, people underestimate the value of recess. Recess is a very important part of a child's development, so they started school on Zoom with no social interaction, and now there's a dependency on their parents, so they don't even know how to be self-efficacious.
So, we've a lot of work to do in education because of the pandemic, and I do think that kids should be in classrooms.
Peter McCormack: Within the classes that you were teaching, were you already aware of wealth disparity pre-pandemic, so you know those who were from maybe more economically-challenged situations?
Aarika Rhodes: Yes.
Peter McCormack: That disparity, were you able to close that gap within the school; or, is that something that's naturally going to exist?
Aarika Rhodes: I think if we don't modernise our education system, it will continue to widen and exist.
Peter McCormack: Okay, so this is a real problem. Just out of interest, did you always want to be a teacher?
Aarika Rhodes: No.
Peter McCormack: How did you end up becoming a teacher?
Aarika Rhodes: I did not want to be a teacher. What ended up happening was I met a woman who was an on-set tutor, and she was telling me about it and I was like, "Wow, what a sweet gig between jobs, or just a part-time job situation". And so, I ended up deciding to pursue that. I could pursue whatever endeavours I wanted to do at the time. And, I went in to do my observation hours, I went into a classroom of fifth graders that were reading at a first- and second-grade level. Immediately I thought, "What an injustice. How do we have fifth graders, about to go to middle school, that cannot read? That's just not okay to me".
So, I switched my major and I have devoted my life to education ever since. I chose to focus on science education, because I think for me, I'm a forward thinker. I felt like that's going to be the jobs of the future. Critical thinking is just an imperative and it's the one discipline where you can engage kids of all ages, backgrounds and lift them up in all the other content areas; because, if you're fun and dynamic and do hands-on, kids love the class. So, you can slip in the reading, you can slip in the maths and they'll take to it.
I ended up getting to fast-forward; I got my Masters in Curriculum Instruction with an emphasis on science. I was Teacher of the Year by the LA Clippers in 2012, and I write curriculum that bakes in all the other content areas, puts pressure on the importance of hands-on learning and project-based learning, and inspires kids to think innovatively and to persevere and have grit. So, instead of doing a lab or a lesson, it's designed to make them struggle and to not quit and to think, "Well, what's another way you can do it? Well, that's not working, try another". So, it's always making them fail, essentially.
Peter McCormack: Build resilience.
Aarika Rhodes: To build resilience, to be able to pull themselves out to get to the final result. That is why I think I've been very successful in the teaching profession, and I hope to bring that to Washington.
Peter McCormack: That's in opposition to the participation trophy culture that's built around youngsters. I remember my son's first football tournament, where no team was allowed to win. I thought it was bullshit.
Aarika Rhodes: It's not the real world and I do push back against that. I understand why people are for that, but that's not the real world.
Peter McCormack: Okay, so in terms of the curriculum you build for the students, what is the framework you have to operate within to build it?
Aarika Rhodes: That standards?
Peter McCormack: Yeah.
Aarika Rhodes: So, you start with either, depending on the school, the California State Standards, or the Next Generation Science Standards. So, you use that as your base and then you dream up, depending on the school you're at, curriculum that will elevate those standards to make sure that kids are proficient within those standards.
Peter McCormack: Is there much pushback, or challenge, with regards to the standards that are given to you? I'm obviously aware at the moment, particular areas of biology are an important area of debate right now with regards to gender; that's a particular subject.
Aarika Rhodes: Yeah, it's been brought up, but because I teach at the elementary level, I don't experience it. Maybe a middle-school teacher would, and I think we have to have these conversations. I think everything should be age appropriate. And when a kid's development is appropriate and when they're able to digest and understand what is being talked about, that's my personal and professional opinion. But it's not something that I'm addressing currently. But parents, I'm sure, are concerned about those things.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, I mean within the education system in my kids' schools, that is a topic at the moment that's up for discussion.
Aarika Rhodes: Well, how do you feel about it?
Peter McCormack: It's a really interesting one. I think it's important to teach about sex and gender and talk about the variety of, how do I put this? The variety of genders that people may feel that --
Aarika Rhodes: They identify with?
Peter McCormack: -- they identify with and embody, and I think that's important to do. The one place I think is a step too far is in one of their classes, I think it's PSE or PSH, I can't remember what it is, there was an explanation that for me, confused sex and gender. So, they had a body of a boy and a body of a girl, but rather than say boy or girl, it was "person with penis, person with vagina". I thought that was a step too far.
Aarika Rhodes: Okay, I've never seen that.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, that was because they didn't want to offend anyone who identified as a different gender. And it's not to say that it shouldn't be discussed; I think it should be discussed, but it went a step too far for me without it being explained, as a parent.
Aarika Rhodes: And for schools having parent nights, parent education, where you can have that dialogue maybe before it reaching a child, but that's the discussion of the school. The school should extend that conversation like, "Hey, what are your thoughts?" take surveys, take polls, "Where are you comfort levels?" Because, there also has to be support at home too. I like to think of teaching as a team. Let's say you are a parent and I had your children; we're a team now.
Peter McCormack: I agree.
Aarika Rhodes: So, I think that we need to be able to have that dialogue and bring parents along the way; because if you don't, then when you do present something that they may not feel comfortable with, now it causes more problems and it could have been prevented, had there been pre-dialogue before introducing X, Y and Z.
Peter McCormack: Well, that's why I strongly dislike any aggression towards teachers, and I've seen a lot of stuff on Twitter recently, where there's been clashes between teachers and parents. And I'm thinking, these people are spending more time with your children, they're one of the most important parts of their education, you need to have a relationship. I have a relationship with the teachers of my children, and I fundamentally agree with you.
So, you're obviously entering down the Bitcoin rabbit hole, which is cool; welcome!
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you.
Peter McCormack: There are a range of views of people within Bitcoin. There are a lot of people within Bitcoin who believe in smaller government, or small government; and some, no government. There is a range and there is a spectrum. I personally am for smaller government where possible, but I am not someone for no government, but I believe in government accountability, and I think we're in a very bad place with the role governments are playing at the moment, whether it's the UK, US or wherever.
What do you believe the role of government is yourself; what is your personal thesis?
Aarika Rhodes: That's such a big question.
Peter McCormack: I know, sorry!
Aarika Rhodes: But to say it simply, I think the government's responsibility is to represent and serve people. And I think what's happening is that the government's not listening to the needs of people, and therefore people are not seeing a change in their daily lives, and that's where a lot of the friction is coming from.
When I was campaigning, during the Democratic primary, for Andrew Yang, I was in Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and so I went to all parts of the country, very far right to the very far left. And, you realise that everyone wants the same thing. They want autonomy over their life, they want to put food on the table, they want their kid to get a good education, they want to not have to live paycheque to paycheque, healthcare, etc.
