Latest / Yaron Brook Show / AMA & Hangout with Contributors (Dec 2025) | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

AMA & Hangout with Contributors (Dec 2025) | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:03
  Speaker 1: A lot of fundamental principles of edom, national self interest
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: and an individual lots.
• 0:15
  Speaker 2: This is the show, oh right, everybody, welcome to your
• 0:22
  Speaker 2: one book show on this Saturday, December twenty seventh, and
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: today is our monthly AMA show.
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: So you can ask those of you who are on
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: the panel live. We'll go through a couple a few
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: rounds with them asking questions. We'll also be taking super
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: chat questions. So the super chat is on. It's a
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: feel free to use it. And let's see. Do I
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: have anything to say before we get started. Remind no
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: show tomorrow. Nicos Nicos is I'm going to be interviewing
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: Nicos on Monday. Socialist of the Right is the topic.
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: But of course you guys will ask questions and you
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: can ask me, of course whatever you want and what else.
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: And of course January thirty first, which I think is Wednesday,
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: one pm Eastern time, we'll start the show and we'll
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: go four plus hours and that'll be our final show
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: of the year. We'll do a summary of the year,
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: looking for the twenty twenty six and we'll raise a
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: lot of money hopefully, so we'll complain all that. All right,
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: So let us get started with a panel. Let's start
• 1:42
  Speaker 1: with John questions.
• 1:46
  Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, we're on great to see registered for the
• 1:52
  Speaker 3: Iron Rand birthday in the end of the January.
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: Down and four in Florida.
• 1:58
  Speaker 3: Yeah yeah, looking forward to that and good Uh first
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: time for that.
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: Uh.
• 2:06
  Speaker 3: I you know, I don't have any question that comes
• 2:08
  Speaker 3: to mind. I'm going to go back a little bit
• 2:11
  Speaker 3: on college I Rand groups asked the question, you know,
• 2:17
  Speaker 3: don't know why the you know that the number of
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: campus clubs decline, you know, has changed, Uh what.
• 2:33
  Speaker 4: You know?
• 2:33
  Speaker 3: I'm trying to think of what the meaning on that
• 2:36
  Speaker 3: is that campus club organizations.
• 2:41
  Speaker 1: I don't know is.
• 2:42
  Speaker 3: There has anybody been able to give what are the
• 2:47
  Speaker 3: thoughts that have come to pass on the decline of
• 2:51
  Speaker 3: campus clubs.
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think the answer is the Internet. But
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: campus clubs basically started dying more than ten years ago,
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: and by ten years ago they were already dead. Ten eight,
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: ten years ago, camps clubs died, even clubs that like
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: University of Michigan and some others where there was on
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: a club there forever and didn't get renewed. So I
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: think so one camps clubs always relied on one person
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: energy enthusiasm to lead them and to get them all together,
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: and to put it together, and to get people into
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: the group and to organize activity. It was always a
• 3:39
  Speaker 1: challenge when that one person left to create a succession
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: succession plan, and a lot of clubs failed failed to
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: do that. But I also think that getting together in
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: person became less valuable. The quantity of available objectivist information
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: online it was huge. The ability to create groups, whether
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: it's on I don't know, Reddit or whatever, the different
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: platforms for people to create chat groups out there. The
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: ability to do that increased dramatically. And there are lots
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: and lots of objectivists kind of places where people chat
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: about objectivism online, right There are a bunch of those
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: there were. There was just a lot more opportunities for
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: people to engage in people. And I think the culture
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: generally went online, so there was a lot less value
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: to face to face interaction and and everything kind of
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: went online. That's the only explanation I have, because it's
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: not that the numbers have dropped generally. It's not a
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: readership has dropped. It's not that interest in imand has
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: dropped at least a week in measure based on the
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: things that we have. It's campus clubs just died, you know,
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: and it's and it's across the board across the country.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: Once in a while somebody will try to resurrect the
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: campus club. There was, you know, one guy was enthusiastic
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: in Texas and they organized the campus club in Texas.
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: And Texas is ideal to have a campus club because
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: you've got a lot of objectives already living in Austin.
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: You've got Greg and Terror and Ben and a bunch
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: of intellectuals living in Austin. And yet once this one
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: person left, nobody continued and the club died. So it's
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: just yeah, I mean, I don't have more of an
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: explanation than that.
• 5:39
  Speaker 5: Okay, great, thanks very much.
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: People. Going online is my only explanation for it. All right,
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: let's see you guys have all got your video off,
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: which is making it much more difficult for me. So
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: those of you who can and don't mind, turn your
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: videos on. M's more fun to see you anyway, all right, Steve.
• 6:02
  Speaker 6: So I've been thinking a lot about like how principles
• 6:07
  Speaker 6: and pragmatism apply at work, like specifically in engineering, because
• 6:12
  Speaker 6: while we would say here like someone's being pragmatic as
• 6:16
  Speaker 6: like an insult and that say you talk a lot
• 6:20
  Speaker 6: about John F. Kennedy be having like a pragmatic foreign policy,
• 6:24
  Speaker 6: You're not meaning that in a complimentary way. Like in engineering,
• 6:30
  Speaker 6: Like there's a super popular blog called the Pragmatic Engineer.
• 6:33
  Speaker 6: You'll say, Oh, that engineer, he's really pragmatic and thinking
• 6:39
  Speaker 6: about this. I don't think the words aren't talking about
• 6:44
  Speaker 6: the same thing. Like one of my observations is that
• 6:48
  Speaker 6: a pragmatic engineer will consider a lot more than just
• 6:53
  Speaker 6: like the engineering, Like in software, we can think about
• 6:57
  Speaker 6: like the business context or what other trade offs might be.
• 7:00
  Speaker 7: And I was reading a book on.
• 7:02
  Speaker 6: SR seventy one Blackbird, and they were talking about, you know,
• 7:05
  Speaker 6: in one engineer being like super pragmatic when they're coming
• 7:10
  Speaker 6: up with it's kind of like esoteric lubricants, so they're
• 7:12
  Speaker 6: going to use that can deal with like this temperature
• 7:15
  Speaker 6: range of you know, plus a thousand degrees down to
• 7:18
  Speaker 6: your room temperature. I was wondering if you have any
• 7:22
  Speaker 6: thoughts on that, because like it seems like we talk
• 7:24
  Speaker 6: about like engineering principles or engineering pragmatism I just might
• 7:28
  Speaker 6: extend to like other parts of work life, Like we're
• 7:31
  Speaker 6: not talking about the same thing as like a moral principle.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: No, And I don't think anybody's ever said about JFK
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: in a positive way that he had a pragmatic phone post.
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: I think it was a negative way. But so people
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: misuse the term pragmatic when they apply to engineering and
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: other things. What they really mean is practical that is
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: attuned to reality. You know, can get stuff done, and
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: it isn't you know, it takes context into account, isn't
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: bogged down by I don't know, some platonic form of perfectionism.
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: And I think that what they mean is practical pragmatism
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: is the rejection of principle. And I don't think you
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: can do engineering if you reject principles. I mean implicitly,
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: all engineers abide by certain principles, whether they know it
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: explicitly or not. They have to. You know, if you
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: do liquid mechanics, there's certain principles that by which liquids travel,
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: and you take that into account when you do the math,
• 8:35
  Speaker 1: and you just can't avoid that. And you can find
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: practical ways to get around obstacles and to get around
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: certain issues, but you're not You're not by doing that
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: negating the principle whereas pragmatism as a philosophical concept as
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: a negation of principle and the negation of long term,
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: long term thinking, which is what negating principle really means.
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: So when we talk about pragmatic engineers, what really mean
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: is practical engineering, practical people people who could get stuff done,
• 9:05
  Speaker 1: or practical But in but particularly and I don't know
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: how this is used in Europe, but in in the US,
• 9:13
  Speaker 1: those concepts are being mixed up and confused. Pragmatism is
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: viewed as just and and and there's a sense of which,
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: just get stuff done, just just get it done, just
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: get it done now, whatever it takes, ignoring kind of
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: the philosophical roots of what they actually mean by it.
• 9:33
  Speaker 1: So pragmatism is really in a pistemological concept more than
• 9:37
  Speaker 1: it is a moral concept. It's basically saying principles are
• 9:42
  Speaker 1: not just Madel principles. Any principles it just don't apply.
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: There is there are no such things. You can't generalize.
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: You know, the sun, the sun might not rise tomorrow.
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: You know you have to take that into account. You
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: can't generalize. You can't come to real truths. There are
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: no universal or than truths to what.
• 10:04
  Speaker 6: So I think if I said to someone like, oh,
• 10:07
  Speaker 6: this politician is pragmatic, I said it to an engineer, they're.
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: Going to be like, oh, yeah, that's good.
• 10:12
  Speaker 7: It sounds like that's like what I do.
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 10:15
  Speaker 8: Yeah.
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: So they're misusing the concept. So the concept comes it's
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: not an objectivist interpretation of the concept. Right, So pragmatism
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: is a philosophy articulated by John Dewey and God his
• 10:30
  Speaker 1: name escapes to me. But you know late nineteenth century
• 10:33
  Speaker 1: American philosophers William James, William James is the other guy, right,
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: So they actually articulate what they mean by pragmatism. The
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: way the engineer is using the term is inconsistent with
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: the way the term was defined in the nineteenth century.
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: Now you can say, the hell with that, this is
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: the new way to describe it. But that creates confusion.
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: It creates a certain confusion because the term comes from
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: as far as I know, the term comes from the philosophy,
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: not the other way around. Maybe I'm wrong, Maybe the
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: term existed before the philosophy and it's the philosophy is
• 11:06
  Speaker 1: that perverted it. But one way another, we're not talking
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: about the same thing. When we're talking about it, and
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: I think a lot of people use pragmatic pragmatic pragmatism
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: as meaning practical rather than its meaning unprincipled.
• 11:22
  Speaker 7: Do you think it's worth pushing back on?
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: Not really, I mean there's certain concepts that it's really
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: worth fighting for. Now. It's worth pushing back in a
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: sense on all concepts because it's important we get them
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: accurate so we know we're all talking about But in
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: the cultural battle, if you will, no, I mean, selfishness
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: is hard enough, capitalism is hard enough, and those I
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: think important ones individualism, there are a few other There
• 11:48
  Speaker 1: are few that are really important. Pragmatism is probably just
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: not I don't think that's important enough to push back on. Thanks,
• 11:57
  Speaker 1: maybe later in the battle, like at a later stage,
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: it will elevate that we've got we've got low hay
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: food to fight over before we get there, all right,
• 12:09
  Speaker 1: Thanks Steve Adam.
• 12:13
  Speaker 9: Yes, I'm concerned, and I'll just follow up on what
• 12:20
  Speaker 9: Steve said. Generally, when people say pragmatic, they mean contextual.
• 12:32
  Speaker 9: Principles apply in the context in which they are known,
• 12:40
  Speaker 9: and someone who does not try to apply principles outside
• 12:48
  Speaker 9: their proper context is popularly called pragmatic, but I think
• 12:56
  Speaker 9: that we objectivists really should insist an accurate language, and
• 13:03
  Speaker 9: we should say he is a contextual thinker rather than
• 13:08
  Speaker 9: a pragmatic thinker. Now I have other words that I
• 13:16
  Speaker 9: think are frequently misused, for example, saying public schools instead
• 13:23
  Speaker 9: of government schools, saying illegal immigrant instead of unauthorized immigrant.
• 13:32
  Speaker 9: And I think the really big one is the market.
• 13:38
  Speaker 9: Many people are not just objectivists.
• 13:42
  Speaker 1: But.
• 13:44
  Speaker 9: And the liberal right generally speak of the market in
• 13:52
  Speaker 9: the same way that socialists speak of society. So instead
• 13:57
  Speaker 9: of saying individuals will make their choices, we say the
• 14:03
  Speaker 9: market will take care of it. And I think that
• 14:08
  Speaker 9: is so liable to be misinterpreted as meaning, you know,
• 14:16
  Speaker 9: the market is some kind of magic collective force. Why
• 14:23
  Speaker 9: don't we just say individuals will make their decisions.
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: Because because that doesn't really explain what's actually going on.
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: Individuals will make their decisions in a particular context where
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: the decisions get aggregated, and there's a certain market phenomena.
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: You know, the price of stock is determined by individuals
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: making decisions, But that doesn't tell you anything about the
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: fact that, you know, these individual decisions get aggregated into
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: a picular price, and that's the function of the market.
• 15:02
  Speaker 1: The market is supplying demand. Supplying demand is individuals making
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: decisions aggregated in a particular place, at a particular time,
• 15:11
  Speaker 1: in a particular way, and that we call the markets.
• 15:14
  Speaker 1: I think using the marketers is legitimate. You know, we
• 15:18
  Speaker 1: need to understand what we're talking about, and we should
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: convey that to people. But I don't think it's helpful
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: to say individuals making decisions. So also think illegal immigrants
• 15:27
  Speaker 1: is legit. They're illegal, right, There's there's law. The law
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: says it's illegal to immigrate into the United States without authorization,
• 15:35
  Speaker 1: without permission of the state, you know, And and in
• 15:40
  Speaker 1: that sense they're violating the law. And I don't see
• 15:44
  Speaker 1: illegal as offensive. I agree with the other ones you mentioned. Pragmatism.
• 15:51
  Speaker 1: I mean, if you look at pragmatism, let's see solving
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: this is just this is the Cambridge Dictionary for whatever.
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: They're all about the same, solving problems and sensible way
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: that suits the conditions. That's consexual. It really exists now
• 16:05
  Speaker 1: rather than of being fixed theories, ideas or wolves, which
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: is principles. But but they're creating this false economy between
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: contextual and the principle. So it's uh, you know, so
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: a uh, But that is exactly what the pragmatic philosophers did.
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: They divorced pragmatism. They divorced, divorced context from principle.
• 16:32
  Speaker 5: But I think that.
• 16:34
  Speaker 9: By using proper language we can change the way people
• 16:40
  Speaker 9: think about it.
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: I agree, agree completely, we should use proper language. The
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: question is what fights should we have with the culture.
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: That is, should you go around with your co workers
• 16:50
  Speaker 1: telling them they're misusing the term pragmatist? I just I
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: think that there are there are other hills to fight on.
• 16:57
  Speaker 9: Rather, yeah, I think I think there are other hills
• 17:01
  Speaker 9: to fight on. But as an individual, I can say
• 17:08
  Speaker 9: contextual rather than pragmatists, and that will cause my interlocutor
• 17:17
  Speaker 9: to think again about what they mean.
• 17:19
  Speaker 1: Sure, you should speak accurately. The question is what should
• 17:23
  Speaker 1: you argue with your fellow You know, if somebody uses
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: selfishness wrong, I'm going to go up and correct them
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: just because it's it's a it's a term that's I
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: really want to inject into the culture. To use pragmatism wrong.
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: I might not, you know, interject and correct them.
• 17:41
  Speaker 9: But in the case of immigrants saying unauthorized brings in
• 17:50
  Speaker 9: the idea that there is an arbitrariness on the part
• 17:56
  Speaker 9: of the state authorizing some people, now authorizing some people
• 18:02
  Speaker 9: making the decisions about who you can deal with instead
• 18:07
  Speaker 9: of leaving those decisions for you, and all that is
• 18:13
  Speaker 9: encapsulate in the world. Unauthorized you say illegal, and people
• 18:23
  Speaker 9: generally understand that to be criminals you should go to
• 18:27
  Speaker 9: prison and so on.
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I like to say I'm an illegal
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: driver because I speed, just to make it, to make
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: it clear that illegal doesn't mean criminal. But the reality
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: is that I think you're you're loading unauthorized with way
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: too much meaning. That is, you could be authorized to
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: come into my building or not authorized to come into
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: my building. You can be authorized to come into my
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: country and not authorized to come into country. I don't think.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: I don't think if somebody outside of objectivism thinks it's, oh,
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: that's arbitrary, and that one's okay because it's private property,
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: and that one's not okay. Indeed, they conflate the state
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: with private property all the time. There's so many issues
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: that I don't I don't think with regard to immigration,
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: the semantics matter that much. Whereas again, there's some terms
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: that I think deserve to be fought over. There are
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: others where I just don't think it's worth the effort.
• 19:16
  Speaker 9: Saying government schools rather than.
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: I agree with that one. I try to correct myself
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: whenever I say public schools to government schools, because I
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: think I think government school is much more effective. Public
• 19:28
  Speaker 1: public is conflated with public corporations, which are not government corporations.
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: So it's public is a is a is too loose
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: of a term. Government is much clearer and mobbious. I agree,
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: I agree completely on that one. Thank you, Adam. Uh
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: let's see Randy.
• 19:45
  Speaker 4: Thank you, Sorry you're on. Before Randy goes, can I
• 19:49
  Speaker 4: just hit a quick follow up on that and ask
• 19:51
  Speaker 4: you would you would you correct the person in a
• 19:57
  Speaker 4: political discussion, because I will say that I I think
• 20:00
  Speaker 4: it's a very important term pragmatic to identify the phenomena
• 20:07
  Speaker 4: that we see politically in reality.
• 20:11
  Speaker 1: It depends. I mean, when you're doing a debate with
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: somebody in a political context or whatever context, they're throwing
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: out so many concepts that are misused, that are being
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: misused and abused, and the biggest frustration in a debate
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: is they've just spoken for five minutes. As you know
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: from my videos where I analyze other people's videos, I
• 20:34
  Speaker 1: could pause them every twenty seconds and comment on what
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: they just said. So I have to retain five you know,
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: that's three times every minute. That's fifteen. I would have
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: to have fifteen points to a contradict them on. I
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: couldn't do that. See, you have to prioritize what you're
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: going to do. Certainly there's a context in which a
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: correcting they use the pragmatism would be appropriate. It depends
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: on what the debate is all on. It depends on
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: what else is being said. It depends on a lot
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: of things. It's contextual. Randy.
• 21:11
  Speaker 10: Yeah, I want to ask you a little bit about
• 21:12
  Speaker 10: this m r n A vaccine. Yeah, you know a
• 21:16
  Speaker 10: lot about that, and there's some things I'm missing about that.
• 21:19
  Speaker 10: I understand that there's some work and towards cancer with that.
• 21:23
  Speaker 10: I also understand that JFK has stopped funding some of
• 21:28
  Speaker 10: the m r n A and I want to what
• 21:32
  Speaker 10: you know about that.
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean M and E technology is an incredibly
• 21:36
  Speaker 1: valuable technology that that I think during COVID proved incredibly efficacious. Uh,
• 21:44
  Speaker 1: if you understand what the goal was of the vaccine
• 21:47
  Speaker 1: and since then and before that, m O and A
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: was developed primarily for cancer. So both Modona and Biointech,
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: the two mr and A companies that developed mRNA vaccine
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: for COVID, we're both working on cancer vaccines. Before COVID
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: hit and since then, there's been a lot of promise
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: with regard to mRNA vaccines for cancer and also m
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: and A vaccines for potentially other contagious diseases, but at
• 22:22
  Speaker 1: least in terms of contagious diseases. RFK stopped all the
• 22:25
  Speaker 1: funding for it. There's a lot of fear that he's
• 22:28
  Speaker 1: going to stop the funding for cancer as well. A
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: lot of the mRNA researchers moving outside the United States
• 22:36
  Speaker 1: because they're worried that they won't be able to get
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: FDA approval and they won't get funding in the US,
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: so it's moving to China. China's very you know, China
• 22:46
  Speaker 1: was very behind when COVID hit on mRNA. They couldn't
• 22:49
  Speaker 1: develop their own mRNA vaccine, so they are really trying
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: to accelerate development of mr and A technology right now.
