Latest / Yaron Brook Show / AI Impact; Russia War; Iran–Will He?; US Chips; Prediction Markets; Welfare Fraud | Yaron Brook Show

Transcript

AI Impact; Russia War; Iran–Will He?; US Chips; Prediction Markets; Welfare Fraud | Yaron Brook Show · Yaron Brook Show

0:02
Speaker 1: A lot of the fundamentals of the leader, my actually
0:08
Speaker 1: self interesting and individual loss. This is the show, all right, everybody,
0:21
Speaker 1: welcome to your one book show on this Tuesday, February
0:25
Speaker 1: twenty fourth. I hope everybody is having a fantastic week.
0:31
Speaker 1: Tomorrow I leave for London, so I'm going to fly
0:35
Speaker 1: tomorrow afternoon. I think I'm going to be able to
0:37
Speaker 1: squeeze in the show before I head to the airport.
0:40
Speaker 1: We will see, hopefully TSA Prix still exists. Supposedly it's
0:45
Speaker 1: still up there, up and running. A Department of Homeland
0:49
Speaker 1: Security threatened to do a way with TSA Prix, I
0:53
Speaker 1: think over the weekend, but I think I think they
0:55
Speaker 1: backed backed out of that, realizing the care us that
1:00
Speaker 1: would create for me. Anyway, So if if TSAP is around,
1:05
Speaker 1: then i't have enough time to to do a show tomorrow.
1:09
Speaker 1: So there will be a show tomorrow, and then I'm
1:10
Speaker 1: off to London. Which reminds me, if you're in London,
1:13
Speaker 1: you haven't haven't signed up to my seminar I'm doing
1:16
Speaker 1: on capitalism, you should. It's going to be a lot
1:19
Speaker 1: of fun. It's a small group, a lot of back
1:21
Speaker 1: and forth, a lot of questions answered. Uh, yeah, it'll
1:27
Speaker 1: be an intimate group. You can ask me about anything,
1:29
Speaker 1: but we can talk about capitalism, finance, anything you guys want.
1:34
Speaker 1: And I'll obviously have material prepared, but but very much
1:38
Speaker 1: I'll let I'll let you guys guide it. I'm looking
1:41
Speaker 1: for a handful more people to join us, so it's
1:46
Speaker 1: definitely happening. Three four more people would be fantastic, So
1:50
Speaker 1: if if you know, we'll also go out to dinner
1:52
Speaker 1: after afterwards as well, so it's time to socialize and
1:56
Speaker 1: and and and just hang out. So uh, hopefully, hopefully
2:01
Speaker 1: you guys are interested and we'll sign up. You can
2:04
Speaker 1: check it out on your on bookshow dot com. Your
2:06
Speaker 1: on bookshow dot com and you're on bookshow dot com
2:10
Speaker 1: and then just scroll down to events and then a
2:13
Speaker 1: February twenty eighth, which is Saturday fairbu twenty eighth in London,
2:17
Speaker 1: and there's a link there to buying it to get
2:19
Speaker 1: in the ticket and that'll take you to event bright
2:22
Speaker 1: and and there you'll have all the detailed information. It's
2:25
Speaker 1: basically going to be at a hotel in Leicester Square,
2:28
Speaker 1: the w Hotel, so right in the middle of town,
2:30
Speaker 1: easy to get to. All the subway stops are there
2:33
Speaker 1: and underground underground on subway and uh yeah, join us.
2:37
Speaker 1: It's going to be I think it's going to be
2:38
Speaker 1: a lot of fun, all right, Tonight, tonight, big deal.
2:44
Speaker 1: Tonight is the most boring speech of the year. Every
2:48
Speaker 1: year we get a boring speech by the sitting presidents.
2:51
Speaker 1: It's usually long, boring and pretty stupid. But this year,
2:56
Speaker 1: this year promises to be the most boring, this stupidest,
3:02
Speaker 1: the longest State of the Union address in American history.
3:08
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is going to be up on stage giving
3:12
Speaker 1: the State of the Union address to joints, to a
3:15
Speaker 1: joint Meeting of Congress, although some Democrats have said they
3:20
Speaker 1: won't be attending. The Streme Court will be there, right
3:22
Speaker 1: in the front row. The Supreme Court will right there.
3:26
Speaker 1: As Donald Trump gets red and angry and mad at
3:30
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court, he'll probably point at them and yell
3:33
Speaker 1: at them and wag his finger at them. That should
3:35
Speaker 1: be fun, just for that. It might be worth watching,
3:38
Speaker 1: but it is, he has said. Donald Trump today said
3:41
Speaker 1: that the speech will be long. Last year was ninety minutes.
3:45
Speaker 1: I think it was the longest ever. It was ninety minutes.
3:48
Speaker 1: So if he's saying it's long. Does that mean it's
3:54
Speaker 1: longer than the ninety minutes that he already stated it would. Yeah, God,
4:00
Speaker 1: it's going to be long. Uh, it's gonna be a
4:04
Speaker 1: litany of how amazing he is. We all know that already,
4:09
Speaker 1: how amazing the economy is. We all know that already.