So, what we're seeing in government, though, is that their interests and what they're fighting and advocating for are their donors, and it has nothing to do with people; because, the average person doesn't have disposable income to participate in the election process, and to participate actively in the government, they just can't.
So, I feel we need new representation, people that are rational, that can reach up and work across the aisle to find common ground, so we can start to serve American people, to serve our constituents and the people in our country. And I think, if we can repair that relationship, then we won't have so much friction.
Peter McCormack: So, I would imagine that a lot of people that first get into politics would feel like this, and then something goes wrong somewhere. I'm imagining the horse-trading of Washington is what ends up putting people in a position where they maybe can't represent. How do you feel about that?
Aarika Rhodes: That means that they're unprincipled.
Peter McCormack: Of course.
Aarika Rhodes: If someone can get to Washington and they can waver on what they stand for, they weren't principled to begin with, they didn't have morals and values to begin with. And for me, even as a candidate, I have walked away from a lot of big donors, people that have extreme wealth. And I'm like, "You know what, your values don't align with mine. I'll go the longer, harder, moral just way, because that money is not money that I want in my campaign, because I'm principled". My parents raised me to stand for something and not fall for just anything.
I think that's why it's a double-edged sword to be in my position. I would do a great job in Washington and I would serve my constituents well, but I'm also at a disadvantage of being in Washington, because I'm not corrupt, do you know what I mean? We don't get people, the everyday person -- we need to get them involved in the election process and vote and donate and get behind candidates like myself, all these amazing people running. That's how we'll end up changing government. Because even my incumbent, Congressman Brad Sherman, a lot of his money comes from big banks, pawn shops, big corporations --
Peter McCormack: Big banks.
Aarika Rhodes: Big banks.
Peter McCormack: That's why he won't like Bitcoin!
Aarika Rhodes: It's true though! But that's who he's trying to represent. But when you look at my campaign, and you go to FEC filing, it's all individual contributions. We have more individual contributions than he does, from all 50 states, American Samoa, DC and Puerto Rico. And their average contribution is $40, and we have been able to have six figures cash in hand.
So, with that said, when people get to Washington and they change like that, it's because they weren't principled to begin with, and that they seek power.
Peter McCormack: Well, you'd better win.
Aarika Rhodes: I hope so. We're trying! Our team, I'm not a polished person, I'm really just someone that saw some things that I didn't like, and I felt it was my responsibility to do something about it; I've been that way my whole life. And we are working non-stop in order to do that, literally for over a year.
Not to get emotional or anything, but this is our race to lose. I think that the community, which is the San Fernando Valley, is getting behind my race, is inspired by my race, and I think the country has gotten inspired by my race. And I think this is the moment where we can show everyday people can stand up to the Brad Shermans of the world, the big banks, and say, "Enough is enough. The working-class people have a voice too, and we deserve representation. We deserve to not have to be hit with bank fees in a pandemic".
I was dying when I saw how much the big banks made in just bank fees during the pandemic, or politicians making money off the back of the poor, the injustice of it. So, I really think that this is our race to win. We're in a position to win, we're very, very viable. I'm working my butt off to make sure that we pull this off, but it's going to take a coalition of people to decide that they are also fed up and join me. This is a mass movement, and I just feel very confident that we can get there.
I really honestly don't like the fact that he is trying to ban Bitcoin; it honestly pisses me off for a number of reasons: (1) a lot of young people have made this investment; (2) a lot of single mothers have made this investment; (3) a lot of people have pulled themselves out of poverty because of Bitcoin, and you're over there trying to ban it, and I take great issue with that. You never once came to your district and talked to these people and asked them how they feel about it. That's not being a representative. Because, when I go around my district and I talk to people and I casually bring up Bitcoin, and they hear that that's what you're working on; out of all the things to be working on in Washington, that's what you're working on, I take great issue with that.
So, I'm in this fight with the Bitcoin community, and he's going to have to earn it this time. It's not going to be handed on a silver platter. He can have all the big bank money, all the corporate pack money, whatever. We're going to prevail; I really believe that, I just do. And I'm sorry to get on a little rant, but it's time for him to go.
Peter McCormack: Well, it's funny you should say that, because I feel like we're at a moment in time where people have always never really trusted politicians. When I say I believe in democracy, I'm a reluctant supporter of democracy, because I'm usually picking between shit party A, shit party B. But I think the pandemic really shone a lens on what these people stand for.
I mean, I'll give the UK as an example. When we had the lockdowns and the lockdowns started, lots of small businesses went to the wall, lots of people lost their businesses, or had to rack up debts to support themselves. Everybody in government keeps their job. Everybody is protected within government. We're perfectly aware of the massive contracts that went to friends of people in Parliament, we know all of this.
I think we're in this moment in time where people are really recognising the system is fundamentally broken; and not just broken at a political level, but broken because of the media too. But it is fundamentally broken. People need champions and heroes. They need Aarikas who are going to come in and make a difference. So, I think you have a moment in time now to do this.
So my question really for you is, what actually happens in the race? Explain to me, because I'm not from the US, I don't understand US politics as well as I should; I understand you're running for Congress, which is --
Aarika Rhodes: The House of Representatives.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, not the Senate. There's 500 Congress people, are there?
Aarika Rhodes: 400.
Peter McCormack: 400, and 100 in the Senate?
Aarika Rhodes: Right.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, okay. So, you're running to be one of the 400. Does that mean you represent a particular area of California?
Aarika Rhodes: Yes. The California 30th District, which is the west San Fernando Valley, is the seat that I'm vying for.
Peter McCormack: Okay. So, how does the whole process work? Explain to me where we're at. And I want to talk about donors as well. Explain to me where we're at, when the important votes are; explain me this process?
Aarika Rhodes: Okay. So, right now, we are about eight months away from the primary, and it's an open primary, so that means it doesn't matter your political affiliation; if you get on the ballot, anyone can vote for you. That vote takes place on 7 June 2022. So, we need every single person in the San Fernando Valley to vote for Aarika Rhodes.
Then, if we come in one or two, it's the first hot two, so it could be Brad and myself, Brad and another candidate, or myself and another candidate, the top two people out of all the people running, then we'll move onto the general election. And then the general election determines who's going to be the next representative of the 30th district.
Peter McCormack: So, in some ways, you're not really competing against Brad Sherman as much now as the other people on the --
Aarika Rhodes: I am absolutely just competing against Brad, because we're the only one that's the most viable to unseat him.
Peter McCormack: What I mean is, your goal now is to become top two?
Aarika Rhodes: Yes, we have to be top two.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, so right now, whilst you are up against Brad Sherman, you're really also up against anyone else who's on the paper, because you want to be in the top two?
Aarika Rhodes: Right. Technically yes.
Peter McCormack: Technically yes. Is anyone of any substance on the paper yet?