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: A leading Chinese scientist who was working in the US
• 23:03
  Speaker 1: at a tenure trek position ten position in the US
• 23:07
  Speaker 1: at a research lab at a major university. Uh is
• 23:10
  Speaker 1: just moving back to China. Uh. I know Europe is
• 23:13
  Speaker 1: investing quite a bit in m and Evoccines because they
• 23:16
  Speaker 1: see the United States not doing it. Yeah, it's it's
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: tragic and sad, but but it that is the reality.
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: It's it's a it's it's another biotech technology that could
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: have huge ratifications for for our health that the government
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: is sabotaging. Very good, thank you? Sure? Uh okay, Daniel.
• 23:41
  Speaker 11: Wrong.
• 23:44
  Speaker 5: Politics is such a mess?
• 23:46
  Speaker 12: Is it now time for someone objective as not me
• 23:50
  Speaker 12: to get back into politics?
• 23:54
  Speaker 1: I mean sure, it has to be somebody who likes it,
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: who enjoys it, who who is going to understand that
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: he'd probably lose quite a bit and willing to willing
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: to live with that. I understand. Rob Trasinski is running
• 24:14
  Speaker 1: for office, so he's running for Congress.
• 24:16
  Speaker 4: So you need to be a little bit of a
• 24:17
  Speaker 4: wing knot. Don't you a little bit of what a wingnot?
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: I don't know what that means.
• 24:23
  Speaker 4: Like, you know, I mean if you're an objectivist and
• 24:26
  Speaker 4: you know you're going to lose.
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but you have to view it as an opportunity
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: to talk to audiences, participate in debates, get the wood
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: out there. So you have to have the mentality of
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: you know, I'm out there. I mean, if it was
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: easy to do, I would do it. I would have
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: fun doing it right, It would be it would be fun.
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: I mean, I told I was serious. At some point
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: I was approached by somebody about running, some big shot
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: in the Republican Party to run for governor of California,
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: and I said, you know, if you can, if you
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: can raise the first fifty million dollars for me, because
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: it'll cost one hundred million, and I'm not going to
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: raise the first fifteek and I don't believe I can
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: raise the first fifty I think that's impossible. Nobody will
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: give me that kind of money. If you could bring
• 25:08
  Speaker 1: me a check for fifty million dollars, I will raise
• 25:11
  Speaker 1: the second fifty and I will do it. And I
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: was serious. I would have done it. It would have
• 25:14
  Speaker 1: been fun. So I you know, so I think I
• 25:18
  Speaker 1: think it has to be. You have to take the
• 25:21
  Speaker 1: perspective this is this is gonna be fun. No matter
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: what I'm probably gonna lose, I'm going to create a
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: lot of you know, shake, shake, shake things out. I'm
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: gonna create a lot of cognitive you know, dissonance and
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: uh and upset a lot of people and you know cool. Yeah,
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: I mean I don't see why not. I think Tasinski's
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: running as a Democrat if I remember, right, which is
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: probably right to do in Virginia. You get you're not
• 25:49
  Speaker 1: gonna get anywhere with Republicans in Virginia. It's too religious,
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: you know, there's it's it's too anchored in Trump and
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: in kind of the now heritage Americans. So in Democrats,
• 26:00
  Speaker 1: maybe you've got some kind of angle you can go after.
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: It's interesting, it's an interesting tactic. We'll see how it goes. Yeah,
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: I I do not I think it could be interesting.
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: I'm not promoting it, but if there's somebody out there,
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: but I'm not against it. Again, I think it's it
• 26:17
  Speaker 1: has to has to be consistent with your values and go.
• 26:21
  Speaker 12: I've got to say the governor of Puerto Rico has
• 26:23
  Speaker 12: got to be a lot cheaper than of California.
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but you know, if I spoke Spanish fluently, I'd
• 26:31
  Speaker 1: actually consider it.
• 26:32
  Speaker 4: You know, what about the aspect of it of kissing
• 26:35
  Speaker 4: babies and shaking hands.
• 26:37
  Speaker 1: I don't mind that, and to travel too, but yes,
• 26:41
  Speaker 1: I won't travel, so I mean that's fine. It would
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: be fun, right, But it was such a blast. And
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: kissing babies, I mean, there's worse things in life than
• 26:48
  Speaker 1: kissing babies. And uh yeah, I guess shake hands. I
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: can put on the act of doing that for a while.
• 26:53
  Speaker 1: It's it's an act. I'm an actor. That's what you
• 26:56
  Speaker 1: do when you lecture, and you know, the audiences would
• 26:59
  Speaker 1: be larger. And yeah, I mean if I spoke fluent Spanish,
• 27:03
  Speaker 1: I would consider doing it in Puerto Rico. But you know,
• 27:06
  Speaker 1: when I first came to Puerto Rico, I think I
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: was three months after I'd arrived here. I was invited
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: to speak at some conference. I think it was a
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: crypto conference, and I said, okay, I'll speak on how
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: to turn Puerto Rico into the Hong Kong of the Caribbean.
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: And I gave a talk on how to turn Puerto
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: wec Go into the Hong Kong the Caribbean, basically do
• 27:23
  Speaker 1: what Hong Kong did, and it's easy, and people were enthused,
• 27:27
  Speaker 1: they were excited. They all told me, the governor will
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: call me, there will the people there from politics, and
• 27:32
  Speaker 1: they said, the governor will call you. You should be on
• 27:34
  Speaker 1: some committee, some advisory board. I said, I'm happy to
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: I I'd love to do that. I never got a call.
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: So that's what happens with politics, is you know, they
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: all they promised, they talked, they get excited, they hear
• 27:45
  Speaker 1: something new, but then they think about it and they say, oh, no,
• 27:48
  Speaker 1: that's radical, that's crazy. Nobody will do that. But yeah
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: I could. I could see myself doing that. My wife
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: would probably kill me. But other than that, I she
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: does not want to be first one.
• 28:01
  Speaker 4: If you want, yeah, like, don't you think you would
• 28:06
  Speaker 4: do it because you know that it's a short term
• 28:08
  Speaker 4: thing because your greater value is really doing what you're doing.
• 28:12
  Speaker 4: I think as an intellectual right. I don't know.
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: I mean, look at Melai. Look at how many people
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: are paying attention to free markets because of Mela. So
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: imagine if I won governor Puerto Rico and uh and
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: I could get away with doing stuff like like Malay
• 28:26
  Speaker 1: has gotten away.
• 28:27
  Speaker 4: That's true.
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: And imagine if Puerto Rico went from being the posts
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: pseudo state in the Union to somewhere in the middle
• 28:35
  Speaker 1: pack because of within you know, within four years because
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: of policies I put in place, and people started to
• 28:42
  Speaker 1: move from Orlando to Puerto Rico instead of Puerto Rico
• 28:46
  Speaker 1: to Orlando. That as Puerto rican started coming back to
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: the island because there were so many economic opportunities here.
• 28:52
  Speaker 1: I mean, think about what that would do to whatever
• 28:55
  Speaker 1: career is a podcast I would have after that, right
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: I could? I could, I could right mount check for
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: as a podcaster afterwards in terms of the you know,
• 29:06
  Speaker 1: the influence and the and the reach I could have.
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: So no, I mean, don't dismiss politics. It's it's a
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: great marketing ploy again, it's uh. And if you get
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: into power and you can do as much as you
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: can do. Uh. Now, the problem is if you can't
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: do anything, then it's a waste, right, if you really
• 29:23
  Speaker 1: can't do anything. But you know, governors and presidents have
• 29:28
  Speaker 1: a lot of power. Look look at how much Corumpany
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: is doing in spite of the fact that he's not
• 29:32
  Speaker 1: going to Congress, he's not acting in Congress or anything.
• 29:35
  Speaker 1: Now's the time to get elected president. You can you
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: can be an imperial president in the name of liberty.
• 29:40
  Speaker 1: Uh and uh, you know, and and and reboot the
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: whole American system. So yeah, I'm getting excited now. I'm
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: I'm uh, you know, you know, I'm just looking for
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: that check. What's up?
• 29:53
  Speaker 4: You wouldn't win. You couldn't win.
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: I couldn't win. I couldn't win.
• 29:57
  Speaker 5: What's that I'll put in the first five dollars?
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: I mean, just just just think about how much money
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: would be if I was on the stage in one
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: of the presidential debates. Yeah, I mean, it would be.
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: It would It would completely change dynamics. I mean, Rand
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: Paul is there. You think, Okay, Rand at least's proprey markets.
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: But he's quiet, and he's dull, and he never says
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: anything interesting and never says anything exciting, and he doesn't.
• 30:25
  Speaker 4: Those debates when he was running for president.
• 30:27
  Speaker 1: Yeah, anyway, so we can fantasize that's I think that's
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: as far as it can go at this point with me,
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: at least, if.
• 30:36
  Speaker 5: You reconsider all all, I'm willing to up my bed.
• 30:39
  Speaker 1: Okay, sounds good, thanks Daniel. All right, Lincoln, you're still muted.
• 31:01
  Speaker 1: Still muted? Right, let me come back to you, Lincoln,
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: figure out how to unmute. Let's see maybe they can
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: do that, asked. I mean, I'm not sure what's going on.
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: All right, let's see Ryan. The fact that you guys
• 31:16
  Speaker 1: are not on video makes it more difficult for me
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: to keep track on who's asked and who isn't. But
• 31:21
  Speaker 1: Ryan is here. Ryan. Do we have more than one Ryan?
• 31:23
  Speaker 1: We have more than one Ryan, So let's do Ryan boobak.
• 31:26
  Speaker 13: Okay, Hey, hey, thank you for taking my question on
• 31:31
  Speaker 13: a previous show. I have a Samana question too. On
• 31:34
  Speaker 13: a previous show, you were reviewing the Matt Walsh video
• 31:39
  Speaker 13: and you were talking about like legitimate sources of pride,
• 31:42
  Speaker 13: and this was sort of a side comment, but you said.
• 31:45
  Speaker 9: How.
• 31:47
  Speaker 13: You know, in reality, like a parent can't even take
• 31:51
  Speaker 13: pride in what their children do or something along those lines.
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it's you don't want to overstate it,
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: but yes, I mean, yeah, it's it. Achievements are their achievements,
• 32:05
  Speaker 1: not yours.
• 32:07
  Speaker 13: Well, okay, So, so I'm gonna take this to kind
• 32:11
  Speaker 13: of brag about one of my kids. I'd love to
• 32:13
  Speaker 13: brag about both of them, but I'll just brag about
• 32:14
  Speaker 13: one of them. So, my oldest is a senior in
• 32:17
  Speaker 13: high school, and he's about halfway through earning his private
• 32:23
  Speaker 13: pilot license and about a month ago he had his
• 32:27
  Speaker 13: first solo flight, and my wife and I went to
• 32:30
  Speaker 13: watch it, and you know, you know, forget my language,
• 32:33
  Speaker 13: but you know, watching him fly, you know, he basically
• 32:36
  Speaker 13: took off, flew around the airport, landed, you know what
• 32:39
  Speaker 13: they're called touching goes. He did about five or six
• 32:41
  Speaker 13: of those. And but you know, watching him doing that flight,
• 32:45
  Speaker 13: you know, there's like this feeling of like, hell, yeah,
• 32:48
  Speaker 13: you know, that's my kid up there flying. And you know,
• 32:52
  Speaker 13: if it's not, if the word isn't pride for that, like,
• 32:55
  Speaker 13: what is the word?
• 32:56
  Speaker 4: I was?
• 32:56
  Speaker 13: I was querying chat ept and looking at the fsaars
• 32:59
  Speaker 13: and stuff, and the closest I came to is like admiration.
• 33:02
  Speaker 13: But that didn't seem strong enough. And maybe it's just love.
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: Certainly love its love is applied to a particular concept.
• 33:13
  Speaker 1: You know, I don't think it's I don't know that
• 33:18
  Speaker 1: it is that is. I don't know that pride is
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: what captures it because because it's I mean, there's a
• 33:26
  Speaker 1: sense that you made the kid right, but there's a
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: sense in which he made himself. And it particularly if
• 33:33
  Speaker 1: he's a senior, you influence the kid, You influence him,
• 33:38
  Speaker 1: but he has to choose to be influenced.
• 33:40
  Speaker 4: Absolutely and his achievement ultimately.
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so sure there's an element of pride and I
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: raised him well, that's great, But is there direct link
• 33:50
  Speaker 1: between I raised him well and he's he's doing this
• 33:53
  Speaker 1: great flying Maybe maybe not. It's it's a reach that
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: there's some very positive feeling that you get. It's love,
• 34:03
  Speaker 1: it's admiration, it's a combination of those. It's just that
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: you want us, you please because he has made himself
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: into this phenomenal human being. And I don't know what
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: the wood is, what the right term would be for that.
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: Pride implies that you made him into this phenomenal human being,
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: and I'm just warning against that. Right, Yes, you had
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: an impact, you raised him well, that's great. But at
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: the end of the day, it's his achievement. And so
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: you should feel incredibly positive at your children's achievement, absolutely,
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: and depressed when they don't when they fail, right, because
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: you love them, so you're tied to them emotionally in
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: that way. It's it's it's not like they feel your
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: fault and this success is a your fault.
• 35:06
  Speaker 4: You could put it negatively if you were to decide,
• 35:09
  Speaker 4: don't be delusional and think it's your achievement. You're not,
• 35:14
  Speaker 4: like he's not you. But but I do think that
• 35:19
  Speaker 4: unhappy about his achievement.
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: Yes, absolutely, absolutely should be happy about his achievement.
• 35:24
  Speaker 13: Yeah, like you know, couching it in terms of like,
• 35:29
  Speaker 13: you know, this is your achievement when I'm and I've
• 35:31
  Speaker 13: been conscious of that even before the episode that I've
• 35:34
  Speaker 13: been very conscious of, like you know, when I talk
• 35:36
  Speaker 13: about it to him, you know, like this is your
• 35:38
  Speaker 13: hard work, this is your achievement. But there's still that Yeah,
• 35:42
  Speaker 13: And I don't know another word for it besides pride,
• 35:45
  Speaker 13: but you know it's sometimes.
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean there might be a use of pride
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: that go that is separate from kind of the way
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: we use pride as a moral as I'm all principle
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: and objectivism and and maybe we just don't have a
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: tomb that captures that, so we need to use probably
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: because it's all we got. You know that that might
• 36:10
  Speaker 1: be the case. So I mean a point of me
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: doing that is the emphasis on they need to be
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: proud of themselves and and the recognition is the achievement
• 36:23
  Speaker 1: that that was the emphasis trying to make, not that
• 36:25
  Speaker 1: you shouldn't feel good when your kids do well. You
• 36:28
  Speaker 1: absolutely should.
• 36:29
  Speaker 13: Yeah, and I understand that, but I just, you know,
• 36:32
  Speaker 13: I was trying to work out, you know, if there's
• 36:34
  Speaker 13: a different word than tried, but it's it's sort of
• 36:37
  Speaker 13: hard to think it's.
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: Something I I you know, I don't have an answer
• 36:42
  Speaker 1: for that one for a change. Thanks, Ryan. All right,
• 36:51
  Speaker 1: let's go to the other way.
• 36:52
  Speaker 13: And.
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: Can you hear me? Yep? Okay.
• 36:55
  Speaker 14: So I've been working at this philosophy for six years now,
• 37:01
  Speaker 14: watching you for a long time.
• 37:04
  Speaker 8: Two and a half years ago, I quit my job.
• 37:07
  Speaker 14: I ran a business for a year as a consultant.
• 37:11
  Speaker 14: On January third, I'm driving to Missouri to leave Canada
• 37:15
  Speaker 14: and live in the United States for two years and work,
• 37:17
  Speaker 14: which is one of my dreams and one of my goals.
• 37:23
  Speaker 14: Sorry Missouri, Kansas City, Kansas City. Yeah, so it could
• 37:28
  Speaker 14: lead to a GREENEE card, it could not. I don't know.
• 37:31
  Speaker 14: I got to leave my family behind for two years.
• 37:33
  Speaker 14: I'm going to be back to visit them, and it
• 37:35
  Speaker 14: made me think about every couple of months, somebody on
• 37:38
  Speaker 14: the show asks why there aren't more demonstrations or public
• 37:44
  Speaker 14: action by objectivists or by the groups, And I started
• 37:50
  Speaker 14: to think. You know, your response is generally it's not effective,
• 37:53
  Speaker 14: and you know iron Ran didn't support it, and it's
• 37:56
  Speaker 14: not practical. I've come to have a different reason, a
• 38:01
  Speaker 14: personal reason, which is, unless someone has really committed to
• 38:07
  Speaker 14: making big changes in their lives and to taking these
• 38:10
  Speaker 14: ideas seriously, I think it would be a waste of time.
• 38:13
  Speaker 14: You've got better things to do, you've got better places
• 38:15
  Speaker 14: to be, you need to focus on your life. And
• 38:18
  Speaker 14: I almost drew the conclusion that it's almost secondhanded to
• 38:21
  Speaker 14: want to go out and demonstrate with the group. It's
• 38:23
  Speaker 14: almost anti individualistic. And I want to get your thoughts
• 38:28
  Speaker 14: on that.
• 38:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I don't think it's that. I think
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: sometimes sometimes things happen that piss you off so much
• 38:36
  Speaker 1: that you want to find a way to express the
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: fact that this is, that this is wrong, that it's
• 38:43
  Speaker 1: an injustice, that that you know. And I think I
• 38:47
  Speaker 1: think for some of you guys, the way you express
• 38:50
  Speaker 1: it is coming to you on book show and listen
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: to me vent and I do it for you in
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: a sense, or you support dynamin inst you do you
• 38:57
  Speaker 1: do something like that. But I think I think sometimes
• 39:01
  Speaker 1: there's a lot of satisfaction in going out and and
• 39:04
  Speaker 1: and and and expressing this publicly. This is this is this,
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: this is a bad deal, this is wrong. Stop doing this.
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: I don't think it's particularly effective. I don't think it's
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: I I don't think that it is that it is
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: achieved much other than to make you feel a little
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: better after the fact. But yeah, that assumes that you
• 39:34
  Speaker 1: already are, you know, doing the things that you need
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: to do to make your life within the scope of
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: your control better. But I can imagine. I don't imagine
• 39:45
  Speaker 1: if tomorrow, I don't know, Trump nationalizes CNN, I don't know,
• 39:51
  Speaker 1: something like that, right, Yeah, I can see. Really, I mean,
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: this is free speech we're talking about. This is the
• 40:00
  Speaker 1: it's the important thing. I can imagine, you know, more
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: people at a rally, more people protesting, more people camping
• 40:06
  Speaker 1: outside the White House might have an impact, you know,
• 40:10
  Speaker 1: and and and people want to act on it, and
• 40:12
  Speaker 1: they see their whole future contingent on the success of
• 40:16
  Speaker 1: this action, you would do it. You might also imagine
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: a situation where the old alternative we had was revolution, right,
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: risking your life, literally risking your life. Well, if things
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: got bad enough, you can imagine a context in which
• 40:32
  Speaker 1: that would you would do that? You would you would say, yeah,
• 40:35
  Speaker 1: I get all that, but right now, if I don't
• 40:38
  Speaker 1: do this, my future is gone anyway, right, I just
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: won't have a future. So it depends on the circumstances.
