Latest / Yaron Brook Show / Answering Capitalism’s Critics #1: Benn Jordan’s “Leveragism” | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

Answering Capitalism’s Critics #1: Benn Jordan’s “Leveragism” | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

• 0:08
  Speaker 1: Fun undamental Princess how read the lead them lash yourself
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: instance and individual you wan watse this this is the
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: your show, oh right, everybody, welcome to your show on
• 0:26
  Speaker 1: this uh Fundamental Princess business lead them their co last
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: year that Frice, Welcome to your undup show on this
• 0:35
  Speaker 1: uh Friday, August fourteenth. But everybody's having a great week
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: and there you're all looking forward to the weekend, all right.
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: So I decided to do something a little different today,
• 0:46
  Speaker 1: partially because I'm tired of the news and I'm tired
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: of talking about the news, and there's really nothing that
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: exciting going on, uh in the world out there. Most
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: of the stuff is just the same stuff, the same bs.
• 0:59
  Speaker 1: Uh say yes over and over and over and over
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: and over again. And I just find myself repeating myself
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: as we talking about you on again. Nothing new. We
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: talk about tariffs again, nothing new. We talk about I
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: don't know, inflation again, nothing new. So you know, I'm
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: just tired of it. So I thought I do something
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: different today. I'll be back to the news on Monday.
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: Don't worry, I'm not gonna stop doing the daily news.
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: I'll be doing the news. I might do it four
• 1:26
  Speaker 1: days a week instead of five, and do something else
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: on the fifth day. We'll see. Also, I won't have
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: a show tomorrow, Nicolas and I will be on on Sunday,
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: but no show tomorrow. So I figured I'd do something
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: a little different, more like what I do on Saturdays today.
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: So I want to start a new I guess, a
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: new category of shows, a new type of show. Right,
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: and we'll see how it goes today, and you guys
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: will tell me whether this is worth doing or not,
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: whether we should continue to do this or not. But
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: here's the category. It's it's basically going to be answering
• 2:09
  Speaker 1: capitalism's critics, and every week I will choose a different
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: critic and they will vary from economists. They could be
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: Marxist economists, they could be just mixed economy economists, to
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: two popular popular people out there. We'll talk about that today.
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: You know who are not economists, who are not necessarily
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: political generally, but just regular guys, regular people who tend
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: to comment on on capitalism and tend to comment on
• 2:45
  Speaker 1: economic issues. Maybe maybe the argument should be they shouldn't,
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: but you know, they do, and they get a lot
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: of views, and they have a lot of influence. Right,
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: we'll see the video. Whetch today has been seen by
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: two point six million to six million views. And this
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: guy's channel, I've never heard of him, Ben Jordan. His
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: channel as one point three one million subscribers. I don't
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: know if that's you know, that's too much, too little,
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: but two wt six million views, that's a lot. And
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: we'll see the quality of the video in a minute.
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: We'll talk about political pundits, politicians, YouTube personalities like Ben Shapiro,
• 3:31
  Speaker 1: uh and and people like that commenting on capitalism. So
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: we'll take the whole gamut and we'll take videos and
• 3:37
  Speaker 1: analyze them and talk about them. So that is the idea,
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: and a lot of this will be Some of this
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: will be philosophical, song would be economics, some of it
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: will just be these people don't know what they're talking about.
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: So you know, we'll we'll we'll every week, I'll scan
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: I basically cut SHATBT going going through a bunch of
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: videos and giving me a top five that it thinks
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: are worthy of commenting on. I'll choose the top one
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: and then and then give you the commentivity. These are
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: tough to do because, as you know, I tend to
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: want to say something about almost everything that they say.
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: So we'll do some of that. We'll play it, but
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: I will skip around a little bit. I'm not gonna
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: I'm not gonna cover everything this guy says. Well, we'll
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: ground us in a few principles and then and then
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: move forward. But the idea is to review these videos
• 4:37
  Speaker 1: and do this, and do it systematically, do it every
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: week and and and build up kind of uh, because
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: you know, these things go on challenge, that's the thing.
• 4:47
  Speaker 1: The things go on challenge. And most people out there
• 4:51
  Speaker 1: who are watching something like this by by Ben jordin
• 5:00
  Speaker 1: nogative have a exposed to an alternative. And hopefully part
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: of this will lead the people who watch Ben Jordan
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: videos to come and watch my videos. Uh, you know,
• 5:11
  Speaker 1: commenting on his his uh what is he called it?
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: Leveragism uh and and uh and and everything else. And
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: we'll keep you know, we'll keep uh, we'll keep doing
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: that anyway. We'll keep doing that on a bunch of
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: different videos, a bunch of different people. I got one,
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: you know, I've got another one lined up maybe for
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: next week, which is similar to Ben Jordan's in a
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: sense in the in the style and and the kind
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: of I think, uh, maybe following, although Ben Jordan clearly
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: comes on the left and this other guy comes from
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: the right, but but ultimately they come to the same
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: kind of kind of conclusions. Let's see, what else do
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: we want to what else I want to say about this.
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: I'm curious about you input, So please provide input about
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: what you think of this. I mean the the objective
• 6:06
  Speaker 1: input will be how many people view it and how
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: much money you put into the super chats on this.
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: You know, I need to do shows that pay the bills.
• 6:17
  Speaker 1: So if you like these shows, then make sure to
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: show that in stickers and in super chat questions and
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: of course shares and likes and comments and chats and
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: all of that, all the stuff that algorithm likes to,
• 6:36
  Speaker 1: you know, to raise this, you know, okay, let me
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: let me just see. Yeah, so please step in and
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: and uh and give give commentary. I would appreciate that
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: that that kind of helps. That helps me figure out
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: what's working and what's not, what makes sense and what
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: is not. You can go right now, for example, and
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: on I don't know and x so on Facebook or whatever,
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: go tell your friends that you are watching the book show,
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: right now and and to get them to come over
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: and and check it out. So you know, you can
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: help grow the show, promote the show, get the word
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: out there to people. And of course if I see
• 7:28
  Speaker 1: if I see a viewership decline, then I'll switch back
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: to doing all news all the time, my favorite thing.
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: All right, ready, all right, so I'm gonna I'm gonna
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: play you clips. I'm gonna play this and then and
• 7:44
  Speaker 1: then we'll see and then I'll comment on it again.
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: Uh ask questions. Use the stick of feature to just
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: about the show of value for value if you're getting
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: something out of the show. So let's let's get started
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: with Ben. Oh, I want to tell you Benjo this,
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: I mean Benjoron is a US electronic musician. He's a
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: science and technology YouTuber and as a filmmaker with a
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: large general interest audience. So he's not known as a
• 8:15
  Speaker 1: political pundit. He's not known as an economic economic pundit.
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: But here he is doing something on capitalism, on what
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: he calls levagism, and he calls it the richest country
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: is pretty mid Now I'm not sure what that even means,
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: and he doesn't really talk about that in the video.
• 8:32
  Speaker 1: Is star combines documentary, storytelling. You'll see personal experience data
• 8:36
  Speaker 1: and kind of moral commentary, a moral stand These kind
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: of people, right who are not political commentators, who are
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: not debaters, who are not engaged, they have a huge
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: amount of influence because when they do a show on
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: economics or on politics, or on philosophy and morality, they're
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: gonna get, like this guy, two point six million views.
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: And these are two point six million views of not
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: necessarily people particularly interested in coming to YouTube just to
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: listen to, you know, politics and stuff like that. So
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: they might not listen to another video on capitalism other
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: than this one, and so all they know about the
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: economy and the present state of the world is what
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: they hear from Menjordren. And we'll see that Ben does
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: something that we saw Tucker COOFS and Dude the other
• 9:28
  Speaker 1: day when I reviewed one of his videos, and that
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: is he gives you. He gives you just statements of
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: what he considers just basic truth, uncontroversial stuff, and he
• 9:41
  Speaker 1: expects you to just just accept it without having to
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: argue for it, without having to prove it, and he
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: just states the stuff and it goes unchallenged and unquestioned,
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: and a hind two. Three million to six million people
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: just absorb that. And this is how the how you
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: shape the culture. Imagine, imagine a thousand objectivists ben Jordan's
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: doing this. The whole thing would be our culture would
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: be completely different, not only because a culture to produced
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: a thousand like the objectivists like that would be a
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: different culture, but also because they would start shaping the
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: way people viewed the world. So let's look at how
• 10:21
  Speaker 1: Ben Jordans views the world. He is I'll just tell
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: you he's central left. He's no Marxist. We'll go through
• 10:29
  Speaker 1: a segment of way praises capitalism. So he's no Marxist,
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: but he clearly is a leftist. He's clearly on the
• 10:35
  Speaker 1: left on you know, is a he's an FDR like
• 10:42
  Speaker 1: FDR like democrat versus he's not a Hassan Pika type democrat.
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: He's not a Marxist. Right, we'll do Marxists as well.
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: I almost did a Marxist today. I figured this would
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: be better just because it has got to reach. But
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: next time we'll do Amoxist.
• 11:03
  Speaker 2: You noticed it two, haven't you. We've been exposed to
• 11:06
  Speaker 2: controversies and warnings and just NonStop bad news our entire lives.
• 11:10
  Speaker 2: But this hits different. Beneath all of these chaotic headlines
• 11:14
  Speaker 2: that we see every single day. It just feels like
• 11:16
  Speaker 2: something bigger is happening. Do me a favor, try and
• 11:19
  Speaker 2: think of one, just one general thing in your life
• 11:23
  Speaker 2: that has improved in the last ten years.
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: Okay, so no, right, already, kind of something's worse, something,
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: something's unusual, something's different, something's bad in the world out there,
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: like this vibe, right, And a lot of this is
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: about vibe, right, says a vibe out there that something
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: is bad, something is wrong, and it you know, I'm
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: going to try to explain this to you, right, He's
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: going to try to explain what it is that is
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: different right now, that is really changed, that is, you know,
• 12:00
  Speaker 1: clausing all these all the all the inks that we
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: feel in the world right now. And he really starts
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: with think of something, Think of something that you know
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: in your life that has gotten better, that has gotten better.
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: So and he is going to throw out.
• 12:20
  Speaker 2: Of one just one general thing in your life that
• 12:23
  Speaker 2: has improved in the last ten years, as.
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: Your quality So think of that.
• 12:26
  Speaker 2: Have health care improved? How about your quality of education?
• 12:29
  Speaker 2: Your cost of living, your insurance, coverage, your privacy, your freedom.
• 12:33
  Speaker 2: Do you have more time to do what you want
• 12:35
  Speaker 2: to do today than you did in twenty sixteen?
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: Now he talks really fast, so I'm going to cut
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: him off because he talks so fast. But hum it is,
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: you know, is there anything in your life that is better?
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: Anything over the last ten years that has actually improved?
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: My iPhone is better in twenty sixteen, I couldn't do this.
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: I couldn't do this from every way I traveled. I
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: didn't have the bandwidth. So he couldn't do what he's doing,
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: not quite as effectively, probably not with two point six
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: million views. I mean, it's just ludicrous. It really is ludicrous.
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: And yet people do this all the time, whether they
• 13:14
  Speaker 1: hawking back to the sixties or whether they're hogging back
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: to the fifties, or whether they're hogging back to ten
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: years ago. Is anything improved in your life over the
• 13:20
  Speaker 1: last ten years, and if it hasn't, how much is
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: that is due to decisions you may How much is
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: that is due to things that you are responsible in
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: terms of the world out there and its impact on you.
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: Has your life of thing's gotten better? I mean healthcare? Yes,
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: there are so many more treatments right now for diseases
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: that I might get as I get older than they
• 13:45
  Speaker 1: were ten years ago. The science has advanced dramatically. Then
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: will bio to companies producing drugs that benefit my life?
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: Just think about the benefits of Goop one drugs right now.
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: I mean Goop one drugs amazing. Yes, maybe cost of
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: healthcare has gone up, but the benefits are enormous. Think
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: about how much more we know about longevity and you know,
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: health span and how to live a healthy long life.
• 14:13
  Speaker 1: It's improved dramatically now. It's also with noting that the
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: things that he is most concerned about and where they are,
• 14:24
  Speaker 1: He's right. Education gotten worse, Yeah, cost of living gotten worse. Absolutely,
• 14:32
  Speaker 1: those in the control of the government. So yeah, if
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: you're going to be concerned, if you're going to be worried,
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: then maybe you should be worried about big government. Maybe
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: you should be worried about Washington, d C. Maybe you
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: should be worried about the fact that big government is
• 14:50
  Speaker 1: flooding a world with money, which is causing inflation. So
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: what they did during COVID, what they continue to do
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: post COVID, maybe you should could be concerned about the
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: fact that publique education, or could call it government education,
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: education run by the government doesn't work. Maybe that should
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: concern you. Yeah, But indeed, when it comes to the
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: private sector, for the most part, I'm not saying this
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: is true everyway, and ultimately we don't live under capitalism,
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: which is going to be a big part of my
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: critique of what he says when it comes to private sector.
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: My television is bigger and better, my computer is better, faster,
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: my internet is much better, my iPhone is better, my
• 15:37
  Speaker 1: ability again to do this on YouTube is improved dramatically.
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: Everything that private sector touches has mostly not everything mostly improved,
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: mostly improved. And when it hasn't, I can point and
• 15:56
  Speaker 1: I can need the particular I mean not always name,
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: because I don't know all the regulations, but I can
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: name the regulation. I can name the government policy. I
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: can name the thing that is restricting the ability of
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: markets to improve my life. So, yes, there are problems,
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: but what is their ology, What is the source of
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: the problem. And if the source of the problem is government,
• 16:22
  Speaker 1: then name it as government and don't blame capitalism markets.
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: Let's keep going and again be objective about these things.
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: God it drives me nuts. The world is so bad,
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: things are so awful, Things are just horrible. Are they
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: really in what realm? How bad are they? How responsible
• 16:47
  Speaker 1: they you for them being bad? And in what ways
• 16:51
  Speaker 1: are your life better? In what ways are your life better?
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: It's easy to think of all the bad things. But again, healthcare,
• 17:01
  Speaker 1: I mean, you've got to be blind not to see
• 17:05
  Speaker 1: the benefits that have recruited over the last ten years
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: in healthcare. Let me just think about the number of
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: people in GOP wants right, and you know this could
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: be the solution to the obesity crisis. People actually odeing
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: less than I think twenty sixteen, certainly less than twenty twenty. Yeah, anyway,
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: lots of ways in which our lives are better. Homes
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: are bigger. Yeah, they're more expensive, but they're also bigger.
• 17:38
  Speaker 2: This day, one decade ago, the Dow Jones closed dead
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: around eighteen thousand points. Since then it has skyrocketed, closing
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: today had fifty one thousand points. So congratulations and less.
• 17:47
  Speaker 2: Of course, your quality of life is not two point
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: eight three times better.
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: But even if your quality of life is not two
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: point eight times better, which is not the Dolls Jones,
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: Industrial or whatever's measuring the SP five hundred. It's not
• 17:58
  Speaker 1: a measure of your quality of life. You don't expect
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: your quality of life to improve by the same amount
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: as the stock market has. But one of the things
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: he never says during this entire show is the fact
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: that most Americans have money in the stock market. They're
• 18:14
  Speaker 1: for one case, even if they don't, even if they
• 18:17
  Speaker 1: have a pension plan, the pension plans money is in
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: the stock market. If they have insurance, the insurance company's
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: money is in the stock market. Our wealth, all of
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: our wealth, is still large extent tied up with the
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: stock market. The fact that the stock money has gone
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: up so much benefits almost all Americans. We're all better
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: off for the fact that the stock monet is much higher.
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: A wealth has increased. Now, I know some of you
• 18:45
  Speaker 1: are they're going to say it's all inflation. It's all well,
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: but prices are not three point eight times higher from
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: ten years ago. They're just not. So whatever's driving it.
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: You are wealthier, you have purchasing power, you can buy
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: more stuff. And the reality is that more and more
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: Americans now are kind of retiring, and semm are retiring.
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: And the reason they can retire in summer, retire right now.
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: Is because they have a lot of money in the
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: bank because of the stock market, they can outlive off
• 19:21
  Speaker 1: of their savings. Isn't that something to celebrate? Isn't that
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: one way in which our life is better than it
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: was ten years ago. We're richer, well quite a bit richer,
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: and richer doesn't just mean a number in a bank account.
• 19:36
  Speaker 1: Richer means more opportunities, more opportunists to start a business,
• 19:40
  Speaker 1: more opportunities to retire early or retire late, or just retire,
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: more opportunities to buy a vacation home, more opportunities to
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: hang out with your kids and grandkids and take them
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: on vacation and expensive vacations and buy them a home.