Aarika Rhodes: I'm going to just use data and FEC filing. We have the most money by a lot, and Brad Sherman has, as of today, almost $4 million cash on hand. We have the second highest amount of money cash on hand. No one else even has six figures.
Peter McCormack: So, why is the money so important?
Aarika Rhodes: Because you have to get your name out there.
Peter McCormack: Right, so it's marketing.
Aarika Rhodes: Right, marketing. So, canvassing materials, ads, being able to get on the ballot. Just even to put your bio in the pamphlet, this is not for certain, but from history, we think it's about $20,000. But just to even get your bio in the pamphlet that goes to all the voters is $20,000. I think that's what it is; I'm not sure what the new number is, or how much it's going to cost. So, it's just those expenses that you have to pay for.
But for me, because I'm of the people, a lot of the money that we use, we do good along the way. So for example, we started a lending library programme, which creates a community of readers. So, our campaign will have kids paint them, and we install them in our community. And so, whether we win or lose, something good comes out of it. And we've started different programmes, and we do community events and outreach, just to get people aware of how the election's going, how government works, why they should get involved in our race. So, it's not just throwing up a billboard, or something like that; we actually are trying to educate our voters on why this election is so important. So, a lot of our money has been for that.
Peter McCormack: Okay. One of the things I dislike in politics is the campaigning and messaging of why you shouldn't vote for the other person.
Aarika Rhodes: Why you shouldn't?
Peter McCormack: Yeah, as opposed to why they should vote for you. Now, I know you have to criticise the opposition, you have to point out their faults, but you also need to promote yourself, why you are a brilliant candidate. But I feel like the side which is criticising, it ends up taking over. So, when you watch the Presidential debates, it tends to degenerate into arguments about who is at fault for what and blaming, rather than people saying, "Look, I disagree with him, but these are my policies, this is what I want to do".
How much do you feel -- you're now somebody who's campaigning. How drawn into that process do you feel and how is your approach going to be?
Aarika Rhodes: I've been running since 2020, so over a year, and I would say 1% has ever been about Brad. 99% of it has been about the new vision that we have for our district, the future, what we can be, and showing and modelling what new leadership will look like in our district. I agree with you; if you're going to run for office, it can't just be because you dislike the incumbent, you have to be for something.
I'm for education reform, foster care reform, really meaningfully address the disparities in education, promoting small businesses and community service. I personally feel public servants should also be in the community giving back and doing community service hours. Even if I lose, I would not even get behind a candidate that wasn't clocking in hours in their community. You need to be in the community, you need to know what is happening.
So, most of our campaign is about that, and I think that's why we've taken off in the way we have, because people are seeing a clear contrast between Brad and I, and that's through our actions. So, it doesn't have to be said; it goes without saying, to be honest.
Peter McCormack: Okay. So, big campaign coming for you. But I do want to talk a little bit about Brad Sherman. He appears to be somebody who is now just part of the Washington elite. I don't know a lot about him. The only things I really know about him is he's anti-Bitcoin, which is a problem for me, because I see Bitcoin as a tool, I see it as optionality for people to save and protect wealth and route around the political and banking system. So, that's the only thing I really know about Brad.
But tell me a little bit more about him. What's he been good for; has he been good for anything; why do people like him; why do people dislike him?
Aarika Rhodes: So, I've lived in the San Fernando Valley my whole adult life, and I have not really seen him do anything to elevate and improve our community. He really focuses on supporting the people that donate to him. So, if you're not a big donor, a big bank, he doesn't really look after you. And I think people are fed up with that.
I think you said something incredibly important, is that during the pandemic, people paid attention, people woke up and they really saw the importance of government, so I'm glad that you brought that up. And I think that's what's happened in our community, is that people are seeing, "Wait, he doesn't really do anything, he's not really fighting for anything, he's not improving, he's not passing or even fighting for legislation that helps everyday people".
But people speak with their deeds, and if you look at the bills that he's introduced, they're not really for everyday people; that's not really his priority. Whereas for me, when I go into Washington, I know the things I'm going to introduce and I know the things I'm going to fight for, and it's the antithesis of what he's fighting for.
Peter McCormack: So, the bills he's introduced, do they tend do --
Aarika Rhodes: Favour big donors.
Peter McCormack: -- favour ideas of support that industries that he --
Aarika Rhodes: Right.
Peter McCormack: Yeah, okay.
Aarika Rhodes: Like, wanting to ban Bitcoin, for example. Well, who does that help?
Peter McCormack: Banks!
Aarika Rhodes: Exactly, so that's his priority. But we have a lot of issues. Just going back to education, why aren't you fighting for that stuff? We have an Infrastructure and a Build Back Better Bill; I don't even see you talking about it.
Peter McCormack: Well, it sounds to me like the system of donors and donations itself is broken. It feels to me a form of legalised bribery in some ways, like a loose bribe. If you could map bills to donors, it would be very obvious that this isn't in the best interests of the people, this is in the best interests of the bourgeoisie, and that is not correct. That feels like something that should be reformed itself?
Aarika Rhodes: Oh, yeah. And the thing is, and I've said this so many times on the campaign trail, it's not the sexiest thing to run on, but campaign finance needs to take precedent, because our government's corrupt in that sense. The fact that even me, as a teacher, thinking about, "How do I raise $1 million?" is insane.
I even had a thought, I was like, "Maybe once we hit this $1 million goal, maybe then we just stop asking everyday people for money, and win it just off $1 million to show that you don't need $150 million, $20 million for a race". And if you lose, where does all that money go? It's just so maddening, because I genuinely want to serve and the fact that the money piece is just such a stressful part of it really underscores why we need the campaign finance.
So, something that I'm for on my campaign, two policies that I'm very for is ranked-choice voting, so we're not voting between two evils, etc; and democracy dollars. Democracy dollars basically gives every American citizen $100 that they can put into whatever candidate that they want to. So, now that allows someone, like a teacher, a bus driver, an engineer, a nurse, whatever to be able to properly participate in the election process. So, it's not the big donors that are having the say; it's everyone that gets a say, and it makes it -- we're American and this is a part of what we do.
I also think that we should shorten how long you can campaign for, because a year and a half, that's a long time to be campaigning for votes. I think that we might have to restructure that time.
Peter McCormack: Well, you've also got a job to do, whilst he's a full-time politician.
Aarika Rhodes: I work full time as a teacher. I get up at 4.00am.
Peter McCormack: 4.00am?
Aarika Rhodes: I do. I've been doing it for a year now. That's probably why I have bags!
Peter McCormack: There are no bags; you look great.
Aarika Rhodes: But it's literally get up at 4.00am, work for a couple of hours. Sometimes, I'll hit up a neighbourhood and just put door hangers up, or go to coffee shops and talk to everyday people, and then go to work. As soon as I get off work, we go door-knocking, or phone-banking. Up until 9.00pm legally is when you have to stop. And then, there's another two hours of just responding to my emails and constituents, etc.