• 40:46
  Speaker 14: I think that people individually, though you know, aren't doing enough.
• 40:50
  Speaker 14: And I agree, you know you don't. You don't need uh,
• 40:54
  Speaker 14: you don't need the whole system of rights to fall
• 40:58
  Speaker 14: apart for you to get up and change your life
• 41:00
  Speaker 14: and do something drastic.
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: I know that. I think people need to do a
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: lot more in terms of improving their lives and making
• 41:10
  Speaker 1: sure they're making the most of the life that they
• 41:12
  Speaker 1: have before they get involved in uh in uh superficial
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: political activism.
• 41:19
  Speaker 4: A lot more personal values creation.
• 41:22
  Speaker 14: Yeah, as an example to people around you.
• 41:24
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's right. I think at the end
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: of the day, you have a lot more impact than
• 41:29
  Speaker 1: just living a great life than you do in in
• 41:32
  Speaker 1: going to a protest. Thanks, right, who have I not
• 41:39
  Speaker 1: Jacob to go back to Lincoln the check go ahead.
• 41:44
  Speaker 11: Jacob driving back from Okay, driving back from Kansas City
• 41:49
  Speaker 11: to Saint Louis.
• 41:50
  Speaker 8: So I know it's a little bit about Kansas City.
• 41:52
  Speaker 1: Right, And you've got you've got somebody from Kansas City already.
• 41:55
  Speaker 1: There you go.
• 41:55
  Speaker 11: Well, now now I'm in Saint Louis, okay, But I
• 41:58
  Speaker 11: was driving back. I was listening to a podcast on
• 42:00
  Speaker 11: pattern and correctly if I'm wrong, but you said FDR's
• 42:03
  Speaker 11: only redeeming feature or basically only one, was how he
• 42:07
  Speaker 11: handled the war and guided it.
• 42:10
  Speaker 8: That roughly true.
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: I don't know if it's his only redeeming feature. You know,
• 42:14
  Speaker 1: don't take everything I say. Yeah, it's certainly it's certainly
• 42:20
  Speaker 1: a redeeming feature of his presidency, given how much bad
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: he did.
• 42:24
  Speaker 11: But then, so the podcast I was listening to was
• 42:27
  Speaker 11: on patent and the Yalta conference and how FDR basically
• 42:32
  Speaker 11: gave up most of Eastern Europe yep. And then that
• 42:34
  Speaker 11: led to forty plus years of the USSR signing off
• 42:38
  Speaker 11: wealth and continuing their funding.
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: Yep.
• 42:40
  Speaker 11: And would you say that the gates or what I
• 42:44
  Speaker 11: got from a podcast, Now, I'll have to do more research.
• 42:46
  Speaker 11: That necdates a lot of his positive traits in leading
• 42:50
  Speaker 11: the war is he didn't know how to end it.
• 42:53
  Speaker 11: Then it lasted forty plus years in the future and
• 42:56
  Speaker 11: the Aliens was suffering.
• 42:57
  Speaker 1: And then I mean, I mean the fact he wasn't. Yeah,
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: I mean absolutely, he was terrible vis a vis the Soviets.
• 43:06
  Speaker 1: He was terrible because he appointed Eisenhower to lead the
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: Sultan Europe. Eisenhower is a political a politician, not a
• 43:15
  Speaker 1: real general. So he was terrible in a lot of things.
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: But you get a lot of credit for me by
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: saying unconditional surrender. We will do any you know, everything
• 43:27
  Speaker 1: and anything to win this war. And it's it really
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: is unconditional surrender. You know. That's the credit I give
• 43:34
  Speaker 1: him for. And I say that in spite of all
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: the mistakes that were made in World War Two. And
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: the more you read about World War Two, the more
• 43:41
  Speaker 1: you realize how political it was, and how you'll get
• 43:45
  Speaker 1: you'll get just the more you read about World War Two,
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: they're angry. You'll get at at eisen at Eisenhower and
• 43:53
  Speaker 1: FDR and all of them, that Bradley and all the
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: generals there and all pathetic.
• 43:58
  Speaker 8: And on that it was talking about how.
• 44:01
  Speaker 1: But it's even worse like if you read about the
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: Civil War, right, if you read about the Civil War
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: and the generals of the North, oh my god, until
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: they got Grant, and really Grant was bailed out by
• 44:10
  Speaker 1: Schuman until you got Schuman and you unleashed Schuman. The
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: Civil War is just dragging, and it just was tough,
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: and it's very rare to have great generals and have
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: the great attitude over entered around victory. It's very unusual.
• 44:25
  Speaker 8: All thored up the modes.
• 44:26
  Speaker 11: But on that so Paton was hearing reports of what
• 44:30
  Speaker 11: was happening in Eastern Europe, and that he said, or
• 44:33
  Speaker 11: the podcast was saying, that was his primary drive for
• 44:36
  Speaker 11: wanting to invade is to liberate Eastern Europe. But that
• 44:40
  Speaker 11: for me, that sounded a little self sacrificial or secondhanded
• 44:44
  Speaker 11: of him, rather than considering the position of US troops
• 44:48
  Speaker 11: and US interests. I don't think I couldn't make an
• 44:50
  Speaker 11: argument that hey, by sacrificing now or by engaging the war,
• 44:55
  Speaker 11: then you would save lives in the future and the
• 44:57
  Speaker 11: trillion dollars spent. That sounded or that felt almost like
• 45:01
  Speaker 11: a justification for it, rather than like me posts history
• 45:07
  Speaker 11: justifying it, rather than having a concrete truth of why
• 45:09
  Speaker 11: it was an American interest when they see yourselves there.
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: Doesn't sound right to me, Patton, you know, Patten, wasn't
• 45:18
  Speaker 1: I mean the Soviets hadn't reached Eastern Europe before D Day.
• 45:25
  Speaker 1: Patten wasn't involved in D Day. He came with his
• 45:29
  Speaker 1: army after D Day had already passed. He was used
• 45:33
  Speaker 1: as a decoy, which just tells you everything you need
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: to know about how stupidly the Woar was fought. We
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: used Patent as a decoy, and you have the incompetent
• 45:41
  Speaker 1: generals actually invading Europe.
• 45:44
  Speaker 11: Pattin argument was Paton presented a report to Opper leadership
• 45:49
  Speaker 11: that hey, in six weeks week, six weeks, we could
• 45:53
  Speaker 11: go into Prague, going and mop up most of eastern Europe.
• 45:56
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean he was. He was on the vortive
• 45:58
  Speaker 1: checkers of the Czechoslovakie. He was on the board of Czechoslovakia.
• 46:02
  Speaker 1: This is way into the war, towards the end of
• 46:04
  Speaker 1: the war, and he telegraphed Bradley and Eisenhower. He telegraphed
• 46:09
  Speaker 1: Eisenhower and he basically said, I could be in Prague
• 46:12
  Speaker 1: in twenty four hours and I can take eastern Europe.
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: And he didn't hear anything, and he telegraphed again, and
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: finally Bradley got back to him. Not even Eisenhower. It's
• 46:23
  Speaker 1: too much of a coward. Bradley got back to him,
• 46:26
  Speaker 1: and Bradley said, we promised Czechoslovakia to the Soviets. Standout,
• 46:33
  Speaker 1: but he should have done it. You're in the middle
• 46:36
  Speaker 1: of a war. You're in the middle of a war. Anyway,
• 46:41
  Speaker 1: liberating those countries from the Nazis as part of the
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: war and preventing the Soviets from taking over was completely contingent,
• 46:49
  Speaker 1: consistent with American interests at that point in time, and
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: would have saved a lot of heartache later when he
• 46:56
  Speaker 1: was stationed in Berlin as head of the Allied forces
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: in Western Europe, he wanted to start a war with Russia.
• 47:03
  Speaker 1: He wanted to kick the Soviet Union out of Germany,
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: and he was he was he was obnoxious to the
• 47:10
  Speaker 1: Soviets and was trying to start a war, and Eisenhower
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: and Truman had to basically fire him or you know,
• 47:21
  Speaker 1: change his command and pull him out of Berlin. And
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: it was on his way out of Berlin, and I
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: think it was in I can't sure where it was,
• 47:29
  Speaker 1: maybe it was Paris, but he was on his way
• 47:31
  Speaker 1: out of that command when there was a traffic accident
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: and he got killed. And if you want to believe
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: in any conspiracy theory. You know, it's not a bad
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: conspiracy theory to think that they had him killed to
• 47:43
  Speaker 1: get to get an anti communist out of the way
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: so they could engage in whatever negotiations they wanted to
• 47:49
  Speaker 1: do with the Soviet Union. Now I don't believe that,
• 47:52
  Speaker 1: but it's a much more, much more reasonable conspiracy theory.
• 47:56
  Speaker 1: Then I don't know the Mossad killed JFK or something
• 47:59
  Speaker 1: like that.
• 48:01
  Speaker 8: Well, thanks, I have another question that I'll leave up
• 48:03
  Speaker 8: for the future.
• 48:04
  Speaker 1: Sure, all right, Lincoln, let's se if you can unmute.
• 48:11
  Speaker 15: That is really bad.
• 48:14
  Speaker 1: Real noise coming through so your mic is not plugged in,
• 48:17
  Speaker 1: right or something like that. Right, let me go to Andrew. Well,
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: Lincoln chose to figure that out.
• 48:25
  Speaker 4: I could follow up on every question that you answered,
• 48:28
  Speaker 4: because I think the answers are so interesting. But like
• 48:31
  Speaker 4: the one I'll follow up on is did you notice
• 48:33
  Speaker 4: the Kantianism or the Christianity in the definition that you
• 48:39
  Speaker 4: read of pragmatism It said obey you either do the
• 48:48
  Speaker 4: sensory knowledge or you obey principles.
• 48:52
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean that's pragmatism, that's the concient nature of pragmatism.
• 48:56
  Speaker 4: Yes, you obey, you know, like the notion of obeying
• 49:00
  Speaker 4: principles is interesting.
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: I think you know, to duty to act on principle. Yeah.
• 49:08
  Speaker 4: And the other thing I'll fall up on is I
• 49:10
  Speaker 4: think that a logical inference that you're making about the
• 49:14
  Speaker 4: issue of pride and children and your own children is
• 49:21
  Speaker 4: like there's a child rearing tip in there that I
• 49:24
  Speaker 4: think is implied by what you say, which is, tell
• 49:27
  Speaker 4: your child, inculcate in your child that his achievement is
• 49:31
  Speaker 4: his achievement, and that end that he should feel proud
• 49:35
  Speaker 4: of it.
• 49:37
  Speaker 1: Yeah. Absolutely, that's the emphasis I want to I want to.
• 49:41
  Speaker 4: Emphasize because because I think that parents are not doing
• 49:46
  Speaker 4: it that way. I think, and the majority what they're
• 49:48
  Speaker 4: doing is they're saying, we feel proud of you, we
• 49:50
  Speaker 4: feel proud of you, over and over again, exactly, and
• 49:54
  Speaker 4: it's like it's a bad premise, you know, I think. So,
• 50:01
  Speaker 4: you know, I think that, you know, I think it's important. Actually,
• 50:07
  Speaker 4: But anyway, let me ask you my question, which is
• 50:11
  Speaker 4: a history question. What led to What do you think
• 50:16
  Speaker 4: of the essential causes that led to the Dark Ages.
• 50:24
  Speaker 1: God?
• 50:26
  Speaker 4: Either historically or philosophically or I.
• 50:28
  Speaker 13: Mean, I mean.
• 50:31
  Speaker 1: A combination of the complete fragmentation of the Roman Empire
• 50:37
  Speaker 1: due to due to kind of the various they had
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: conquered lands which had a tribal allegiance. There were tribes
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: on there were barbaric tribes on the periphery. There was
• 50:58
  Speaker 1: just too much mayhem. It led to the breakdown of
• 51:03
  Speaker 1: the empire, which ultimately led to anarchy, uh, which is
• 51:09
  Speaker 1: anti civilizational inherently. And you know, you could argue about
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: why they got so weak as to fragment like that,
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: and I would I would say that that is that
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: is partially philosophical, partially uh, geopolitical.
• 51:26
  Speaker 4: But there was one increase in statism.
• 51:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but there was an increasing statism as partially. I mean, look,
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: it was an empire, so it was always status, but
• 51:35
  Speaker 1: there was there was a there was a philosophically, the
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: empire became the philosophy of the empire, you know was
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: was it was dominated by either Christianity or various forms
• 51:50
  Speaker 1: of stoicism or cynicism, basically a divorce from reality, a
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: a search for meaning outside of reality and outside of self. Uh.
• 52:01
  Speaker 1: That led to hedonism and uh and and particularly in
• 52:05
  Speaker 1: the upper classes, hedonism and and uh and and uh
• 52:09
  Speaker 1: and and to some extent nihilism, the enjoyment of gladiators
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: whipping each other to shreds, and and lions eating Christians,
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: which was very a very short period of time when
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: the lions ate the Christians. Uh, but the persecution of
• 52:23
  Speaker 1: Christians didn't last very long in other words. But so
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: I think it's the it's the philosophy of of of
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: the bad philosophy that they got from the Greeks, which
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: was cynicism and and ultimately led to hedonism and nihilism,
• 52:38
  Speaker 1: and and the combination with that of Christianity as being
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: the only positive, together with real geopolitical upheavals militarily as
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: their own armies got weaker and weaker, uh, and and
• 52:53
  Speaker 1: a complete fragmentation of the empire. Fragmentation. You know, the
• 52:57
  Speaker 1: empire was rich pasture because you know, it facilitated trade. Uh,
• 53:05
  Speaker 1: it had one system of law over vast periods of land.
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: And once that fragmented trade disappeared, production disappeared. You know,
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: money disappears from from Western Europe once wone falls.
• 53:21
  Speaker 3: Uh.
• 53:22
  Speaker 1: Sophisticated pottery, any any kind of industry, any kind of artisanship,
• 53:27
  Speaker 1: the sophisticated disappears because it becomes one big violent hellhole,
• 53:34
  Speaker 1: because all that's left is is uh is violenced the
• 53:38
  Speaker 1: arbitrary disputes. The empire held back the violence, you know,
• 53:42
  Speaker 1: and once it collapsed, Yeah, you got it, you gotta
• 53:47
  Speaker 1: dark ages. And it took a long time for Europe
• 53:51
  Speaker 1: to coalesce around a new set of ideas that could
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: lead it to be peaceful again and and to be
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: some extent united and to see production and uh, you know,
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: start up again. And that doesn't happen until I mean,
• 54:10
  Speaker 1: the Renaissance is the beginning of it, but it don't
• 54:12
  Speaker 1: really happen until the Enlightenment in the nineteenth century.
• 54:14
  Speaker 4: So you you put cynicism first, would you put skepticism
• 54:19
  Speaker 4: before cynicism?
• 54:20
  Speaker 1: Yeah, skepticism leads to cynicism. Skepticism is the fundamental Okay, yep,
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: thank you. Sure. All right, let's see if Lincoln has
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: his mic problems fixed, right, say something? You know, all
• 54:42
  Speaker 1: I get is noise? Sorry, right, all right, let's uh,
• 54:50
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna do. I got everybody I think. Uh, let
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: me let me do some super chats and then we'll
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: come back to the panel. James, does anxiety often amount
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: to the undertaking of amount to the undertaking of creating
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: scenarios that will only ever exist in your head, that
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: are adverse to the outcome you want. We suffer more
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: in imagination than ever in reality. Well, I don't know.
• 55:27
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't know that anxiety has to be
• 55:30
  Speaker 1: perceived in You know, you're anxious because you're not sure
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: about an outcome. You're anxious, you know when you're not,
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: when you're you know, I'm not Your anxiety is. Anxiety
• 55:48
  Speaker 1: is like fear, But I think it's often exacerbated by
• 55:58
  Speaker 1: our imagination. But I think you know, if if if
• 56:02
  Speaker 1: you're watching take your kids, right if if you know
• 56:06
  Speaker 1: they're in a race and you want your kids to win,
• 56:09
  Speaker 1: and it's really really close, and you feel you feel
• 56:12
  Speaker 1: anxiety about whether they'll win or not. No, I mean
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: that's real. You're anxious, you're not sure, you're not you
• 56:18
  Speaker 1: have an outcome and and you and you're little, you know,
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: it's it expresses you're worry about that the outcome being
• 56:24
  Speaker 1: not in your favor, and that might not just be
• 56:27
  Speaker 1: in your imagination, it might be real. So I don't
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: think anxiety is necessarily an imaginary thing. Again, I don't
• 56:33
  Speaker 1: think anxiety or anything like that as a negative. It's
• 56:35
  Speaker 1: it's a it's a signal to you about something of concern,
• 56:39
  Speaker 1: and then you have to evaluate, you know, what am
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: I going to do about it? What? What?
• 56:44
  Speaker 10: What?
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: How do I? How do I deal with the situation.
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: So it's true that we can make it a lot worse.
• 56:53
  Speaker 1: And in that sense, I agree with you that we
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: suffer more in imagination than every reality. Often a super
• 56:59
  Speaker 1: anxious about at about a conversation with your boss about
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: and then when you actually have it, it goes incredibly
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: It goes much better than you expected, or it goes
• 57:09
  Speaker 1: worse than you expected. It could go either way, right,
• 57:12
  Speaker 1: But the worrying about it in advance, the thinking about it,
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: the worrying the imagination doesn't really usually doesn't often help
• 57:19
  Speaker 1: the outcome, although it could lead you to strategies about
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: how to deal with it in a better way. So
• 57:26
  Speaker 1: anxiety is just to signal that there's something that you're
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: worried about, that you're fearful about, that needs addressing. All right, Thanks,
• 57:39
  Speaker 1: thanks James. Let's see, Michael, when did Francisco then Connam mean,
• 57:44
  Speaker 1: what did he mean when he said your manners have
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: never been glued to you to Let's say your manners
• 57:52
  Speaker 1: have never been glued to you too solidly. You lose
• 57:56
  Speaker 1: them in an emergency, and that's the time when one
• 57:59
  Speaker 1: needs them most. I mean, it's a good question, what
• 58:06
  Speaker 1: does he What did you mean by it? I've never
• 58:07
  Speaker 1: thought of that. Uh, that's the time when you need
• 58:13
  Speaker 1: them most. I think it's really that in an emergency,
• 58:19
  Speaker 1: you you need to aid to stay rational. But part
• 58:23
  Speaker 1: of staying rational is not to lose your respect for
• 58:28
  Speaker 1: the people around you, not to lose, you know, the
• 58:33
  Speaker 1: things that make you civilized, the things that make you
• 58:38
  Speaker 1: a good human being. You know, people use emergencies, use
• 58:42
  Speaker 1: panic situations to excuse a descent into kind of a barbarism,
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: or descent away from the civilized, away from from from manners.