4:14
Speaker 1: And all the things that the government is going to
4:17
Speaker 1: do for you, all the ways it's going to do
4:21
Speaker 1: price controls and regulate and tariff and tax, well tax
4:25
Speaker 1: is not for you, but anyway, all the ways in
4:27
Speaker 1: which is going to make things better for you. In particular,
4:32
Speaker 1: the issue of affordability is going to come up. So
4:34
Speaker 1: any kind of price caps on interest, on interest you
4:37
Speaker 1: pay on credit cards, caps on mortgages, caps on everything,
4:42
Speaker 1: you will get the full array of socialist policies to
4:48
Speaker 1: try to get prices down, rent control on steroids. That'll
4:54
Speaker 1: be That'll be the message tonight. We are here from
4:57
Speaker 1: the government, and we're here to help and be because
5:00
Speaker 1: it's me Donald Trump. It'll work this time, and you
5:05
Speaker 1: guys might buy it. I don't know. Am I gonna
5:10
Speaker 1: watch it? Am I going to watch it? No way
5:13
Speaker 1: in hell am I watching this live. I'll probably watch
5:17
Speaker 1: it after the fact, probably watch it tomorrow morning at
5:20
Speaker 1: one and a half time speed or two times speed
5:22
Speaker 1: or something like that. There's no way I'm gonna waste
5:25
Speaker 1: an hour and a half of my life or two
5:27
Speaker 1: hours of my life. Who knows how long this will
5:29
Speaker 1: be on watching this. I'll either read it tomorrow or
5:33
Speaker 1: if I want to get some of the fun nuance
5:36
Speaker 1: of Donald Trump yelling at people, I'll watch it, but
5:39
Speaker 1: i'll watch it at two times speed. You know, watching
5:42
Speaker 1: Donald Trump at one time speed is annoying enough. Watching
5:45
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is annoying enough. So yeah, you want to
5:47
Speaker 1: get it over as fast as you can. So I
5:52
Speaker 1: will watch it or I'll read it, and so I will
5:55
Speaker 1: have comments tomorrow on the state of the Union. But yes,
6:00
Speaker 1: be ready to be told how wonderful things are and
6:03
Speaker 1: how wonderful he is, and how wonderful he's going to
6:06
Speaker 1: make it all through goverment interference and governed intervention. This
6:10
Speaker 1: is not going to be a speech about more liberty,
6:13
Speaker 1: more freedom, more markets. That is the solution of things.
6:20
Speaker 1: If you watch it live. What's the term God help
6:25
Speaker 1: you or something like that, whatever the Spirit be with you,
6:28
Speaker 1: something like that, Because I don't know how you can
6:31
Speaker 1: how you can tolerate it. But some of you love
6:33
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, so you guys think he's fantastic. I am
6:39
Speaker 1: not taking one for the YBS team. I don't know
6:41
Speaker 1: who is is somebody taking for the YBS team. No,
6:44
Speaker 1: I'll take it at one and a half time speed
6:46
Speaker 1: or two times speed. Two times speed sounds right. The
6:49
Speaker 1: content is repetitive and meaningless anyway. All right, So yesterday,
6:55
Speaker 1: yesterday the stock market took a real beating. I mean
6:59
Speaker 1: an asdek was down five sp five hundred is down.
7:02
Speaker 1: Bank stocks are down like four percent. I mean yeah,
7:05
Speaker 1: the market just got crushed and some stocks took a
7:08
Speaker 1: real beating, like like IBM was down thirteen percent. That
7:13
Speaker 1: is the biggest drop IBM has hired in one day
7:17
Speaker 1: since two thousand and a bunch of other stocks KKR
7:24
Speaker 1: private Equity went down a lot and just all over
7:28
Speaker 1: them happened. Initially, when I look at the market, I said, okay,
7:30
Speaker 1: this is tariff uncertainty. But it didn't make any sense.
7:33
Speaker 1: Why would IBM go down? It's not clear how tariffs
7:36
Speaker 1: affect IBM and KKR wouldn't be affected by tariffs. What's
7:40
Speaker 1: going on here? So so it turns out that it
7:43
Speaker 1: wasn't just tariffs. I'm sure tariffs had an intensifying impact
7:50
Speaker 1: on the stock market, but there was there was more
7:57
Speaker 1: that was going on. And here's a story, and it's
8:00
Speaker 1: a somewhat a bizarre story, but the reality is that
8:04
Speaker 1: yesterday a company or a blogger, a blogger that blogs
8:09
Speaker 1: under Citrini Research, published a piece called the twenty twenty
8:14
Speaker 1: eight Global Intelligence Crisis. This is a piece kind of
8:20
Speaker 1: describing how AI is gonna change the world and not
8:28
Speaker 1: from our economic financial perspective, not for the better and
8:32
Speaker 1: ultimately going to lead to a massive crash and collapse
8:37
Speaker 1: in the market. They you know, I guess it's it's
8:42
Speaker 1: it's two bloggers wrote this. I don't know much about
8:45
Speaker 1: Sutrini Research, but they're the ones who wrote this and
8:48
Speaker 1: distributed yesterday. And they say, they say in the thing,
8:54
Speaker 1: let me let me find the exact you know, where
8:57
Speaker 1: is this? Yeah, this is what they say right right
9:01
Speaker 1: after about what follows is a scenario, not a prediction,
9:07
Speaker 1: soona and even presenting this is this is what we
9:10
Speaker 1: predict what happened, This is a possibility, And basically the
9:15
Speaker 1: prediction or the scenario goes like this over the next
9:20
Speaker 1: few months, AI is rapidly going to start replacing white collar,
9:26
Speaker 1: white collar jobs. It'll start with software, but it'll also
9:32
Speaker 1: go into financial services, banking. You know, AI agents will
9:38
Speaker 1: start replacing those jobs people start getting laid off. Now,
9:43
Speaker 1: the initial consequence of this will be profits will go
9:46
Speaker 1: up dramatically. According to this scenario, profits will go up dramatic.