The fact that I've done all of that while working a full-time job and we're this viable underscores how badly I want change. No one puts themselves through this. I was literally door-knocking one day, we were going for so long, my feet were so swollen, and I was like, "Just 10 more doors, 20 more doors, because it's for the next generation". I was like, there's so much riding on this and I don't want to get to the end of this and lose and say, "I wish I would have knocked on that one more door".
So, we're literally doing everything and anything we can to win this. This is, I think, the most important race of 2022, because it is David versus Goliath; it is this guy that loves and wants to keep power, against this teacher who really wants and loves change and needs that for her future kids I don't have yet, my students. I need them to see this, I need them to see this win, I need them to know that if they don't like something, they can do something about it and do it the moral just way, and that it is possible.
Our whole campaign has been, literally from day one, people saying, "You're never going to beat him. He's cutthroat, he's bullish"; watch. We've come this far and we're showing that it is possible. If people can just help us get there, we can do it. Sorry, I get very passionate.
Peter McCormack: No, you should. Good God, it's infectious! It's infectious, because this is what you want, this is the kind of passion you want to represent you. Politicians should represent the constituents; that is their role. It's not to represent big business, it's not to represent the elites; it's to represent the people. So, your passion is infectious and I want you to win, absolutely want you to win.
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you.
Peter McCormack: How much do you need to raise?
Aarika Rhodes: $1 million.
Peter McCormack: $1 million.
Aarika Rhodes: By January.
Peter McCormack: That's a target?
Aarika Rhodes: We have to raise $1 million by the end of January.
Peter McCormack: Why do you have to?
Aarika Rhodes: Because, we need to be able to put in place everything to get out the vote.
Peter McCormack: Okay, but it's a target. Like, if you hit $900,000, it doesn't mean you can't run?
Aarika Rhodes: It makes it harder. We did the maths. We don't need what Brad Sherman has; he's always going to have more money than us. We just need the $1 million to make sure we can finish executing our path to victory. So, when we calculated all the things that we need in order to make sure that people know that they have a choice this primary, it ended up equalling $1.1 million. We've raised almost $200,000; we have a little over $100,000.
Peter McCormack: Over what period did you raise $200,000?
Aarika Rhodes: Over a year, but Q3 was big for us. I think the Bitcoin community, when we took a stance, you guys definitely came in and supported, thank you so much, and I will ever be grateful and loyal, just FYI, so that was huge for us. But Brad is fundraising, he's campaigning. And, we also need to be able to put X amount of money away to prepare for a debate with him.
Peter McCormack: So, you need, in four months -- is it end of January?
Aarika Rhodes: End of 30 January, yeah.
Peter McCormack: Okay, so basically we're in mid-October; three and a half months, you need to raise another $800,000?
Aarika Rhodes: I know.
Peter McCormack: It's doable.
Aarika Rhodes: You think so?
Peter McCormack: I think so.
Aarika Rhodes: Why do you think that?
Peter McCormack: Well, hopefully some bitcoiners will listen and understand and support. Are you allowed international donations?
Aarika Rhodes: No.
Peter McCormack: I can't donate?
Aarika Rhodes: No, but you can ask people that you know. So, you've got to be a United States citizen. The maximum donation is $2,900; that's the most that someone can donate to a political campaign, at the congressional level.
Peter McCormack: But what about the corporations?
Aarika Rhodes: Those are PAC money that he gets.
Peter McCormack: What does that mean?
Aarika Rhodes: So that means that, a PAC money is where someone creates a PAC and they get a lot of people to donate money to it, and then they put it to a candidate that they like.
Peter McCormack: Like a pool of cash.
Aarika Rhodes: Right, and we don't take that.
Peter McCormack: You don't take PAC money?
Aarika Rhodes: We don't want dirty money. I want to be beholden to people, and that's it and that's all.
Peter McCormack: So, we need to get your message out there. I'm not going to weigh in and say what I understand about Brad Sherman or yourself; you're obviously somebody who's very likeable --
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you.
Peter McCormack: -- and I believe that you represent the best interests of children, which is the most important thing, really. Okay, so let's talk a little bit about financial literacy --
Aarika Rhodes: Let's do it.
Peter McCormack: -- because this is a subject that's important for you, I think this is something that bitcoiners are very aware of, that we're not teaching financial literacy. I've been trying to teach my children about it, because they don't get taught it at school. The only finance they get taught is if they study economics at A Level. I don't know if you know, we have GCSEs and A Levels in the UK, but A Levels is 16 to 18. They might do a little bit of business beforehand, but that's really the economy itself, it's not actual financial literacy.
So, it's something we're all aware of and, look, the bigger question is the entire setup of the school, are we really teaching things that kids require right now; are we teaching them to memorise facts when they've got a supercomputer in their pocket? But practical skills, financial literacy, is probably one of the most important things we should teach people.
Aarika Rhodes: Absolutely.
Peter McCormack: So, talk to me about your passion for financial literacy?
Aarika Rhodes: I think -- I don't think, I know my passion for financial literacy was when I taught 2nd grade many years ago and I felt it was important to teach kids how to save money and how to invest money. So, I took my 2nd graders and I said, "We're going to have a class bank account, and our job is to build this bank account with money and then invest it into something awesome".
So, we read Freckle Juice and then they created a Freckle Juice stand, and we created different types of Freckle Juice.
Peter McCormack: What's Freckle Juice?
Aarika Rhodes: So basically, it's a book and it's this juice to take freckles away. But they created their own, they invented their own, and then we sold it, almost like a lemonade stand, a Freckle Juice stand. And we sold it to parents at the school and other kids, and we did it for three weeks, and we raised a couple of thousand dollars, and we put it in our class bank account. Then we started a class newspaper, and we sold newspapers and we put it in our bank account.
Long story short, by the end of the year, the kids had thousands of dollars in their class bank account, and we charted it, we graphed it, "Okay, so we started here and then we did --", and that's where the maths came in. "Oh, so we started here, so how much more do we need to get to this?" etc, and then we just had a line chart.
At the end, the kids were so mindful of how they invested the money, because it's like they worked hard for it, they earned it, and then that was when I was like, "This needs to be taught in school. This needs to be taught in every school". And today, some of those kids, they're now 9th graders, but they still talk to me about that lesson, the overarching lesson, and they're more conscientious about money. And I think with having Bitcoin and the advancements of blockchain technologies and the mining, I think it's the jobs of the future. I think Bitcoin's going to be the finance of the future, the future of finance.
So, if we're not teaching kids about financial literacy and the future of finance, how are they going to be set up for the jobs of the future, right. I really personally think that Bitcoin's the next big internet; I just think it's a matter of time. And I really encourage lawmakers to take the time to understand. Am I still learning about Bitcoin? Absolutely.