• 19:56
  Speaker 1: Who knows, right, so you can proof with the stock
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: and it's increases. But the reality is that the increase
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: in the stock Marcket benefits almost all of us and
• 20:09
  Speaker 1: is a reflection of dramatic increasing productivity, the dramatic increasing innovation,
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: and the fact that Americans are far better off than
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: they were ten years ago. We produce more more efficiently,
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: more effectively. Maybe we don't manufacture with our hands more.
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: Maybe we don't you know, we're not what do you
• 20:33
  Speaker 1: call it, to outdate farming with our hands, But in
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: terms of the value of what we produce, we're producing
• 20:42
  Speaker 1: more than we ever have. And our companies, as a
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: consequences because of our productivity, because of their productivity, are
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: more profitable than ever and that is reflected in rising stocks.
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: And Yeah, the fact that the government inflates, the fact
• 20:58
  Speaker 1: that there's a lot of money slush out there helps,
• 21:01
  Speaker 1: but that ultimately, as I've said many signs, ultimately has
• 21:04
  Speaker 1: to express itself in rising prices, and we're not seeing that.
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: We're just not seeing that. You're not seeing how what places,
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: places of goods rise anyway close to the same level
• 21:20
  Speaker 1: as the stock market is race.
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: In that case, I made a video for you to watch.
• 21:27
  Speaker 2: But this video isn't about evil CEOs or how capitalism
• 21:30
  Speaker 2: and wealth inequality are out of control. You probably already
• 21:32
  Speaker 2: knew those things. This is a theory.
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: I mean, capitalism is out of control. You knew that
• 21:37
  Speaker 1: inequalities out of control. You knew that. That's just again
• 21:40
  Speaker 1: an assumption. Everybody knows crazy CEOs. Everybody knows that. We
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: don't need to comment on that, right, maybe.
• 21:48
  Speaker 2: A conspiracy theory, but a theory nonetheless, that I've been
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: sharing and discussing and refining for years. For you, it's
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: merely some lenses that you can try on when reading
• 21:57
  Speaker 2: your news feed. It's an introduction to what comes after capitalism,
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: something I can only call leveragism.
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: So just credit, he's talking about what comes after capitalism
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: what we live in today, and he's calling it leveragism.
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: It's a silly title. What comes after capitalism? Really we've
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: never had capitalism, And what comes after capitalism is the
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: mixed economy. And what comes after a mixed economy is
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: more statism and less capitalism, most statism, less freedom, and
• 22:33
  Speaker 1: that mixture keeps shifting. But overall, what we're seeing and
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: have seen for decades and decades and decades is a
• 22:40
  Speaker 1: one way direction, more statism, less freedom, more statism, less freedom.
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: And as we see that, you know, yes, a freedom shrink.
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: And all the problems, all the problems that really do
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: exist out there, and the fact that we're now growing
• 22:57
  Speaker 1: as fast as we should be growing, all that, all
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: that manifests itself. But that is a consequence of that
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: shift in a mixed economy. Not the consequence is not capitalism.
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: For notice, the game.
• 23:15
  Speaker 2: If we make a really really is dependent on economic
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: and technological growth on.
• 23:23
  Speaker 1: So I need to go back here, all right? Yeah,
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: it's hor to tell with all the sometimes you can
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: see things popfull you.
• 23:37
  Speaker 3: I'll be footing on the side.
• 23:46
  Speaker 2: Capitalism on paper is dependent on economic and technological growth
• 23:51
  Speaker 2: on paper.
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: So capitalism is dependent on technological and economic growth. Now
• 23:58
  Speaker 1: what does that even mean? What does it mean to
• 24:02
  Speaker 1: say that capitalism mean to non lights it? What does
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: it mean to say that capitalism is dependent on technological
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: and economic growth? What is capitalists? He hasn't defined it
• 24:18
  Speaker 1: and never will. Capitalism is a system, a political, social
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: economic system of property rights. It's a system of private property.
• 24:29
  Speaker 1: It's a system where the government, in an ideal situation,
• 24:34
  Speaker 1: protects individual rights, famarily property rights, which and in which
• 24:38
  Speaker 1: all property is privately owned. So it's a system of
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: property rights. It's a system of individual rights. It's a
• 24:45
  Speaker 1: system of freedom. It's a system because that's what individual
• 24:48
  Speaker 1: rights are. Individual rights are the freedom to act, to
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: pursue your values based on your rational mind, in pursuit
• 24:58
  Speaker 1: of your goals, to pursuit of your happiness, free of causion,
• 25:07
  Speaker 1: free of force, free of an authoritarian regime telling you
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: what you can and cannot do. That's what capitalism is.
• 25:17
  Speaker 1: Capitalism doesn't depend on technology and economic growth. Technology and
• 25:23
  Speaker 1: economic growth out growth of capitalism. This is putting, you know,
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: it's a reversy cause and effect. It's not that capitalism
• 25:33
  Speaker 1: depends on these things. It's that these things don't exist
• 25:38
  Speaker 1: without at least some element, some big chunk of our
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: society being based on freedom in the economic real. Without
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: economic freedom, there is no technological and economic progress. So again, no,
• 25:58
  Speaker 1: he's not explaining, he's not proving. He's just stating capitalism
• 26:03
  Speaker 1: depends on the economic growth, and people are going, oh, yeah,
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: that makes sense, makes sense. No, it doesn't. Actually couplism
• 26:10
  Speaker 1: makes economic growth possible. Where do you have a system
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: that is not reliant on aid, on a free enterprise system,
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: on free companies, on private property, the growth North Korea,
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: the Cuban, you won, the old Soviet Union, maos China. No,
• 26:39
  Speaker 1: you don't get economic progress and you don't get technological
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: progress in any of those. The only places where you
• 26:45
  Speaker 1: get economic growth and technological progress all places to respect
• 26:51
  Speaker 1: property rights, and you get that progress to the extent
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: that they respect property rights. Now he goes on that fallacy.
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: The idea is that everybody gets a slice of the pie,
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: and if we make a really really really big pie
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: that keeps growing, then everybody can get fat. And not
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: only is that example.
• 27:11
  Speaker 1: Now notice the pie analogy, which is, you know, one
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: of my favorite analogies in all of politics and economics,
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: high analogies. The economy is a pie, right, you know,
• 27:26
  Speaker 1: we just want we have a pie, and and what
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: we do is we redistribute the pye and we give
• 27:31
  Speaker 1: people pieces of the pie. We give people slices, and
• 27:36
  Speaker 1: if the pie is big, then we all get big
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: slices and we can get fat, which means we can
• 27:40
  Speaker 1: get rich. But again that's that's just such a bizarre allergy.
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: There is no pie. It's it's this is collectivism one
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: o one. This starts on the assumption that there is
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: societal wealth and we can grow that wealth and we
• 27:59
  Speaker 1: can shrink that wealth. But there was no such thing
• 28:01
  Speaker 1: as society with wealth. There's your wealth in my wealth,
• 28:04
  Speaker 1: and Eline Musk's wealth, and jeft bezos as wealth well
• 28:08
  Speaker 1: that they created that they did something to earn, and
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: we don't get to divvy that up. We each create
• 28:19
  Speaker 1: the pie. That we're going to use to consume. We
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: each create the pie that becomes our wealth. Now we
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: can invest some of our pie in somebody else's enterprise,
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: somebody else's pie, and grow with them. That's what happened
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: with the stock market when it grew as much as
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: it did over the last ten years. We invested our
• 28:40
  Speaker 1: money with the you know, the the the jetpiesos and
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: all the musks and and ped of teals and the
• 28:47
  Speaker 1: rest of the venture capital and technological community, and it
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: grew because of their productive efforts and not just them,
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: you know, small or other kinds of businesses, not just
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: technology but primalody technology. But there was ald pie. And
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: the whole thing in economics is not dividing up the pie.
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: Too much discussion in economics is about redistribution, But the
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: fundamental leation of economics is production. How do you produce stuff?
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: What do you get the stuff to begin with? What
• 29:22
  Speaker 1: is required to get anything? To get stuff? Now, I
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: know I'm stopping every two seconds. There's no way we
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: can get through this whole video, But that's fine. Whenever
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: we get we get through ample.
• 29:35
  Speaker 2: Kind of a literal one. When we look at the
• 29:37
  Speaker 2: American obesity epidemic. A capitalism also led to agricultural innovation
• 29:41
  Speaker 2: and global supply chains and wealth creation and developing countries
• 29:43
  Speaker 2: that played a huge part in decreasing global hunger. It's
• 29:46
  Speaker 2: worth recognizing that in nineteen seventy one third of the
• 29:50
  Speaker 2: people on this planet we're starving, and now that number
• 29:52
  Speaker 2: is down to about eight point two percent. How much
• 29:55
  Speaker 2: of that achievement can be awarded to capitalism can be debated,
• 29:58
  Speaker 2: But ignoring that this drop in fan and happened in
• 30:00
  Speaker 2: a time when all but four countries rely on in
• 30:03
  Speaker 2: capitalist structure would be disingenuous.
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so at least he recognizes that. Right, So something
• 30:08
  Speaker 1: good is happening out there because of private property. And
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: by the way, it's not just four. Right, much of
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: Africa does not rely on any kind of semblance of
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: a capitalist economy and doesn't rely on private property, and
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: therefore as we're made poor. So it's more than four.
• 30:29
  Speaker 1: But at least he recognizes, Yes, all the supply chains
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: and innovation and progress and things have happened, and maybe
• 30:36
  Speaker 1: that's us a capitalism. But notice that complete conceptual confusion.
• 30:43
  Speaker 1: You don't define the term, and then you reverse cause
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: and effect, and there's some good, but what about all
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: this other stuff? And you can't separate We'll get to
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: you can't separate economic power, big business, wealthy individuals from
• 31:03
  Speaker 1: political power. And a big part of the confusion in
• 31:08
  Speaker 1: our world, a big part of a confusion about capitalism
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: is the inability to separate political and economic power. We'll
• 31:15
  Speaker 1: get to that.
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: Let's revisit that on paper parts. So like, even if
• 31:19
  Speaker 2: we limit our examples to Coca Cola, who I seem
• 31:22
  Speaker 2: to frequently use for economic examples, for some reason, capitalism
• 31:25
  Speaker 2: leads to a lot of evil shit in.
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: So Coca Cola. So capitalism leads to a lot of
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: evil shit. So Coca Cola might have done some stuff
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: that today looking backwards looks, but capitalism leads to a
• 31:39
  Speaker 1: lot of evil shit. You know. So you're picking one example,
• 31:45
  Speaker 1: you're picking a company, You're picking different periods of time.
• 31:49
  Speaker 1: By the way, I haven't gone down the research to
• 31:51
  Speaker 1: challenge all of these I don't think that that important.
• 31:56
  Speaker 1: You know, you can nippick this stuff, particularly going back
• 31:59
  Speaker 1: into the ninety escentury.
• 32:01
  Speaker 2: Fifty four, Coca Cola financially and politically supported as CIA
• 32:03
  Speaker 2: backed military coup of Guatemala. Then in the early two thousands,
• 32:06
  Speaker 2: Coca Cola was suspected to have hired right wing paaramilitary
• 32:09
  Speaker 2: death squads to assassinate union leaders. Coca Cola is the
• 32:12
  Speaker 2: number one top plastic polluter in the world. Despite their
• 32:15
  Speaker 2: constant marketing of their sustainability goals, they've caused water shortages
• 32:19
  Speaker 2: in Latin America and India.
• 32:20
  Speaker 1: But I mean, this is amazing to me. They've caused
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: water shortages in Latin America and India, and the life
• 32:25
  Speaker 1: expectancy in those countries goes keeps going up. As he
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: showed a few and few of people in these countries
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: Latin America and Asia, poverty is declining dramatically in these places.
• 32:39
  Speaker 1: You think of that, water shortages probably wouldn't be declining
• 32:42
  Speaker 1: that much. I mean, it's just it's you know, they
• 32:46
  Speaker 1: just pick and choose because they want to believe all
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: the evil stuff about any particular company. And why do
• 32:55
  Speaker 1: they want to believe it? And this is an important
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: model of point. Why do these people buy into it?
• 32:59
  Speaker 1: Why is it so easy to believe that business creates
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: does evil in the world. Well, because business is greedy
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: in other words, business is focused on making money. In
• 33:14
  Speaker 1: other words, business is focused on its own self interest.
• 33:20
  Speaker 1: Oh my god, there's selfish and what is selfishness? Selfishness
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: is the pursuit of short term gain in any way possible, life, steal, cheat, murder,
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: steal their water, whatever it takes. Short term gain is
• 33:40
  Speaker 1: all the matters to selfish person. And this isn't just
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: some Marxist thing. This is every moral philosopher almost in
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: human history has believed this. If you pursue your own
• 33:55
  Speaker 1: self interest, you will do harm to others. That is
• 34:00
  Speaker 1: almost definitional in them all code. So their own self interest,
• 34:06
  Speaker 1: self interest leads along to others. Okay, well then it's
• 34:09
  Speaker 1: not surprising the co Cola did all these horrible things.
• 34:12
  Speaker 1: Of course they did. Why would you ever challenge that?
• 34:15
  Speaker 1: What would you ever second guess that? So, yeah, why
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: we have to have regulations and controls about these businessmen
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: because otherwise the light sheets steal their weight and take
• 34:28
  Speaker 1: all our stuff, because that's the best way to do business, by.
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: Depleting local aquifiers. They have bottling partners that have been
• 34:39
  Speaker 2: repeatedly accused of human rights violations and suppressing union organization.
• 34:43
  Speaker 2: They have Israeli franchises that have sourced their resources from
• 34:46
  Speaker 2: my Palestinian territories, which is considered illegal under international law.
• 34:51
  Speaker 2: It's not is the existence of capitalism. The problem here,
• 34:54
  Speaker 2: most regret it.
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: Good question, is the existence of capitalism. The problem mean
• 34:59
  Speaker 1: is the protection of property rights that has caused us,
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: you know, but it is the existence of capitalism. Because
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: what is it about capitalism that causes these problems? Self interest?
• 35:15
  Speaker 1: Self interest, the pursuit of profit, greed, and that's why
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: it's so easy to buy the bullshit.
• 35:23
  Speaker 2: As of people would answer that question with a resounding yes.
• 35:26
  Speaker 2: I think it's debatable. I would argue that most of
• 35:29
  Speaker 2: these things that Coke did violate the rules written by
• 35:32
  Speaker 2: capitalist governments. And the problem is greed, which is a
• 35:34
  Speaker 2: byproduct of jealousy. Since capitalism is frequently associated with hoarding
• 35:38
  Speaker 2: more resources than your neighbors, we tend to associate capitalism
• 35:41
  Speaker 2: with being a douchebag.
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: So capitalism is about greed. Greed is about holding, which
• 35:52
  Speaker 1: means being a douchebag, right, I mean, but that's a
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: necessary connection if you have an altruistic view morality, which
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: almost everybody in the world has. This is why people,
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: this is why it's so difficult to get these ideas
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: across the people.
• 36:09
  Speaker 2: And that's totally fair, so much so that we even
• 36:11
  Speaker 2: get popular memes and fake Karl Marx quotes like there
• 36:14
  Speaker 2: is no ethical consumption under capitalism, which is a completely
• 36:17
  Speaker 2: sane and reasonable thing to shout at lemonade stands in
• 36:19
  Speaker 2: farmers' markets. The reason I'm discussing this to begin with
• 36:22
  Speaker 2: is to highlight what American capitalism means on paper, and
• 36:26
  Speaker 2: how apparently nobody has seen that paper in decades.
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: So notice how he's trying to be balanced here, right,
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: So he you know, his idea about yelling yelling this
• 36:37
  Speaker 1: lemonade stands in from of markets. He's being He's cynical here, right,
• 36:41
  Speaker 1: He's making fun of the crazy left that yells these
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: things that there's no ethical consumption under the capitalism. He
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: doesn't believe that. It's also how you know, he threw
• 36:52
  Speaker 1: out the hoarding, the capitalist horde. What does that even mean?
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: What does that mean? To hoard? I mean, it's such
• 36:59
  Speaker 1: a overused term. Again, it's one of these things that
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: people just say, this is what happens. Rich people hold
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: their wealth. But do rich people hold their wealth? What
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: do people do? What do rich people do with their wealth? Well,
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: what did Alon Musk do with their wealth. He started
• 37:16
  Speaker 1: SpaceX and Tesla. What did Jeff Vizos do with his wealth?
• 37:20
  Speaker 1: He started you know, Blue whatever and and you AI company.