9:51
Speaker 1: Costers just been cut significantly, which will allow companies to
9:54
Speaker 1: invest more in AI and in getting rid of more
9:58
Speaker 1: white collar jobs. And over the next two years, employment
10:02
Speaker 1: and white collar jobs is going to plummet. That is
10:06
Speaker 1: going to lead unemployment to go from what it is
10:08
Speaker 1: right now a four point to over ten percent. But
10:12
Speaker 1: the thing is that it's not just any unemployment. These
10:15
Speaker 1: are going to be high earning jobs. These are going
10:18
Speaker 1: to be white collar, high earning people who are losing
10:22
Speaker 1: their jobs. The consequence of all these people losing their
10:26
Speaker 1: jobs is they stop consuming. Now we are told the
10:30
Speaker 1: consumption is seventy percent of the economy, so that will
10:33
Speaker 1: lead to a collapse in demand and therefore a lot
10:38
Speaker 1: of companies are going to really really struggle. But this
10:43
Speaker 1: is just a self reinforcing as you know, to cut costs,
10:48
Speaker 1: they will introduce AI in layoff more people, and you
10:53
Speaker 1: get this constant process of people losing jobs and no
10:58
Speaker 1: jobs really being created and over time, and this happens
11:03
Speaker 1: in Wall Street and in any kind of job where
11:07
Speaker 1: you can see that is easily replaceable by AAI. It
11:13
Speaker 1: probably happens to some doctors. It happens to bankers. You
11:17
Speaker 1: can make all loan decisions by algorithm. It happens to
11:20
Speaker 1: why do we need real estate agents? Almost everything that
11:23
Speaker 1: a real estate agent could be done could be automated.
11:28
Speaker 1: And all of this, over time goes away, you know,
11:33
Speaker 1: destroys jobs, employment collapses, and demand collapses. An economy really
11:42
Speaker 1: really struggles at the same time as companies become more
11:46
Speaker 1: and more profitable because they cost structure is smaller, the
11:49
Speaker 1: cost of producing is lower, and all of this is
11:53
Speaker 1: leading to basically a depression, like you get what they
11:59
Speaker 1: call ghost GDP. GDP is going up, but human beings
12:04
Speaker 1: are not benefiting from it except for the people who
12:08
Speaker 1: own the AI companies. And as they say in one
12:13
Speaker 1: of these passages, machines don't consume anything. So you have
12:19
Speaker 1: record profit, record setting corporate profits that are going back
12:25
Speaker 1: into AI. But nobody's being employed, and ultimately the economy
12:32
Speaker 1: is slowly collapsing as nobody is buying, nobody can afford
12:37
Speaker 1: to buy anything. There's a sense in which this leads
12:42
Speaker 1: to some kind of financial crisis. You could imagine certain
12:46
Speaker 1: financial institutions collapsing really hit hard. For example, they say
12:51
Speaker 1: make an Express's hit hard. You know, they have the
12:55
Speaker 1: headwinds from white collar workforce reductions, gutting its customer base,
12:59
Speaker 1: and a agents you know, writing around interchange. You know,
13:04
Speaker 1: so basically the business model is gone. People can transfer
13:07
Speaker 1: money directly. The agents can do all of it. American Express,
13:11
Speaker 1: American Express took a beating yesterday because it's named in
13:14
Speaker 1: the article, and indeed, all the like MasterCard is named
13:18
Speaker 1: in the article. All these companies that were named in
13:20
Speaker 1: article are the ones that take the biggest hit. I mean,
13:29
Speaker 1: think about it. If our agents outdate buying and selling
13:33
Speaker 1: stuff for us, and the agents have direct access to
13:36
Speaker 1: our bank accounts UH and direct access to the bank
13:41
Speaker 1: account of the person who are buying stuff from, then
13:44
Speaker 1: you can see why MasterCard is history. All financial intermediation
13:49
Speaker 1: is gone. Facilitating UH, facilitating exchange to credit cards is useless.
13:57
Speaker 1: I mean, think about the idea that I have an
14:02
Speaker 1: agent Uron purchasing agent, and I send that Uron purchasing
14:08
Speaker 1: agent to go buy stuff. Why they don't have to
14:11
Speaker 1: go to Amazon. They can go to the people providing
14:15
Speaker 1: this stuff to Amazon and they can go buy it directly.
14:20
Speaker 1: I won't do that because I don't have the time
14:21
Speaker 1: to go sift through all the different stores and look
14:24
Speaker 1: at all the different stores and all the different products
14:26
Speaker 1: and knows the best price. But if I have an
14:28
Speaker 1: AI agent, THEI agent can go and search an Amazon.
14:33
Speaker 1: Who is an intermedia You really between people who manufacture
14:37
Speaker 1: goods and me. I can go directly to the manufacturer.