Peter McCormack: We all are always learning about Bitcoin.
Aarika Rhodes: We're always learning. And CJ, Cory, they're always sending me information and all these great articles, and I literally was thinking the other day when I was reading the articles, "God, there's so much economic prosperity that can come from this, it's unbelievable". So, I think that we need to start shifting our curriculum to really look at personal finance, savings accounts, debit, credit cards, retirement, all these different things; and what's happening with the crypto space, what does that mean for your future?
I just think it's something that's not going to go away, and so now we, as adults, have a moral responsibility to educate them on it, and that's just how I feel about it.
Peter McCormack: How were you orange pilled?
Aarika Rhodes: It's funny, because Dennis Porter, he reached out to me, because I guess Brad did a hearing and was going really hard about banning Bitcoin, and he just asked me very casually about my position on it. I said, "Of course I'm not for banning it; why would anyone do that? Is that what he's really doing?" And so, he got me on a Zoom call with all these amazing influential bitcoiners, and they took two to three hours, just walking me through it, from all aspects of this industry. The passion was so inspiring and then they were like, "But you do your own research", and I loved that, "You do your own research and you decide for yourself".
That's how it all evolved after that and then I decided, "You know, our campaign's going to accept Bitcoin", and so we accept Bitcoin. And then I was like, "I love the Lightning Network, this is so cool". And so, I got really excited about Lightning, I'm still learning about it. So, I think it's evolving and I just don't see it going away.
Peter McCormack: And you've been very much welcomed by the Bitcoin community?
Aarika Rhodes: Yes, thank you!
Peter McCormack: How's that been for you?
Aarika Rhodes: It's been awesome.
Peter McCormack: They can be wild sometimes.
Aarika Rhodes: They're nice. I haven't had any bad experiences.
Peter McCormack: Don't raise any Ethereum; they might turn on you!
Aarika Rhodes: I'm so busy, I've only had the time to only look at Bitcoin. And I actually talked to an elected official of mine, Dr Jermaine Johnson, who's the representative of South Carolina. He decided to put Bitcoin on his platform and accept Bitcoin, and I just talked to a mayor that's running in Los Angeles, about putting Bitcoin on his platform as well. And he was super, super open to it. He actually took 30 minutes just on that one topic of why he should consider adding Bitcoin to his platform.
Peter McCormack: Do you know why I think this is important, for another reason?
Aarika Rhodes: Why?
Peter McCormack: There have been some movements across the Republican Party to understand and accept Bitcoin. Ted Cruz has become a supporter of Bitcoin, Governor Abbott has become a supporter of Bitcoin, Cynthia Lummis up in Wyoming. I think it's really important that Bitcoin doesn't become a partisan issue and political fight, because it is something that can benefit, it doesn't matter whether you're conservative or liberal, it can support you.
Bitcoin is great for reducing wealth disparity, and Bitcoin also protects property rights, so it covers both conservative and liberal issues. And I would hate it to become something that was dominated by Republican candidates and therefore, Democratic candidates used it for attack.
Aarika Rhodes: But there are a lot of Democratic candidates that do support Bitcoin, so myself; Matthew, he's running in Ohio; Reverend Wendy, who's running in DC, she's a really good friend of mine, she accepts Bitcoin donations; Will Connor, who's a sitting Congressman, he supports Bitcoin. I think what has to happen is that someone like me, that is liberal, that supports Bitcoin, you have to also understand that there are other things that we care about as well.
Peter McCormack: Of course.
Aarika Rhodes: And I understand, I really am starting to learn the issue with printing money; that's an issue. But I support universal basic income, and that can be very controversial within the Bitcoin community.
Peter McCormack: It is.
Aarika Rhodes: However, I think that instead of just brushing me off, take the time, just like I took the time to understand why Bitcoin shouldn't be banned, and I've really taken to it; well, maybe try to hear where I'm coming from on having a universal basic income as a different social safety net, where capitalism doesn't start at zero. And I don't think that universal basic income should be necessarily at $1,000, because I looked at the federal budget. We literally broke down the entire maths.
There is a place to exchange it with different programmes, implement a VAT tax and do it at a $500 mark, where if we know that the average person lives -- 75% of people live paycheque to paycheque, and most people are one bill away from financial ruin. Well, maybe there is a net benefit for having a universal basic income, coupled with -- and if someone wants to take their UBI and invest it in Bitcoin, great, go for it, do what you've got to do. But let's say you have a single mum that wants to put it for fixing their tyre, or childcare, well then that's their prerogative as well.
I just think that if we want more people to support Bitcoin in government, I think there needs to be a dialogue about the things that we care about and not just, "Oh, she's the worst person ever"!
Peter McCormack: No, listen, you've worked on Andrew Yang's campaign.
Aarika Rhodes: Yes, and he's very big on it, huge!
Peter McCormack: I know. And I'm pretty sure I heard him on Rogan talking about it. Look, I'm not an expert on UBI, so I'm not armed with the necessary information to argue against it now, but I'll talk about the things that concern me about UBI. I'm not against the idea of a social safety net. I believe a civilised society has a social safety net to protect those people in unfortunate circumstances, whether that is economic, or even health circumstances. I am one of those people who wants everyone to be able to have that opportunity in life, to be protected when required. And I think a civilised society does that.
My problem with UBI and where my conflict is as a bitcoiner, and it's one of the basic tenets of Bitcoin, is proof of work. And my worry is that UBI firstly creates a disincentive to work. Also, when I heard Andrew Yang talk about it, I think he was talking about lorry drivers going to lose their jobs through autonomous trucks, and they could get UBI. Now, these truck drivers earn $72,000 a year, or $70,000 a year, and they would be provided with $12,000 a year. So, I don't understand how they can move from being able to support their life from there to there.
Also, I'm not sold on the idea that automation is going to destroy the entire economy; I actually believe people are pretty resourceful and will just move to different services or different ideas. So, I don't have the ammo against it, I'm just not sure if UBI is the correct answer yet; but I'm not against welfare. And let me throw one thing in there. I actually think one of the issues is to do with wealth disparity, that's why we are discussing UBI, and I would hope Bitcoin is going to reduce wealth disparity.
Aarika Rhodes: So, a couple of things. Every trial, every UBI trial has shown over and over again, it pulls people out of poverty. It actually allows people to go into the fields that they're most passionate about, which helps with mental health stress, a decrease in drug use, alcoholism, etc. So, every trial has proven this over and over again; that's just data, that's just the maths, that's just the research.
Second, the child tax credit is a great example. It's already reduced child poverty by half, because now parents have that extra couple of hundred dollars, so where they can afford childcare, or whatever they need. I think that we have to really start being innovative with how we approach social safety nets, and I believe it's more where capitalism doesn't start at zero.
Peter McCormack: I also think capitalism's broken at the moment.