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: And yes, he consumes a lot. He bought a big
• 37:28
  Speaker 1: yacht with somebody built, and a lot of people got
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: paid to work on and you know a lot of
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: people got compensated for providing him now yacht. And he
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: probably has a couple of private jets, and he has
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: a bunch of homes and so on. But he also
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: the primary way in which he uses his wealth is
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: he invests in. It doesn't sit in his mattress. He
• 37:54
  Speaker 1: doesn't big dig a big hole in the backyard and
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: put it all there. He doesn't even gold with it.
• 38:03
  Speaker 1: All right, So he's going to go into a long
• 38:07
  Speaker 1: section here about you know, what he calls political leverage,
• 38:14
  Speaker 1: which is you know, all the you know, if we
• 38:18
  Speaker 1: just run through this, it's about Breton woods and import
• 38:22
  Speaker 1: exports and inflation and going off the gold standard and
• 38:27
  Speaker 1: what has happened to our purchasing power since then? And
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: all of this is true, But why doesn't he name
• 38:38
  Speaker 1: the problem? None of that is capitalist under capitalism. Under capitalism,
• 38:48
  Speaker 1: money is private. The state has no business in money.
• 38:54
  Speaker 1: In the nineteenth century in America, government didn't issue money.
• 38:58
  Speaker 1: Now we intervened, and they interjected way too much. But
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: in Canada, for example, Canada had private banks that issued
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: their own money. Canada only got a central bank. I
• 39:13
  Speaker 1: think it was the nineteen forties, maybe the nineteen thirties,
• 39:15
  Speaker 1: but late much later than the US. So the real
• 39:21
  Speaker 1: answer here is not capitalism produces you know, all this
• 39:28
  Speaker 1: increased cost of living. No, that is the anti capitalists
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: that produce that. That is working against freedom. That is
• 39:37
  Speaker 1: the state taking over the resource, the product, that the creation,
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: the thing that is money. Money is not just money,
• 39:47
  Speaker 1: is something is a human creation. It's a technology. And
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: when people are left free to innovate around with this technology,
• 40:02
  Speaker 1: you don't get a high cost of you don't get
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: a rising cost of living, actually get a declining cost
• 40:07
  Speaker 1: of living. You get small deflation. But he doesn't know this,
• 40:13
  Speaker 1: and this is hard and people want easy answers. And
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: so let's blame the rising cost of living on capitalism,
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: when you should be blaming the rising cost of living
• 40:23
  Speaker 1: on the federal reserve and the federal government that is
• 40:26
  Speaker 1: running massive debts that are hard for me to even
• 40:29
  Speaker 1: contemplate and hard for me to see any way that
• 40:33
  Speaker 1: this ends in any positive kind of sense. And when
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: all of this collapses, which it is bound to do
• 40:38
  Speaker 1: in one way or the other, is government going to
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: get blamed for it? Or you're going to get blamed
• 40:44
  Speaker 1: for it? Is the market going to get blamed for it?
• 40:46
  Speaker 1: Is capitalism going to get blamed for it? Oh, you're
• 40:48
  Speaker 1: going to need a new system to replace capitalism because
• 40:51
  Speaker 1: capitalism implode it with the federal government defaulting on all
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: of its debt. Anyway, he goes to the nineties seventies
• 41:00
  Speaker 1: and he has a whole theory about what happened, you know,
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: during the nineteen seventies and what happened to oil and
• 41:09
  Speaker 1: all of that. And it's a mixture. It's a mixture.
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: That whole section is a mixture of true stuff. I mean,
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: some of the history is shoot and some of his
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: analysis situe, but a lot of just bogus stuff that
• 41:24
  Speaker 1: he just presents without proof, without analysis, without debate, without
• 41:29
  Speaker 1: any suggestions that there might be an alternative explanation of
• 41:32
  Speaker 1: what's happening. No, this is what's happening. A lot of
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: his economic analysis is I don't know, conventional I was
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: going to say, but it's worse than conventional. But let's
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: look at his discussion of leverage here. He is a
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: section of classical leverage. All right, let's go there.
• 41:51
  Speaker 2: Need to philosophically understand leverage.
• 41:55
  Speaker 1: Two. Checkter one was about government and money.
• 41:58
  Speaker 2: Leverage is a term frequent used by economists, although maybe
• 42:01
  Speaker 2: not frequently enough. Studying leverage on an investment is about
• 42:04
  Speaker 2: as fun as writing down thousands of metrics and using
• 42:07
  Speaker 2: logistic regression to predict a fight instead of just betting
• 42:09
  Speaker 2: against Jake Paul and then watching him get knocked unconscious
• 42:12
  Speaker 2: and you winning one hundred hours in the process.
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: So you just see why popularly comes up with all
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: these popular references. But no, levage is actually quite fun,
• 42:20
  Speaker 1: and calculating levage on an investment is actually quite interesting
• 42:24
  Speaker 1: and a lot of people do it and it's not
• 42:28
  Speaker 1: that complicated, and yeah, it's worth really thinking about it.
• 42:32
  Speaker 2: Decide to rent a home in a small town where
• 42:35
  Speaker 2: every house costs exactly one hundred thousand hours and you're
• 42:38
  Speaker 2: saving up to buy one. I decided to move to
• 42:40
  Speaker 2: the same town as well, but not just to live there.
• 42:43
  Speaker 2: I'm going to try and make as much money as possible.
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: I happen to have one hundred thousand hours in cash,
• 42:48
  Speaker 2: so I buy a house. Here goes buy property, value
• 42:50
  Speaker 2: increases by ten percent, and I sell the same house
• 42:53
  Speaker 2: for one hundred and ten thousand hours, making ten percent
• 42:55
  Speaker 2: profit on my equity. But then I get a better idea.
• 42:58
  Speaker 2: I take one hundred thousand hours from the sale of
• 43:00
  Speaker 2: my house and use it as five twenty thousand dollars
• 43:03
  Speaker 2: down payments on five houses. Another year of ten percent
• 43:06
  Speaker 2: value increase will earn me fifty percent return. I'm investment.
• 43:09
  Speaker 2: So why don't I do this in real life? Why
• 43:11
  Speaker 2: don't I own dozens of properties?
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: That's right, This is exactly how vid wooks well.
• 43:17
  Speaker 2: Because this isn't some sort of infinite money glitch. It's
• 43:19
  Speaker 2: a high risk maneuver. In fact, it's asymmetrical against me
• 43:23
  Speaker 2: because if those properties would lose twenty percent of their
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: value before I sell them, then I would lose one
• 43:27
  Speaker 2: hundred percent of my investment as they broke. But there's
• 43:30
  Speaker 2: a whole lot more to this. Long before George Soros
• 43:32
  Speaker 2: was known for paying everybody in the world to be
• 43:34
  Speaker 2: mean to Alex Jones and Donald Trump, he wrote a
• 43:37
  Speaker 2: classic and important book called The Alchemy of Finance, which
• 43:40
  Speaker 2: was published in nineteen eighty seven. This book introduced and
• 43:43
  Speaker 2: popularized the theory of reflexivity, which is now arguably cited
• 43:47
  Speaker 2: more in anthropology than it is in finance. Continuing with
• 43:50
  Speaker 2: my pedantic little example here, as we all know, one
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: of the few predictable things about housing markets is that
• 43:55
  Speaker 2: they constantly fluctuate. And if I arrived to that town
• 43:59
  Speaker 2: with millions, there are billions of dollars in capital to
• 44:01
  Speaker 2: absorb the housing market losing value, I'd be able to
• 44:04
  Speaker 2: tip the scales in a way where I'm not as
• 44:06
  Speaker 2: exposed to the asymmetrical risk. If I buy enough of
• 44:09
  Speaker 2: these houses in this little town, I'm actually not only
• 44:12
  Speaker 2: contributing to the increase in the appraised property value, but
• 44:15
  Speaker 2: I'm able to maneuver the local economy to my benefit.
• 44:18
  Speaker 1: Is that true? So if you go into a local
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: neighborhood and you buy lots of these houses, you can
• 44:26
  Speaker 1: somehow manipulate the local economy in your favor over time.
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: I mean, again, where is this coming from? On the
• 44:35
  Speaker 1: basis of what what is the economic of financial theory
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: that suggests that this is true? Will some numbers by me?
• 44:45
  Speaker 1: How does how would that work? What's the economic logic, coven.
• 44:49
  Speaker 1: We don't need that. We're just going to make a stake.
• 44:51
  Speaker 1: Then if I buy enough houses, I can I can
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: you know, change the economy, and I can make sure
• 44:57
  Speaker 1: that the value houses never goes down. So I'm not
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: to key any risk anymore. But that's complete made up
• 45:06
  Speaker 1: fairy tales.
• 45:08
  Speaker 2: It perform a little magic trick called the dividend recap.
• 45:11
  Speaker 2: I could create a shadow company and then sell the
• 45:13
  Speaker 2: houses to myself far below their actual value. Then when
• 45:16
  Speaker 2: this causes comparable houses to be appraised at a lower value,
• 45:19
  Speaker 2: I can buy them and rent them at higher prices
• 45:22
  Speaker 2: until I create a housing shortage, which will then inflate
• 45:24
  Speaker 2: the value for when I decide to sell them.
• 45:26
  Speaker 1: By the way, all of that is bys. All of
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: that assumes that you're the only you know, you dominate
• 45:34
  Speaker 1: the time market, that you can manipulate home prices just
• 45:38
  Speaker 1: like that, that no other buyers are going to come in,
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: that you're the only buyer, and if nobody's going to
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: compete with you to raise the price of the home
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: up because you're the only buy it it's just you know,
• 45:52
  Speaker 1: it's made up numbers. It's made up numbers without understanding
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: market dynamics and how markets actually you work. How do
• 46:03
  Speaker 1: you create a housing shortage? Why can't people build new houses?
• 46:08
  Speaker 1: Maybe that's the problem. Maybe that's what you should be
• 46:10
  Speaker 1: looking at. Hey Ben, look at how white white people
• 46:14
  Speaker 1: can't build new houses? And how do you know? How
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: can you create a housing showing? And what are you
• 46:19
  Speaker 1: doing at these houses? You're sitting on them? What causes
• 46:22
  Speaker 1: their prices to go up? People want to move in?
• 46:25
  Speaker 1: But if the entire neighborhood's empty because you haven't rented
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: them out, then why are anybody gonna move in there?
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: And if people are renting them, then you know, the
• 46:37
  Speaker 1: rent has value. And why prices going down? How did
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: you cause the price to go down? The whole thing
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: is just it's just mind bogglingly, mind bogglingly. Is that
• 46:47
  Speaker 1: that that is a legitimate, you know, economic term. I
• 46:50
  Speaker 1: think it's just he just is making stuff up. And
• 46:55
  Speaker 1: this is the problem with most people who are attack capitalism.
• 46:59
  Speaker 1: They make stuff up. Now, I think that he's convinced
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: he's right. He's convinced himself because he doesn't understand economics.
• 47:07
  Speaker 1: He doesn't know how markets work. He you know, it's
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: I remember these students I had in the nineteen nineties
• 47:15
  Speaker 1: during the dot com bubble who used to tell me
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: profits don't matter. All that matters is growth. Stocks just grow, grow, grow, grow,
• 47:22
  Speaker 1: And as long as they grow, you know, that's what matters.
• 47:25
  Speaker 1: If they never make a profit every but they continue
• 47:29
  Speaker 1: to grow, how do they continue to grow? Oh, they
• 47:32
  Speaker 1: keep you shing shifts. Why would anybody give them shares?
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: Because they keep growing? In there? For the ship price
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: goes up, why does the ship? I mean, it's just
• 47:38
  Speaker 1: it makes no economic sense. You can't ground it in anything.
• 47:45
  Speaker 1: But people are really good at self delusion and really
• 47:50
  Speaker 1: good at binding into delusional stories because they're simple and
• 47:53
  Speaker 1: it makes sense if you don't think, and if you
• 47:57
  Speaker 1: don't think too abstractly, and if you don't think in
• 48:01
  Speaker 1: a two complicated way about the complexity of the world
• 48:04
  Speaker 1: in which we live. All right, let's see.
• 48:13
  Speaker 2: None of this is hypothetical. This is exactly what Blackstone
• 48:17
  Speaker 2: did via invitation homes after the two thousand and eight
• 48:19
  Speaker 2: financial crisis.
• 48:20
  Speaker 4: And Blackstone, for example, is now the largest owner of
• 48:25
  Speaker 4: individual houses in the United State.
• 48:28
  Speaker 1: Yeah, so when there was housing crisis, When there was
• 48:31
  Speaker 1: a housing crisis, which was really bad because prices were
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: going down, not because of Blackstone, not because of anybody.
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: Because my Headdrefts said, the woman to cut my head.
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: In those days owned three homes. Because we're not going
• 48:45
  Speaker 1: to get into the whole story of the financial crisis,
• 48:47
  Speaker 1: because a lot of really bad government policies encouraged people
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: to take on a lot of debt and buy lots
• 48:52
  Speaker 1: of homes, and then they couldn't pay the mortgages and
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: house prices collapsed, and Blackstone incredible opportunity to buy a
• 49:01
  Speaker 1: hole cheap, and they bought them up and started renting
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: them out. They didn't cause the collapse, but they they
• 49:10
  Speaker 1: actually created a flaw in the collapse. By Blackstone buying
• 49:14
  Speaker 1: the homes up, they actually prevented the homes from going
• 49:18
  Speaker 1: down even more. They actually provided liquidity. Liquidity means money
• 49:25
  Speaker 1: entering a market when nobody else was willing to provide
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: equidity because the market was only going down. So Blackstone
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: buying homes during this period is not market manipulation. It's
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: actually what allows markets to recover, which we all benefit from,
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: at least all of us who own homes benefit from us.
• 49:44
  Speaker 4: And then we're renting them to people as.
• 49:49
  Speaker 1: They're reading them, people who maybe had even lost their
• 49:53
  Speaker 1: home because they couldn't make the mortgage, but now they
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: could rent at least they could still have a home.
• 50:04
  Speaker 1: So well, this should be viewed as a positive thing.
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: Here's a beautiful market mechanism that protects us from the
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: egregious disaster that caused by government policy and keeps people
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: in homes. They don't own them, they rent them. But
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: who said owning is better than renting.
• 50:27
  Speaker 4: Posed to selling them. It's a good business for us,
• 50:31
  Speaker 4: it's a new thing, but it's also good for America,
• 50:35
  Speaker 4: and it's good to be able to provide housing for
• 50:39
  Speaker 4: those people who need it.
• 50:41
  Speaker 2: In fact, they built a highly sophisticated algorithm to scan
• 50:44
  Speaker 2: real estate markets and intentionally overpaid for houses to price
• 50:47
  Speaker 2: out families who wanted to live in them.
• 50:49
  Speaker 1: Really, they purposefully overpaid for houses. How do you make
• 50:54
  Speaker 1: money by over paying for an asset? How do you
• 50:59
  Speaker 1: do that? Right? They have an AI strategy, true, but
• 51:06
  Speaker 1: how do you how do you overpay and make money?
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: I mean, I understand underpaid. You buy low, sell high.
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: That's generally the world and finance buy low, sell high.
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: But here the whole point is buy high. Don't tell
• 51:22
  Speaker 1: I don't know what buy sell higher, and it's just igno.
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: And he had two point three million.
• 51:30
  Speaker 2: People algorithm to scan real estate markets and intentionally overpaid
• 51:33
  Speaker 2: for houses to price out families who wanted to live
• 51:35
  Speaker 2: in them.
• 51:36
  Speaker 1: Over this because blackstell he hates families. They hate families.
• 51:39
  Speaker 1: They want to price you out of your home.
• 51:40
  Speaker 2: Here's plenty of white papers commissioned by private equity firms
• 51:43
  Speaker 2: openly detail these theories. They describe housing as a supply
• 51:46
  Speaker 2: constrained asset with inelastic demand that can systematically block the
• 51:50
  Speaker 2: working class.
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: None of the white papers say system making bulk the
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: working class, right, But he just said this is what
• 51:58
  Speaker 1: the white papers say, but none of gonna say systematically
• 52:01
  Speaker 1: bulk the white working class. What it says is it's
• 52:04
  Speaker 1: supply constraint. If it's supply constrained in certain parts of
• 52:08
  Speaker 1: the country and demand is still there, then prices will
• 52:12
  Speaker 1: go up. So we should buy now because it's supply constrained.
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: And this is an asset that will go up in value,
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: and you can buy it with a lot of leverage
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: because banks will give us money because these houses are
• 52:24
  Speaker 1: worth something. But if you're really looking at the problem.