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: And and he is saying, no, you always need to
• 58:59
  Speaker 1: remember or a human being, and and and and the
• 59:03
  Speaker 1: value of civilization and the value that other people might
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: represent to you. So you know, I don't have a
• 59:16
  Speaker 1: better explanation than that. I have to read the whole
• 59:18
  Speaker 1: scene and remind myself it's been a while since I
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: Atlas Shock that I should probably reread it soon. Clark,
• 59:26
  Speaker 1: Thank you, Michael. Your attitude is very flippant and nonchalant
• 59:30
  Speaker 1: about cutting off immediate family members like parents or siblings.
• 59:34
  Speaker 1: What's the point of having children if you won't have
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: a relationship with them when they're adults. I mean, my
• 59:40
  Speaker 1: ANSI's not flippant about it, but it's it's you have
• 59:45
  Speaker 1: to be. You have to be rational about it, you
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: have to be realistic about it. So, of course, the
• 59:50
  Speaker 1: whole purpose of raising children, the whole purpose you have,
• 59:54
  Speaker 1: your long term purpose with have is to have a relationship.
• 59:57
  Speaker 4: But that is not why this guy isn't honest in
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 4: this question, because.
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 1: He be honest and dishonesty.
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 4: No, no, I'll give you my evidence. I'll give you
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 4: my evidence. He said that you are for cutting off family,
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 4: you never.
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 1: Done non conchalant about it.
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 4: Not that i'm you are not nonchalant about it.
• 1:00:20
  Speaker 1: I am. I am in the relative to the cultural
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: attitude about the sanctity of it. So I get what
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: he's I get what he's saying. I don't I don't
• 1:00:31
  Speaker 1: attribute it to dishonesty. I don't.
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 4: I think there's something to it.
• 1:00:37
  Speaker 1: I don't think so. I I think I think relative
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 1: to the way the culture views it. So, yes, it's
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: absolutely your long term goal. But if that goal is
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 1: not being achieved. You have to be realistic and you
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 1: have to act accordingly, and you can't you can't be
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 1: deluded about it. And you have to be selfish. You
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 1: have to you have to figure out. You know, the
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 1: past is the past asked. You might invest it in
• 1:01:02
  Speaker 1: a relationship a lot, in a marriage and a friendship
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: and in a sibling, in whatever, a huge amount. But
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: you know, I'm a finance guy. I believe in some costs,
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: the past is over, the past doesn't exist, the past
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: is finished. What matters is the present in the future.
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 1: And you have to make an evaluation today about the
• 1:01:24
  Speaker 1: prospects of the future and determine the nature of a
• 1:01:27
  Speaker 1: relationship based on that. And I wouldn't be flipping about it.
• 1:01:32
  Speaker 1: You know. I don't think you should do that lightly.
• 1:01:34
  Speaker 1: I don't think you should do that easily in any relationship.
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 1: I think you should do it rationally, taking into account
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 1: the real objective prospects moving into the future. But you know,
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: the reason I come across flippant is I'm trying. It's
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: like my point about pride. I'm trying to undo a
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 1: cultural bias. There's two big of a cultural bias in
• 1:02:01
  Speaker 1: favor of sustaining relationships of blood, blood is thicker than water,
• 1:02:06
  Speaker 1: all kinds of stuff like that, and and elevating that
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 1: to some kind of supernatural, you know, mystical thing. And
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: I'm trying to say, no, it's a relationship, and you
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 1: have to view it as is it in my interest
• 1:02:22
  Speaker 1: or isn't it in my interest long term? You know,
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 1: given all the facts as I know them.
• 1:02:30
  Speaker 4: But people are taking you literally, I think some people,
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 4: And it's okay. I will just say that rand Rand
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 4: had a very positive like for rand parents. If you
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 4: know about her history her as a person, she was
• 1:02:46
  Speaker 4: very respectful of the parent child relationship. In practice, she
• 1:02:51
  Speaker 4: did not think that somebody should detach from their parents
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 4: and cut them off easily.
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 1: I don't think anybody should do it easy. But again
• 1:03:01
  Speaker 1: I think that I think there are a much more
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 1: prevalent problem. The much, much much more prevalent problem is
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: the people who latch on and hang on to relationships
• 1:03:12
  Speaker 1: when those relationships bring them no value. That is the
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 1: bigger problem. So I'd be much more concerned about that
• 1:03:19
  Speaker 1: than the other way around. All Right, Multon Moulton's Fladers said,
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 1: I just sent you two interesting links to articles, one
• 1:03:28
  Speaker 1: about Michelangelo as an architecture for fortresses, and the others
• 1:03:34
  Speaker 1: about a vermea on exhibit in w Palm Beach, a
• 1:03:40
  Speaker 1: short drive from Fort Myers and West pom Beach. Well,
• 1:03:44
  Speaker 1: westbom Beach is not a short drive from Fort Myers.
• 1:03:48
  Speaker 1: I know enough to know that that's what a three
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 1: hour drive something like that. So but I appreciate that. Uh,
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 1: there's a Vermia at the w Hotel. God, can you
• 1:04:01
  Speaker 1: imagine the insurance, the cost of insurance of having that
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 1: painting at a hotel and it's super humid there. Yeah,
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 1: I'm a little upset. I mean, they should send that
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: Vermia back. I don't know. That's great, it's I'm gonna
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 1: look it up because I'm curious what vimia that is
• 1:04:23
  Speaker 1: and where they got it from. Thank you for both articles.
• 1:04:28
  Speaker 1: I'll check them out. Molten splendid. I've searched and cannot
• 1:04:32
  Speaker 1: find your recent podcast where you show Megan Kelly ranting
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 1: and providing details of a specific torture that she believes
• 1:04:40
  Speaker 1: should be applied. Can you call the podcast? God, I
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 1: have a vague recollection of talking about something like that.
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: I can't sure what it is. Anybody remember what I said.
• 1:04:55
  Speaker 4: I kind of remember. I think what they're referring to,
• 1:04:57
  Speaker 4: which is like you covered her saying that she wishes
• 1:05:02
  Speaker 4: that the boat.
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 1: Oh yeah, that's right.
• 1:05:05
  Speaker 4: Suffer, you know, like to the last breath, that kind
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 4: of thing.
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 1: That's right. The question is what podcast did I say
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 1: that in?
• 1:05:12
  Speaker 4: That would be I'd be super impressed if you remember that.
• 1:05:15
  Speaker 1: Well, no, I don't remember what I did yesterday. I
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 1: want you to remember that. But I'm gonna look at
• 1:05:20
  Speaker 1: my live shows. Let's see if you can figure it
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: out from the titles. Individuals Amvaniscota's Greenland, new Weapons. I
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 1: don't think it's that. That's not it. That's not a
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: Bundy Hue murder, Those trade stagnations not that. Yeah, I
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 1: I god, what would it be? What would have?
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 4: What would have the problem is your own You've talked
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 4: about Megan Kelly a lot lately.
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but this one was a main story, so I
• 1:05:53
  Speaker 1: should have I would have titled it with something. Okay, I'll, i'll,
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: I'll ask Angela because Angela secretly has a secret project
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 1: that she's doing where all my latest shows are being
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 1: transcribed and and there's an you know, we're doing something
• 1:06:12
  Speaker 1: with AI with it all and this stuff on. So
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 1: she could probably deal with keyword search a text search
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 1: on making Kelly, and I'll get back to you. Molten's
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 1: Fillinda on that, so I'll tell you which one it was.
• 1:06:29
  Speaker 1: But yes, that was them making Kelly saying not only
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: should they kill them all, she hopes they kill them
• 1:06:39
  Speaker 1: slowly and that they bleed out in the ocean slowly,
• 1:06:43
  Speaker 1: and in playing in pain, you know, yelling and complaining.
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 1: I mean it was brutal.
• 1:06:49
  Speaker 4: Talk about bloodlust.
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: She was really expressing significant blood lust day. Yes, you know,
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: I would not want to be friend making Kelly. She
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 1: scares me. Uh, let's see, but that's the you know
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 1: to be Uh, that's Fox, right, that's Fox. I'm looking
• 1:07:09
  Speaker 1: at my at the list of people on here, and
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 1: I think this is true every time. But you notice
• 1:07:13
  Speaker 1: that there's not a single woman on on the on
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 1: the path.
• 1:07:17
  Speaker 4: I was wondering what happened to Deborah.
• 1:07:19
  Speaker 1: Deba's kind of faded out, and and and Jennifer's. She
• 1:07:23
  Speaker 1: was a very good Deba hasn't showed up in a while.
• 1:07:26
  Speaker 1: She's still supports to show and everything, but she hasn't
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: shown up for one of these. She got married, so
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: she's not uh as active.
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 4: But I thought because the last time, maybe she and
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 4: she and you and Jason Ryan gotten a little dust
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 4: up about like about yeah male female.
• 1:07:47
  Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah. I don't think she's I don't think she's
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 1: not coming because of that, but maybe who knows. I'll
• 1:07:51
  Speaker 1: ask her next time I see her.
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 13: I hope.
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 1: I saw this summer. Jennifer said she was late today,
• 1:08:00
  Speaker 1: that's why. But yeah, there's no women. I mean, what's
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 1: I have? You know YouTube is supposed to be a
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: platform that's male dominated. All right, Uh, let's do Lincoln
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 1: and then I just saw that somebody joined. Robie joined,
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 1: So we'll do Lincoln and rob it and then we'll
• 1:08:16
  Speaker 1: go back to our list. Lincoln. Does it work?
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 10: Now?
• 1:08:20
  Speaker 1: I can't hear you. God, something's going on there. All right,
• 1:08:29
  Speaker 1: let me go to Robit Robit. I assume you joined
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 1: because you have something urgent. You wanted to.
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 15: Sort of. I just wanted to say, well, let me
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 15: let me throw this at you. Now, my camera's messing
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 15: up here, we go, so as long as the audio works, Yep.
• 1:08:50
  Speaker 15: There are there are there are people who've got it
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 15: harder in life. Obvious example of this is is poor people.
• 1:09:01
  Speaker 15: Kid works two jobs to work his way through college,
• 1:09:05
  Speaker 15: gets his college degree. Graduates, I've run into objectivists and
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 15: friends of mine who don't who kind of shudder, who
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 15: are uneasy with the idea that poor kid who had
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 15: to work so much harder to get his degree deserves
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 15: more credit than the wealthy students who did all the
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 15: same work in college work just you know, and he
• 1:09:30
  Speaker 15: deserves all the credit of the degree he got. But
• 1:09:33
  Speaker 15: they don't want to acknowledge that that poor kid deserves
• 1:09:39
  Speaker 15: a certain amount of admiration for the extra things he
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 15: had to do to get where he got. And they
• 1:09:43
  Speaker 15: seem to feel like if we do that, then suggesting that,
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 15: well then something should be done, or we should sacrifice
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 15: for him, or the government should do something. And I'm
• 1:09:53
  Speaker 15: not none of that has to be assumed just because
• 1:09:56
  Speaker 15: you're willing to say somebody who had to work twice
• 1:09:59
  Speaker 15: as hard to get some thing deserves twice as much
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 15: moral credit or just admiration forget moral credit. I don't
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 15: want to make it that serious. Does that sound right
• 1:10:07
  Speaker 15: to you? And is that kind of related to some
• 1:10:11
  Speaker 15: of these other conversations about what we're trying to make
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 15: a point here, And we can't get distracted with that
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 15: other stuff.
• 1:10:16
  Speaker 8: Does it?
• 1:10:17
  Speaker 15: Does it? Does that kind of resonate or make any sense?
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 1: I don't. I don't see the connection.
• 1:10:20
  Speaker 5: But I don't see the connection.
• 1:10:23
  Speaker 1: I'm getting, ann you have a mic on.
• 1:10:26
  Speaker 15: Yeah, let me commute myself while you're talking.
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 1: So No, absolutely, that child deserves, you know, extra admiration.
• 1:10:35
  Speaker 1: That is, you know, absolutely, the fact that he had
• 1:10:39
  Speaker 1: a hard to go at it is a much greater
• 1:10:43
  Speaker 1: reflection on character than the kid who who had it easy. Yes,
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: they both achieved the same thing, but one one exhibits
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 1: a certain level of character that It's not that the
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 1: other is a negative. It's just hasn't had the opportunity
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 1: to exhibit that character, and the poor kid did. And
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: if he gets moral credit, but he also and he
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 1: gets admiration. Absolutely, So I have no problem with assigning
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: moral credit. You know, there's no question that there are
• 1:11:12
  Speaker 1: circumstances under which it's harder to shape your soul in
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 1: a positive way, and there are other circums that's what's
• 1:11:19
  Speaker 1: easier to shape your soul in a positive way, and
• 1:11:22
  Speaker 1: overcoming adversity is admirable. It's that word, you know what
• 1:11:30
  Speaker 1: I mean. It's something to admire and it's heroic, which
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 1: you would You wouldn't say a hero is somebody who
• 1:11:37
  Speaker 1: who overcomes adversity and achieves something. Somebody overcomes the same adversity.
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 1: It's somebody who achieves the same thing but does not
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: overcome adversity. Great, but it's not a hero, right. The
• 1:11:50
  Speaker 1: heroism comes from overcoming adversity. So absolutely, I mean, if
• 1:11:54
  Speaker 1: I if those two applicants applied for a job with me,
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: I towards the poor kid who hustled to get there
• 1:12:03
  Speaker 1: because it reflects something that I don't know about the
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 1: let's call him the rich kid. I just don't know
• 1:12:12
  Speaker 1: how he will face deal with adversity. I know this
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 1: kid will deal with adversity well, so all else the same. Right.
• 1:12:21
  Speaker 1: The fact that one had to overcome more to achieve
• 1:12:23
  Speaker 1: something says something about his character that I find admirable
• 1:12:27
  Speaker 1: that it would encourage media make a decision in his favor.
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 1: So I'm going even further than MU did. You're muted now,
• 1:12:38
  Speaker 1: sorry about that.
• 1:12:39
  Speaker 15: The connection is is nature and nurture, and people wanting
• 1:12:42
  Speaker 15: to say, well, we're objectivists. We don't care about nature,
• 1:12:45
  Speaker 15: we don't care about nurture, we don't care how someone
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 15: was brought up. We don't care what their background was.
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 15: They've got free will, but that's ridiculous. I mean, nature
• 1:12:52
  Speaker 15: has an impact to have an impact if he will
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 15: is not not it's not in a vacuum. And when
• 1:13:01
  Speaker 15: you have free will, you will.
• 1:13:03
  Speaker 1: You might want to mate because going when we have
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 1: free will, when you apply your mind, some people when
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 1: they apply their mind, have a plethora of choices, lots
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 1: of opportunities, lots of different things they could do and
• 1:13:19
  Speaker 1: it's just waiting there to be picked up. And other people,
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: you know, when they when they apply their mind and
• 1:13:26
  Speaker 1: apply their free will, have very limited choices. You know.
• 1:13:29
  Speaker 1: They could join a gang, or they could go up
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: against everybody in the little community and go to school
• 1:13:35
  Speaker 1: in spite of that and be harassed by everybody. It's
• 1:13:39
  Speaker 1: not the same. It's just not the same. And h
• 1:13:45
  Speaker 1: so you can't you can't igno what somebody has to
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: go through in order to achieve what he achieves. Now
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 1: the achievement is the same as you said, they both
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 1: get a degree. Is one shouldn't get an A because
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: he tried hard to They both get a's. But in
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: terms of admiring, in terms a character and admiration of
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: the character. Absolutely how you got to where you got
• 1:14:11
  Speaker 1: matters and makes a difference.
• 1:14:13
  Speaker 15: Excellent. I think it's just a great point to bring
• 1:14:15
  Speaker 15: out because again maybe you're not seeing this the way
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 15: I do, but especially younger objectivists, but even some older
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 15: folks who want to say, well, but that would lead
• 1:14:23
  Speaker 15: to you know, participation trophies and egalitarianism, and no, it's not.
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 15: It's just one when when you great judge somebody, you
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 15: got to judge everything.
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 8: I just don't.
• 1:14:31
  Speaker 1: I just don't socialize enough with objectivists to get into
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: these conversations. Very good, too much of a loan, No,
• 1:14:39
  Speaker 1: I guess, okay, but yeah, I I you know, it
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 1: sounds familiar in the sense that, yeah, I can see
• 1:14:49
  Speaker 1: how young objectivists would would would make that case. But
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: it's it's wrong. It's wrong.
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 8: Good, Thank you?
• 1:14:58
  Speaker 1: Sure? All right. Uh let's see we're going to start
• 1:15:01
  Speaker 1: this time with Daniel.
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 3: Jeron.
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 12: I wonder if you're planning on doing some sort of
• 1:15:09
  Speaker 12: a year end summary on the economy, the markets, and
• 1:15:15
  Speaker 12: where you think things might go in twenty twenty six.
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 12: And I have to preface this by saying, back before
• 1:15:22
  Speaker 12: Trump got elected, this time. After hearing all the terrible
• 1:15:26
  Speaker 12: things you were saying, I bought a bunch of calls
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 12: on gold, got in at under three thousand dollars on
• 1:15:33
  Speaker 12: a lot, and so I'm looking for the next big
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 12: trade out of you.
• 1:15:37
  Speaker 1: Wow, that is amazing. Next time you do that, can
• 1:15:40
  Speaker 1: you can you text me and let me know I
• 1:15:42
  Speaker 1: can cut.
• 1:15:44
  Speaker 5: I was embarrassed. I was embarrassed thinking I'm probably who.
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: Could imagine gold at forty five hundred. I mean, it's
• 1:15:52
  Speaker 1: just unimaginable to me, and I don't understand it. And
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 1: I'm sorry. I know there's a bunch of gold bugs
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 1: out there who think I'm a complete iigno amus because
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 1: they get that they understand it doesn't make any sense
• 1:16:02
  Speaker 1: to me from an economics perspective, I don't get it.
• 1:16:05
  Speaker 1: It's it's not compensating for inflation. Inflation's price increases, it's
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: not reflective of increase in M two. It just it's
• 1:16:16
  Speaker 1: just out of nowhere. So I don't get.
• 1:16:18
  Speaker 4: Why do they think you're missing something obvious? Like these
• 1:16:21
  Speaker 4: these commenters.
• 1:16:23
  Speaker 1: Well, because they believe gold is money. In there's a
• 1:16:27
  Speaker 1: sensure which is implicitly money and it going up, you know,
• 1:16:32
  Speaker 1: immediately suggests that the value of the dollar has declined
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: significantly and all prices and all wages be denominated in gold.
• 1:16:40
  Speaker 1: And of course if you did that, that would mean
• 1:16:43
  Speaker 1: that your your income has just declined in terms of
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 1: purchasing power in terms of the value of the dollar
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 1: by fifty, by yeah, fifty, over the last over the
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: last year or so, And that just is insane to me.