Aarika Rhodes: There are some systematic problems with it, but overall UBI allows people to make different life choices, it allows them to… So, to me, you can't talk about homelessness without talking about foster care system, because every kid, when they age out, a large percentage end up immediately into poverty or in the prison system. Then the cost of serving both of those, just to service that, is millions and millions of dollars.
Well, I'm just trying to use an example. Let's say kids age out of the foster care and now they have a universal basic income, and they're able to go to school and we fix that system, that aging-out part of it. Now we're reducing poverty in that regard and allowing kids to be able to go to school, be able to have their basic needs met, which every person deserves to have, and now we're not dealing with an increase in homelessness and paying all the money needed to address this issue; because right now, what's happening is, we're just throwing millions and millions at the problem and nothing's changing.
So, I think if we start allowing people to not fall into poverty in the first place, I think we'll solve that indirectly, and I think universal basic income does that. When you play Monopoly, when you pass Go, what do you get?
Peter McCormack: $200.
Aarika Rhodes: $200. That's why the game lasts forever, right. So, you have another chance, you can keep going. And not everyone has the social and the financial and relational support to prevent themselves from falling into poverty. And small businesses, talk about small businesses. If more people had disposable income, now we can support our local economy. 67 cents for every dollar goes back into our economy, and that's because people now have the money to go to the ice cream shop or the flower shop, or whatever small business. So, I think we just need to rethink and look at this differently.
Peter McCormack: Yeah. I know it's not a popular idea within bitcoiners, I know that.
Aarika Rhodes: I know it, I know it too.
Peter McCormack: It's something that I'm not just going to dismiss, because other bitcoiners do. I'm going to do my research and I want to understand it as an idea and as a concept. I also want to talk to Andrew Yang. I'm hopefully going to interview him when I'm in --
Aarika Rhodes: Do you want me to connect you with him?
Peter McCormack: I'm already talking to someone over email, and we're trying to make it work. Now, a little nod from you might help, but I think I might be doing it in October while I'm in New York, so fingers crossed.
Aarika Rhodes: He's a great person. Another person I would recommend, specifically about universal basic income, is Scott Santens. He is an expert in it.
Peter McCormack: Well, for me, my biggest question is, well two questions I have is, where does the money come from to do it? Does it come from the money printer, or does it come from taxation? Ideally, it comes from smaller government, shrinking the size of the government. Does everybody actually get it, because there are people who really do not need UBI?
Aarika Rhodes: Well, you can't means test it. So one, it's a VAT tax; two, it's changing how different programmes are not working and then -- so for example, we have programmes. They are showing that they're not pulling people out of poverty, it's not helping or leveraging people; why do we still have those programmes? So I think at some point we say, "This programme's not working, let's try another way", and I think this is what I mean.
Maybe we get away from certain programmes and maybe try this, and the child tax credit has proven at a national level to be advantageous for a lot of families, and it's reduced child poverty by half. So, they can implement a VAT tax, which is on the big corporations, and so that they're paying their fair share in taxes. And instead of doing $1,000, we do a $400 or $500 universal basic income, because when we did the maths in the federal budget, that is implementable without raising the deficit.
Peter McCormack: So, is it universal; is it every man, woman, child?
Aarika Rhodes: No, so it would be 18 years of age, Americans is 18 years of age until the day you expire, so that's where it would start, is at 18 years old.
Peter McCormack: And is it a weekly or monthly?
Aarika Rhodes: Monthly. And the reason why I chose $500 is because it's fiscally responsible, doesn't raise the deficit. Two, the average person falls into financial ruin with an unexpected $400 or $500 bill.
Peter McCormack: And, what is that, 250 million adults in the US? I mean, population 330 million?
Aarika Rhodes: Ish, yeah.
Peter McCormack: 250 million-ish adults. Okay, what's my maths here? 250 million times 500. I'd have to do the maths; what is it? Is that $12.5 billion a month?
Aarika Rhodes: Well, to implement it would be in the trillions, I think, but the return on the investment would be far greater than that.
Peter McCormack: But is that a societal benefit, or an economic benefit?
Aarika Rhodes: Both, because right now, we have a mental health issue, we have parents that can't even afford… As a single woman, one of the reasons why I supported Andrew during the Democratic primary, because when he mentioned the UBI, I had to listen to him a couple of times to really wrap my head around it. I was like, "This is an interesting, different idea. Yeah, that sounds reasonable".
Then I was like, "If I had that, what would I do?" That was my first, "If I had $1,000 a month, what would I do with it?" and my answer was, I would adopt; I would absolutely adopt. I'm super, super single --
Peter McCormack: You want a baby!
Aarika Rhodes: -- and I was like, "I want to be a mum one day". I was like, "I would adopt if I had that". But because I don't have the disposable or the extra income on my teacher's salary, I can't adopt. And there's a lot of kids that would need to be adopted. I also threw this out to some of my other single friends, and they said the same thing, "I would adopt too". So, I think you'd be surprised by what people would spend that extra money on.
Peter McCormack: That's not the bit that worries me.
Aarika Rhodes: Well, you said to not work, do you think it incentivises people to not work, and I don't think that's true. I think the work would just look differently. I think that people would do the things that they cared about. It supports artists, it supports people that have to take care of their loved ones. My grandmother's health is declining and now my mum has to take care of her, so that would help with that.
Peter McCormack: I understand what you're saying, and we in the UK, I'm sure we have a specific benefit, a carer's allowance, etc. My father would have been able to claim. He's in Ireland, they have one there. He could have claimed it for looking after my mum. He didn't, because in the end he said, "I would do this anyway", when she had cancer. So, there are different benefits for that, and I'm not saying everyone would not work. I'm just saying some might not work.
Aarika Rhodes: And that's their choice.
Peter McCormack: Of course. But also, I don't think it replaces certainly salaries that are lost to automation. But my bigger question for it is, and where I will do my study, is where you talk about the examples that every time it's been implemented, it's lifted people out of poverty.
Aarika Rhodes: Improved mental health, drug use has gone down.
Peter McCormack: I'll stick to the economic side for the moment for a specific reason, is that these are micro tests inside a macro economy, so it's raised those people up within that wider economy by giving them that money. What I don't know is, if you scale this to an entire country, it's not a micro improvement within a macro economy, it's the entire country. Do the economics across the entire country work? Does that lead to higher inflation? This is what I don't know.
So, rather than answer it now, because I'm not an expert, and hopefully I'm going to talk to Andrew, I'm going to do some research on it, because I don't want to dismiss it just because other people have, I want to understand it.
Aarika Rhodes: I appreciate that. And, a couple of things. One, last Thanksgiving, I was driving home in my district and there was a line of cars two miles long, and I was like, "What's going on, what's happening in my hood?" So, I pulled over and I started walking up to each car, "Why are you in line?" There were mums in line for diapers, waiting two or three hours for just diapers and baby wipes. If they just had that extra money, they wouldn't be waiting in this line, and then you wouldn't have a local leader trying to figure out how to get diapers to everyone.