14:39
Speaker 1: I don't need an Amazon. And you can see how
14:45
Speaker 1: you know, jobs just get destroyed left and right. Jobs
14:48
Speaker 1: are disappearing, and you know, we might have stable coins
14:57
Speaker 1: or some kind of crypto, and everything is set up
15:00
Speaker 1: that way. So you don't need credit cards, you don't
15:02
Speaker 1: need banks. This is why banks went down. I think
15:04
Speaker 1: the bank index, the regional banking indexs went down four
15:07
Speaker 1: percent yesterday. No news about banking, no really news even
15:12
Speaker 1: about interest rates. Well, I mean the long term rate
15:15
Speaker 1: went down, so the yield curve is less steep, which
15:19
Speaker 1: means banks make less money, so there was some reason
15:22
Speaker 1: for banks to go down a little bit, but here
15:24
Speaker 1: they went down four percent. I mean, it made no
15:26
Speaker 1: sense because these guys came up with a scenario, not
15:31
Speaker 1: even a prediction, whereby banking becomes irrelevant again, jobs collapse
15:40
Speaker 1: and its official circle. And basically in the past and
15:46
Speaker 1: in the present, there is an intelligence premium. Right. We
15:51
Speaker 1: pay people for their intelligence, for their brain, but AI
15:55
Speaker 1: is replacing those brains, it's replacing that intelligence. So what
16:00
Speaker 1: are we paying people for? What are we paying them
16:04
Speaker 1: for now? It's true that you might find more other
16:12
Speaker 1: types of jobs that computers can't do yet, robots can't
16:16
Speaker 1: do yet, but those are mainly manual labor and they
16:23
Speaker 1: pay a lot less. So you're taking somebody who's making
16:25
Speaker 1: two hundred thousand dollars as a programmer and now you're
16:27
Speaker 1: paying them fifty thousand dollars. That is not good, not good, right,
16:37
Speaker 1: And you know, and maybe there's a lot of ubers,
16:40
Speaker 1: although I don't know why they would be ubers. They
16:41
Speaker 1: use Uber as an example, but I think Uber is
16:44
Speaker 1: one of the first things that disappear because you've got waymow,
16:47
Speaker 1: and you've got Tesla's and you've got self driving cars,
16:49
Speaker 1: why would we even have Uber. Of course, the more
16:55
Speaker 1: people go into Uber because they don't have a job,
16:58
Speaker 1: the lower the price I had this supply, the lower
17:02
Speaker 1: the price, and the ubers and they can't make any money.
17:08
Speaker 1: She se wages are suppressed, jobs don't exist, and it's
17:13
Speaker 1: a constant change. Anyway, this is it's a long article,
17:17
Speaker 1: long article explaining all this in detail. It's written from
17:22
Speaker 1: the perspective of I'm sitting in June twenty twenty eight
17:25
Speaker 1: looking backwards at what's happened over the last two and
17:27
Speaker 1: a half years, how we got to where we got
17:31
Speaker 1: and this caused the stock market to go down a
17:33
Speaker 1: huge amount yesterday, particularly the stocks that are mentioned. So
17:38
Speaker 1: first in terms of the stock market or first, there's
17:43
Speaker 1: nothing new in this piece. There's nothing new. It feeds
17:48
Speaker 1: on fears that we're spending around the markets for months
17:53
Speaker 1: now and particularly in the last few weeks, about where
17:58
Speaker 1: the company is, how susceptible companies are to be disrupted
18:02
Speaker 1: by AI. So there's nothing new in the piece. Why
18:07
Speaker 1: did they ask such a profound effect. I think this
18:10
Speaker 1: is a memes stock phenomena. This is people not to prose.
18:16
Speaker 1: This is people getting really excited about this, really really
18:21
Speaker 1: panicking about this and running to implement it, and not
18:27
Speaker 1: being professionals, they don't know exactly how to implement it,
18:30
Speaker 1: so they just take the examples they give in the article,
18:34
Speaker 1: which is a complete scenario, not even a prediction, right,
18:38
Speaker 1: So just making up the companies that these are the
18:41
Speaker 1: things that came to their mind as maybe possibilities, and
18:44
Speaker 1: those companies get hit the hardest. It's just it's just
18:51
Speaker 1: pretty pretty pathetic, really, But this is kind of a
18:54
Speaker 1: meme stock phenomena, not buying but selling like crazy those
19:01
Speaker 1: stocks that these guys are saying might be significantly affected
19:07
Speaker 1: by this complete collapse of the US economy as a
19:10
Speaker 1: result of AI. Now, the reality is, as I said,
19:14
Speaker 1: anxiety about the future of AI is out there. Everybody's
19:18
Speaker 1: trying to figure out what this means. Was it last
19:20
Speaker 1: week or the CEO of Entropic or something said that
19:24
Speaker 1: Claude is going to replace programmers and a lot of
19:27
Speaker 1: these software company stocks went down. They then recovered because
19:32
Speaker 1: not so fast, guys. This isn't going to happen so fast,
19:37
Speaker 1: and it's not so much that they're going to replace programmers,
19:40
Speaker 1: at least not in the early stages, it's going to
19:42
Speaker 1: be that these programs are going to become so much
19:45
Speaker 1: more productive because they're going to be using AI. And generally,
19:53
Speaker 1: while the general trend long term of these jobs being
19:57
Speaker 1: replaced is true, it will happen, and that's a good thing,
20:02
Speaker 1: not a bad thing. We'll get to that in a minute.
20:09
Speaker 1: It doesn't happen quickly, and nobody knows how it's going
20:15
Speaker 1: to happen. The one thing we can be certain about
20:19
Speaker 1: what's happening with AI and how AI will change business
20:24
Speaker 1: and change economy is that we don't know how it's
20:28
Speaker 1: going to do either one of those. A lot of
20:33
Speaker 1: different scenarios are going to play out, a lot of
20:35
Speaker 1: different models will be tried, and some jobs will get
20:40
Speaker 1: lost at different paces, but generally job losses what happens
20:46
Speaker 1: slower than one would expect. There's a stickiness to jobs.