• 1:16:59
  Speaker 1: That's just not true. I remember that it used to
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: be said that an ounce of gold could buy a suit,
• 1:17:06
  Speaker 1: and so in when an ounce of gold was forty
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: five bucks, that's how much a suit costs approximately, and
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 1: a nice suit cost four hundred and fifty bucks when
• 1:17:15
  Speaker 1: gold went up to four hundred and fifty, and it
• 1:17:18
  Speaker 1: kind of tracking for a while there. Yeah, an ounce
• 1:17:20
  Speaker 1: of gold could buy a suit, but what the hell
• 1:17:23
  Speaker 1: four five hundred dollars. Suits give me a break, particularly
• 1:17:26
  Speaker 1: if you can get them cheap from Asia. You can
• 1:17:29
  Speaker 1: get suits have gone cheaper, not more expensive, and sillin
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 1: me not that expensive. So let's say a suit now
• 1:17:35
  Speaker 1: is fifty a nice suit, the same kind of nice
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 1: suit that you could get once for four and fifty,
• 1:17:41
  Speaker 1: Maybe it's fifteen hundred dollars. I don't know of a
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: suit that costs four five I'm sure there is. I'm
• 1:17:46
  Speaker 1: not saying there isn't a suit that cost forty five
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 1: hundred dollars. I'm sure Chanelle or Lousvitan or something like that.
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 1: But it's but it's just absolutely not true that an
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: ounce of gold buys the same today as it did
• 1:18:01
  Speaker 1: forty years ago. That's just it buys so much more today.
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 1: Gold has gone up in real terms, in terms of
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 1: puchasing power. It's gone up dramatically. And I don't know
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 1: why they think what they think. I haven't got into it.
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 1: As I said, I'm alone, so I haven't got into
• 1:18:16
  Speaker 1: a debate with them, but it would be interesting to
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 1: try to figure that out.
• 1:18:20
  Speaker 4: But they're pretty harsh with you.
• 1:18:22
  Speaker 1: Yes, people are people generally, when they disagree with me,
• 1:18:25
  Speaker 1: they don't disagree with me gently.
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 4: They they feel like respectfully, they always a way to
• 1:18:31
  Speaker 4: respectfully disagree with them.
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 1: They feel like if they're going to disagree with me,
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 1: they have to make clear that my my my faults, uh,
• 1:18:41
  Speaker 1: you know, irredeemable and uh and uh yeah, it's it's
• 1:18:45
  Speaker 1: it's a brutal out there in the world of social media,
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: particularly if they're anonymous if they if they don't put
• 1:18:51
  Speaker 1: their name on the post, and then they're even more brutal.
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 4: Yeah, they're name callers.
• 1:18:55
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but yeah, so of course I'm president too. So yeah.
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 1: So January thirty, first show, I will do a section
• 1:19:04
  Speaker 1: on how the economy has been and where I think
• 1:19:07
  Speaker 1: it's going. I have to say that I haven't called
• 1:19:17
  Speaker 1: it very well in the past, right I mean, I mean,
• 1:19:19
  Speaker 1: I've been calling the session for a long time and
• 1:19:22
  Speaker 1: it hasn't happened. I thought there would be a session
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: during the Biden term. I think I don't understand the
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: latest GDP reading and where that is coming from and
• 1:19:34
  Speaker 1: what's generating it. It's you know, and I don't understand
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 1: where the market is at this point. It really does
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: feel like, you know, nineteen ninety nine or beginning of
• 1:19:48
  Speaker 1: two thousand and you know if but I don't have
• 1:19:52
  Speaker 1: the courage to sell everything into short the market. I
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: wish I wish I had that. You know, if I
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 1: had my style, had my hitch fund, I might be
• 1:19:59
  Speaker 1: doing it. But I don't have the cover.
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 8: You know.
• 1:20:01
  Speaker 1: My attitude is I'm just going to stay diverse ft
• 1:20:04
  Speaker 1: It's worked for the last fifty years. It'll work for
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 1: the next And but yeah, I wish i'd bought some
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 1: call options in gold, or on the market for that matter.
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 1: Call options on in video would have done pretty well too.
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 5: Oh yeah, sure.
• 1:20:19
  Speaker 1: But that's the thing. It doesn't make sense that gold
• 1:20:21
  Speaker 1: goes up that much and then video goes up that much.
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 1: That and you know, unless the Invidia is pure monetary inflation, right,
• 1:20:29
  Speaker 1: what's driving the in Vidia stock is monetary inflation, and
• 1:20:32
  Speaker 1: gold is predicting massive depreciation and the value of the
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 1: dollar over the next few years. And that means we'll
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 1: see price inflation go up dramatically in the next few years.
• 1:20:45
  Speaker 1: Maybe that's going to happen. I just don't see it.
• 1:20:48
  Speaker 1: I see much more likely in Vidia collapsing and losing
• 1:20:53
  Speaker 1: I don't know, forty fifty percent of its value. I
• 1:20:55
  Speaker 1: wouldn't be shocked if that happened. I'd be pretty shocked
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 1: of inflation was double digits any I mean, CPI consume
• 1:21:02
  Speaker 1: inflation double digit anytime in the foreseeable future.
• 1:21:07
  Speaker 5: Right, Thank you, looking forward to the show.
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 1: Thanks all right, Ryan, Ryan, Okay, we'll go buback. I
• 1:21:18
  Speaker 1: was thinking would but that's fine. No, I can go.
• 1:21:21
  Speaker 1: I can goa Ryan next, So that's.
• 1:21:24
  Speaker 14: All this question is related to all this discussion. What
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 14: do you think about the prospect of the tariff rebate
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 14: checks mimicking stimulus checks from COVID And as second part,
• 1:21:46
  Speaker 14: you know, do you do you think that the impacts
• 1:21:49
  Speaker 14: of that sort of stimulus, which is.
• 1:21:51
  Speaker 1: What it is, really would would have the same.
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 14: Impacts to the economy or two inflation or to other
• 1:22:02
  Speaker 14: metrics as the COVID checked Or has that already been
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 14: priced into people's markets, like they don't know, People don't
• 1:22:09
  Speaker 14: know what's going to happen. How can you price that in?
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I don't eats priced. I don't think anybody expects
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 1: the checks to ever materialize. I think it's a fantasy.
• 1:22:15
  Speaker 1: It's one of those lies that Trump keeps saying, and
• 1:22:17
  Speaker 1: it will never happen.
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 4: I think just said it again.
• 1:22:20
  Speaker 1: Who did every two days bested? I mean, excess secretary war?
• 1:22:27
  Speaker 1: What the hell does you know?
• 1:22:29
  Speaker 10: So?
• 1:22:32
  Speaker 1: Okay, I mean, I don't. I don't know why they're
• 1:22:36
  Speaker 1: saying it. Maybe maybe their plan is to try to
• 1:22:39
  Speaker 1: bribe the American people before the next election, in before
• 1:22:42
  Speaker 1: the congression election in twenty twenty six. They have to
• 1:22:46
  Speaker 1: get Congress to pass it, so it'd have to be
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: in a budget resolution next year. You know that we're
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 1: running these massive deficits. You know, I don't. I can't
• 1:22:58
  Speaker 1: imagine it happening. I just can't imagine it happening. Now
• 1:23:03
  Speaker 1: if it does, then again, it really depends. It depends
• 1:23:08
  Speaker 1: what the FED does, right, So you can imagine them,
• 1:23:14
  Speaker 1: you know, basically issuing all of US two thousand dollars
• 1:23:18
  Speaker 1: checks and the FEDS sucking up two thousand dollars per
• 1:23:22
  Speaker 1: person money out of the economy at the same time.
• 1:23:25
  Speaker 1: So it's called immunizing. So they immunize the effect of
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 1: it by taking the money out of the economy by buying,
• 1:23:32
  Speaker 1: by you know, selling a bunch of bonds in their portfolio.
• 1:23:41
  Speaker 4: You know.
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 1: That is possible, So I really, I really, But if
• 1:23:47
  Speaker 1: Trump gets his guy into the FED, it's unlikely that
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 1: would happen because that would probably also if the FED
• 1:23:56
  Speaker 1: starts selling bonds, that'll that'll drive interest rates up. Uh, So.
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 8: I know it would be a slowed drip in.
• 1:24:07
  Speaker 11: But what if the terrorists get overruled and all the
• 1:24:10
  Speaker 11: one hundred billion dollars it's a different scale, but all
• 1:24:14
  Speaker 11: that gets sent back to the manufacturers and importers. Would
• 1:24:17
  Speaker 11: that also be an inflation driver?
• 1:24:20
  Speaker 1: No, because it's it's gonna be spent anyway, right, it's
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 1: just a question of who's spending. It's the government of them.
• 1:24:25
  Speaker 1: They're not taking any additional debt out. I mean, interstates
• 1:24:31
  Speaker 1: would change, interstates would reflect it. Yeah, it's gonna be
• 1:24:36
  Speaker 1: interesting to see. I don't I don't know. I don't
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 1: think that's inflationaty in the same sense as putting, uh,
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 1: putting money out of nowhere and distributing it. I I
• 1:24:48
  Speaker 1: I need it. I'll think about it, but I don't
• 1:24:50
  Speaker 1: think it's gonna happen. That's why I haven't given any thought,
• 1:24:53
  Speaker 1: because I think it's just it's just a it's just
• 1:24:55
  Speaker 1: something that these guy guys are saying, uh to make
• 1:24:58
  Speaker 1: a conversation. But I don't think there's any any way
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 1: that it could become a realistic thing. Uh. But and
• 1:25:07
  Speaker 1: I think the same quote is going to rule against
• 1:25:09
  Speaker 1: Trump on the tariffs.
• 1:25:10
  Speaker 4: And then the question is shape up the electorate. Don't
• 1:25:13
  Speaker 4: you think you're own They're just trying to hype people up,
• 1:25:15
  Speaker 4: regardless of whether they're going to deliver on the promise.
• 1:25:19
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but the election is far away. Enough in the
• 1:25:22
  Speaker 1: future that people will say, but why haven't you delivered it?
• 1:25:25
  Speaker 1: I'll need yet, So hyping it up now is a
• 1:25:27
  Speaker 1: little early. They should have done it in six months.
• 1:25:30
  Speaker 1: Should they should basically say, they should have said in
• 1:25:32
  Speaker 1: six months, if you give me a republic in Congress,
• 1:25:36
  Speaker 1: I'll give you the checks. But now is a little
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 1: early that people will say, why haven't you delivered You've
• 1:25:41
  Speaker 1: had a year that you said, Yeah, what's new? I mean,
• 1:25:47
  Speaker 1: I need to think about what Jacob said, if that
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 1: makes a difference. If it comes directly to consumers, it
• 1:25:53
  Speaker 1: goes through the companies in terms of its effect and prices.
• 1:26:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, the thing about what happened during COVID is
• 1:26:05
  Speaker 1: that they it was basically completely you know, they basically
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 1: borrowed a huge amount of money, which was monetized by
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 1: the FED. Because there wasn't enough of a market to
• 1:26:16
  Speaker 1: actually borrow all that money. It was monetized by the FED.
• 1:26:20
  Speaker 1: That is, the FED created money so that they could
• 1:26:22
  Speaker 1: then and then they pitched it directly to consumers who
• 1:26:25
  Speaker 1: then went out and spend it. And so you had
• 1:26:27
  Speaker 1: an immediate effect of an increase in demand without you know,
• 1:26:34
  Speaker 1: supply catching up and prices have to go up. It's
• 1:26:40
  Speaker 1: not true that every stimulus has that same effect. For example,
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 1: if you give it to Walmart, it doesn't quite filter
• 1:26:47
  Speaker 1: through the economy in a way that raises prices in
• 1:26:50
  Speaker 1: the same way as you give it to every household,
• 1:26:54
  Speaker 1: it doesn't have the same impact on prices. It might
• 1:27:01
  Speaker 1: smooth it out over the longer run, and I'm not
• 1:27:04
  Speaker 1: sure it would be monetized. I don't know what the
• 1:27:07
  Speaker 1: FED is going to do. It's going to be interesting
• 1:27:08
  Speaker 1: to see what the FED does over the next year.
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 1: That will really determine what happens over the next year.
• 1:27:13
  Speaker 1: Is you know what the feds mandate is. Once a
• 1:27:17
  Speaker 1: FED a point a Trump appointee is running the FED.
• 1:27:21
  Speaker 4: Is there any doubt it's going to be whatever Trump wants?
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: There is some doubt, Okay, there is some doubt. I mean,
• 1:27:30
  Speaker 1: he's going to try to make sure that the person
• 1:27:32
  Speaker 1: he nominates is somebody who will do what he wants.
• 1:27:35
  Speaker 1: But you know, who knows? People could I guess we
• 1:27:39
  Speaker 1: should just buy gold in the meantime, I don't know
• 1:27:42
  Speaker 1: how do you buy gold at forty five hundred? God?
• 1:27:46
  Speaker 8: Do you buy a platinum not gold or silver?
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 1: Sil visit all time highs as well, and completely irrationally
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 1: so at least from my perspective. Yeah, I don't know.
• 1:27:57
  Speaker 1: You know, maybe you should buy bitcoin. Bitcoin is cheap.
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 1: It's only eighty seven thousand. It was one hundred and
• 1:28:02
  Speaker 1: twenty four thousand not that long ago. So there you go.
• 1:28:05
  Speaker 1: There's there's upside, all.
• 1:28:08
  Speaker 6: Right's Steve, there are other possibilities or Golden City at
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 6: both paying at.
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 1: All time highs.
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 6: Other question someone mentioned Michael Angel meant what meaning what
• 1:28:23
  Speaker 6: I mean, there's like a wide.
• 1:28:24
  Speaker 13: Like if you look at like gold flows like.
• 1:28:26
  Speaker 6: The biggest buyers and like retails, like central banks, like
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 6: I think I says more about the West makes my
• 1:28:35
  Speaker 6: potential weaponization of the US dollar than it does anything
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 6: about inflation.
• 1:28:42
  Speaker 1: I just I just don't know. You know what people
• 1:28:48
  Speaker 1: what the central banks are going to do with the
• 1:28:49
  Speaker 1: gold Okay, because they're not going to go to bolt
• 1:28:55
  Speaker 1: stand it, that is for certain.
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 6: And listen, I think they use it for bilateral bilateral settlement.
• 1:29:03
  Speaker 1: I don't think that will ever happen. I mean, ever,
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 1: it's a long time, but it's not gonna happen anytime
• 1:29:08
  Speaker 1: soon because it's it's Yeah, do.
• 1:29:12
  Speaker 4: You think it's irrational to buy gold at this price.
• 1:29:15
  Speaker 1: No, I don't think it's irrational. I mean I it's
• 1:29:19
  Speaker 1: it's rational for me to buy gold at this price
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 1: because I don't get it. But if you get it,
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 1: then do it. I mean, I don't have all the
• 1:29:26
  Speaker 1: knowledge in the world and these things, Steve.
• 1:29:29
  Speaker 6: It's difficult because like people worth like it's two thousand,
• 1:29:33
  Speaker 6: but also could be nineteen ninety five, right like in
• 1:29:36
  Speaker 6: nineteen ninety.
• 1:29:36
  Speaker 7: Five, there was a long way to run, and in terms.
• 1:29:39
  Speaker 1: Of stock market. In terms of stock market, yes, and
• 1:29:43
  Speaker 1: it could be nineteen ninety five, although it's unlikely because
• 1:29:46
  Speaker 1: valuations are much more like ninety ninety nine in terms
• 1:29:49
  Speaker 1: of in terms of price to book pe foward P,
• 1:29:51
  Speaker 1: backward P. However you want to value it. It doesn't
• 1:29:54
  Speaker 1: look like ninety five. It looks much more like ninety nine.
• 1:29:57
  Speaker 1: But I'm not saying it is because because it could
• 1:29:59
  Speaker 1: value just could go a lot higher, and the upside
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 1: of AI could be a lot higher than the upside
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 1: of Internet. Right, So yeah, I don't know. I just
• 1:30:12
  Speaker 1: I know. I don't understand that. I know, but I
• 1:30:14
  Speaker 1: didn't understand ninety nine either, and I failed to make
• 1:30:18
  Speaker 1: any money off of that one as well, so it's
• 1:30:21
  Speaker 1: I both put options in Amazon.
• 1:30:26
  Speaker 6: Too soon a few months a few months and someone
• 1:30:28
  Speaker 6: mentioned Michael Angelo.
• 1:30:30
  Speaker 7: A few months ago, either you or someone on the
• 1:30:33
  Speaker 7: chat recommended that I read Agony the Ecstasy, which was
• 1:30:36
  Speaker 7: an absolutely amazing book.
• 1:30:38
  Speaker 1: Is amazing.
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 6: I will go back and see more of Michaelangelists, a
• 1:30:42
  Speaker 6: whole new appreciation for what it took to like bake
• 1:30:45
  Speaker 6: the Sistine Chapel good After after that, well into another
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 6: book that you recommended a couple of years ago that
• 1:30:56
  Speaker 6: I read, which was Christendom. Look at these people that
• 1:30:59
  Speaker 6: come off and I hear it like I listen to
• 1:31:01
  Speaker 6: the podcast, so I hear like in the questions like
• 1:31:04
  Speaker 6: why aren't we making more progress in objectivism?
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 7: And what are we going to do in like ten years?
• 1:31:12
  Speaker 6: And I think that book gave me a real appreciation
• 1:31:17
  Speaker 6: for the time scale that like an intellectual movement can take,
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 6: because that book starts three hundred years into Christianity, right,
• 1:31:26
  Speaker 6: and it ends a thousand years later, right, like it
• 1:31:30
  Speaker 6: took really thirteen hundred years for Christianity to you know,
• 1:31:35
  Speaker 6: conquer Europe. I'm not saying that this will take thirteen
• 1:31:39
  Speaker 6: hundred years, but like the it feels like I could say,
• 1:31:43
  Speaker 6: where are we going to be in ten twenty fifty years?
• 1:31:46
  Speaker 6: Seems like really the wrong time scale to be thinking about.
• 1:31:51
  Speaker 6: I don't you know, I've thought about.
• 1:31:53
  Speaker 7: This, Andrew. I'm not convinced that.
• 1:31:57
  Speaker 6: Just having zoom or zoom or the Internet it's like
• 1:32:01
  Speaker 6: necessarily going to help us, because that seems like a
• 1:32:04
  Speaker 6: nutrament technology.
• 1:32:05
  Speaker 4: Man, you're wrong about that. You're being You're being cynical
• 1:32:09
  Speaker 4: it's actually gonna help us. But I do agree with
• 1:32:13
  Speaker 4: you as on your fundamental point that like it is
• 1:32:16
  Speaker 4: going to take longer than a lot of people think.
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 7: Yeah, that's some sort of belief.
• 1:32:22
  Speaker 6: Eehold, I was gonna ask you Rod, like, how do
• 1:32:24
  Speaker 6: you think about like these time scans? It just strikes
• 1:32:27
  Speaker 6: me like even Christianity was wrong, right, and it still
• 1:32:34
  Speaker 6: was able to win out over you know, other things
• 1:32:38
  Speaker 6: and its day. And if I was like being like optimistic,
• 1:32:42
  Speaker 6: I'd be like, hey, man, if we could have like
• 1:32:43
  Speaker 6: we could have like some of the mysticism crushed in
• 1:32:47
  Speaker 6: a couple of hundred years, like we'll be just way
• 1:32:49
  Speaker 6: better off, And that seems like a much more attainable
• 1:32:52
  Speaker 6: goal than like we're gonna be living in this lasi
• 1:32:55
  Speaker 6: faire capitalist society, you know, voluntary taxes.