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: If you're really concerned about housing, why aren't you spending
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: an enormous amount inordinate amount of time really thinking about
• 52:40
  Speaker 1: how to increase supply instead of attacking private equity. By
• 52:46
  Speaker 1: the way, the Trumpet administration, Donald Trump has just allowed
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: a bill to restrict the ability of private equity funds
• 52:52
  Speaker 1: to own homes in America significantly. Say again, left and
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: right all agree on this stuff.
• 53:02
  Speaker 2: It's from building generational wealth through homeownership. Instead, this guarantees
• 53:06
  Speaker 2: that workers.
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: Home ownership shouldn't be a way you build generational wealth.
• 53:12
  Speaker 1: I'll say this again, home ownership shouldn't be the way
• 53:14
  Speaker 1: you build generational wealth. Home Ownership is just it's a home.
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: It's a it's a it's a product. It's a consumable product.
• 53:24
  Speaker 1: Home should go down in value over time or stay flat.
• 53:29
  Speaker 1: They get old, they need to be maintained. And if
• 53:33
  Speaker 1: new homes could be built freely, then what makes your
• 53:37
  Speaker 1: home rise in value over time when it's clearly falling
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: apart or at least you know old, Just like your
• 53:44
  Speaker 1: car when you you know your car is worth less
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: two years in than it was when you originally bought it.
• 53:49
  Speaker 1: Why is your home any different? Why should your home
• 53:52
  Speaker 1: be any different only because the government restricts a supply
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: of homes, only because they're No new toyota is being
• 54:01
  Speaker 1: made because the government has limited the number of toyotas
• 54:04
  Speaker 1: they can be made. That's why the price of toyotas
• 54:07
  Speaker 1: might go up. You'd have to restrict all cause because
• 54:11
  Speaker 1: there's substitute products of toyota. See, you know, economics, you
• 54:14
  Speaker 1: have to think through. You can't just jump to conclusions
• 54:18
  Speaker 1: like this guy, like most critics of capitalism constantly do.
• 54:23
  Speaker 2: Constantly, this income can be siphoned back into Wall Street equity.
• 54:26
  Speaker 2: In twenty twenty six, this is now commonplace in nearly
• 54:29
  Speaker 2: every industry. Nearly every price tag you see is partially hypothetical,
• 54:33
  Speaker 2: obfuscating the objective value that the commodity holds.
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: What is the objective value the commodity holds? Where does
• 54:39
  Speaker 1: that come from? If not of supplying demand for that
• 54:42
  Speaker 1: commodity for that thing? Anyway, let me skip ahead here
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: he goes into a tax private equity toys of us.
• 54:52
  Speaker 1: He goes into the toys of us story. I mean,
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: I just did a whole course on for Peterson Academy
• 54:59
  Speaker 1: on private ACA equity and venture capital and I talked
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: about Toys of Us. So yes, it's interesting. He talks
• 55:05
  Speaker 1: about Toys of Us how private equity destroyed it. He
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: never mentions, never mentions. And this is how this is
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: now boat aligning. It's, you know, in dishonesty. He never
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: mentions Amazon. He never mentions Amazon. Do you think Amazon
• 55:22
  Speaker 1: had anything to do with the demise of Toys of Us?
• 55:26
  Speaker 1: Do you think that online competition had anything to do
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: with the bankruptcy of Toys of Us and other large retailers?
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: Is online world even real to this guy? It's just bewildering.
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: It's just bewildering. But no, it's all about private equity.
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: It's their fault. It's all about leverage. I want to
• 55:51
  Speaker 1: skip ahead to authoritarian leverage.
• 56:04
  Speaker 2: If Elon Muskin is entourage of private security pulled up
• 56:07
  Speaker 2: my driveway right now and he rolled down his window
• 56:09
  Speaker 2: and said, hey, I love your channel style. I'll give
• 56:12
  Speaker 2: you ten million dollars to make a video about the
• 56:14
  Speaker 2: dangers of transgender culture. I tell him to get the
• 56:17
  Speaker 2: fuck off my property. This isn't some edgy precedent either.
• 56:19
  Speaker 2: This same situation plays out with nearly every brand that
• 56:22
  Speaker 2: emails this channel. I know what I want in life,
• 56:24
  Speaker 2: and I know that I'll be happier not making a
• 56:26
  Speaker 2: video I don't want to make. Then I would be
• 56:27
  Speaker 2: with ten million dollars.
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: Good for him, But.
• 56:30
  Speaker 2: That's a privilege that I've worked extremely hard for.
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: But what if something happened, thought it's on.
• 56:35
  Speaker 2: If I had a child that had cancer and couldn't
• 56:38
  Speaker 2: afford the treatment, or what if I was behind on
• 56:40
  Speaker 2: my property taxes and was expecting the county to evict
• 56:43
  Speaker 2: me any day now, Well, then my integrity might be
• 56:45
  Speaker 2: more compromisable, and I might swallow my pride and make
• 56:48
  Speaker 2: propaganda or insincere content for my subscribers. A really fascinating
• 56:52
  Speaker 2: and important study called Income and Emotional well Being a
• 56:55
  Speaker 2: conflict resolved Zero's in on the root of this very thing.
• 56:59
  Speaker 2: These researchers found that money and happiness are closely intertwined,
• 57:02
  Speaker 2: but this usually flattens out between sixty thousand and ninety
• 57:06
  Speaker 2: thousand dollars.
• 57:07
  Speaker 1: So here's the thing about happiness studies, be very very
• 57:11
  Speaker 1: weary of them. How do you define happiness? Is happiness?
• 57:15
  Speaker 1: Satisfaction is happiness? Thinking that you can't things cannot get
• 57:20
  Speaker 1: any better for you than they are right now? What
• 57:23
  Speaker 1: exactly are you measuring? What are you asking, what are
• 57:27
  Speaker 1: people reporting? What are the questions being asked to try
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: to derive whether somebody is happy? You know, he says,
• 57:37
  Speaker 1: happiness taps off at I don't know, one hundred and
• 57:40
  Speaker 1: ten thousand dollars. After making more than one hundred and
• 57:43
  Speaker 1: ten thousand dollars, you don't gain any happiness. Now, I
• 57:47
  Speaker 1: can tell you just personally, that's bullshit. I'm much more
• 57:51
  Speaker 1: happy making more than one hundred and ten thousand, which
• 57:53
  Speaker 1: I do, than making one hundred and ten thousand dollars.
• 57:57
  Speaker 1: And if I had a shrink right now and only
• 57:59
  Speaker 1: have one hundred and ten thousand dollars, I would be
• 58:03
  Speaker 1: visibly unhappy. Postually I'd have to downsize my home, that
• 58:09
  Speaker 1: would you know? That would not be good? Not be good.
• 58:13
  Speaker 1: So where do these researchers come off by aggregating us
• 58:17
  Speaker 1: all out into some you know group that that basically says,
• 58:25
  Speaker 1: on average, when you make more than one hundred and
• 58:28
  Speaker 1: ten thousand dollars, you don't get happier. So beware of
• 58:33
  Speaker 1: all these happiness studies here.
• 58:36
  Speaker 2: This also happens to be the average income where a
• 58:39
  Speaker 2: person or family of comparable owners can turn their income
• 58:42
  Speaker 2: into wealth. They can own a house, they could start
• 58:44
  Speaker 2: a business.
• 58:45
  Speaker 1: They Owning a house is not turning your money into wealth.
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: Owning a house is buying a consumable product. Now, it's true,
• 58:53
  Speaker 1: if you buy a house in a place that has
• 58:55
  Speaker 1: supply constraints and a lot of demand, like California, then
• 59:00
  Speaker 1: it's likely to go up in price, and you're likely
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: to make money and create wealth. But if you buy
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: a house in I don't know, Kansas City, it's not
• 59:10
  Speaker 1: clear that home prices are only gonna go up in
• 59:13
  Speaker 1: Kansas City. I have nothing against Kansas City. I just
• 59:17
  Speaker 1: don't know. I just don't think there's a huge demand
• 59:19
  Speaker 1: in Kansas City, and I don't think the constraints supply
• 59:22
  Speaker 1: are as rigorous as the constraints of supply are in California.
• 59:27
  Speaker 1: I don't think home prices have gone up that much
• 59:30
  Speaker 1: in Chicago, in parts of Illinois, in Memphis, Tennessee. I
• 59:38
  Speaker 1: know rents have gone way down in Austin, Texas, and
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: some prices of properties have actually gone down in Austin,
• 59:45
  Speaker 1: Texas because there's no restraints on supply, and while demand
• 59:52
  Speaker 1: is high, so is increased supply. So the whole fixation
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: of housing wrong. And again you element to the question
• 1:00:03
  Speaker 1: of capitalism rights, what did I do it and really
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: want to do that?
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 2: Still have to work, and they would still be affected
• 1:00:09
  Speaker 2: by setbacks, but for the most part they've escaped complete
• 1:00:13
  Speaker 2: financial control. They can afford to take the risk of
• 1:00:16
  Speaker 2: reporting sexual harassment, or they could start a union without
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 2: the immediate threat of being homeless if they're illegally fired
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 2: as a result. What's fascinating, though, is that those making
• 1:00:24
  Speaker 2: one hundred and thirty thousand dollars per year are generally
• 1:00:27
  Speaker 2: just as happy as those making eighty thousand hours per year?
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: Is that really true by what standard? Again? What are
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 1: the questions? How do we I mean, it's a nice graph. Cool,
• 1:00:37
  Speaker 1: there's a study. I'm sure the other studies as of
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 1: being replicated. I ned lots of questions here, and he
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: also said a bunch of other stuff there that I
• 1:00:45
  Speaker 1: would question. But we don't have time to question everything
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 1: the guys do.
• 1:00:48
  Speaker 2: They don't need to be wealthy. They can live in
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 2: a small suburban home and have to keep the AC
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 2: off on a warm day to keep the power build down.
• 1:00:54
  Speaker 2: They can drive a mid range vehicle and eat generic
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 2: cereal and they're just as happy as the people who
• 1:00:59
  Speaker 2: don't have to make those How do.
• 1:01:02
  Speaker 1: You assess these things? This is on average? Is everybody
• 1:01:07
  Speaker 1: just as happy? And if I had to keep my
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: home at seventy eight, if I had to do the work,
• 1:01:12
  Speaker 1: if I had to sit in this office and do
• 1:01:14
  Speaker 1: this at seventy eight degrees, I would not be happy.
• 1:01:18
  Speaker 1: I would be miserable, Absolutely miserable. I know because once
• 1:01:23
  Speaker 1: in a while the AC goes out in Puerto Rico
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 1: and it gets up to seventy eight inside the house
• 1:01:28
  Speaker 1: and humid, and I am miserable. So this guy they
• 1:01:34
  Speaker 1: make stuff up promises.
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 2: It's almost as if economic but.
• 1:01:38
  Speaker 1: They make stuff up with economic studies to back them up.
• 1:01:42
  Speaker 1: That look really sophisticated in a.
• 1:01:44
  Speaker 2: Small suburban home and have to keep the AC off
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 2: on a warm day to keep the power build down.
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 2: They can drive a mid range vehicle and eat generic cereal,
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 2: and they're just as happy as the people who don't
• 1:01:54
  Speaker 2: have to make those compromises. It's almost as if economic
• 1:01:57
  Speaker 2: happiness is defined solely by having just any income to
• 1:02:00
  Speaker 2: say few when you're mistreated each.
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: What if he would be willing to use his income
• 1:02:05
  Speaker 1: just to that level? And he would say, I'll be
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 1: just as happy. And I wonder why he doesn't do it.
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 1: Why doesn't he give all his money away? I'm sure
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: he doesn't. I'm sure he doesn't.
• 1:02:16
  Speaker 2: Little marble here represents one billion dollars, and depending on
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 2: how the spacexipo goes, Elon Musk's net worth will land
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 2: somewhere between eight hundred billion and eight trillion dollars. So
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 2: let's just say nine hundred billion. And this is the
• 1:02:28
  Speaker 2: total purchasing power of the city of Austin, Texas and
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 2: every person who lives there two hundred and sixty eight
• 1:02:35
  Speaker 2: billion dollars. This includes everybody's earnings, investments, business revenue, real estate,
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 2: and so on. Now, if we were to draw a
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 2: line representing the point in which Elon Musk's purchasing power
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 2: dipped below the amount he needed to live a comfortable life,
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 2: we would quite literally need to use.
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: Comfortable by what measure by whose standards? Elon Musk, in
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 1: order to live a comfortable life, needs to be investing
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 1: in companies like Boring or New a Link and things
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 1: like that. That's what a comfortable life or a lone
• 1:03:04
  Speaker 1: Musk means. And the fact is that as he does that,
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 1: he creates wealth for himself and for many other people.
• 1:03:15
  Speaker 1: That's the process of what creation. It's because the loan
• 1:03:18
  Speaker 1: musk is not comfortable at ninety thousand dollars a year,
• 1:03:22
  Speaker 1: and neither is this guy Ben Jordan comfortable at ninety
• 1:03:26
  Speaker 1: thousand dollars a year. It's what supposed them to do more.
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 1: It just drives me crazy when they take an average
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: or some study or some survey or something and extrapolate
• 1:03:42
  Speaker 1: that on all of us. We're all as comfortable as
• 1:03:46
  Speaker 1: the average person who was asked in the survey.
• 1:03:48
  Speaker 2: It's a microscope on a single marble. But if we
• 1:03:51
  Speaker 2: go by that study that I mentioned earlier versus Austin's
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 2: GDP per capita, that line for the combined people in
• 1:03:57
  Speaker 2: Austin is right here. If they're purchasing powers suddenly dropped
• 1:04:00
  Speaker 2: below this level, the average family would not be able
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 2: to accumulate well. Their life in Austin, Texas would be
• 1:04:06
  Speaker 2: spent working from paycheck to paycheck hoping for some sort
• 1:04:09
  Speaker 2: of windfall or miracle to get them past the vicious
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 2: cycle of debt.
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 1: So is that really true? I mean paycheck to paycheck
• 1:04:15
  Speaker 1: ninety six K. I mean it could be true, but
• 1:04:18
  Speaker 1: you could again shrink your expenditures way below that and
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 1: save some money. People do people in poverty. People who
• 1:04:25
  Speaker 1: are poor managed to escape poverty by doing exactly that,
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: by saving up money, by by by you know, trying
• 1:04:32
  Speaker 1: to get better, you know, by just shrinking them out
• 1:04:36
  Speaker 1: of expenditures they engage in. So again a really superficial
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 1: way of thinking about what wealth creation really means. And
• 1:04:47
  Speaker 1: putting an arbitrary figure ninety six thousand dollars is signifying
• 1:04:52
  Speaker 1: what it means to advance, of what it means not to.
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 2: So this combined with having enough purchasing power to eclipse
• 1:04:57
  Speaker 2: a major city you live in, create a completely different
• 1:05:01
  Speaker 2: mechanism of wealth, whether it's a company or an absurdly
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 2: wealthy individual. When a single actor is purchasing power is
• 1:05:07
  Speaker 2: comparable to entire communities. It is more valuable to them
• 1:05:11
  Speaker 2: to remove billions of dollars from here than it is
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 2: to add billions of dollars to here.
• 1:05:16
  Speaker 1: How is that? How is it in elone musk's interest
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 1: to remove putsasing power from other people? Isn't the way
• 1:05:25
  Speaker 1: he maintains his wealth by making sure that not making
• 1:05:28
  Speaker 1: sure by by by the fact that other people have
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: put you hempous so they can put us his products.
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 1: And why would he ever want to juice other people's pushes?
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 1: He power? And by the way, is his wealth is
• 1:05:42
  Speaker 1: that puts his power? Because if you ever had to
• 1:05:45
  Speaker 1: sell that wealth, how much would he have? Imagine alone,
• 1:05:49
  Speaker 1: Musk in about a year will be able to sell
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 1: the SpaceX stock. Imagine if you try to sell all
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 1: the space stock to get his hands on that trillion dollars,
• 1:05:57
  Speaker 1: how much would he actually get his hands up? I mean,
• 1:06:00
  Speaker 1: the market would collapse, SpaceX would vomit, and he would
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 1: get very little out of it. Is it really purchasing power? Again,
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 1: the whole way in which they think about these things
• 1:06:13
  Speaker 1: is motivated by collectivism. They can't think it terms of individuals.
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 1: They can't think it's others of markets, and they think
• 1:06:23
  Speaker 1: in terms of exploitation. They think in terms of selfish
• 1:06:27
  Speaker 1: therefore exploiting.
• 1:06:28
  Speaker 2: All of a sudden, some of the confusing and chaotic
• 1:06:31
  Speaker 2: things that are happening in the world start to make sense.