20:52
Speaker 1: I mean, for how many years have we heard at
20:56
Speaker 1: least thirty since really the beginning of the Internet, that
21:02
Speaker 1: real estate agents are history, right, because software will match
21:06
Speaker 1: buyers and sellers. You'll go to Zilo. I mean, you
21:09
Speaker 1: can go to Zilo. You can check every you don't
21:12
Speaker 1: need a real to check their proprietary database, the propriety
21:16
Speaker 1: databases online, and yet not only real estate agents exist.
21:22
Speaker 1: They still are charging those ridiculous, unbelievable fees and people
21:26
Speaker 1: are paying them. We don't need to. The contracts are
21:32
Speaker 1: not that complicated. You could find a house on Zillo yourself.
21:36
Speaker 1: You don't have to go through an agent. Now, there
21:40
Speaker 1: are all kinds of institutional legal barriers that make it
21:44
Speaker 1: very difficult to do these things without an agent, and
21:46
Speaker 1: some states have laws protecting them. But that's all true
21:50
Speaker 1: even with AI. In other words, job losses for good
21:55
Speaker 1: and for bad reasons will happen much slower than what
22:01
Speaker 1: people think, much slower and in very unpredictable ways. When
22:10
Speaker 1: it comes to software, for example, the reality is that
22:26
Speaker 1: there's no end to the number of software jobs that
22:30
Speaker 1: are possible. Right Software, I think somebody wrote, and I
22:34
Speaker 1: think it's probably true. Software generally sucks. You're constantly tinkering
22:39
Speaker 1: with it, you're constantly changing it, you're constantly improving it.
22:43
Speaker 1: I mean, there's so much work to be done to
22:46
Speaker 1: make software really good, and it's like it's an endless
22:50
Speaker 1: process of making it really good and improving it. And yes,
22:54
Speaker 1: it's absolutely true that AI will make that so much
22:58
Speaker 1: more efficient and faster. But somebody is still going to
23:01
Speaker 1: have to guide the process. And this is why I
23:04
Speaker 1: think AI does more to increase the productivity enhance the
23:08
Speaker 1: productivity of the programmers than it does in completely replacing them.
23:15
Speaker 1: Somebody has to figure out that the software is not good.
23:21
Speaker 1: The software is not good by a human standard, not
23:23
Speaker 1: by a standard AIAI doesn't know what good and what
23:26
Speaker 1: not good is. You need a human being to use
23:29
Speaker 1: the software to be able to tell you, yeah, this sucks.
23:35
Speaker 1: Think about all the legacy software that could be rewritten
23:38
Speaker 1: really fast with AI to a place I don't know.
23:42
Speaker 1: You remember, you know how many programs, particularly in financial
23:46
Speaker 1: services and other places, written Cobo or for Trand. Nobody
23:53
Speaker 1: knows how to program Cobo and for Trand anymore. So Yes,
23:56
Speaker 1: if you're a full Trand and Cobo programmer, AI is
23:59
Speaker 1: going to do your job. But somebody has to be
24:03
Speaker 1: able to guide AI and figure out if they're doing
24:06
Speaker 1: a good job or not. And somebody is gonna have
24:09
Speaker 1: to figure out how to replace all that stuff do
24:10
Speaker 1: with something modern and better, and how to transition and
24:13
Speaker 1: how there's a huge number of jobs I programmed in basic.
24:18
Speaker 1: I used to know basic really really well. I programmed fortrand,
24:24
Speaker 1: basic and debase. So all of this is blown out
24:32
Speaker 1: of proportion, exaggerated, and it's also just bad macro economics
24:39
Speaker 1: or microeconomics. People lose their jobs, what are they gonna do?
24:44
Speaker 1: Just sit on their hands, there's no will work, But
24:49
Speaker 1: there's a lot of capital because companies are making a
24:52
Speaker 1: lot of money. It's not clear, by the way, how
24:53
Speaker 1: companies are making a lot of money, because it's true
24:56
Speaker 1: that costs of going down, But who the hell is
24:59
Speaker 1: buying the product if nobody has a job, And so
25:04
Speaker 1: the whole thing is a little contradictory. But what are
25:06
Speaker 1: they going to do? What are these white collar smart
25:09
Speaker 1: people going to do once they realize once these jobs
25:13
Speaker 1: are gone, well, they're going to start thinking about doing
25:20
Speaker 1: things that add value. They're going to start thinking about
25:25
Speaker 1: doing things that are fun and interesting. They're going to
25:30
Speaker 1: be able to escape the drudgery of so many of
25:34
Speaker 1: the jobs that we have out there. I mean so
25:38
Speaker 1: much about life today. The life of people out there
25:42
Speaker 1: is managing databases. But you know, people will start being
25:53
Speaker 1: able to get to do what they're passionate about, whether
25:59
Speaker 1: that is you know, somebody still has to make judgments.
26:06
Speaker 1: There's still a whole lot of work to be done
26:09
Speaker 1: in relationships, in psychology, in creativity, solving real problems and
26:21
Speaker 1: providing a human touch. We'll have a lot more entertainers.