I think at some point, we have to just think of humanity, just the injustice of that. And people do work. I volunteer at a food bank every Tuesday. These are people that work full time, but they still have enough to be able to just put food on the table. And so, I just think as a society, as a whole, we should look after one another. I do think that people should work, that's my personal opinion. I think that there is value in hard work, I really believe that.
The child tax credit on a larger scale has proven to work. So, take the other UBI trials I mentioned and just look at just the child tax credit; it's proven to work. And I'm saying this, maybe we think programmes are in place right now, and trying another alternative. If we're doing the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome, that's insanity.
Peter McCormack: Einstein.
Aarika Rhodes: Albert Einstein, my favourite person ever! But it really falls into insanity, and UBI is actually a very conservative idea. They do it in Alaska, they do an oil dividend, and it's wildly popular, and people loved having the cash payments during the pandemic. There were three different cash payments that were distributed.
Peter McCormack: But we are also now in a place of quite high inflation.
Aarika Rhodes: But that's not because of the payments, that's because of the unemployment, the extension that people were getting more off unemployment than they were working. And, we also have to account for --
Peter McCormack: I think it's a range of issues.
Aarika Rhodes: It's a range. But also, the amount of deaths that took place, there's a lot of different things that are happening. So, it's not just because they got free cheques!
Peter McCormack: No, but the economics of it is super important, because if a UBI programme costs trillions a year, I'm not sure what the US GDP is per year; is it like $5.5 trillion? I don't know what it is, I'd have to look it up.
Aarika Rhodes: But we wouldn't be adding it, it would be replacing with other programmes and implementing a different taxation.
Peter McCormack: And this is where I need to do my research, because the most important thing is --
Aarika Rhodes: And I'm not promoting the $1,000. Andrew, when he was running, he was saying $1,000; I'm saying half of that.
Peter McCormack: But the wider point being --
Aarika Rhodes: Oh, can I say one more thing?
Peter McCormack: Yeah, of course.
Aarika Rhodes: It came back to me. Another reason why you have to give it to everyone and not means test it is because millions of dollars go into just, "Who gets it, who does not?" the administration fees. So, we would save millions of dollars just by not having to deal with all that.
Peter McCormack: Of course. So, one of the arguments I've seen for UBI, when it was discussed in the UK, is the administration and the complexity around the welfare, the social care system, and all the different benefits you can claim, if you replace that with a single payment, you eradicate a lot of costs. So, I've heard that argument as well. I do feel like it should have an option, the ability to option out of it. So like myself, I would say, "No, I don't need this, I don't want this, I don't have to have it".
Aarika Rhodes: I just think it just makes everyone in America -- you're an American, it's what you get as an American citizen, do with it what you want.
Peter McCormack: Well, one of the most important things for me is just understand the economics, so what I will do is hopefully talk to Andrew. So, what I'm going to do is I'm going to do my research now, and this is going to be my homework, which hopefully you can mark and hopefully I'll get an A-grade and I'm going to do that.
What other policies are important to you? I know homelessness is a big one for you, and it's a big issue for me. I'm a donor to Shelter in the UK, I'm a big fan of Los Angeles, but it's the first time I've been here since the pandemic. I always enjoyed Venice, going down to Venice Beach. I haven't been down since I got here. I'm preparing to go down and I'm expecting to see a different Venice from last time I was there.
It existed before, but it was manageable, and it was kind of a nice community as well. I mean, the homeless community there and the locals actually had quite a good relationship. I found there was a lot of creativity within the homeless community and a lot of people trying to work and earn money. And yes, there were drug issues, but I've been told it's very different now. So, homelessness is a big issue for me.
There's a really good interview Rogan did. I can't remember if it's with the Governor or the Mayor of Texas, where he talked about the issue of homelessness. Where do you stand on this; I know it's important for you?
Aarika Rhodes: It's very important to me. I mean, it's the number one issue in my district, is the increase in homelessness. And I think we keep putting Band-Aids on the problem and not getting to the root of it. And I believe very strongly that we need to fix our foster care system. And it's like what I mentioned earlier, what's happening is a lot of people, when they age out of the foster care system, they fall immediately into homelessness or prison. So, we address our foster care system, and that transition, that would reduce this population by half.
So for me, we've got to get to the source of the bleeding, and that's where the bleeding is. I think that we need to invest in mental health, and have proper facilities. We can't just keep putting people in a hotel for six months, then they go back on the street unfortunately; that's not solving the problems. And just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Then again, implementing a universal basic income, which would prevent people from falling into poverty in the first place, that's the entire point of it. And our education system. And when I say our education system, not everyone needs to go to college. We don't talk about trade school, we don't talk about entrepreneurship. I think we have to modernise our government.
Let's just take all the different agencies that address homelessness. Why don't we have one centralised system that speaks to each other so we can see how we manage this?
Peter McCormack: This was discussed, and I bring up Rogan again, on Rogan this week between him and, I forget the guy's first name, Shellenberger. He wrote the book, San Fransicko, where he discussed the homeless problem there. He was talking about these agencies that don't talk to each other.
Aarika Rhodes: They don't talk to one another.
Peter McCormack: He also said the central issue is drugs; you have to deal with drug addiction and you have to have consequences. You have to provide support, but have consequences for people as well within that system.
Aarika Rhodes: What did he say the consequences should be?
Peter McCormack: So things like, if you provide shelter and accommodation for homeless people, you might have rooms which are shared, and then individual rooms. And if you want an individual room, you have to be clean and you have to go to the job that's been sourced for you. If you don't do that, the consequence is you don't get a single room. That was just one specific.
Aarika Rhodes: And he thinks that's the way to solve drug use?
Peter McCormack: No, I'm giving you one small part of a two-hour interview, but that was one. He was saying there has to be action and consequences. But the main point being is that, one of the central issues is actually drug use.
Aarika Rhodes: And why do you think people use drugs? Because they're depressed, right, or they're unhappy. I think we live in a time where it's hard to just be happy.
Peter McCormack: But also, sometimes they do it because it's fun.
Aarika Rhodes: I mean, I don't even smoke weed; I don't do any drugs.
Peter McCormack: Well, weed is for junkies.
Aarika Rhodes: I don't know that as I don't do those things.
Peter McCormack: I've done a lot! Not now, but historically, yeah.
Aarika Rhodes: Okay, so I don't know if it's just recreationally and it's just for fun for people. But I do think that, going back to young people, I think there are social pressures, I think that we're out of whack, and we need to find a way to look at how we're approaching child rearing and our school system, and we have so many broken homes now. We have all these different things that are causing people to use drugs.