• 1:06:34
  Speaker 2: Capitalism doesn't work without growth. That is in its core definition,
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 2: whether it's the industrial revolution or agrarian.
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 1: Again, not true, it's not a part of its definition.
• 1:06:44
  Speaker 1: It's the consequence of embracing capitalism. When you embrace capitalism,
• 1:06:48
  Speaker 1: you get growth, not the other way, Mom. Capitalism does
• 1:06:51
  Speaker 1: not depend on growth. Capitalism produces growth. Capitalism creates growthanism
• 1:06:57
  Speaker 1: or a crack dealer.
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 2: Here's a question that I've been screening for years and
• 1:07:01
  Speaker 2: have not once seen it asked on any debates or
• 1:07:03
  Speaker 2: news channels. Why the would so many capitalists support closed
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 2: borders and contribute to political campaigns that lowered the population,
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 2: even if they were evil mister Burns style capitalists, wouldn't
• 1:07:14
  Speaker 2: they want underpaid Latin Americans mining steel and aluminum and
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 2: then going home and buying more groceries and prescription drugs
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 2: without insurance and renting their private.
• 1:07:24
  Speaker 1: Because because many capitalists don't pursue their own self interest,
• 1:07:29
  Speaker 1: Because many capitalists are confused, as you all, Because many
• 1:07:32
  Speaker 1: capitalists have political agendas that go beyond just the bottom line,
• 1:07:38
  Speaker 1: you know, and don't always pursue the bottom line. Because
• 1:07:41
  Speaker 1: many of them are confused economically and don't understand the economy.
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 1: His argument is going to be because they don't care.
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 2: Equity owned departments. I really want to believe that so
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 2: many conservatives and fake libertarian billionaires are so weirdly racist
• 1:07:56
  Speaker 2: that it somehow conflicts with and defeats every capitalist principle
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 2: that define their entire lives. I want to believe that
• 1:08:01
  Speaker 2: Trump and Elon and Peter Theo and Bill Ackman are
• 1:08:04
  Speaker 2: stupid and the ruling class is somehow exclusively filled with
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 2: morons who failed upwards over and over and over again.
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 2: I want to believe it because it awards me a
• 1:08:11
  Speaker 2: lot of social credit to do so. I want to
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 2: believe it because it allows me to roll my eyes
• 1:08:15
  Speaker 2: at the last two decades. I want to believe that
• 1:08:17
  Speaker 2: in twenty years will point to this page in our
• 1:08:19
  Speaker 2: history books as the stupid wild ride that we can't
• 1:08:21
  Speaker 2: believe actually happened. But I don't actually believe that, because
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 2: it makes way more sense that they're using xenophobia's a
• 1:08:27
  Speaker 2: scapegoat to create a labor and supply shortage that forces
• 1:08:30
  Speaker 2: the middle class to pay twice as much for products
• 1:08:32
  Speaker 2: using these what's materials. I want to believe that things
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 2: will go back to normal at some point, but I
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 2: don't think that they will consider.
• 1:08:40
  Speaker 1: So his idea is is what he's saying, right. Just
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: think about this economically, If you created a labor shortage
• 1:08:46
  Speaker 1: because we close the border, so the fewer people coming in.
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 1: Then what happens. Wages go up, the cost of producing
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: things goes up, and we charge more for those things,
• 1:09:00
  Speaker 1: but the profit margin doesn't go up. And indeed, you know,
• 1:09:06
  Speaker 1: and I agree with this completely, the economy generally gets
• 1:09:09
  Speaker 1: poorer because we have fewer people, we have few brains,
• 1:09:12
  Speaker 1: we have less innovation. The economy gets poorer and it's gone.
• 1:09:17
  Speaker 1: So when the economy gets poorer, people have less money
• 1:09:19
  Speaker 1: to buy the stuff that Ia is a rich businessman
• 1:09:22
  Speaker 1: and producing and before I get poorer. So no, it's
• 1:09:27
  Speaker 1: clearly not in this self interest. So it's not in
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 1: the you know, this is greedflation, right, This is Elizabeth
• 1:09:38
  Speaker 1: Waan's greedflation. Inflation is a product of the fact that
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 1: businessmen are pitrariy raising prices, but they can't this competition,
• 1:09:48
  Speaker 1: people won't buy from them. It's not how markets work.
• 1:09:51
  Speaker 1: It's a complete perversion of the idea of markets. But
• 1:09:57
  Speaker 1: again you stated it. It's a conspiracy theory. It explains
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 1: what's going on in the world, but it doesn't because
• 1:10:05
  Speaker 1: the economics don't work. The economics work the exact opposite way. No,
• 1:10:10
  Speaker 1: these people are actually pursuing policies that are not in
• 1:10:14
  Speaker 1: their long term self interest? But why is that unusual?
• 1:10:18
  Speaker 1: Isn't that people do that all the time? Why? You know,
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: you know, by this logic, why did people elect Donald Trump?
• 1:10:27
  Speaker 1: They're the ones who are getting screwed by all this?
• 1:10:30
  Speaker 1: Are they the stupid ones? And Trump is the smart one?
• 1:10:36
  Speaker 2: That are that four out of five of the wealthiest
• 1:10:38
  Speaker 2: people in the world attended the presidential inauguration and the fifth,
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 2: Larry Ellison, was in the White House the following day.
• 1:10:44
  Speaker 1: Because yeah, but why did four of the five richest
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 1: people attend the inauguration? Why did they do that? Well?
• 1:10:50
  Speaker 1: Because Trump has a thumb economic power. Trump doesn't have
• 1:10:58
  Speaker 1: economic power, its political. He has the power to force companies.
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 1: So if you want to make sure that you're in business,
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 1: if you want to make sure that you're on a
• 1:11:06
  Speaker 1: positive side, if you know that Trump is going to
• 1:11:09
  Speaker 1: try to do to manipulate the control, to distort and
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 1: they all knew because they saw the first term and
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 1: they saw what he was saying about the second term. Yeah,
• 1:11:18
  Speaker 1: you better suck up to it. But is that because
• 1:11:21
  Speaker 1: you agree with the policies. How many of those people
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: really agree with his policies. I don't think very.
• 1:11:27
  Speaker 2: Many consider that the wealthiest person in history spent nearly
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 2: three hundred million dollars on the presidential election, illegally, paying
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 2: between forty seven hours and one hundred dollars to people
• 1:11:38
  Speaker 2: who promised to register to vote.
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: And it couldn't be because is political philosophy aligned with
• 1:11:43
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump? Even if it didn't align with these economic interests?
• 1:11:48
  Speaker 1: Is that possible? Could those diverge your economic interests in
• 1:11:52
  Speaker 1: your polegal alignment?
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 2: Vote in swing states? He then selected right wing registered
• 1:11:57
  Speaker 2: voters at random and awarded them with one million dollar checks.
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 2: Then the wealthiest person in history, equipped with zero minutes
• 1:12:05
  Speaker 2: of government managerial experience go perhaps you've heard of it.
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 2: This was given his own government department that fired hundreds
• 1:12:14
  Speaker 2: of thousands of government employees, terminated fifteen thousand grants, and
• 1:12:17
  Speaker 2: gutted the Department of Human Services. The administration then terminated
• 1:12:20
  Speaker 2: the food stamp benefits of four point three million Americans
• 1:12:24
  Speaker 2: and expanded work requirements to people over fifty five years
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 2: of age. And all of the money we saved from
• 1:12:29
  Speaker 2: this is eclipsed by the amount of our tax dours
• 1:12:31
  Speaker 2: that were spent on ice border patrol and a rapid
• 1:12:34
  Speaker 2: expansion of mass government surveyor.
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 1: Now all of the money is being eclipsed by the
• 1:12:40
  Speaker 1: increases of social security, the increase in Medicaid, the increase
• 1:12:43
  Speaker 1: in interest payments on the debt, and by all the
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: things you're mentioning. But why are you picking and choosing
• 1:12:50
  Speaker 1: because you're pushing a political agenda rather than trying to
• 1:12:54
  Speaker 1: look at things objectively. Oh, what I want to do?
• 1:13:00
  Speaker 1: What I don't want to do? Here? I wanted this
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: final segment quickly.
• 1:13:07
  Speaker 2: So most people's retirement savings and fial one k's are
• 1:13:10
  Speaker 2: in things like passive index funds and ETFs, and passive
• 1:13:14
  Speaker 2: index funds are traditionally safe, conservative investments for people who
• 1:13:18
  Speaker 2: like dying on a mattress more than they like gambling.
• 1:13:20
  Speaker 2: They're very mainstream and diversified, and they don't rely on
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 2: an investment manager to make decisions. Instead they rely on benchmarks.
• 1:13:27
  Speaker 2: In fact, they're legally required to buy mainstream stocks listed
• 1:13:30
  Speaker 2: on the Nasdaq one hundred to diversify investments and reduce
• 1:13:33
  Speaker 2: human error. So the Nasdaq one hundred or NDX has this.
• 1:13:36
  Speaker 1: Again, all of this is oversimplification and generalization. They're indexes
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 1: all kinds of indexes. Some of them are quiet contractually
• 1:13:46
  Speaker 1: to invest in a particular index in the nastic one hundred,
• 1:13:50
  Speaker 1: some of them don't. Some of them can exclude certain
• 1:13:53
  Speaker 1: stocks of certain sectors. There's a huge variety of index
• 1:13:59
  Speaker 1: funds out there in the economy, out there in the
• 1:14:02
  Speaker 1: financial markers, and you can choose which kind of indixes
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: you want, which kind of indixes you don't want. But again,
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: he's trying to create this notion of a kind of
• 1:14:12
  Speaker 1: a pyramid scheme that is somehow, you know, screwing you
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: for the benefit of you know, of the uh. And
• 1:14:21
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to go about the whole thing because
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: it's it's just too much. Was this what I wanted
• 1:14:27
  Speaker 1: to do? Yeah? Maybe this is the.
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 2: Most common regret from people who knew that their lives
• 1:14:32
  Speaker 2: were about to end and they were about to leave
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 2: this world. I wish I'd had the courage to live
• 1:14:36
  Speaker 2: a life true to myself, not the life others expected
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 2: of me.
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 1: To put it more, by the way, that is great,
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: I wish I had the courage to live a life
• 1:14:45
  Speaker 1: true to myself rather than when others expected of me.
• 1:14:48
  Speaker 1: Now there's something to live by. Live a life, true
• 1:14:52
  Speaker 1: to yourself, true to your own values, in pursuit of
• 1:14:55
  Speaker 1: your own values, rather than the life that others expected. Rather,
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 1: you know, I I wish I'd lived how it works
• 1:15:02
  Speaker 1: life rather than Peter Keating's life. That's a great statement,
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: that's absolutely true. It's not how heal, intipiated or bluntly.
• 1:15:12
  Speaker 2: When you are at your wisest, equipped with the most
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 2: memories and the most context, looking back at every single
• 1:15:18
  Speaker 2: thing that you've experienced in your entire life, you will
• 1:15:21
  Speaker 2: not give a about a single statistic in this video,
• 1:15:25
  Speaker 2: And what you will regret is spending a single second
• 1:15:27
  Speaker 2: of your life concerning yourself with it. Circling back to
• 1:15:30
  Speaker 2: where this started, the things I've mentioned in this video
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 2: make me miss the capitalism I grew up with, But
• 1:15:35
  Speaker 2: contrary to that, they highlight the core problem that is
• 1:15:38
  Speaker 2: seemingly always coupled with capitalism itself, and that's existing, or
• 1:15:43
  Speaker 2: being forced to exist in a constant state where you
• 1:15:46
  Speaker 2: are valuing yourself by your earnings and belongings and doing
• 1:15:49
  Speaker 2: so in a way that is unfairly asymmetrical.
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: Are you forced to value yourself by your earnings and
• 1:15:54
  Speaker 1: your dollars? Is that how you value yourself. Is that
• 1:15:56
  Speaker 1: the only place in which you get self esteem is
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 1: that the sense of your self worth. By the way,
• 1:16:04
  Speaker 1: you know, we're about to finish the video, I'll just
• 1:16:07
  Speaker 1: I'll just mention that if you like this kind of show,
• 1:16:11
  Speaker 1: if you want me analyzing these kinds of videos on capitalism,
• 1:16:14
  Speaker 1: specifically on people's claims about capitalism as they may be,
• 1:16:19
  Speaker 1: you gotta be you gotta be more, you gotta trade more.
• 1:16:24
  Speaker 1: You've got to be more engaged in trading with me,
• 1:16:26
  Speaker 1: whether by super chadow or sticker. If this is all
• 1:16:29
  Speaker 1: we can raise on a show like this, I'm not
• 1:16:31
  Speaker 1: going to make shows like this. So if you know
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: your your support for shows like this has to be
• 1:16:36
  Speaker 1: reflected in the amount of money we raise in these shows.
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 1: That's the most objective signal I get for the value
• 1:16:46
  Speaker 1: that I'm creating. So just a note, because we're way
• 1:16:49
  Speaker 1: behind on where we need to be in terms of
• 1:16:52
  Speaker 1: in terms of our goals for raising money. All right,
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 1: let's let's keep going.
• 1:17:00
  Speaker 2: Simply no denying that capitalism creates a world where a
• 1:17:03
  Speaker 2: deadbeat dad with a trust fund is respected more than
• 1:17:07
  Speaker 2: a single parent who works to low wage.
• 1:17:09
  Speaker 1: Job respected by whom a deadbeat dad, who is a
• 1:17:13
  Speaker 1: trust fund, is respected more than a single mom who
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 1: works through jobs to pay for kids. Respected by whom
• 1:17:21
  Speaker 1: who respects that did beat dad more? No answer, no answer.
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 2: To provide for their family. If we're to think about
• 1:17:30
  Speaker 2: it logistically, the asset that everybody should be hoarding and
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 2: protecting the most is time. And I don't mean this
• 1:17:36
  Speaker 2: in the time is money sense, Maybe it's something that
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 2: happens in her.
• 1:17:39
  Speaker 1: But time, of course, is the one thing the capitalism
• 1:17:42
  Speaker 1: gives us. It gives us an enormous amount of time.
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: We actually worked less today than we did twenty years ago.
• 1:17:48
  Speaker 1: We worked less today than we did one hundred, two
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 1: hundred years ago, A lot less, a lot less. Capitalism
• 1:17:56
  Speaker 1: is the thing that buys us time money what is money?
• 1:17:59
  Speaker 1: Therefore it buys us time.
• 1:18:05
  Speaker 2: Forties. But if I order something and it requires four
• 1:18:07
  Speaker 2: hours in my life to assemble it, I'm just sending
• 1:18:09
  Speaker 2: it back, like, sure, this cabinet looks really nice and
• 1:18:12
  Speaker 2: it's worth the two hundred and fifty hours that I
• 1:18:13
  Speaker 2: paid for it. But I want to play guitar or
• 1:18:16
  Speaker 2: look at stuff under the microscope for four hours more
• 1:18:19
  Speaker 2: than I want a nice looking cabinet. And then you
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 2: just realize that it's all ironically coming back full circle.
• 1:18:24
  Speaker 2: Like thirty years ago. If my grandfather ordered a new
• 1:18:26
  Speaker 2: coffee table in a little, thin, heavy box showed up
• 1:18:29
  Speaker 2: with a twenty two page assembly manual, he would absolutely
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 2: lose his shit. That kind of thing would be absolutely
• 1:18:36
  Speaker 2: unacceptable to consumers in the nineteen eighties.
• 1:18:39
  Speaker 1: Here's the thing. Why is it acceptable today? Because it's
• 1:18:43
  Speaker 1: much much cheaper and some people quite happy to build
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: it themselves. I'm not. I hate the idea of building myself.
• 1:18:54
  Speaker 1: I buy stuff in a kiel all the time. And
• 1:18:57
  Speaker 1: what do I do? What do I do? Because I've
• 1:19:00
  Speaker 1: value my time, I hire somebody to build it for me.
• 1:19:05
  Speaker 1: And the combined costs of the buying from a Kia
• 1:19:09
  Speaker 1: and hiring somebody to build it for me is significantly
• 1:19:13
  Speaker 1: lower than buying something that's already assembled. And why is
• 1:19:18
  Speaker 1: that not in consciousness? Even and by the way, a
• 1:19:21
  Speaker 1: Kia provides that service. When you check out from a
• 1:19:24
  Speaker 1: Kia with the boxes of dissembled stuff, you can ask
• 1:19:31
  Speaker 1: a Kia, you can schedule and a Kia service person
• 1:19:35
  Speaker 1: to come to your home to build it all for you.
• 1:19:43
  Speaker 1: Why is that not under consideration? Here? And again, the
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 1: combined price is less than would use the cost to
• 1:19:51
  Speaker 1: buy the whole thing and ship it as a whole
• 1:19:54
  Speaker 1: to your own the fact.