26:27
Speaker 1: There'll be a lot more money to be made in
26:33
Speaker 1: human to human stuff that AI just can't do. I mean,
26:38
Speaker 1: look at how many people today make a living on
26:41
Speaker 1: YouTube and TikTok and places like that. It was impossible
26:47
Speaker 1: twenty years ago. Thirty years ago, influenza was not a
26:51
Speaker 1: career that existed. I mean, can we even imagine what
26:56
Speaker 1: careers are going to come in the future. Now, it's
27:01
Speaker 1: not clear that I have more Leisia time, because it's
27:03
Speaker 1: not clear that that want it. But it's just not
27:07
Speaker 1: clear that the jobs are paying enough according to the NASAs.
27:15
Speaker 1: But people will be in a position to actually think
27:23
Speaker 1: outside the box and consider new options and different professions
27:27
Speaker 1: and different entrepreneurship. With Skyrocket, people will start businesses and
27:34
Speaker 1: new products and new services and new things will appear
27:39
Speaker 1: that I can't imagine because that's just not me right,
27:43
Speaker 1: I'm it's gonna need entrepreneurs, it's going to need the capitalists,
27:48
Speaker 1: it's going to need the process as we know it.
27:55
Speaker 1: So yes, it's uh, we're info upheaval. And the one
28:07
Speaker 1: thing that worries me is government intervening and stepping in
28:15
Speaker 1: and thinking that they needed in order to solve problems,
28:21
Speaker 1: in order to you know, soften the landing, in order
28:25
Speaker 1: to low key capital to the right use. And there
28:27
Speaker 1: are a lot of economists I see writing yes, there'll
28:30
Speaker 1: be you know, the AI companies will make a lot
28:32
Speaker 1: of money and then will tax them and use that
28:34
Speaker 1: taxes to build big infrastructure projects. Oh my god, no,
28:38
Speaker 1: please know, save us from from infrastructure projects, save us
28:42
Speaker 1: from you know, the usebaults of the world FDRs. We
28:51
Speaker 1: could really use fewer FDRs, not more FDRs. What we
28:56
Speaker 1: need and more entrepreneurs. What we need is to that capital, yeah,
29:00
Speaker 1: to seek out profit opportunities, because I mean, in some
29:06
Speaker 1: of these things, the profit opportunities and AI will be
29:09
Speaker 1: driven to zero. That's the other thing. They don't take
29:11
Speaker 1: an account that a lot of these companies are going
29:13
Speaker 1: to be competitive, they won't be able to charge a lot.
29:15
Speaker 1: So what happens to prices in a world like this,
29:18
Speaker 1: Prices go down. It's not clear profits go up, prices
29:23
Speaker 1: go down. Everything becomes more affordable, she can live on better,
29:29
Speaker 1: on making less. So many different things are going on
29:34
Speaker 1: here now. It's true, and you guys should be excited
29:38
Speaker 1: about this. We are probably living through a and a
29:44
Speaker 1: sense and industrial revolution, a business revolution, a revolution about
29:51
Speaker 1: how business is going to be done, how the market
29:53
Speaker 1: is going to be structured, how it all functions. It's
29:58
Speaker 1: exciting because it is. It really is a unique moment
30:01
Speaker 1: in history, and it's gonna be interesting. I'm fascinated about
30:05
Speaker 1: how it all plays out. I don't think we're gonna
30:10
Speaker 1: see a massive collapse because of AI in two years now.
30:13
Speaker 1: They might be a collapse. They might do a financial
30:15
Speaker 1: crisis for other reasons caused by all kinds of other stuff,
30:19
Speaker 1: but not AI. So it's it's exciting, and I'm curious
30:40
Speaker 1: about how it plays out. I don't know how it's
30:42
Speaker 1: gonna play out. I can't imagine unless the politician's intervene,
30:47
Speaker 1: and they could. I can't imagine a scenario that prays
30:50
Speaker 1: a badly, But politicians might intervene and it might play
30:56
Speaker 1: out badly. And of course when it plays out badly,
30:59
Speaker 1: who will be blamed? Yeah, markets, AI technology will be blamed.
31:10
Speaker 1: He's a politician might not be able to keep up,
31:12
Speaker 1: but the things that they might do might be so
31:14
Speaker 1: destructive that they don't have to keep up. One of
31:16
Speaker 1: the things they might do is is so distort the
31:20
Speaker 1: markets that everything slows down to their pace, or for example,
31:25
Speaker 1: that the site we need a UBI, we need a
31:28
Speaker 1: universal basic income because everybody's losing their jobs. So they'll
31:32
Speaker 1: raise taxes dramatically on internet companies, on technology companies and
31:37
Speaker 1: try to redistribute all that wealth to the rest of
31:39
Speaker 1: the population and all the distortive effects that has. You
31:44
Speaker 1: get a self fulfilling prophecy in that case. So I
31:48
Speaker 1: don't know, but that's why I think this is super exciting.