Vaping is through the roof among young people right now. It's not really talked about. I think social media, the pressures, all these different things. But if we're talking about addressing homelessness, yes, that's an aspect that needs to be addressed. But I think that we have these systems in place that are not working, and so we have to fix the system if we want them to work. And we have elected officials that make money and benefit off a broken system.
Peter McCormack: Fix the money.
Aarika Rhodes: Fix the problems.
Peter McCormack: Yeah. Do you feel at all overwhelmed, because there are so many big, complicated issues here you're talking about; none of them are small? Do you feel overwhelmed by it?
Aarika Rhodes: It keeps me up at night.
Peter McCormack: In those few hours you have spare!
Aarika Rhodes: Yeah, because it's not just one person. It takes a bunch of well-intentioned people to actually care and want to solve the problems. And, there's a lot of money to be made off the poor, and that's the sad thing. There's a lot of money to be made off the poor that they benefit by people waking up on concrete; they benefit from that. And they benefit off women waiting two hours for diapers, or they benefit off the line at the food bin that's an hour long.
It's why getting behind everyday people, that can relate to everyday people, is imperative; it's really important. It's going to take a lot of work. It's going to take years, decades probably, to really fix these things, but we have to be intentional about it.
Peter McCormack: So, not if, but when you win --
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you for saying that!
Peter McCormack: When you win, will you have to give up teaching?
Aarika Rhodes: Yes.
Peter McCormack: You'll have to give up teaching, because you'll have to be in Washington three days a week?
Aarika Rhodes: I don't know the logistics of it, but I know you go back and forth between your district, as you should if you're an elected official, you should come back home.
Peter McCormack: Listen in, Brad, it's not just your buddies in Washington, mate!
Aarika Rhodes: But I want to serve on the Education and Labour Committee in Congress, so I will still be deeply connected. And my signature, part of my platform is my kids have a voice too, which basically states that elected officials are involved in the education process and that they show up at the schools of their youth constituents, that they host town halls for young people.
So basically, let's say your kids had an idea about how to address homelessness and they do a whole town hall and a presentation over it, then we, as the adults and people in the community come and listen to their ideas and really consider it. So, that's something that I want to do, so I'll still stay deeply connected to the school system obviously; that's who I'm fighting for in a lot of ways. I'm fighting for everyone, but that's a near and dear pocket to me.
Peter McCormack: Well, it's really infectious. I just wish you all the best. I want you to win this.
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you.
Peter McCormack: I want you to go and make change, because we don't have enough people in politics who really, genuinely care, who have the right morals, right ethics, who are trying to deal with big problems. We seem to be surrounded by fucking morons.
Aarika Rhodes: I'm nodding!
Peter McCormack: It doesn't matter whether it's the US or the UK, it's very similar problems. There's the occasional person that's likeable, or a person that has an occasional policy that you like, but it is a broken system, with misaligned incentives, which I think the money is at the root of.
Aarika Rhodes: And I think that's why the Bitcoin community is thriving, because they're fed up with his broken system, and because the government will not listen to their constituents and the everyday people. And now, you have this emerging community, this emerging technology, and it's taking over. It's an influential community. I just think that it's because they're not being heard, so it's kind of like, "You know what, we're going to do it our way".
Peter McCormack: And we're going to route around them. Okay, so how do we help you?
Aarika Rhodes: The biggest thing now is to help us reach our $1 million goal by 30 January. You have to be a United States citizen, and the max donation's $2,900. And, if you are in the San Fernando Valley, CA 30, volunteer. We need door-knockers, phone-bankers, and tell every and anyone you know to get behind our campaign.
Peter McCormack: And you've got some support now obviously.
Aarika Rhodes: A lot of support.
Peter McCormack: I'm glad to have you on the show and I want people to hear this. You've got CJ helping you, Cory you've spoken with, Dennis, hopefully Jack Dorsey; Jack, are you listening? You've had some really good support and I think people will listen; not everyone. Listen, when this goes out, maybe don't look at the comments on YouTube, because I think some of the people are not going to agree with some of things, like maybe UBI.
Aarika Rhodes: But that's okay, and we also have to get in a place where we can respectfully agree to disagree.
Peter McCormack: But they won't be respectful!
Aarika Rhodes: But I'll be respectful, because that's my character. But I'm okay with someone disagreeing with me, and I'm also okay with changing my mind. I'm not so stuck in my ways that --
Peter McCormack: You sound crazy!
Aarika Rhodes: But if someone presents a better argument and really valid points that are sound and just, I will listen to that. And I think we need more of that too. That's why problems don't get solved, because people are just like, "I know it all. I have all the answers", and they're so quick to just write someone off without even having a proper conversation.
What I love about you, just from talking, "I'm going to learn about that…" Can you imagine if I said, when Dennis reached out to me about Bitcoin, "Oh, I'm not doing that"? You can't do that. You've got to give people the room to learn.
Peter McCormack: Some people see changing their mind as a weakness, and I see being able to change your mind as a strength, to admit you're wrong is a strength. I did it today. I put out a bit of a shitty tweet about somebody and I reflected on it today and I was like, "You know what, that was wrong of me" and I retweeted it with an apology or admitted I was wrong. I think a lot of us are wrong a lot of the time and need to change our minds a lot, but I think people see it as a weakness. I think it's a superpower. The ability to change your mind and not care, because you're searching for the truth and the best, I just see it as an absolute strength.
So, listen, how do people follow your campaign, how do they support your campaign; tell them where to go?
Aarika Rhodes: So, aarikaforcongress.com. You can sign up for a newsletter. And Twitter, it's @AarikaRhodes, and then our Instagram is @aarikaforcongress, and those are probably the best ways to keep up with our campaign.
Peter McCormack: Brilliant. Well, listen, I wish you all the best. If you win --
Aarika Rhodes: When!
Peter McCormack: Sorry! When you win, I'm going to come back and I'm going to interview you again and we're going to talk about what you're going to do, and maybe we'll do it in Washington, maybe we'll do it here, who knows?
Aarika Rhodes: We'll do it in the office. We can do it in my congressional office.
Peter McCormack: We'll do it in San Fernando Valley.
Aarika Rhodes: We'll do it in my district, yes.
Peter McCormack: We'll do it in your district and we'll do it again.
Aarika Rhodes: Let's just manifest this now. Maybe what we do is we get a bunch of our young people to come while we interview.
Peter McCormack: I'd be so nervous.
Aarika Rhodes: Then, we can do it for our kids.
Peter McCormack: We could do a Q&A as well.
Aarika Rhodes: We can do a Q&A, okay, manifest it!
Peter McCormack: Okay, well look, we will stay in touch whatever happens, but I wish you the best, I hope you win. I think Brad Sherman's a bit of a dick, so I want you to beat him! So, good luck, all the best and hope you win.
Aarika Rhodes: Thank you so much, appreciate it.