• 1:19:56
  Speaker 2: It would be seen as such an egregious scam that
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 2: it would be on the evening news this time. Theft
• 1:20:00
  Speaker 2: isn't just some annoyance that old men pitch about in
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 2: their yards.
• 1:20:03
  Speaker 1: Yeah, is stealing your time. Stealing your time, and it
• 1:20:06
  Speaker 1: gives you no option. You have no option. You can't
• 1:20:08
  Speaker 1: pay somebody to do it for you. Oh no, you
• 1:20:10
  Speaker 1: go to jail for that.
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 2: And economics and sociology, its clinical name is shadow work.
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 2: It describes the uncompensated and unpaid labor that the ruling
• 1:20:20
  Speaker 2: class have quietly outsourced to the consumer under the guise
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 2: of convenient But.
• 1:20:25
  Speaker 1: This is completely bs. They've also said by making everything cheaper.
• 1:20:30
  Speaker 1: They've also said, by reducing your cost of living on
• 1:20:34
  Speaker 1: those goods. And you don't have to do any of
• 1:20:38
  Speaker 1: this work. You don't have to use a self checkout.
• 1:20:41
  Speaker 1: You can still cashier's dead and you know where they are.
• 1:20:47
  Speaker 1: Self checkouts costs a loo and it actually moves fast.
• 1:20:51
  Speaker 1: You notice that.
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 2: It's or innovation in a classic market. You've exchanged money,
• 1:20:57
  Speaker 2: so somebody else could spend their time processing as service
• 1:21:00
  Speaker 2: for you. The post capitalist mechanism works by charging you
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 2: the full price and forcing you to act as an
• 1:21:05
  Speaker 2: unpaid employee.
• 1:21:06
  Speaker 1: Also, none of that is true. That is just untrue.
• 1:21:09
  Speaker 1: You can outsource so much more today, and by the way,
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 1: with AI and AI agents, you'll be out of be
• 1:21:16
  Speaker 1: about out so so much even more in the future.
• 1:21:19
  Speaker 1: But this is just unreal. We live in a world
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 1: of constant outing. We can do, you know, we can
• 1:21:29
  Speaker 1: basically limit ourselves today. I mean, how many people, how
• 1:21:32
  Speaker 1: many people don't have nannies? When middle class people don't
• 1:21:36
  Speaker 1: have nannies to help out with their kids. I didn't
• 1:21:38
  Speaker 1: have nannies, couldn't afford it. I mean when I was
• 1:21:42
  Speaker 1: a kid, we didn't have a nanny, and then when
• 1:21:43
  Speaker 1: I was a grown up and had kids, didn't have
• 1:21:45
  Speaker 1: a nanny because couldn't afford it. But today almost everybody
• 1:21:50
  Speaker 1: I know, I mean, who's middle class. I'm not assuming
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 1: poor people have nannies, have nannies, or cleaning people become
• 1:22:00
  Speaker 1: in your house, and you know, a million other things
• 1:22:05
  Speaker 1: we've outsourced. I mean, this is this is the thing
• 1:22:07
  Speaker 1: that capitalism provides. Specialization, division of labor, this is exactly now.
• 1:22:12
  Speaker 1: This is much closer to the definition of capitalism than
• 1:22:16
  Speaker 1: growth and technological progress, which are consequences. But one of
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: the another consequences of capitalist in one of the features
• 1:22:25
  Speaker 1: of capitalism is the vision of labor and specialization, outsourcing
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 1: all the things you don't like doing. And I'm sure
• 1:22:34
  Speaker 1: he does. I'm sure he does. This idea that capitalism
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 1: requires us to do work for free is just so bizarre.
• 1:22:45
  Speaker 1: But again, this is kind of a leftist trope that
• 1:22:48
  Speaker 1: is out there and people believe it. And I think
• 1:22:50
  Speaker 1: just not just on the left. I think it's left
• 1:22:51
  Speaker 1: and right. As we've said, there's not much difference these
• 1:22:54
  Speaker 1: days when it comes to economic policy.
• 1:22:56
  Speaker 2: So at some point we have to admit that this
• 1:22:57
  Speaker 2: isn't our own fault. We drove to Ikea and picked
• 1:22:59
  Speaker 2: up the bedroom set, and then searched the warehouse for
• 1:23:01
  Speaker 2: the parcel number, and then lifted the boxes and rented
• 1:23:04
  Speaker 2: the truck to transport them, and then assembled the furniture
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 2: in our own home.
• 1:23:06
  Speaker 1: I don't assemble the furniture. I have somebody else do it.
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 1: And all of that stuff. It's a key employees, Dude,
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 1: you don't get on ladders and post stuff off the shelves.
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 1: I mean, think of the liability nobody's can let you do.
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 2: That homes with our own tools instead of laughing at
• 1:23:21
  Speaker 2: the very proposal of being expected to do all these
• 1:23:23
  Speaker 2: things on our own free time without compensation.
• 1:23:26
  Speaker 1: And he's not mentioning the fact that it ki is cheap.
• 1:23:28
  Speaker 2: We felt like it could save us a few bucks,
• 1:23:30
  Speaker 2: and we were greedy about the wrong thing. We were
• 1:23:33
  Speaker 2: greedy about the thing that wildly changes value without our control,
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 2: the thing that is controlled by people who don't care
• 1:23:39
  Speaker 2: about us, but who repeatedly throughout history time and time again,
• 1:23:44
  Speaker 2: break our social contracts. Or perhaps the thing didn't account
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 2: for nor could have predicted when he drew a map
• 1:23:50
  Speaker 2: to make capitalism work for everybody, was this inevitable phenomenon,
• 1:23:54
  Speaker 2: whether you're working three jobs at the same time just
• 1:23:57
  Speaker 2: to keep the lights on, or literally the wealthiest person
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 2: in the history of civilization. It seems like capitalism's flaw
• 1:24:03
  Speaker 2: is a very abstract one. It robs us of the
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 2: ability to prioritize the appreciation of living.
• 1:24:09
  Speaker 1: What capitalism robs you of the ability to to to
• 1:24:15
  Speaker 1: appreciate living. It's exactly the other way. Will capitalism and
• 1:24:23
  Speaker 1: will end this here. Capitalism has brought us time to
• 1:24:29
  Speaker 1: appreciate living. It's brought us the wealth and the time
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 1: to have careers work at stuff that interests us, versus
• 1:24:40
  Speaker 1: working as subsistence farmers just to do the necessary chores.
• 1:24:49
  Speaker 1: Capitalism has made it possible for us to have leisure hobbies,
• 1:24:54
  Speaker 1: pursue art. It's made it possible for us to outsource,
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 1: I don't know, to allow us to outsource all the
• 1:25:06
  Speaker 1: things we don't like to do in life, like cleaning
• 1:25:11
  Speaker 1: and do it ourselves. It's allowed us to outsource that
• 1:25:13
  Speaker 1: the machines, dishwashers, laundry, you know, laundry machines, washers and dryers.
• 1:25:23
  Speaker 1: It's just mn buggling. If anything. Capitalism is the first
• 1:25:26
  Speaker 1: system in all of human history to allow human beings
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 1: to appreciate life. And it's true, many people are second handed.
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 1: Many people don't care about the appreciation of their own life.
• 1:25:43
  Speaker 1: They care about what's happening with the Joneses. They care
• 1:25:46
  Speaker 1: about the relative performance as compared to other people. They
• 1:25:50
  Speaker 1: constantly compare. Yeah, that's a problem, not a problem with capitalism,
• 1:25:56
  Speaker 1: a problem with how priority is a problem without philosophy.
• 1:25:59
  Speaker 1: But it's not something capitalism promotes the endorsements so people.
• 1:26:08
  Speaker 1: So he takes for granted secondhandedness, He takes for granted
• 1:26:12
  Speaker 1: kind of the collective, collectivized approach to economic statistics and
• 1:26:17
  Speaker 1: economic data and economic studies. And then he conflates political
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 1: power with economic power. Political power is the power of
• 1:26:26
  Speaker 1: the gun, the power to force, the power to cause.
• 1:26:30
  Speaker 1: Economic power is the power to voluntarily engage in transactions.
• 1:26:37
  Speaker 1: You can always walk away from an economic player. You
• 1:26:41
  Speaker 1: cannot walk away from policeman. You cannot walk away from
• 1:26:44
  Speaker 1: a gun. You cannot walk away from the government. So,
• 1:26:52
  Speaker 1: you know, the whole way of framing things, the whole
• 1:26:55
  Speaker 1: way of thinking about the world is in the context
• 1:26:58
  Speaker 1: of exploitation. A power of equating political power or economic
• 1:27:07
  Speaker 1: power really with political power massively flawed in every respect.
• 1:27:18
  Speaker 1: And but you'll see this as we go through different
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 1: variations of these critics of capitalism. They all do the
• 1:27:25
  Speaker 1: same thing. They're all engaged in the same kind of deception,
• 1:27:31
  Speaker 1: in the same kind of if you want to be generous, confusion, Right,
• 1:27:36
  Speaker 1: But maybe it's not a confusion. Maybe it's something deeper
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 1: than a confusion. All Right, what do I wanna? What
• 1:27:47
  Speaker 1: are Yeah? So I'm curious what you think about this series,
• 1:27:51
  Speaker 1: so feel free to put that in the comments. So
• 1:27:53
  Speaker 1: though it's hard for me to read all the comments
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 1: right now, I think we don't have a lot of questions,
• 1:27:58
  Speaker 1: so we're not going to be on here for very
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 1: long time. Yeah, we've got very few questions. We have
• 1:28:03
  Speaker 1: quite a few stickers. That's great. Again, if you want
• 1:28:06
  Speaker 1: to see more of this, then show me in the
• 1:28:10
  Speaker 1: sense of show me, show me the money. Is the
• 1:28:13
  Speaker 1: guy I used to say, right, what's that movie? I
• 1:28:17
  Speaker 1: forget the name of the movie, show me the money anyway,
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: show me the money. If you want to see more
• 1:28:22
  Speaker 1: of these, If you have particular, if your particular videos
• 1:28:29
  Speaker 1: you would love me to analyze and to criticize and
• 1:28:34
  Speaker 1: to comment on, then send me those videos, send me
• 1:28:38
  Speaker 1: links to them, youran at yourn brokeshow dot com, youran
• 1:28:42
  Speaker 1: at iran brokeshow dot com. Send me those videos so
• 1:28:45
  Speaker 1: that I can critick them. We'll add them to the
• 1:28:47
  Speaker 1: list and we'll do hopefully one a week, and we'll
• 1:28:52
  Speaker 1: go through this. Now, you know, I don't know if
• 1:28:56
  Speaker 1: this you know, if this is again, I don't know.
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 1: You guys, tell me how valuable this is. It's long
• 1:29:06
  Speaker 1: because you know, I have a lot, a lot to
• 1:29:09
  Speaker 1: comment on and but yeah, if you find it a value,
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: then tell me, or if you wanted me to do
• 1:29:19
  Speaker 1: it a little differently, tell me if you want it shorter.
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 1: Let me know. The more feedback I get from you,
• 1:29:24
  Speaker 1: the better I can do this. All right, let me
• 1:29:28
  Speaker 1: thanks some of the stick of people. Stephen Henderson is third,
• 1:29:32
  Speaker 1: super chat ever. Thank you, Steven. I really appreciate it.
• 1:29:37
  Speaker 1: Barry fifty dollars, Thank you for the sticker. Thank you, Barry,
• 1:29:41
  Speaker 1: Paul Cohen Stringer, bell Enrick, thank you for the stickers.
• 1:29:48
  Speaker 1: Wes fifty dollars, Thank you. Wes. Really appreciated Alan, thank you.
• 1:29:57
  Speaker 1: I wonder if you think, all right, let's do Roland,
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 1: let me finish this Bonnie and then are going with
• 1:30:03
  Speaker 1: that thought, let's see who else do we have shots?
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 1: But we got a lot of stickers, very few questions,
• 1:30:09
  Speaker 1: a lot of stickers today it's usually the reverse Bonnie Ryan, Yeah,
• 1:30:15
  Speaker 1: all right, thanks guys, really really really appreciate the support.
• 1:30:19
  Speaker 1: I wonder if you think if this is a way
• 1:30:21
  Speaker 1: to get people engaged and to get people to question
• 1:30:28
  Speaker 1: they kind of believes in economics or is it too
• 1:30:30
  Speaker 1: am I being too dismissive of the other side. You
• 1:30:33
  Speaker 1: would need a deep analysis to actually convince anybody to
• 1:30:37
  Speaker 1: come over or to question their own ideas and their
• 1:30:40
  Speaker 1: own values. It's hard for me to get the right balance.
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 1: So again, feedback from you guys would be incredibly helpful
• 1:30:47
  Speaker 1: and appreciated. All right, I want to remind you of
• 1:30:52
  Speaker 1: Let's see, I'm an institute has courses AOI Live that
• 1:31:00
  Speaker 1: are being offered right now. I'm teaching one a globalization
• 1:31:03
  Speaker 1: right now, but I will be starting one which I'm
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 1: really looking forward to starting one in October that it's
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 1: going to be on the origins of Western civilization. It'll
• 1:31:14
  Speaker 1: be basically, you know, a course built around my book
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 1: with Don Watkins about Christianity versus the West and the whole.
• 1:31:22
  Speaker 1: The point of the course is to try to identify
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 1: what is a cause of civilization, but in this case
• 1:31:28
  Speaker 1: Western civilization and what is not Christianity, not reason, Greece, science,
• 1:31:36
  Speaker 1: individualism a cause and really digging deep into the history
• 1:31:40
  Speaker 1: of it. And so I'll use the book as a resource.
• 1:31:45
  Speaker 1: I'm not exactly what we're going to do in terms
• 1:31:47
  Speaker 1: of what kind of readings I'm going to ask you
• 1:31:49
  Speaker 1: to do. But we'll figure that out anyway. That's the
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 1: course I'm going to be teaching. You can sign up
• 1:31:56
  Speaker 1: for right Live on dot slash ybs Ironman dot oak
• 1:32:02
  Speaker 1: slash ybs. You can also get a discount ten percent
• 1:32:04
  Speaker 1: discount the usual ybs discount twenty six YBS ten twenty
• 1:32:09
  Speaker 1: six ybs ten for that. Let's see. Alex Epstein is
• 1:32:15
  Speaker 1: the number one advocate of data centers right now, data
• 1:32:20
  Speaker 1: centers and debunking all the mists of our data centers.
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 1: I believe he's writing a book about it. He writes
• 1:32:26
  Speaker 1: on a substack about it. He's doing a lot of
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 1: interviews about data centers. Check him out, Alex Epstein do
• 1:32:31
  Speaker 1: substack dot com all right, And I did want to
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 1: remind you that they are raising money to bring a
• 1:32:40
  Speaker 1: to bring We the Living the movie, the renewed Cleaned
• 1:32:46
  Speaker 1: movie to Australia and if you would like to support that,
• 1:32:51
  Speaker 1: you can go to GoFundMe dot com. GoFundMe dot com
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 1: and if you support the round book show, highly encourage
• 1:32:57
  Speaker 1: you to support this effort. This is a beautiful movie.
• 1:33:00
  Speaker 1: It's the best movie of an iman book that I
• 1:33:03
  Speaker 1: know of. It's beautifully done. If you've never watched it.
• 1:33:07
  Speaker 1: There's something opportunity to watch it live on a big screen.
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 1: That is such a privilege. Just go to go fundme,
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 1: go fund me one word dot com and just put
• 1:33:19
  Speaker 1: in I'm trying it right now to see if this works.
• 1:33:23
  Speaker 1: I think I think it works. Let's see how do
• 1:33:26
  Speaker 1: you search? What do you search? Oh, there's a search.
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 1: Just click and search and do We the Living. Let's
• 1:33:35
  Speaker 1: see what happens. Yeah, there it is Ironman. We the
• 1:33:38
  Speaker 1: Living Official Australian premiere. And you clicked on that, and
• 1:33:43
  Speaker 1: you can make a contribution, you know, and and and
• 1:33:47
  Speaker 1: try to help them get to the goal of ten
• 1:33:49
  Speaker 1: thousand dollars through it tw and eighty seven. It's growing,
• 1:33:53
  Speaker 1: but it's going very very very slowly. If somebody out
• 1:33:58
  Speaker 1: there can give this a boot and get this going,
• 1:34:02
  Speaker 1: they're trying to raise ten thousand dollars. They're only twenty
• 1:34:04
  Speaker 1: two percent of the way there. I know how many
• 1:34:07
  Speaker 1: of you out there in Australia. I don't know. I
• 1:34:10
  Speaker 1: don't think you're listening to it live right now, but
• 1:34:12
  Speaker 1: if you're listening after the fact, please consider donating to this.