31:52
Speaker 1: And instead of being excited now again, exciting doesn't mean
31:57
Speaker 1: go out and buy tech stocks because you who the
32:00
Speaker 1: winners are going to be. You don't know who the
32:02
Speaker 1: losers are going to be. I don't. I'm just excited
32:08
Speaker 1: to be alive while this happens. Now. If I was
32:11
Speaker 1: investing actively, yeah, I would look carefully into Okay, where
32:15
Speaker 1: do I think AI will impact first, and who's going
32:18
Speaker 1: to benefit and who who might suffer, who might go
32:21
Speaker 1: out of business, who might lose their jobs? Where can
32:24
Speaker 1: I make money. But if you've used AI a little bit,
32:33
Speaker 1: I have a little bit. It's unbelievably exciting. It makes
32:38
Speaker 1: me more productive, and I use it just to teeny
32:40
Speaker 1: bit and I can only imagine how it's going to
32:43
Speaker 1: get better, and how other people are using it and
32:46
Speaker 1: in more productive endeavors, and how it's going to make
32:48
Speaker 1: their lives much much better. So yeah, I think I
32:51
Speaker 1: think the main thing, the main view of the world
32:57
Speaker 1: right now should be excitement and curiosity. Excitement and curiosity,
33:10
Speaker 1: all right. Uh so it's it's kind of tragic that
33:13
Speaker 1: the doomsday stories are dominating. Dominating. Uh that's what people
33:20
Speaker 1: are focused on, all right. Think about I think about
33:31
Speaker 1: liberating millions of some of the best minds we have
33:36
Speaker 1: from work that is relatively boring. To think about exciting
33:43
Speaker 1: new possibility for the human race. That's amazing, that's amazing.
33:56
Speaker 1: All right. Today is the fourth anniversary of the invasion
34:01
Speaker 1: of Ukraine by Russia. If you remember four years ago
34:06
Speaker 1: in twenty twenty two, after weeks of speculation, after weeks
34:12
Speaker 1: of Biden, you know, urging Putin and Macron flying to
34:18
Speaker 1: flying to Moscow and trying to urge Putin not to
34:22
Speaker 1: do anything Putin indeed invaded, pushed through from the Donbas,
34:31
Speaker 1: try to push there, but really invaded through every side
34:34
Speaker 1: of every border the Ukraine had, including the northern border
34:39
Speaker 1: from Belarus. The hope was the Russian hope was that
34:46
Speaker 1: they could take care of in days subdue the government,
34:50
Speaker 1: replace it with a friendly Russian government and the war
34:53
Speaker 1: would be over in days. Not only did we have
34:57
Speaker 1: columns coming in from the north, we had columns coming
34:59
Speaker 1: in from the north. These and then you had special
35:02
Speaker 1: forces landing in the Kiev airport. I didn't mean to
35:06
Speaker 1: do a lot of sorry, so you had you had
35:14
Speaker 1: Russian troops coming in from from all all surrounding Kiev.
35:18
Speaker 1: And I think most most military analysts were telling us
35:22
Speaker 1: it's a matter of a week, maybe three weeks, Kiev
35:25
Speaker 1: is going to be surrounded. Troops were coming in from
35:27
Speaker 1: the south, they were coming in from the east, that
35:29
Speaker 1: were coming in from the northeast and coming in from
35:31
Speaker 1: the north, and it looked hopeless. And then special forces
35:34
Speaker 1: were landed Kiev airport, and it literally looked hopeless. And
35:40
Speaker 1: the Americans were urging Zelenski to leave and form a
35:44
Speaker 1: governor exile because basically the United States had come to
35:48
Speaker 1: the conclusion that it was hopeless, that that the Ukrainians
35:51
Speaker 1: are going to lose. And and if you watch TV,
35:54
Speaker 1: every single commentator out there were saying, this is it,
35:59
Speaker 1: It's over. Uh, you know, and and Ze lens Key,
36:04
Speaker 1: to his credit, and I think You'll go down in history,
36:08
Speaker 1: you know, basically said I'm not leaving. I'm staying. I'm
36:11
Speaker 1: staying in Kiv. We will fight. And I think people
36:15
Speaker 1: were shocked and surprised. Now I was keeping track. I
36:20
Speaker 1: remember the first couple of days of that I was
36:22
Speaker 1: keeping track of what was going on and noticing a
36:25
Speaker 1: certain pattern of reports from the front line. And the
36:30
Speaker 1: pattern was basically that the small groups of Ukrainian soldiers
36:35
Speaker 1: were basically stopping whole columns of Russian tanks and Russian
36:41
Speaker 1: armored vehicles by using Javelin anti tank missiles, by using
36:49
Speaker 1: Western technology, and by taking advantage of the fact that
36:53
Speaker 1: these tanks were old, that they soldiers were unmotivated, and indeed,
37:00
Speaker 1: in the north and in the northeast, the columns were stopped,
37:05
Speaker 1: halted and started advancing very very slowly, if at all.