• 1:33:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean I was. I've been an objectivist for
• 1:33:05
  Speaker 1: almost fifty years. It's a little scary to say that.
• 1:33:08
  Speaker 1: Like I read Outla Shrugged forty forty eight years ago,
• 1:33:13
  Speaker 1: is that right? Yeah, seven in nineteen seventy, nineteen seventy seven, right,
• 1:33:21
  Speaker 1: So I read at LEAs Shrug in nineteen seventy seven,
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 1: So it's almost fifty years and so yeah, I mean things,
• 1:33:32
  Speaker 1: you know, from the perspective of progress and objectivism, Wow,
• 1:33:36
  Speaker 1: I mean a huge amount of progress has happened. From
• 1:33:38
  Speaker 1: the perspective of changing the world. Almost nothing's happened, right,
• 1:33:42
  Speaker 1: So it's not going to be ten years, it's not
• 1:33:44
  Speaker 1: going to be twenty years. You should think in terms
• 1:33:47
  Speaker 1: of you know, fifty to one hundred to several hundred
• 1:33:52
  Speaker 1: years in terms of progress. Christianity also had the huge
• 1:33:56
  Speaker 1: benefit of the Roman Empire basically making it to state religion.
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 1: And even in spite of that, it took hundreds of
• 1:34:05
  Speaker 1: years after that to solidify as hold on the West,
• 1:34:10
  Speaker 1: and it was challenged. Now Christianity's false. So that is
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 1: a detriment that right, that it should take them longer
• 1:34:21
  Speaker 1: given that they're false, but then again, everything else around
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 1: them were false, So everything was false. It was just
• 1:34:26
  Speaker 1: a matter of false ideas battling each other. You would
• 1:34:29
  Speaker 1: think that a true philosophy or philosophy that you know
• 1:34:33
  Speaker 1: is moving us certainly towards reality and objectivity, would spread faster.
• 1:34:44
  Speaker 1: But you know, given how entrenched false ideas are, and
• 1:34:49
  Speaker 1: given how anti intellectual so many people are, and given
• 1:34:52
  Speaker 1: how many people are at the missing link stage kind
• 1:34:56
  Speaker 1: of the perceptual level, I just don't see how it happens.
• 1:34:59
  Speaker 1: And less than fifty to one hundred years, I mean,
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 1: it's just I've become I used to be more optimistic
• 1:35:06
  Speaker 1: in that sense, and it've become more I think, realistic.
• 1:35:09
  Speaker 1: So I used to argue with Landed, but lended as
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 1: usual is right. So it was.
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 4: And do you view the Internet as a net positive
• 1:35:16
  Speaker 4: or a net negative?
• 1:35:17
  Speaker 1: It's definitely a net positive because because you know, the
• 1:35:20
  Speaker 1: access to information and ideas has to benefit us, it
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 1: doesn't hurt us. And the reality is that we don't
• 1:35:29
  Speaker 1: have to, you know, write out in script the Aristotle's books,
• 1:35:34
  Speaker 1: and we're not going to lose the books. And everything's online.
• 1:35:37
  Speaker 1: You can access everything that has to be in that benefit,
• 1:35:40
  Speaker 1: but how much it helps to shorten it. You know,
• 1:35:44
  Speaker 1: there's a shorten it for thirteen hundred years to six
• 1:35:47
  Speaker 1: hundred years to three hundred years. In any case, we're
• 1:35:51
  Speaker 1: talking about a long period of time. We're not talking
• 1:35:52
  Speaker 1: about a decade or two. I always thought that by
• 1:35:57
  Speaker 1: the end of my life, i'd like to see the
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 1: beginnings of a positive change. And I still would like
• 1:36:04
  Speaker 1: to see that. But I'm most skeptical now that I will.
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 1: I figure I've got twenty maybe, okay, let me make
• 1:36:12
  Speaker 1: it thirty years, just we'll be optimistic. Thirty is maybe.
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 4: Didn't you give us didn't you give a lecture on
• 1:36:18
  Speaker 4: being optimistic, like a big lecture at Ocon?
• 1:36:22
  Speaker 1: Yeah, but you know, but you you not not irrationally,
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 1: not irrationally, So.
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 4: Would you update that conclusion?
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 1: No, you should be optimistic depends on what In terms
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 1: of changing the world, there's no reason to be optimistic,
• 1:36:39
  Speaker 1: and I don't think I don't think that was my
• 1:36:41
  Speaker 1: conclusion at the talk, that I was optimistic about changing
• 1:36:44
  Speaker 1: the world.
• 1:36:45
  Speaker 6: Change yourself as chairman of AARI, how has this like
• 1:36:50
  Speaker 6: you're you're shifting, You're like, I guess you're thinking about
• 1:36:54
  Speaker 6: different time.
• 1:36:54
  Speaker 7: Scales, like, how has that evolved?
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 6: What you think or how you've influenced the strategy if
• 1:37:02
  Speaker 6: you don't when you say anything, you don't want to.
• 1:37:04
  Speaker 7: But I'm curious about that.
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 1: I don't think it's really shifted the strategy much because
• 1:37:09
  Speaker 1: the strategy has always been long term. You know, in
• 1:37:11
  Speaker 1: long term could mean decades or centuries, it doesn't really
• 1:37:14
  Speaker 1: matter for that respect, right, So the long term strategy
• 1:37:18
  Speaker 1: has always been get people to read din Rand and
• 1:37:21
  Speaker 1: train intellectuals, because intellectuals ultimately change the culture. Right, Ironran
• 1:37:25
  Speaker 1: being the chief intellectuals, you want people reading her, and
• 1:37:28
  Speaker 1: then train as many intellectuals as you can and get
• 1:37:31
  Speaker 1: them out there. I think what I've discovered, and this
• 1:37:35
  Speaker 1: is why I think it's going to take longer, is
• 1:37:39
  Speaker 1: that getting people to read inn Rand it's not that hard,
• 1:37:46
  Speaker 1: but particularly as the culture deteriorates and education deteriates, what
• 1:37:51
  Speaker 1: they get out of reading iron Ran becomes less and less.
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 1: That is, it changes few and fewer people actually reading
• 1:37:58
  Speaker 1: the books. And then it turns out that training intellectuals
• 1:38:02
  Speaker 1: is super difficult, much much more difficult than I would
• 1:38:05
  Speaker 1: have expected.
• 1:38:07
  Speaker 4: But it seems like Aari has really honed in on
• 1:38:11
  Speaker 4: focusing in on that element of it, which is training
• 1:38:14
  Speaker 4: new intellectuals, like I see it. A different intensity of
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 4: focus on that in the last couple of years.
• 1:38:20
  Speaker 1: Partially because there's somebody to train. But yes, I think
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: that's right, but it's still hard, harder than I think
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 1: people appreciate that. People understand it's really I mean objectivism.
• 1:38:34
  Speaker 1: You know, you could perceive it as easy in a sense. Yeah,
• 1:38:37
  Speaker 1: it all makes sense I can apply to my life.
• 1:38:40
  Speaker 1: But then to integrate it as an intellectual and to
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 1: apply it as an intellectual, and to apply consistently intellectual
• 1:38:46
  Speaker 1: and to be able to write and speak about it,
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 1: and then to be able to write and speak in
• 1:38:51
  Speaker 1: a way that has an impact out there in the world.
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 1: It's really really hard, and it's hard to train people
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 1: to do it. So it's the only it's the answers.
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 1: It's all you can do. Keep doing it. Sorry, Steve, No,
• 1:39:08
  Speaker 1: not a satisfying answer, but uh I'm satisfied, Okay, good good?
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 1: Uh Randy.
• 1:39:19
  Speaker 10: Yeah, I've been using the chat g t P for
• 1:39:21
  Speaker 10: different things that I've been very impressed with their answers
• 1:39:25
  Speaker 10: and so on.
• 1:39:25
  Speaker 1: But are there other.
• 1:39:29
  Speaker 10: You know, sites that are that do you think are
• 1:39:32
  Speaker 10: just as good or more useful or.
• 1:39:36
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think I think they're all really good.
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 1: They they have a little bit of a different attitude.
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 1: Growk is pretty good on some things. That's the Twitter,
• 1:39:48
  Speaker 1: the X one Gemini which is is Gemini Google is
• 1:39:53
  Speaker 1: that rights Google? And then there's one other one that
• 1:39:58
  Speaker 1: is what's what's that? Claud and anthropic goes thinking of Anthropic. Yeah,
• 1:40:09
  Speaker 1: I think they're all good. Gibt I think is the
• 1:40:14
  Speaker 1: I don't know. It comes across as the most natural Grock.
• 1:40:18
  Speaker 1: I worry because alone Musk runs it, so it has
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 1: its biases. I find it fascinating because it's sometimes really
• 1:40:30
  Speaker 1: really that's right. Anthropic is Claude, Okay, that's what you
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 1: guys were saying. Claude. It's sometimes really good and really satisfying,
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 1: and sometimes it's stupid and it's it's so obvious that yeah.
• 1:40:44
  Speaker 1: I mean, all it can really do is regurgitate what's
• 1:40:46
  Speaker 1: out there in terms of information. It can it it's
• 1:40:51
  Speaker 1: and it can't separate what's true and what's not. I
• 1:40:54
  Speaker 1: have to often guide it away from sources which I
• 1:40:57
  Speaker 1: don't trust, like Wikipedia for example, of fen tell it
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 1: don't use Wikipedia and give me an answer an answer shift.
• 1:41:04
  Speaker 1: It changes because it's waiting the different things differently. Because
• 1:41:08
  Speaker 1: Wikipedia is not not part of the set, it's fascinating
• 1:41:12
  Speaker 1: playground with it. I think it does a really good
• 1:41:15
  Speaker 1: job with objectivism. And I think that's because.
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 9: I would recommend I would recommend co pilot, which gives
• 1:41:24
  Speaker 9: you a choice of five different types of algorithms. One
• 1:41:31
  Speaker 9: of the five is GTP, but there are four others,
• 1:41:38
  Speaker 9: and depending on what your interest is and which algorithm
• 1:41:46
  Speaker 9: you think will do the better job in it, you
• 1:41:50
  Speaker 9: have your choice.
• 1:41:52
  Speaker 1: Cool. Yeah, I'll try that out. But I'm super impressed
• 1:41:56
  Speaker 1: with the understanding of objectivism, understanding in quotation marks. And
• 1:42:01
  Speaker 1: I think the reason is that it's been trained on
• 1:42:04
  Speaker 1: all available public information, and there's a lot of stuff
• 1:42:07
  Speaker 1: out there, good stuff and objectivism, and now critics haven't
• 1:42:11
  Speaker 1: written that much, and the bad objectivists, if you want
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 1: to call them that, haven't written that much. And there's
• 1:42:19
  Speaker 1: just a ton of iron Rand straight iron Rand available
• 1:42:22
  Speaker 1: on the web. There's a ton of you know, Aari
• 1:42:26
  Speaker 1: stuff available on the web. So I'm pretty impressed. When
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 1: you ask you a question, how would iron Ran view
• 1:42:31
  Speaker 1: this and this? It gives it gives good. It gives
• 1:42:34
  Speaker 1: good answers, so it it has us a skeptical band.
• 1:42:40
  Speaker 4: You know, Uh, do you have any doubt that it's
• 1:42:43
  Speaker 4: going to revolutionize business.
• 1:42:46
  Speaker 1: No, I've said it's going to be it's going to
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 1: be huge. And I don't know that LMS is I mean,
• 1:42:53
  Speaker 1: I'm pretty you know, I don't know that l l
• 1:42:55
  Speaker 1: M is the final word in AI. I mean, there's
• 1:42:57
  Speaker 1: a lot of other types of algorithms that people are
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 1: looking at. It'll be interesting to see what they come
• 1:43:03
  Speaker 1: up with. But yeah, it's it's definitely going to revolutionize
• 1:43:07
  Speaker 1: the way we do work that we do. It's going
• 1:43:09
  Speaker 1: to revolutionize the way doctors do what they do, biotech
• 1:43:13
  Speaker 1: stuff gets done. I mean a lot of things are
• 1:43:15
  Speaker 1: going to change dramatically.
• 1:43:18
  Speaker 10: I've had some experience with just setting my seatpat machine.
• 1:43:23
  Speaker 10: I try different settings and then I asked chat GPT
• 1:43:26
  Speaker 10: when I'm having problems with the setting, and she suggests
• 1:43:31
  Speaker 10: another setting that works. Yeah, And she goes through all
• 1:43:34
  Speaker 10: that analysis and the input to them, and she footnotes
• 1:43:37
  Speaker 10: that it's the Sepath machine manufacturer that gave her the information.
• 1:43:42
  Speaker 10: So it's really interesting how that.
• 1:43:44
  Speaker 1: But she scans their website and pulls the information from
• 1:43:47
  Speaker 1: their website. Yeah, and if you're asking a question that's
• 1:43:51
  Speaker 1: being asked before, it will have an answer. If you
• 1:43:53
  Speaker 1: ask a question that's completely new, I'm not sure the
• 1:43:56
  Speaker 1: answer is going to be a good one.
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 10: My daughter's a computer he's a software designer, could check,
• 1:44:05
  Speaker 10: but verify.
• 1:44:06
  Speaker 13: Yeah, yeah, certainly, certainly.
• 1:44:10
  Speaker 12: In designing electronic circuits what they call ethics, there are
• 1:44:15
  Speaker 12: literally millions of pages of documentation out there about all
• 1:44:20
  Speaker 12: these tiny details about what is done with transistors and
• 1:44:24
  Speaker 12: what's legal, what's not, and so forth. And it's a
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 12: tremendous tool for just going through PDFs and saying, I'm
• 1:44:32
  Speaker 12: looking for some specific information, please find this.
• 1:44:35
  Speaker 1: Yeah, it's it's amazing and it's got to revolutionize the
• 1:44:39
  Speaker 1: way so much as gets done. And you know, maybe
• 1:44:44
  Speaker 1: the market is pricing the value of all that already,
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 1: you know, And in that case, maybe it is nineteen
• 1:44:49
  Speaker 1: ninety five. You know, I'm still in the market. I'm
• 1:44:52
  Speaker 1: not out, so I'm certainly hoping it's ninety five, and
• 1:44:57
  Speaker 1: let me know when it's ninety nine. So I notice.
• 1:44:59
  Speaker 10: So thank you, thank you very much, very good answers
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 10: from everybody.
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 16: Hey, Jacob, With the new year coming up, the wife
• 1:45:12
  Speaker 16: and I were looking to build our budget, and we
• 1:45:14
  Speaker 16: may relocate, like I was saying, into Utah. So as
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 16: part of it is my work as a program where
• 1:45:21
  Speaker 16: if you relocate with them, then you sell within thirty days,
• 1:45:25
  Speaker 16: they give you three percent of the cash value of
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 16: your house and I'll probably stay in Utah for about
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 16: five years. And then if you sell under what you
• 1:45:34
  Speaker 16: bought for up to fifty thousand dollars, they cover what
• 1:45:39
  Speaker 16: you like, cover the difference.
• 1:45:41
  Speaker 11: So the thought, yeah, so the thought was, we're we're
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 11: trying to sign.
• 1:45:48
  Speaker 7: A lot.
• 1:45:52
  Speaker 17: You're breaking up the Jacob dollar. Yeah, you're breaking up.
• 1:46:00
  Speaker 17: You've lost coverage.
• 1:46:04
  Speaker 1: Yeah, okay, well we come back he yeah, let me
• 1:46:09
  Speaker 1: come back here, all right, Adam.
• 1:46:15
  Speaker 9: I would like to recommend another Korean TV series. This
• 1:46:21
  Speaker 9: one is called Doctor Romantic and the English spelling is
• 1:46:28
  Speaker 9: just dr Period Space Romantic, and the theme is the
• 1:46:43
  Speaker 9: danger of politically controlled medicine, because South Korea has a
• 1:46:52
  Speaker 9: system like the British or the Canadians, where essentially medicine
• 1:46:58
  Speaker 9: is under complete government control unless you're very wealthy, and
• 1:47:07
  Speaker 9: there's a conflict between the doctors rack climbing the bureaucratic
• 1:47:15
  Speaker 9: political ladder and making their decisions on the basis of
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 9: what will the government ministry like. And there are doctors
• 1:47:28
  Speaker 9: who are practicing real scientific medicine and the conflict between
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 9: the two is the central conflict in the series and
• 1:47:44
  Speaker 9: it's absolutely fascinating.
• 1:47:47
  Speaker 1: Cool, I'll check it out Netflix.
• 1:47:51
  Speaker 9: No, it's an viki okay, rakoviki yep?
• 1:47:58
  Speaker 1: Viki Yeah, I know that. Okay, Cool, I'll check it out.
• 1:48:01
  Speaker 1: Thank you, Adam. Let's see who have I not gone
• 1:48:06
  Speaker 1: another time? Ryan Brew Bacob oh, and Jacob is back? Okay, Jacob,
• 1:48:12
  Speaker 1: wait a second buying Let's do Jacob yep.
• 1:48:17
  Speaker 11: So there's a unique benefit of buying a larger house
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 11: knowing that when you sell, you get an extra amount back.
• 1:48:25
  Speaker 11: I was wanting to get your perspective on should we
• 1:48:31
  Speaker 11: want we want to buy a good house wherever that is,
• 1:48:35
  Speaker 11: but should we lean more towards the higher evaluation of
• 1:48:38
  Speaker 11: a house knowing that you can get and three years
• 1:48:41
  Speaker 11: an extra ten fifteen thousand dollars or is it not
• 1:48:45
  Speaker 11: worth the risk?
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 8: And how to evaluate that?
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 1: I mean, it really depends on the housing marketing Utah,
• 1:48:51
  Speaker 1: And I don't know what it's like. I don't know
• 1:48:53
  Speaker 1: if prices, how high prices are is a salt take.
• 1:48:58
  Speaker 11: To the north Salt Lake most most of the houses
• 1:49:02
  Speaker 11: are new builds. Three bed maybe four bed, two to
• 1:49:07
  Speaker 11: three bath is about four hundred or five hundred to
• 1:49:10
  Speaker 11: seven hundred thousand.
• 1:49:11
  Speaker 1: I'd say buy buy a house that you love. You know,
• 1:49:15
  Speaker 1: you don't find a house that you really like, rather
• 1:49:17
  Speaker 1: than try to play the financial game and try to
• 1:49:20
  Speaker 1: speculate about what's going to happen in three years, Get
• 1:49:23
  Speaker 1: a house you can enjoy living in for three years.
• 1:49:25
  Speaker 1: You know, if it's expensive, you've got a little bit
• 1:49:27
  Speaker 1: of a cushion because you've got that price guarantee. If
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 1: it's a little cheaper, you're giving up that cushion. You know,
• 1:49:33
  Speaker 1: who cares because you can enjoy the house anyway. So
• 1:49:36
  Speaker 1: I'd focus on now rather than trying to do financial engineering.