• 1:34:15
  Speaker 1: I think it's a great cause, a cause that you
• 1:34:18
  Speaker 1: have a selfish interest in because it'll bring objectivism, objectives
• 1:34:22
  Speaker 1: ideas to Australia and it could be it could be
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 1: quite exciting. By the way, if you're not in Australia
• 1:34:28
  Speaker 1: and it's still like to support this because hey, having
• 1:34:31
  Speaker 1: more objectives than Australia is a good thing for the world.
• 1:34:34
  Speaker 1: Then it's not like they only take money from Australias
• 1:34:38
  Speaker 1: like Americans, Canadians, Brits. I'll even take money from people
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 1: living in Spain and France. So yeah, you should. Anybody
• 1:34:47
  Speaker 1: who values this or thinks that will be great. If
• 1:34:49
  Speaker 1: once great exposure to they're living the movie out there,
• 1:34:52
  Speaker 1: wants more objectivism out there, go and support this. Get
• 1:34:59
  Speaker 1: the word out there. All right, let's jump in with
• 1:35:03
  Speaker 1: some questions. I see must sell it, mustsell or Mark
• 1:35:09
  Speaker 1: just came in with one hundred dollars. Thank you, he says,
• 1:35:11
  Speaker 1: thank you. These capitalism critiques are really valuable. Great, this
• 1:35:16
  Speaker 1: is kind of feedback I want with you know, putting
• 1:35:18
  Speaker 1: your money where your woods are. So that really helps
• 1:35:22
  Speaker 1: motivate me to go out there and uh and find
• 1:35:26
  Speaker 1: more videos like this and get them done. I'm going
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 1: to be using you know, chatchapt to help me find
• 1:35:34
  Speaker 1: the videos. I asked chetchipt what I should comment on,
• 1:35:38
  Speaker 1: and I did not find it helpful on that at all,
• 1:35:41
  Speaker 1: So it doesn't wait. I'm thinking, could I feed at
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 1: the transcript of what I did, have it compare that
• 1:35:49
  Speaker 1: to what it suggests that I do, and thus improve
• 1:35:54
  Speaker 1: itself in terms of so I'm thinking of doing that,
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 1: or maybe I could just do your on AI for that. Anyway,
• 1:36:02
  Speaker 1: I'm trying to figure out how to better use AI
• 1:36:06
  Speaker 1: for all these things, because if AI can identify the
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 1: segments you chug you to not do a good job
• 1:36:11
  Speaker 1: this time in identifying segments for me. If AI can
• 1:36:16
  Speaker 1: identify the right segments for me to comment on, that
• 1:36:20
  Speaker 1: would be a huge advantage for me just in prep.
• 1:36:24
  Speaker 1: It would take it would take a lot of a
• 1:36:26
  Speaker 1: lot of the workout of the prep. But anyway, I'll
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 1: do more of these. Thank you, Marcel, really really appreciate
• 1:36:34
  Speaker 1: the support. One hundred dollars is very generous, all right,
• 1:36:40
  Speaker 1: The rest are all basically twenty dollars, So let's uh,
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 1: well we've got less than twenty dollars. Well, let's start
• 1:36:45
  Speaker 1: with the twenty dollars ones. Andrew good rebuttal by a
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 1: conservative to Van saying, if government doesn't ensure universal economic stability,
• 1:36:53
  Speaker 1: people can be blamed for going socialists. The biggest proponents
• 1:36:57
  Speaker 1: of socialism aren't the working poor, but the well to do. Yes,
• 1:37:00
  Speaker 1: of course, it's never been the case that the working
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 1: class have been the one that have been primarily driven
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 1: to socialism. It's primarily the intellectuals, and it's often intellectuals
• 1:37:13
  Speaker 1: that have been kept. It's a trust fund intellectuals, it's
• 1:37:17
  Speaker 1: wealthy intellectuals, and it's you know, more upper class people
• 1:37:27
  Speaker 1: like the people who voted for Mumdani, the professionals. They
• 1:37:30
  Speaker 1: well educated. But the fact is that that is not
• 1:37:36
  Speaker 1: the issue, right. What provides universal economic stability, well, nobody
• 1:37:45
  Speaker 1: can do that for you. Only you can provide for yourself.
• 1:37:48
  Speaker 1: But what provides for universal macroeconomic economic stability, Well, the
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 1: best you can do because you can't guarantee the future
• 1:37:58
  Speaker 1: and he can't giveantee stability stabilities of value. But the
• 1:38:03
  Speaker 1: one that you know that beings about the less downside
• 1:38:15
  Speaker 1: risk is capitalism. Socialism is an incredibly unstable system. So
• 1:38:23
  Speaker 1: if Vans is saying he wants to ensure a universe
• 1:38:27
  Speaker 1: andyconnomnstability so that people don't go socialist, then you should
• 1:38:32
  Speaker 1: embrace capitalists, not government run mixed economy bailouts and and
• 1:38:41
  Speaker 1: you know all that. That's what creaturesentment. That's what drives
• 1:38:45
  Speaker 1: people to socialism more than anything else, is the kind
• 1:38:49
  Speaker 1: of sense that the government will bail out some people
• 1:38:52
  Speaker 1: and and and at the expensive other people. That it's
• 1:38:56
  Speaker 1: a it's a weak game. But real capitalism, freem all
• 1:39:00
  Speaker 1: catch which advance purpos and laughs at, are the most
• 1:39:03
  Speaker 1: stable system in the world, more stable than any mixed economy.
• 1:39:10
  Speaker 1: The more government intervenes in the name of stability, the
• 1:39:14
  Speaker 1: more it hoods stability. You don't get a great depression
• 1:39:22
  Speaker 1: with the depth of the Great Depression. You don't get
• 1:39:24
  Speaker 1: a great recession, financial criations without government intervention, you really
• 1:39:30
  Speaker 1: do not. Capitalism does not generate those kind of things.
• 1:39:34
  Speaker 1: Systemic risk is a feature of government, not of markets.
• 1:39:41
  Speaker 1: So the real answer is not who the proponents of
• 1:39:45
  Speaker 1: socialism are. The real answer is if there's a value there,
• 1:39:51
  Speaker 1: you want economic growth and you want you want to
• 1:39:55
  Speaker 1: cap the downside, then yeah, embrace free markets. Uh, Johnny
• 1:40:04
  Speaker 1: g me Giohnny guy, thank you for the sticker, appreciate it.
• 1:40:09
  Speaker 1: Richard voting with my wallet for this type of show.
• 1:40:12
  Speaker 1: Keep it up. Thank you, Richard. I find this more
• 1:40:15
  Speaker 1: interesting than need news, at least for now. I might.
• 1:40:17
  Speaker 1: You know, maybe we'll get bored with this, but I
• 1:40:19
  Speaker 1: need a little I need to shake it up a
• 1:40:20
  Speaker 1: little bit. The news is getting too me smamming, you know,
• 1:40:25
  Speaker 1: slamming Trump because he deserves to be slammed. So you know,
• 1:40:29
  Speaker 1: what else can I do? And the fiasco in Iran,
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 1: the fiasco of positive living, of inflation, the fiasco of tariffs,
• 1:40:38
  Speaker 1: just fiasco of the fiasco. It's just it's it's unrewarding, Jennifer.
• 1:40:45
  Speaker 1: This fore might is wonderful. Thank you, Thank you, Jennifer.
• 1:40:47
  Speaker 1: Appreciate that Ryan Richard Hanandi has become a staunch defender
• 1:40:51
  Speaker 1: of free markets, but mostly on a utilitarian basis. Can
• 1:40:55
  Speaker 1: he be considered to consider an objective morality? What would
• 1:40:59
  Speaker 1: it take? He would be a great ally, he would be.
• 1:41:01
  Speaker 1: But you know they've tried. I know Alex has tried,
• 1:41:04
  Speaker 1: Alex Epstein. I know that Richard Hanani has had I
• 1:41:09
  Speaker 1: think extensive conversations with Don Watkins about morality, about objectivism,
• 1:41:14
  Speaker 1: about trying to understand objectivism. Kind of gets it. He's
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 1: a fan of An Rand's he's read the books at
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 1: some books. Yeah, he's read some of the philosophy books
• 1:41:25
  Speaker 1: and the novels, and he's just he's just he can't
• 1:41:28
  Speaker 1: get his head around it. So I don't know what
• 1:41:32
  Speaker 1: more can be done than it's been tried and again
• 1:41:36
  Speaker 1: if he has to do the work, and what that
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: mean is he has to read it and study it
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 1: and understand it and choose to embrace it, and he
• 1:41:48
  Speaker 1: has chosen not to. So sadly, it's not that Ryan.
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: At this point, what is stopping Israel from bombing the
• 1:41:58
  Speaker 1: hell out of Iran's oil distributions? What have they got
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 1: to lose more missiles launched at them? Makes no sense?
• 1:42:06
  Speaker 1: So what if oil spice for a couple of years. Well,
• 1:42:08
  Speaker 1: I mean, what they've got to lose is is Trump's wrath.
• 1:42:12
  Speaker 1: What they've got to lose is the one island in
• 1:42:16
  Speaker 1: the world it still supports Israel and the one political
• 1:42:21
  Speaker 1: leader who still has some semblance of support for them. Now,
• 1:42:25
  Speaker 1: I think it's worth it. I would do it, but
• 1:42:28
  Speaker 1: they their calculation is it's not worth upsetting Trump, It's
• 1:42:32
  Speaker 1: not worth destroying the Alliance. Look, it still depends on
• 1:42:37
  Speaker 1: weapons systems, it depends on the ability to buy weapons
• 1:42:41
  Speaker 1: from America. Look at the Democrats. The Democrats are not
• 1:42:44
  Speaker 1: saying we won't, we don't want to sell weapons stair Isra. Right,
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 1: a significant number of Democrats are saying that. Whether it's
• 1:42:52
  Speaker 1: a majority or not, I'm not sure, but it's the
• 1:42:54
  Speaker 1: gnemic number of Democrats, Republicans on the right, the MAGA
• 1:42:58
  Speaker 1: crowd are turning more and more against Israel. Look at
• 1:43:01
  Speaker 1: Tucker Carlson, look at Nique Foytus. But but look at many.
• 1:43:05
  Speaker 1: It's not just them. So they've got to lose America.
• 1:43:10
  Speaker 1: That's what they've got to lose. And then the other
• 1:43:13
  Speaker 1: thing is we don't know I don't know the state
• 1:43:19
  Speaker 1: of Israeli air defense systems. So there's no question during
• 1:43:24
  Speaker 1: the war when Israel was you know, when Iran launched
• 1:43:29
  Speaker 1: massive amounts of missiles towards.
• 1:43:30
  Speaker 3: Israel, a lot of the UH A lot of the
• 1:43:35
  Speaker 3: defense was using Patriot and Thad, the two American air
• 1:43:41
  Speaker 3: defense systems.
• 1:43:43
  Speaker 1: If we're really truly out of ammunition of Patriots and Dads,
• 1:43:47
  Speaker 1: then Israel now only depends on its own systems, the
• 1:43:52
  Speaker 1: Arrow and and and the various other systems that Israel
• 1:43:55
  Speaker 1: has I don't know if that's enough, if they're confident
• 1:43:58
  Speaker 1: that that's enough, it's all. That's the truth that American
• 1:44:02
  Speaker 1: Navy ships were used to knock down Iranian and Huti missiles.
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 1: So I don't know that how confident Israel is in
• 1:44:11
  Speaker 1: its ability to defend its own population from ballistic missiles. Now,
• 1:44:18
  Speaker 1: I think ultimately, again, it would be worth it. I
• 1:44:22
  Speaker 1: think they have to do it, you know, And remember also,
• 1:44:26
  Speaker 1: Israel has a limited amount of resources in terms of planes.
• 1:44:30
  Speaker 1: It's going to have to take out the missiles on
• 1:44:33
  Speaker 1: the ground, try to destroy the infrastructure for the missiles
• 1:44:36
  Speaker 1: and the launchers, and take out the ports and oil
• 1:44:40
  Speaker 1: and all of that. Israel should do it all. And
• 1:44:44
  Speaker 1: by the way, the ports and refineries those are easy.
• 1:44:48
  Speaker 1: Those could be taken out pretty easily. So I think
• 1:44:54
  Speaker 1: it's the extent to which Israel's dependent on the US
• 1:44:57
  Speaker 1: that explains it. And let me just add one thing
• 1:45:04
  Speaker 1: is really reluctance to be too self interested, the reluctance
• 1:45:09
  Speaker 1: we all have. Okay, Meth Digs, sorry, I love these
• 1:45:18
  Speaker 1: do Capitalism Show. Unfortunately, there's no shortage of content to address.
• 1:45:23
  Speaker 1: Do you still have the human achievements section in the
• 1:45:25
  Speaker 1: regular show. Yes, I try to end the regular shows
• 1:45:29
  Speaker 1: with human achievements sections every time. Absolutely, Ryan says, follow up,
• 1:45:34
  Speaker 1: if Israel has operatives all over, they should be sabotaging
• 1:45:38
  Speaker 1: Neuron's all infrastructure and just say it was not them.
• 1:45:42
  Speaker 1: They do not have them all fortitude. I think weak
• 1:45:45
  Speaker 1: politics breeds conspiracies. I think part of it is weak
• 1:45:49
  Speaker 1: is weakness, it's not having them all fortitude. But it's
• 1:45:52
  Speaker 1: also look, Trump has told them, don't do it, don't
• 1:45:55
  Speaker 1: do it, and I think they're worried about what happens
• 1:45:58
  Speaker 1: if they're friend Trump. Sadly that plays a big role
• 1:46:05
  Speaker 1: in Israeli decision making. It could be their undoing. But yeah,
• 1:46:14
  Speaker 1: there's also them all folage. There's also them all conviction
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 1: of doing what's in your self interest. I'll also say
• 1:46:21
  Speaker 1: that there's no question that I believe that Israel's intelligence
• 1:46:27
  Speaker 1: and operatives on the ground in Iran have been depleted
• 1:46:31
  Speaker 1: because they were used so much during the war, and
• 1:46:34
  Speaker 1: the Iranians have rounded up so many people. They probably
• 1:46:37
  Speaker 1: rounded up some of the Masada agents that were there,
• 1:46:40
  Speaker 1: So I'm not sure how much capabilities Israel has on
• 1:46:42
  Speaker 1: the ground in Ivan, although again they could launch they
• 1:46:46
  Speaker 1: could put special forces, say, Israel still has the capability
• 1:46:49
  Speaker 1: to do a lot of damage to the Ranians, and
• 1:46:51
  Speaker 1: they shouldn't and they need to. Israel could probably overthrow
• 1:46:56
  Speaker 1: the regime if America just gave it a free hand,
• 1:47:00
  Speaker 1: just said just do what you want to do. So again,
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 1: I think they're mainly worried about the US. Are what
• 1:47:12
  Speaker 1: ideas from the materialism of leftis, leftists who claim what
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 1: ideas form, not from them. What ideas form the materialism
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 1: of leftists who claim that capitalism confines all values to finances.
• 1:47:29
  Speaker 1: Many are smart. The action that all action of wealthy
• 1:47:33
  Speaker 1: are driven by money is superficial, false and even obtuse. Yes,
• 1:47:38
  Speaker 1: but again they have this narrow vision of what selfishness is.
• 1:47:46
  Speaker 1: They don't assign it to themselves, to themselves. Noticed what
• 1:47:49
  Speaker 1: he said. He said he would not compromise his integrity
• 1:47:52
  Speaker 1: for more money, But he believes alone Musk would. He
• 1:47:58
  Speaker 1: believes which people would would lie cheat steel easily. Why
• 1:48:05
  Speaker 1: is he different than them? Why is his integrity valuable
• 1:48:09
  Speaker 1: to him? But he doesn't believe it's to them because
• 1:48:11
  Speaker 1: they're super rich. He's pretty well off. I think he's
• 1:48:14
  Speaker 1: done very well for himself and yet he hasn't lost
• 1:48:17
  Speaker 1: his integrity. Does he think that if you make over
• 1:48:19
  Speaker 1: a certain amount of money, integrities out the window. Maybe
• 1:48:23
  Speaker 1: he believes that to make that kind of money you
• 1:48:26
  Speaker 1: never had integrity to begin with. You know my mother's
• 1:48:31
  Speaker 1: view of millionaires. They're all lying, liars and cheats and cooks.
• 1:48:35
  Speaker 1: Otherwise he can't become a millionaire. So they have a
• 1:48:39
  Speaker 1: lot of ways to rationalize it, but they're not really thinking.
• 1:48:42
  Speaker 1: This is the missing link. This is the obstacle to
• 1:48:46
  Speaker 1: their abstract thinking and their unwillingness or unwillingness or inability
• 1:48:52
  Speaker 1: to apply to themselves. Notice many of these people are wealthy,
• 1:48:56
  Speaker 1: successful people, and they claim they they hold onto their antiquity.
• 1:49:01
  Speaker 1: They are not lying, cheating and stealing. Their desire for
• 1:49:05
  Speaker 1: success has not led them to do horrible things. But
• 1:49:09
  Speaker 1: it does other people, and it does systematically, and capitalism
• 1:49:13
  Speaker 1: to other people, not just to a few. All right,
• 1:49:23
  Speaker 1: thank you guys, or TAKEI is red hot capitalism did
• 1:49:33
  Speaker 1: least squat thoughts? Not a serious question. Just wanted to
• 1:49:37
  Speaker 1: post something on a super check. Yeah, I mean you're
• 1:49:39
  Speaker 1: absolutely right right now, or you know, authoritarianism in all
• 1:49:44
  Speaker 1: its forms, economic, political is hot right now. There's a
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 1: sense in which it always is. Capitalism is hot. Capitalism
• 1:49:57
  Speaker 1: quite belief understand name of human capabilities, of human capacity.
• 1:50:06
  Speaker 1: It requires an understanding of how leaving individuals free is good.
• 1:50:12
  Speaker 1: That requires a new morality. And people are willing to
• 1:50:16
  Speaker 1: engage in a lot of changing ideas, but they're not
• 1:50:22
  Speaker 1: willing to question morality. Altruism is fixed. That's a starting
• 1:50:26
  Speaker 1: point for almost every discussion of economics, politics, and therefore
• 1:50:32
  Speaker 1: capitalism is out because capitalism is the system of self interest.
• 1:50:36
  Speaker 1: That is the fundamental and you can see it in
• 1:50:41
  Speaker 1: the way they associate capitalism with greed, which leads to
• 1:50:48
  Speaker 1: line cheating, stealing, or leads to the short term trying
• 1:50:52
  Speaker 1: to exploit other people and manipulate other people and use
• 1:50:55
  Speaker 1: force on other people in or to get you away.
• 1:51:01
  Speaker 1: Capitalism requires thinking. That's a sense of which it's hard.
• 1:51:05
  Speaker 1: It's easy once you think to understand it and to
• 1:51:09
  Speaker 1: understand how it works and why it's good, But first
• 1:51:12
  Speaker 1: you have to do the thinking and getting people to
• 1:51:15
  Speaker 1: do the thinking at that abstract level, to go beyond
• 1:51:18
  Speaker 1: the conventional, to go up a notch and to question conventionality.
• 1:51:24
  Speaker 1: That is just too much. It turns out it's too much.
• 1:51:27
  Speaker 1: It's too early in human evolution. Ali Ali Islam says,
• 1:51:36
  Speaker 1: it'd be awesome if you consider the critique critiquing the
• 1:51:39
  Speaker 1: most popular socialist channel, more Perfect Union. All right, I
• 1:51:45
  Speaker 1: will check that out. I'll check that out, more Perfect Union. Yeah,
• 1:51:51
  Speaker 1: send me stuff like that, and particularly if you find
• 1:51:55
  Speaker 1: a particular video that you really think would be good
• 1:52:01
  Speaker 1: to critique, then send me that video. Send me a
• 1:52:03
  Speaker 1: link to that video. Thank you, Elie, really appreciate it.
• 1:52:07
  Speaker 1: And by the way, like the show, before you leave,
• 1:52:09
  Speaker 1: leave a comment. You don't participate in the chat, do
• 1:52:15
  Speaker 1: a sticker or a super chat or something something active.
• 1:52:18
  Speaker 1: But like the show, you should be a lot more
• 1:52:21
  Speaker 1: likes than they are there. Right again, like the show
• 1:52:23
  Speaker 1: to show you like it, to show that we should
• 1:52:25
  Speaker 1: do more of these, like like like cost shoot nothing.
• 1:52:28
  Speaker 1: Harrison says, six months of flown. I'm not one to moan,
• 1:52:33
  Speaker 1: but I do have one small demand. The sky is
• 1:52:36
  Speaker 1: ours by feed rate command. I owe Harrison a bunch
• 1:52:41
  Speaker 1: of song reviews which I keep promising to get to
• 1:52:45
  Speaker 1: and don't get to. But working on it, working on
• 1:52:50
  Speaker 1: it so we will get there. Roman says, sounds like
• 1:52:55
  Speaker 1: a good series. Keep up the good work. Thank you.
• 1:52:57
  Speaker 1: Roman Harrison says, I'll be able to put you much
• 1:53:00
  Speaker 1: more next weekend. Looking forward to it. Thank you. Juson
• 1:53:04
  Speaker 1: I do coll it covert something like that. Capitalism is great,
• 1:53:09
  Speaker 1: but we don't live under capitalism. We just have glimpses
• 1:53:12
  Speaker 1: of it. That's right. Part of what happens is all
• 1:53:15
  Speaker 1: the eels of the mixed economy, all the eels of
• 1:53:18
  Speaker 1: the mixed economy are blamed on capitalism. It's all they
• 1:53:23
  Speaker 1: know to blame. They can't blame government. They can't think
• 1:53:26
  Speaker 1: in those terms because again, that would challenge their altruism. Linda,
• 1:53:31
  Speaker 1: good show, do more. We'll do, thank you, Linda Ryan.
• 1:53:34
  Speaker 1: You said you lived in Seattle when a child. No,
• 1:53:36
  Speaker 1: I never said that. Where exactly and when? Details? Also,
• 1:53:40
  Speaker 1: what places did you go to when in Belvidere or
• 1:53:43
  Speaker 1: Washington for oconn do any turisty things thoughts about the area.
• 1:53:48
  Speaker 1: I never lived in Seattle, so I don't know where
• 1:53:50
  Speaker 1: you get that from. I lived as a child in
• 1:53:52
  Speaker 1: Boston and outside of Israel. I lived in Boston and
• 1:53:55
  Speaker 1: in London. Those are the two places they lived as
• 1:53:59
  Speaker 1: a child than Israel, three different places in Israel. I
• 1:54:05
  Speaker 1: didn't do any Tuesday things when they're when the Belvidere
• 1:54:09
  Speaker 1: for Okan, I you know, look, I'd been to Seattle
• 1:54:13
  Speaker 1: several times. It's got to be one of the most
• 1:54:18
  Speaker 1: beautiful places on the planet, one of those beautiful cities
• 1:54:22
  Speaker 1: in the world. When the sun is shining, when when
• 1:54:26
  Speaker 1: you can actually see the scenery, it is stunning. It's
• 1:54:32
  Speaker 1: it's amazing. The biggest problem with Seattle, in my view,
• 1:54:37
  Speaker 1: is that it is constantly raining, and you know, you
• 1:54:44
  Speaker 1: can't see anything, so you never see how beautiful it is.
• 1:54:47
  Speaker 1: Now in the summer, I'll give you this July August,
• 1:54:51
  Speaker 1: it doesn't rain much and the sun shines and it's
• 1:54:54
  Speaker 1: it's just dropped dead gorgeous. It's one of the most
• 1:54:57
  Speaker 1: amazing places to live on eath. And that's what I
• 1:55:00
  Speaker 1: know about the Trusty. I've hiked a little bit in
• 1:55:03
  Speaker 1: the area many many years ago. It's beautiful, the national parks,
• 1:55:08
  Speaker 1: the volcanoes. I mean, it's just it's a gorgeous, gorgeous
• 1:55:12
  Speaker 1: And of course there's there's water everywhere, there's the Sound,
• 1:55:16
  Speaker 1: there are islands. I've been to those islands. I can't
• 1:55:20
  Speaker 1: remember all the truisty things I've done over the many
• 1:55:23
  Speaker 1: many years that I visited Seattle, but it's it's a great,
• 1:55:26
  Speaker 1: beautiful place, and you don't have to live in Seattle,
• 1:55:30
  Speaker 1: which is run by a bunch of kamis. You can
• 1:55:33
  Speaker 1: live in some of the other cities around it, which
• 1:55:35
  Speaker 1: are not quite as radically left. Marcel, try Grock if
• 1:55:40
  Speaker 1: you have it. I'll try Grock. I'll try Grock. But
• 1:55:47
  Speaker 1: my main go to is right now, are Claude at
• 1:55:50
  Speaker 1: Chachipiki and Claude is? I mean, they have to get
• 1:55:54
  Speaker 1: to know me. That's the key. And I have a
• 1:55:58
  Speaker 1: URANAI which knows needs to be trained on my stuff,
• 1:56:01
  Speaker 1: and that should give me a better answer. I need
• 1:56:03
  Speaker 1: to run the video via you on AI and see
• 1:56:08
  Speaker 1: what kind of time steps it gives me. But yeah,
• 1:56:12
  Speaker 1: we'll see. But I also can Traine CHGBT to get
• 1:56:14
  Speaker 1: better fennhop. But I'll try grock as well. I think
• 1:56:18
  Speaker 1: a video of equal production quality, music graphs transitions as
• 1:56:23
  Speaker 1: this video, but with your type of critique, would go
• 1:56:26
  Speaker 1: a long way. More people would talk about and stick
• 1:56:29
  Speaker 1: around to watch all of it. That's what we're doing
• 1:56:32
  Speaker 1: in London right. Many of you supported my London kind
• 1:56:36
  Speaker 1: of documentary style thing. That's the kind of I think
• 1:56:40
  Speaker 1: video we're trying to do there, so we'll see if
• 1:56:44
  Speaker 1: that has the traction right, and we'll be talking about
• 1:56:47
  Speaker 1: stuff like this on those videos. Noah says, what are
• 1:56:54
  Speaker 1: your arguments against Dugan's multipolarity proposal for the world. Well,
• 1:57:00
  Speaker 1: I mean, my main argument is that what I care
• 1:57:07
  Speaker 1: about is the poll is the moral standing or the
• 1:57:17
  Speaker 1: pro versus anti standing of the different poles. So I
• 1:57:22
  Speaker 1: don't mind multipolarity if all the poles are pro human,
• 1:57:27
  Speaker 1: if all the polls are pro life, if all the
• 1:57:30
  Speaker 1: prose of you know, pro freedom. But when you're talking
• 1:57:35
  Speaker 1: about multipolarity of the United States, China, and Russia, one
• 1:57:41
  Speaker 1: of those polls is purely antagonistic to human life. That's Russian.
• 1:57:46
  Speaker 1: It's just a dark, depressing, authoritarian place which hasn't even
• 1:57:55
  Speaker 1: doesn't even have the achievements that China has in terms
• 1:57:57
  Speaker 1: of at least liberating its economy. And then you have
• 1:58:00
  Speaker 1: a China that is authoritarian and by being authoritarian, has
• 1:58:05
  Speaker 1: a deep streak of anti life and wants to dominate
• 1:58:11
  Speaker 1: once to control. And then you have the United States, which,
• 1:58:15
  Speaker 1: relative to China and Russia, is a beam of sunlight
• 1:58:21
  Speaker 1: and a pole freedom pole so I want I want
• 1:58:26
  Speaker 1: the United States to win. I want it to be
• 1:58:28
  Speaker 1: the dominant pole. I want one pole, freedom. And if
• 1:58:34
  Speaker 1: to achieve freedom you need three big countries, three big
• 1:58:38
  Speaker 1: powerful countries. But if all believe in freedom, then there's
• 1:58:43
  Speaker 1: no problem in multipolarity. Indeed, you don't really have polarity
• 1:58:47
  Speaker 1: in that case. But if some believe in freedom of
• 1:58:50
  Speaker 1: some don't, then I want the ones who don't believe
• 1:58:52
  Speaker 1: in freedom to go away. I want them to disappear.
• 1:58:55
  Speaker 1: I want them to get weak. I want Russia to
• 1:58:58
  Speaker 1: be weak a week poll because it's anti life. I
• 1:59:03
  Speaker 1: want China to be weak because it could overthrow, overrun Taiwan,
• 1:59:07
  Speaker 1: which is pro life. I want freedom and to achieve freedom.
• 1:59:16
  Speaker 1: I want Russia and China to fail the coverent regimes.
• 1:59:20
  Speaker 1: If they both convert to pro capitalism, pro freedom of
• 1:59:24
  Speaker 1: individualism regimes, cool, But then you won't be talking about multiplarity.
• 1:59:30
  Speaker 1: It'll be one poll, a unity of purpose between China
• 1:59:34
  Speaker 1: and Russia and the United States. Freedom. Ryan wants to
• 1:59:41
  Speaker 1: remind us to like the show before you go. Thank you, Ryan,
• 1:59:45
  Speaker 1: Please like the show. I don't know we have how
• 1:59:48
  Speaker 1: many How many likes do we have right now? We
• 1:59:50
  Speaker 1: have sixty four likes. We've had, you know, three four
• 1:59:54
  Speaker 1: hundred people watching the show. So all, I think this
• 1:59:59
  Speaker 1: is our last question. Not to take CNN headlines as gospel,
• 2:00:06
  Speaker 1: but a breaking news headline on Now says quote white
• 2:00:09
  Speaker 1: House shifts message on Iran now saying low gas price
• 2:00:14
  Speaker 1: is equally as important as nuclear goals. Pathetic. Yes, he's
• 2:00:22
  Speaker 1: basically preparing the ground for leaving and for giving up
• 2:00:28
  Speaker 1: on the nuclear stuff. And he's you know, he's basically
• 2:00:34
  Speaker 1: preparing paring the ground for uh, the United States walking
• 2:00:40
  Speaker 1: away and not dealing with the nuclear nuclear RN. So
• 2:00:47
  Speaker 1: I mean, we'll see, we'll see what actually has We'll
• 2:00:50
  Speaker 1: see what actually happens. You know, I don't know what's
• 2:00:52
  Speaker 1: actually going to happen. I don't know what's trauma. But
• 2:00:57
  Speaker 1: it seems like if the if the headline means anything,
• 2:01:01
  Speaker 1: that that's what it means. All right, guys, But you
• 2:01:05
  Speaker 1: know that's the thing about the news, right. Trump's pathetic,
• 2:01:07
  Speaker 1: and he's pathetic on Monday's pathetic on Tuesday, is pathetic
• 2:01:10
  Speaker 1: on Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, He's still pathetic over the weekend,
• 2:01:15
  Speaker 1: he's pathetic. But I'm not on to tell you he's pathetic,
• 2:01:18
  Speaker 1: but it's just overly repetitive and boring, at least for me.
• 2:01:24
  Speaker 1: So I'll do them, but I'll do one less because
• 2:01:27
  Speaker 1: I'll do this capitalism one instead. Yeah, who knows what's
• 2:01:35
  Speaker 1: important for Trump's real Trump can't run again. But who
• 2:01:38
  Speaker 1: knows what will determine what happens in the midterms. I
• 2:01:42
  Speaker 1: think the main influence on what happens in the midterms
• 2:01:46
  Speaker 1: is the candidates that each party puts up. And the
• 2:01:52
  Speaker 1: more freaky left wing, crazy nutty candidates the Democrats put up,
• 2:01:57
  Speaker 1: the less likely they are to win in a landslide.
• 2:02:00
  Speaker 1: On the other hand, them more crazy, you know, crazy
• 2:02:04
  Speaker 1: corrupt candidates Republicans put up the list likely the other
• 2:02:07
  Speaker 1: hold onto the Senate. I mean, look what's happening in
• 2:02:09
  Speaker 1: Texas right now. The Democrat is leading in the polls,
• 2:02:14
  Speaker 1: and that's because it's Paxton that the Republicans nominated. Any
• 2:02:17
  Speaker 1: other Republicans would beat the Democrat. All right, probably no
• 2:02:26
  Speaker 1: show tomorrow, Probably no show tomorrow. Sunday it'll be me
• 2:02:32
  Speaker 1: and Nikos talking about mau Setung, mau Seitung and Maltstum's China.
• 2:02:38
  Speaker 1: I think there's Yeah, I think it'll be a good show.
• 2:02:41
  Speaker 1: It'll be interesting. You know the horrors of malt Setung.
• 2:02:45
  Speaker 1: I don't think you know quite how horrible he was,
• 2:02:48
  Speaker 1: quite how evil he was, quite how destructive he was.
• 2:02:53
  Speaker 1: So Sunday the truth about Mao's China. See you Sunday Hi,
• 2:03:01
  Speaker 1: everybody