• 1:49:40
  Speaker 11: Okay, yeah, we're after living in condo and Saint Louis
• 1:49:44
  Speaker 11: where like we don't we want a house we love.
• 1:49:46
  Speaker 11: The question is do we have a little bit of
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 11: flexibility and income after mortgage or would we go a
• 1:49:55
  Speaker 11: little tighter on the budget.
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think you should decide that based on
• 1:50:00
  Speaker 1: the kind of you know, the kind of life you
• 1:50:02
  Speaker 1: want to live, rather than about what will happen in
• 1:50:04
  Speaker 1: three years. So again, you know, make those calculations regarding
• 1:50:08
  Speaker 1: how much disposable income do you want to have after
• 1:50:10
  Speaker 1: mortgage payments to go out and to travel and to
• 1:50:13
  Speaker 1: do all that stuff, and then work backwards from that.
• 1:50:17
  Speaker 1: Rather than forget about, you know, forget about the houses
• 1:50:20
  Speaker 1: and investment as a source of income, think about how
• 1:50:24
  Speaker 1: much money do you want? How much money, how much
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 1: money do you want in order to live on a
• 1:50:27
  Speaker 1: day to day basis? That should be the focus. Thank you, sure,
• 1:50:33
  Speaker 1: uh and uh Ryan. Finally we get to Ryan bou Bacum. Sorry,
• 1:50:39
  Speaker 1: thank you.
• 1:50:41
  Speaker 13: So the best quotes from the fountain Head is when
• 1:50:44
  Speaker 13: Rourke tells too he doesn't think of him. And if
• 1:50:47
  Speaker 13: I explain the context in which I'm asking this question,
• 1:50:50
  Speaker 13: we might get into another discussion on family relationships and
• 1:50:54
  Speaker 13: being flipping about them. So I'm going to ask about
• 1:50:57
  Speaker 13: it in your context. So I assume you, you know,
• 1:50:59
  Speaker 13: for your daily ship as you put in and you know,
• 1:51:01
  Speaker 13: a couple of hours or whatever of work and going
• 1:51:04
  Speaker 13: through the news and reading all these you know, stupid
• 1:51:06
  Speaker 13: Trump quotes and Matt Walsh and Tuger Carlson and whoever else, Yeah, it's.
• 1:51:10
  Speaker 1: A little bit more than two hours. In a couple
• 1:51:12
  Speaker 1: of hours.
• 1:51:12
  Speaker 13: Okay, however, two hours is probably too long to go
• 1:51:17
  Speaker 13: through all that kind of jump.
• 1:51:18
  Speaker 1: But no, are you taking a lot more than that
• 1:51:20
  Speaker 1: to go of it? Okay?
• 1:51:22
  Speaker 13: Well no, I'm I'm saying it's probably painful to have
• 1:51:25
  Speaker 13: to read it out for over two hours, is what
• 1:51:27
  Speaker 13: I meant by that? Are you able to compartmentalize that
• 1:51:31
  Speaker 13: outside of your you know, once you get into normal life,
• 1:51:34
  Speaker 13: you know, then you do the show, you do all
• 1:51:36
  Speaker 13: this research, Like how do you not let all that
• 1:51:39
  Speaker 13: stuff live and free your head? And like, you know,
• 1:51:41
  Speaker 13: what are your tips for doing that?
• 1:51:44
  Speaker 1: I mean, the way I do it is, I I
• 1:51:48
  Speaker 1: vent on the show, right, So I get to I
• 1:51:51
  Speaker 1: get to I get to express my frustration and upset
• 1:51:58
  Speaker 1: at everything that's going on in the world to you guys.
• 1:52:01
  Speaker 1: And once that's done, I'm done. You know, I've said
• 1:52:04
  Speaker 1: my piece. There's nothing else I can do about it.
• 1:52:05
  Speaker 1: I don't control Trump. I can't let Trump make me miserable.
• 1:52:11
  Speaker 1: You know, it's out of my control. There's a point
• 1:52:14
  Speaker 1: in which it becomes almost metaphysical. It's not so I'm upset,
• 1:52:18
  Speaker 1: I express my upset on the show and then I
• 1:52:20
  Speaker 1: go on with life. So it's easier for me than
• 1:52:27
  Speaker 1: for you guys, I think, because you guys listen to
• 1:52:30
  Speaker 1: me and you're like, oh God, the world's falling apart,
• 1:52:32
  Speaker 1: and you don't have the opportunity event but I do.
• 1:52:36
  Speaker 1: So if I wasn't doing a daily show, I wasn't
• 1:52:39
  Speaker 1: doing a regular show, it would be harder for me
• 1:52:42
  Speaker 1: because I'd still be aware of what's going on in
• 1:52:45
  Speaker 1: the world, and I wouldn't have a way to express
• 1:52:48
  Speaker 1: my frustration and my anger and with it. So, you know,
• 1:52:54
  Speaker 1: that would be that would be the issue. It's my
• 1:52:57
  Speaker 1: ability to talk about it that I you know, I
• 1:53:01
  Speaker 1: let go of it that way. I mean, the best
• 1:53:05
  Speaker 1: way to go of anger is to express it and
• 1:53:09
  Speaker 1: and and and move on.
• 1:53:12
  Speaker 13: Thank you.
• 1:53:13
  Speaker 1: Sure uh. And you know, I hope that part of
• 1:53:18
  Speaker 1: what I do for you guys is you guys don't
• 1:53:21
  Speaker 1: have to go through the Twitter feed and through the
• 1:53:23
  Speaker 1: news and watch Fox or watch CNN or whatever. You
• 1:53:27
  Speaker 1: listen to this and you can spend an hour and
• 1:53:29
  Speaker 1: a half with me, and that's it, and and that's
• 1:53:32
  Speaker 1: the news for the day, and you kind of internalize
• 1:53:34
  Speaker 1: and you go on living so so that you don't
• 1:53:39
  Speaker 1: have to, you know, go down the rabbit holes of
• 1:53:42
  Speaker 1: all these all these nuts and crazies, you know. But
• 1:53:48
  Speaker 1: I do that and then, yeah, it doesn't really affect me.
• 1:53:51
  Speaker 1: Usually it does, and once in a while I feel like,
• 1:53:53
  Speaker 1: why am I being so obnoxious to my wife or something?
• 1:53:56
  Speaker 1: And you know, I realize I'm still carrying some of
• 1:53:58
  Speaker 1: it with me, and I, you know, you need to
• 1:54:00
  Speaker 1: just let it go. So it's sometimes can be hot.
• 1:54:05
  Speaker 4: Even you're on brook and overexpose on politics.
• 1:54:08
  Speaker 1: Then even you, even you're on book and yeah, do
• 1:54:12
  Speaker 1: do things that are wrong. It turns out how to believe.
• 1:54:18
  Speaker 1: All right, let's let's do some super chats and I think.
• 1:54:20
  Speaker 4: We'll call it you missed me? What's that you missed me?
• 1:54:24
  Speaker 4: I didn't ask a question.
• 1:54:25
  Speaker 1: I've been piping in because you pipe in all the time,
• 1:54:28
  Speaker 1: so I I, yeah.
• 1:54:29
  Speaker 4: But I didn't get a formal question.
• 1:54:31
  Speaker 1: To get a formal do a formal question. Then we'll
• 1:54:33
  Speaker 1: get to super chats and we'll call it a day.
• 1:54:35
  Speaker 6: Ye.
• 1:54:35
  Speaker 4: So the new Oxford term added to the dictionary is
• 1:54:42
  Speaker 4: rage bait. Okay, And I kind of think it's interesting
• 1:54:46
  Speaker 4: from a couple of phenomenons like a it's a social phenomenon,
• 1:54:52
  Speaker 4: Like it's like somebody purposefully trying to get you en
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 4: rage for clicks on the internet and for audience and
• 1:55:01
  Speaker 4: stuff like that. Yeah, what do you think about that
• 1:55:06
  Speaker 4: as a cultural phenomenon.
• 1:55:09
  Speaker 1: Oh, you know, I definitely think it is a cultural phenomena.
• 1:55:12
  Speaker 1: I think it's a it's a secondhanded and a kind
• 1:55:19
  Speaker 1: of a cheap shot, cowardly thing to do to rage
• 1:55:22
  Speaker 1: bate somebody. And and you know, it's like a hidden run,
• 1:55:26
  Speaker 1: intellectual hidden run. But it's it's happening more and more
• 1:55:31
  Speaker 1: and again. The thing about online is you can hide
• 1:55:34
  Speaker 1: behind anonymity. Most of the people who do this are
• 1:55:38
  Speaker 1: cowards and would never do it face to face. And uh,
• 1:55:43
  Speaker 1: and yet they feel completely, you know, completely comfortable saying
• 1:55:49
  Speaker 1: the most outrageous, ridiculous, huggable things online.
• 1:55:55
  Speaker 4: What do you think about the fact that obviously people
• 1:55:58
  Speaker 4: want to feel and rape or allow themselves to be
• 1:56:02
  Speaker 4: to feel in rage just because they're kind of baited.
• 1:56:07
  Speaker 1: Well, it's hard not to sometimes, I mean, you know,
• 1:56:09
  Speaker 1: sometimes you know that you're being baited, and yet what
• 1:56:14
  Speaker 1: is being said is objectively offensive and true. So I
• 1:56:19
  Speaker 1: don't I have sympathy for the people who are baited
• 1:56:22
  Speaker 1: into it. I mean, uh, you know something is being
• 1:56:26
  Speaker 1: done that is unjust and wrong and deserving of rage.
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 1: It's the people who do it who I who I despise.
• 1:56:35
  Speaker 4: Okay, I just think I was thinking of it from
• 1:56:37
  Speaker 4: the perspective of life. I do think the mixed economy
• 1:56:42
  Speaker 4: and all of the forces and that that, you know,
• 1:56:46
  Speaker 4: all of the implications of the mixed economy does cause
• 1:56:50
  Speaker 4: people pent up anger.
• 1:56:54
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I think that's right.
• 1:56:55
  Speaker 4: I mean, they're fellow citizens.
• 1:56:57
  Speaker 1: Talks about that a lot. This is the consequence of
• 1:56:59
  Speaker 1: the mist economy. It destroys our soul. It makes us
• 1:57:02
  Speaker 1: zero sum thinkers, it makes us enemies of one another.
• 1:57:06
  Speaker 1: And this is part of its expression. And it's a
• 1:57:08
  Speaker 1: mixed economy the soul, not just a mixed economy of economics.
• 1:57:13
  Speaker 1: We don't have values, we don't have principles. If we do,
• 1:57:17
  Speaker 1: the mixtures of all kinds of stuff, or they're really
• 1:57:19
  Speaker 1: bad principles and bad model values. And that frustrates us
• 1:57:23
  Speaker 1: because you know, there's a sense in which we know
• 1:57:27
  Speaker 1: they're wrong and bad, but we don't know what to
• 1:57:28
  Speaker 1: do about it. And yeah, so people are very confused
• 1:57:31
  Speaker 1: out there, and we're seeing the expression of that confusion
• 1:57:36
  Speaker 1: that is a result of this mixed economy of values
• 1:57:38
  Speaker 1: and the mixed economy of economics all over the internet,
• 1:57:43
  Speaker 1: particularly on my YouTube feed YouTube comments, all right, thanks
• 1:57:49
  Speaker 1: to Andrew Jason. With high taxes and runaway spending, Washington
• 1:57:54
  Speaker 1: State wants a constitutional change to tax one million plus
• 1:57:59
  Speaker 1: owners as if these twenty one, five hundred and thirty
• 1:58:02
  Speaker 1: will stay, I'd rather sell a billionaire a mountain or
• 1:58:07
  Speaker 1: dam any non flippant way to raise three billion to
• 1:58:11
  Speaker 1: keep the rich. I mean two things. I don't think
• 1:58:13
  Speaker 1: they'll go. You think they're all going to leave. I
• 1:58:15
  Speaker 1: don't think they're going to leave. I mean they didn't leave.
• 1:58:19
  Speaker 1: They haven't really left California. I know there are a billionaire.
• 1:58:23
  Speaker 1: A million attacks was passed in California. It raised the
• 1:58:26
  Speaker 1: top marginal state in come tex from ten to thirteen percent.
• 1:58:30
  Speaker 1: If you made over a million dollars a year. How
• 1:58:32
  Speaker 1: many people left because of that three you know, I
• 1:58:35
  Speaker 1: don't know, not a lot. I mean, the exodus in
• 1:58:38
  Speaker 1: California was not over that. And then that was supposed
• 1:58:42
  Speaker 1: to be temporary, and then they made a permanent and
• 1:58:46
  Speaker 1: how many people left. There's still more millionaires in California
• 1:58:49
  Speaker 1: than any other place anyway, you know, in the United States.
• 1:58:52
  Speaker 1: I think, you know, I think even more than New York,
• 1:58:55
  Speaker 1: in more than Washington State. So first, I think you
• 1:58:58
  Speaker 1: overestimate how many people will actually leave. I think many
• 1:59:02
  Speaker 1: of them will actually stay. Second, sure, there's an easy
• 1:59:07
  Speaker 1: way to raise money. Taxing millionaires actually doesn't raise that
• 1:59:11
  Speaker 1: much money. It would be easier way to raise money.
• 1:59:13
  Speaker 1: It's to tax the middle class. Middle class is where
• 1:59:17
  Speaker 1: the money is. There's more money in the middle class
• 1:59:19
  Speaker 1: than there is in the upper one percent, top one percent,
• 1:59:23
  Speaker 1: you know, start taxing the lower middle class. We don't
• 1:59:30
  Speaker 1: tax the lower middle class at all. They pay they
• 1:59:33
  Speaker 1: don't pay any taxes. So if you really were serious
• 1:59:37
  Speaker 1: about it, one way to raise the amount of revenue
• 1:59:40
  Speaker 1: for government is to increase the base, increase the number
• 1:59:43
  Speaker 1: of people paying into the system, as opposed to taking
• 1:59:46
  Speaker 1: money out of the system. What politicians have done over
• 1:59:51
  Speaker 1: the years is reduce the number of people paying into
• 1:59:54
  Speaker 1: the system. So they've cut taxes on lower middle class.
• 1:59:58
  Speaker 1: They've made it zero if you're lower certain income level,
• 2:00:02
  Speaker 1: you know, so it and that has increased the burden
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 1: of taxation on the ridge, so that you keep having
• 2:00:09
  Speaker 1: to increase taxes on the ridge to keep up. But
• 2:00:12
  Speaker 1: the reality is that the base is shrinking, so you
• 2:00:17
  Speaker 1: can increase sales taxes to raise the three billion. There
• 2:00:21
  Speaker 1: are lots of ways in which you can raise taxes
• 2:00:23
  Speaker 1: if you wanted. But of course the real solution is
• 2:00:25
  Speaker 1: the cut spending. It's the cut spinning. All right, helpout Campbell.
• 2:00:34
  Speaker 1: You say the left always wins. Is that really true?
• 2:00:38
  Speaker 1: Communism collapsed worldwide and the Democratic Party shifted to the
• 2:00:41
  Speaker 1: right for decades after the Reagan Revolution. I mean, no,
• 2:00:46
  Speaker 1: they did not really. I mean they became lefts, extreme leftists,
• 2:00:53
  Speaker 1: but it's not that they shifted right. It's not that
• 2:00:55
  Speaker 1: they advocated for free markets. They just advocate for less socialism.
• 2:01:00
  Speaker 1: But it's not like they deregulated in mass so they
• 2:01:02
  Speaker 1: did anything dramatic. I mean, the most dramatic thing Clinton
• 2:01:06
  Speaker 1: did was welfare reform, and a lot of what Clinton
• 2:01:10
  Speaker 1: had to do he was forced to do by by
• 2:01:12
  Speaker 1: nude Gingrich. So no, my part about the left is
• 2:01:17
  Speaker 1: they win the Marael battle, and as a consequence, I mean,
• 2:01:21
  Speaker 1: think of all the left's victories. Right, JFK instituted the
• 2:01:28
  Speaker 1: New Deal, Republicans. The right supposedly claimed that they would
• 2:01:32
  Speaker 1: overturn it as soon as they got into power. They
• 2:01:36
  Speaker 1: didn't overturn it. They doubled down on it. And then
• 2:01:39
  Speaker 1: the left brought us the Great Society under Johnson, and
• 2:01:43
  Speaker 1: the Republicans said, oh, as soon as we get into tower,
• 2:01:45
  Speaker 1: will overturn that. And they haven't overturned it. They've doubled
• 2:01:48
  Speaker 1: down on it. They're much more enthusiastic. You know, the
• 2:01:53
  Speaker 1: welfare state has not shrunk under the right, it increases
• 2:01:57
  Speaker 1: under the right. The right to become the biggest defenders
• 2:01:59
  Speaker 1: of the welface date the left one on gay marriage,
• 2:02:04
  Speaker 1: the left one for a while at least on abortion.
• 2:02:06
  Speaker 1: Maybe it's losing now an abortion. Certainly on all the
• 2:02:10
  Speaker 1: economic issues. The lift is one now It hasn't one
• 2:02:13
  Speaker 1: in a sense that we're socialist, but it's one in
• 2:02:16
  Speaker 1: a sense that the Republicans, the right never even talks about,
• 2:02:20
  Speaker 1: doesn't even talk about reversing the programs of the left.
• 2:02:27
  Speaker 1: So in that sense, the left always wins. Michael, and
• 2:02:33
  Speaker 1: you know, the turn to the right was very short lived.
• 2:02:37
  Speaker 1: Michael says, what is Alex f saying up to these days?
• 2:02:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, what he has been throughout educating people about energy.
• 2:02:44
  Speaker 1: I think he's more involved in politics than ever before.
• 2:02:47
  Speaker 1: I'm going to try to interview him soon. I'm going
• 2:02:50
  Speaker 1: to try to get him on the show to interview
• 2:02:52
  Speaker 1: him soon so you can ask him directly. Neo, I'm
• 2:02:55
  Speaker 1: still shocked that Israel in the United States were able
• 2:02:58
  Speaker 1: to make up after the US liberty incident. What's your
• 2:03:00
  Speaker 1: take on the incident. I mean, it's it's I'm not
• 2:03:04
  Speaker 1: chucked at all.
• 2:03:05
  Speaker 10: It was a.
• 2:03:07
  Speaker 1: Mistaken friendly fire incident. The United States has killed, you know,
• 2:03:18
  Speaker 1: in the Iraq War and the first Irak War on
• 2:03:20
  Speaker 1: the Gulf for in nineteen ninety one, Americans killed more
• 2:03:23
  Speaker 1: American troops than Iraqis did. That is there more casualties
• 2:03:27
  Speaker 1: from friendly fire than they were from enemy fire. It's
• 2:03:31
  Speaker 1: just part of war. I mean, nobody is surprised by it.
• 2:03:36
  Speaker 1: Nobody is shocked by it, except the anti Semites who
• 2:03:39
  Speaker 1: want to make a big deal out of it. The
• 2:03:41
  Speaker 1: liberty is not unusual at all. It is a common
• 2:03:45
  Speaker 1: occurrence in war, and it was a mistake. There been
• 2:03:50
  Speaker 1: I don't know nine different reports on it, official reports
• 2:03:53
  Speaker 1: on it. It's been going, you know, and all the
• 2:03:57
  Speaker 1: questions have been answered. People continue to lie about it. Obviously,
• 2:04:01
  Speaker 1: the sailors on the boat were pretty traumatized about it,
• 2:04:04
  Speaker 1: and they have all kinds of conspiracy theories about it.
• 2:04:07
  Speaker 1: But the reality is there was a mistaken friendly fire.
• 2:04:10
  Speaker 1: Mistaken friendly fire happens all the time. I mean, I
• 2:04:13
  Speaker 1: was witnessed directly to you know, I mean witness you know,
• 2:04:21
  Speaker 1: we saw it almost in real time in nineteen eighty two,
• 2:04:25
  Speaker 1: and a whole Israeli column of tanks, kids eighteen nineteen
• 2:04:28
  Speaker 1: year old kids killed by an Israeli pilot. We thought
• 2:04:32
  Speaker 1: they were an enemy column of tanks. And people say,
• 2:04:36
  Speaker 1: how could that be? I mean, they're all marked. It's
• 2:04:39
  Speaker 1: clear that there Israeli tanks. They're not Syrian tanks. Any
• 2:04:41
  Speaker 1: fool could see that. Well, a very very well trained,
• 2:04:45
  Speaker 1: sophisticated Israeli pilot, in the fog of war, bombed his
• 2:04:49
  Speaker 1: own tanks and he killed a number of people. No,
• 2:04:53
  Speaker 1: I mean in the fog of war, in the intensity
• 2:04:56
  Speaker 1: of action. None of that is obvious. None of that
• 2:04:59
  Speaker 1: is obvious. And people make a lot of mistakes, a
• 2:05:02
  Speaker 1: lot of mistakes. People die, a lot of people in wars.
• 2:05:07
  Speaker 1: More people die because of mistakes that are made then
• 2:05:11
  Speaker 1: because of enemy brilliance. You know, liberty was a mistake,
• 2:05:16
  Speaker 1: nothing more than that.
• 2:05:18
  Speaker 4: You know how the anti stem might cheer on like
• 2:05:20
  Speaker 4: they want to make you think that people are saying
• 2:05:25
  Speaker 4: that Israel is perfect, But who actually says Israel is perfect?
• 2:05:29
  Speaker 1: Yeah? Yeah, nobody says that. I mean, yep, you can
• 2:05:34
  Speaker 1: find so many errors of logic on their side. It's
• 2:05:38
  Speaker 1: it's truly stunny. Like numbers. You spoke of how people
• 2:05:43
  Speaker 1: shouldn't really plan more than fifty years out, So how
• 2:05:46
  Speaker 1: does that tie into a philosophy taking one hundred years
• 2:05:49
  Speaker 1: and more to spread? Well, I mean, you're not planning
• 2:05:52
  Speaker 1: it out for a hundred years, but you realize that
• 2:05:54
  Speaker 1: it's going to take one hundred years or so to spad.
• 2:05:58
  Speaker 1: You plan for the next few decads. You plan to
• 2:06:00
  Speaker 1: maximize the impact tomorrow and over the next ten, twenty,
• 2:06:05
  Speaker 1: thirty forty years. But you don't plan it. There's no
• 2:06:09
  Speaker 1: plans at the issue for what happens one hundred years
• 2:06:11
  Speaker 1: from now. I mean, it would be bizarre to have
• 2:06:13
  Speaker 1: such a plan. How do you know what technologies will be,
• 2:06:17
  Speaker 1: what the state of the world will be. Maybe we're
• 2:06:19
  Speaker 1: in dark ages, Maybe we've had a post nuclear apocalyptic.
• 2:06:24
  Speaker 1: I mean, who knows. So you plan for the future
• 2:06:27
  Speaker 1: that you have some reasonable estimate of what's going to
• 2:06:30
  Speaker 1: happen in but your horizon can still be one hundred
• 2:06:34
  Speaker 1: years in a sense of it's going to say one
• 2:06:37
  Speaker 1: hundred years for all this to have an impact if
• 2:06:39
  Speaker 1: all goes well. Ginger, are you saying that people should
• 2:06:47
  Speaker 1: be taught at pistemology first and foremost so they can
• 2:06:50
  Speaker 1: get objectivism. No, I don't think people should be taught
• 2:06:53
  Speaker 1: at pistemology, and except for specialists, I think people need
• 2:06:58
  Speaker 1: to be taught to think. They need to be taught
• 2:07:01
  Speaker 1: to use their minds, and that is certainly what people
• 2:07:05
  Speaker 1: should be taught. And people should model good epistemology. They
• 2:07:09
  Speaker 1: should model how to use their mind properly. We should
• 2:07:11
  Speaker 1: be using concepts effectively. We should be communicating logically in
• 2:07:18
  Speaker 1: that sense. But no, I don't think we should go
• 2:07:23
  Speaker 1: out there start teaching people formal epistemology. We're not going
• 2:07:26
  Speaker 1: to get it very far. There are very few people
• 2:07:29
  Speaker 1: who have any interest in that or have any capacity
• 2:07:31
  Speaker 1: to actually understand the process of formal epistemology. What people
• 2:07:36
  Speaker 1: need is within their context to be able to use
• 2:07:40
  Speaker 1: their reason and for that they need the basic thinking skills.
• 2:07:44
  Speaker 1: They need basic understanding of logic and basic understanding of
• 2:07:49
  Speaker 1: how to think, which does not involve, you know, teaching epistemology. Yeah,
• 2:08:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, I don't think, you know. I think for example, look,
• 2:08:06
  Speaker 1: civilization did very well even before Iran came up with
• 2:08:10
  Speaker 1: the theory of concepts. So you know, people came up
• 2:08:14
  Speaker 1: with concepts even before they had a theory of concert formation.
• 2:08:17
  Speaker 1: So theory concert formation is important and should should animate
• 2:08:25
  Speaker 1: how intellectuals approach their topics and our intellectus communicate ideas.
• 2:08:29
  Speaker 1: But in terms of literally teaching concert formation to people,
• 2:08:33
  Speaker 1: very few people need to know the theory of concertformation.
• 2:08:38
  Speaker 4: The theory of conceptformation is going to eventually cure the
• 2:08:41
  Speaker 4: world of Platonism once, yes, but not but.
• 2:08:47
  Speaker 1: Directly, not in a direct way, right, Okay? Molten splendor
• 2:08:52
  Speaker 1: gaining Iran's description an American sense of life, which seemed
• 2:08:57
  Speaker 1: to be a first step in heading towards culture of objectivism.
• 2:09:01
  Speaker 1: But why did we lose this sense of life so quickly? Well,
• 2:09:04
  Speaker 1: it wasn't so quickly. It's taken a hundred or so
• 2:09:06
  Speaker 1: years for us to lose that sense of life. I
• 2:09:10
  Speaker 1: don't know that we've lost it completely. It's one hundred
• 2:09:11
  Speaker 1: hundred and fifty years. We lost it because it had
• 2:09:15
  Speaker 1: no philosophical grounding, It had no philosophical foundation. It was
• 2:09:20
  Speaker 1: eroded by our pimelia. Intellectual and political leadership undermined it
• 2:09:26
  Speaker 1: over and over again. And there's only so much that
• 2:09:29
  Speaker 1: people can respond emostly without having a solid understanding and
• 2:09:35
  Speaker 1: grasp of what was going on around them. At some point,
• 2:09:39
  Speaker 1: that emotional response is going to give way to the
• 2:09:43
  Speaker 1: benevolence of the ideas that they hold. Michael thoughts on
• 2:09:50
  Speaker 1: the movie Nuremberg s, I'm not sure which movie you're
• 2:09:52
  Speaker 1: talking about. I understand there's a new movie called Nuremberg.
• 2:09:55
  Speaker 1: I have no idea. I haven't seen it, so I
• 2:09:58
  Speaker 1: don't know anything about it. If you're talking about, you know,
• 2:10:01
  Speaker 1: the old movie, what was it about the new book
• 2:10:04
  Speaker 1: Trials with Spencer Tracy and that that was That's an
• 2:10:10
  Speaker 1: amazing three plus hour movie. That's an amazing, amazing movie.
• 2:10:15
  Speaker 1: Judgment in Newhim book, Thank You, Judgment and New Book,
• 2:10:18
  Speaker 1: then that's an amazing movie, one of the great movies
• 2:10:20
  Speaker 1: out there, and a real You'll learn a lot about
• 2:10:24
  Speaker 1: justice and about how to think about what happened in
• 2:10:27
  Speaker 1: World War Two, so that that is of a committed movie.
• 2:10:30
  Speaker 1: I don't know about this new newm bog movie and
• 2:10:33
  Speaker 1: what it is and what it's about. I'd be suspicious
• 2:10:41
  Speaker 1: if it's about the Trials again, it's about anything about
• 2:10:44
  Speaker 1: that because it's modern.
• 2:10:47
  Speaker 6: It's a it's built on this guy's book who was
• 2:10:50
  Speaker 6: the psychologist who interviewed the so of the book written
• 2:10:55
  Speaker 6: about him a few years ago.
• 2:10:56
  Speaker 1: I interviewed the Nazis. Yeah, yeah, I'm suspicious. So you know,
• 2:11:03
  Speaker 1: I'll probably see it because I'm curious, but I don't
• 2:11:07
  Speaker 1: expect anything good, given given it's a psychologist, and then
• 2:11:13
  Speaker 1: given on top of that, it's a modern interpretation of
• 2:11:16
  Speaker 1: what he wrote into a movie. It's it's it's got
• 2:11:20
  Speaker 1: to be I don't know, overly psychologizing and too little
• 2:11:24
  Speaker 1: about ideas. But it'll be interesting. It'd be any anything
• 2:11:29
  Speaker 1: that treats that topic is going to be interesting and
• 2:11:32
  Speaker 1: reflective of the state of the world. I don't know
• 2:11:36
  Speaker 1: who James Vanderbilt, the director is. I don't know what
• 2:11:39
  Speaker 1: else he did. All right, guys, thank you, yep?
• 2:11:45
  Speaker 11: Yeah, Jacob quick quick follow up, So for budgeting because
• 2:11:51
  Speaker 11: it related to the last question. Yeah, so if we make
• 2:11:54
  Speaker 11: our disposable income for now, but say we want kids
• 2:11:58
  Speaker 11: in two to three years, start with one, maybe two,
• 2:12:02
  Speaker 11: how would you budget that in or would you say
• 2:12:05
  Speaker 11: any future promotions or increases in pay could cover that.
• 2:12:10
  Speaker 11: We already budget in eight thousand for HSA a year
• 2:12:14
  Speaker 11: or so we'll have like thirty thousand within three years
• 2:12:17
  Speaker 11: for that.
• 2:12:18
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean kids are not that expensive healthcare wise,
• 2:12:23
  Speaker 1: and and you know your your diaper budget goes up, right,
• 2:12:27
  Speaker 1: diaper has suddenly become a big item.
• 2:12:29
  Speaker 8: But on the other hand, or for P and SO,
• 2:12:31
  Speaker 8: diapers are pretty cheap.
• 2:12:32
  Speaker 1: There you go, so you work for P, so kids
• 2:12:34
  Speaker 1: are not that expensive. You know, there's there's a lot
• 2:12:37
  Speaker 1: of expenses associated with him, particularly if you both working
• 2:12:40
  Speaker 1: in this childcare. But if there's no childcare then it's
• 2:12:42
  Speaker 1: not an issue. But on the other hand, you're going
• 2:12:46
  Speaker 1: to spend less on dinner's out, movies, having a life, right,
• 2:12:51
  Speaker 1: so all the other stuff that you do is gone
• 2:12:54
  Speaker 1: because you'll be you'll be completely focused on the kids,
• 2:12:58
  Speaker 1: so you'll save money. I wouldn't try to overly budget.
• 2:13:05
  Speaker 1: I mean, make an estimate of what you think you need.
• 2:13:08
  Speaker 1: Think about if there's any like childcare, think about how
• 2:13:11
  Speaker 1: you're going to deal with childcare because it is expensive.
• 2:13:14
  Speaker 1: And if you're a lying on two incomes and suddenly
• 2:13:17
  Speaker 1: a part of one of those incomes is going to childcare,
• 2:13:19
  Speaker 1: that's the one item you might want to think about
• 2:13:22
  Speaker 1: budgeting four for kids. Other than that, they're not that expensive.
• 2:13:26
  Speaker 4: Debt your own what at that age where you're just
• 2:13:29
  Speaker 4: like living on debt because you said you weren't like
• 2:13:31
  Speaker 4: saving until you're mid thirties, and.
• 2:13:35
  Speaker 1: You know we how literally our largest monthly expense at
• 2:13:43
  Speaker 1: a certain point was diapers. I mean, we just didn't
• 2:13:46
  Speaker 1: spend money on anything. We didn't go out. We had
• 2:13:49
  Speaker 1: a crummy you know. We had a car that my
• 2:13:52
  Speaker 1: father in law bought for us, a three thousand dollars
• 2:13:57
  Speaker 1: old Honda a Cord. So we had one car. We
• 2:14:02
  Speaker 1: rented in those days. It was in Austin, so the
• 2:14:04
  Speaker 1: rent was cheap, relatively cheap. We had a decent apartment,
• 2:14:07
  Speaker 1: but nothing.
• 2:14:08
  Speaker 4: We aren't you getting a PhD.
• 2:14:10
  Speaker 1: I was getting a PhD and I was working. I
• 2:14:13
  Speaker 1: was working. No PhD was didn't cost anything. I was
• 2:14:16
  Speaker 1: in a scholarship and I worked right. I did consulting
• 2:14:20
  Speaker 1: and I worked for my professors and I taught. But
• 2:14:22
  Speaker 1: you know we lived. We lived on well less than
• 2:14:25
  Speaker 1: twenty thousand dollars a year. I mean I still have
• 2:14:30
  Speaker 1: my because I did quick and I still have my
• 2:14:33
  Speaker 1: my my. I can still tell you exactly what I
• 2:14:36
  Speaker 1: spent money on and what my income was. And we managed.
• 2:14:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, you know, people tell me, you know, how
• 2:14:43
  Speaker 1: do you you manage? You the trade offs? You don't
• 2:14:48
  Speaker 1: go out, like going out was a big deal, right,
• 2:14:50
  Speaker 1: a big big deal. You eat it home. You don't
• 2:14:56
  Speaker 1: buy expensive toys. You don't have a big you know
• 2:14:59
  Speaker 1: in those days have a big television, a little television
• 2:15:02
  Speaker 1: with a VHS tapes. I mean you, I don't know.
• 2:15:05
  Speaker 1: You you survive. You don't buy by.
• 2:15:08
  Speaker 8: Modern American modern American paralysis.
• 2:15:12
  Speaker 1: What's it?
• 2:15:13
  Speaker 8: I think I maybe doing a little analysis.
• 2:15:15
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I think you get an analysis paralysis. Figure out
• 2:15:17
  Speaker 1: a budget for your disposable ink abo, what you think
• 2:15:19
  Speaker 1: you need approximately to live off of. And there's a
• 2:15:22
  Speaker 1: lot of flexibility within. So if you suddenly discover you
• 2:15:25
  Speaker 1: eating out too much and you kept back on that
• 2:15:27
  Speaker 1: and you spend the money on something else, I mean
• 2:15:29
  Speaker 1: it's it's don't overdo it. Don't overdo it.
• 2:15:33
  Speaker 4: But you know, in but you can't have the same
• 2:15:36
  Speaker 4: life as if you didn't have children. You know, your
• 2:15:40
  Speaker 4: lifestyle is going to change.
• 2:15:42
  Speaker 1: Yeah, once you have children, your lifestyle is going to change.
• 2:15:44
  Speaker 1: But your spending habits will adjust. And but you can
• 2:15:48
  Speaker 1: live within the same budget. You just adjust. You just
• 2:15:50
  Speaker 1: have trade offs. You just stop doing some things and
• 2:15:52
  Speaker 1: do other things.
• 2:15:54
  Speaker 14: I find you don't have a social life because you're
• 2:15:55
  Speaker 14: focused on your kids.
• 2:15:56
  Speaker 1: You save so much money. That's right, that's right, don't
• 2:16:00
  Speaker 1: you don't have you don't again, I mean you're so
• 2:16:02
  Speaker 1: focused on the kids, you don't really go out. Uh.
• 2:16:06
  Speaker 1: You know, maybe once in a while, you you go
• 2:16:09
  Speaker 1: away for a weekend and you get somebody to babysit.
• 2:16:12
  Speaker 1: But it's but you know, yeah, there's not a lot
• 2:16:17
  Speaker 1: of expenses. I don't know. We we you know, we
• 2:16:22
  Speaker 1: we were for six years while I was in school
• 2:16:25
  Speaker 1: and my wife was not allowed to work because she
• 2:16:29
  Speaker 1: was on an F two visa. I was on an
• 2:16:31
  Speaker 1: F one visas. I couldn't work off campus. I could
• 2:16:33
  Speaker 1: only work on campus. It was yeah, we survived on
• 2:16:38
  Speaker 1: very little money. So uh, and then when I got
• 2:16:41
  Speaker 1: my first job as a professor, I think the salary
• 2:16:46
  Speaker 1: is sixty three thousand dollars a year. I literally thought
• 2:16:49
  Speaker 1: I was a gazillionaire. I thought it was a billionaire.
• 2:16:51
  Speaker 1: I'd never imagined that much money. I didn't, you know,
• 2:16:55
  Speaker 1: I start I started a business that failed because of that,
• 2:16:58
  Speaker 1: because I thought I was so flaw with money I
• 2:17:00
  Speaker 1: could just do all kinds of crazy things with it,
• 2:17:04
  Speaker 1: you know, but survived it all and did well.
• 2:17:08
  Speaker 4: So look at you now, Well, yeah, I mean we
• 2:17:12
  Speaker 4: could do beat just then apartment tour. That's pretty impressive.
• 2:17:16
  Speaker 1: Yeah, No, it's it's you know, that's you. You can
• 2:17:22
  Speaker 1: you can do a lot, uh with a little, and
• 2:17:27
  Speaker 1: don't overthink it. Just think. You got to think it's
• 2:17:30
  Speaker 1: a trade offs. You got to think in terms of
• 2:17:33
  Speaker 1: I don't have to do this. I can do something else,
• 2:17:35
  Speaker 1: so I don't have to go out, you know, twice
• 2:17:38
  Speaker 1: a week Tonight's dinners. I can go once a week.
• 2:17:41
  Speaker 1: I can go none at all, and I'll still live
• 2:17:43
  Speaker 1: a good, fulfilling life. That is your you'll the goodness
• 2:17:47
  Speaker 1: of your life is not dependent on any particular material thing.
• 2:17:53
  Speaker 8: Yep, I agree.
• 2:17:54
  Speaker 1: Thanks, all right, guys, have a great weekend. I will
• 2:17:58
  Speaker 1: see you guys on my day with nicos. We got
• 2:18:01
  Speaker 1: nicos that'll be fun. Bye.