37:09
Speaker 1: And you saw these pictures of long columns of tanks
37:13
Speaker 1: and armored vehicles that the Ukrainians kept ambushing and destroying
37:20
Speaker 1: and then at the Key of Airport, this amazing battle
37:24
Speaker 1: which again I think books and movies will be done
37:27
Speaker 1: about it in the future, where the Ukrainians basically fought
37:32
Speaker 1: off Russian special forces and forced them to retreat. And
37:38
Speaker 1: I think already at the end of day one, but
37:42
Speaker 1: certainly at day two, I basically said, this is not
37:46
Speaker 1: going to go Russia's way. You know, they might win,
37:50
Speaker 1: they might take Ukraine, but it's going to take a
37:52
Speaker 1: lot longer than they think, a lot longer than all
37:55
Speaker 1: those military experts think. And the Ukrainians have got them
38:00
Speaker 1: because Ukrainians have, you know, Russian weapons systems suck. Russians
38:04
Speaker 1: unmotivated to fight this war. Most soldiers don't know why
38:07
Speaker 1: they're fighting. Ukrainians are fighting for their homes, they're fighting
38:10
Speaker 1: for their land, they're fighting for their families, They're fighting
38:13
Speaker 1: for themselves. They're the motivated one. And since twenty fourteen
38:18
Speaker 1: they had been armed with Western weapons systems, at least
38:22
Speaker 1: some Western weapons systems, and I think I called it
38:26
Speaker 1: back then, and indeed in the months and in the
38:30
Speaker 1: year and a half they followed, the Ukrainians beat the
38:33
Speaker 1: Russians back beat them all the way back to the
38:36
Speaker 1: border in the north and the northeast, and then later
38:40
Speaker 1: on much of the east, the Kakiv area was taken back,
38:46
Speaker 1: and they beat them back in the south so that
38:49
Speaker 1: the I forget the name of the city now was
38:53
Speaker 1: recaptured and forusd them to the other side of the
38:56
Speaker 1: river there and Ukraine had immense success once the initial
39:02
Speaker 1: invasion happened, and that gets us into somewhere in the
39:07
Speaker 1: fall of twenty twenty three. At that point, you know,
39:13
Speaker 1: Ukraine discovered that it couldn't move much further. The US
39:18
Speaker 1: in particular was not supplying them with the latest best
39:21
Speaker 1: weapons systems they could. Nobody had a superiority, so nobody
39:27
Speaker 1: could win the war. In the air, drones were becoming
39:30
Speaker 1: this big factor in the war. And what's happened since
39:34
Speaker 1: then is basically the equivalent of trench warfare, where armies
39:39
Speaker 1: move very very very very slowly. Russia has captured very
39:45
Speaker 1: little ground since that first initial invasion in twenty twenty two.
39:52
Speaker 1: It continues to push forward in the dawn bas the
39:55
Speaker 1: only place where they're really moving, but very little, and
40:02
Speaker 1: it's costing them unbelievable amounts of troops. We've talked about this.
40:08
Speaker 1: It looks like Puts his forces are something about forty
40:13
Speaker 1: thousand casualties a month over the last few months. These
40:20
Speaker 1: are unbelievable numbers, and he can't replace them. He can't
40:24
Speaker 1: recruit enough people in Russia to replace them. He's actually
40:26
Speaker 1: going as far as as Africa to try to recruit
40:30
Speaker 1: people to pay them to come and fight his war.
40:35
Speaker 1: The US had an opportunity, particularly early on, to provide
40:38
Speaker 1: Ukraine with the weapons systems they needed to kick the
40:40
Speaker 1: Russian out completely, and the US failed to do it.
40:45
Speaker 1: The Biden administration failed to do it. They were cowardly ooh,
40:50
Speaker 1: that would be that'll be an escalation. We don't escalate.
40:54
Speaker 1: How do you escalate, it's war. Of course you want
40:56
Speaker 1: to escalate. And of course Trump came in, and Trump
41:02
Speaker 1: since then has taken basically taken gone all in on
41:06
Speaker 1: taking Russia's side and denouncing Ukraine and of the opportunity
41:11
Speaker 1: and presenting it it as the villain. The Russian economy
41:19
Speaker 1: has become a war economy. Four years in the Russian
41:21
Speaker 1: economy and the Ukrainian economy both war economies. Ukraine has
41:26
Speaker 1: developed the capabilities and the skills to be maybe the
41:29
Speaker 1: world leader in the development of military grade drones. I
41:33
Speaker 1: don't think there's anybody in the world who makes them better, faster,
41:37
Speaker 1: as adaptable to the battlefield as Ukraine does. It has
41:42
Speaker 1: developed over the last four years the ability to produce
41:45
Speaker 1: ballistic missiles, which it didn't have before. We saw that
41:49
Speaker 1: ballistic missile that's taken out significant Russian assets deep into Russia,
41:57
Speaker 1: and Ukraine has developed a kind of a modern drone
42:05
Speaker 1: led military tactics and strategy that they're inventing on a
42:11
Speaker 1: day to day basis that the rest of the world
42:13
Speaker 1: is looking at and learning from. Russia's economy is completely
42:20
Speaker 1: war based, which means standard living is down, quality of
42:23
Speaker 1: life is down. GDP might be up because the government's
42:26
Speaker 1: spending money they don't have. Inflation is way up, interstates
42:30
Speaker 1: way up. Business other than in the extracting oil and
42:36
Speaker 1: extracting natural resources is devastated. Russia exposed more oil now
42:45
Speaker 1: than before the war, but at lower prices because it
42:49
Speaker 1: has to give discounts because of the sanctions to people
42:52
Speaker 1: who are buying it's oil. So Russia's economy is devastated. Ukraine,
42:57
Speaker 1: of course, economies completely viscerrated. It suffers from massive drone
43:04
Speaker 1: and missile attacks every single day. Something like thirteen percent
43:08
Speaker 1: of the entire housing stock in Ukraine as being destroyed,
43:13
Speaker 1: power plants destroyed, waded plants destroyed. Agriculture still functions somehow
43:21
Speaker 1: a bit. Much of the industry shifted to wall production
43:25
Speaker 1: or is being destroyed. Over the last year, support for
43:36
Speaker 1: Ukraine has shifted from heavy American support, although Europe bore
43:42
Speaker 1: the brunt of the support to almost all Europe, the
43:45
Speaker 1: United States is giving nothing, not a dollar, not a
43:49
Speaker 1: weapons system, nothing. Europeans are buying their weapons and giving
43:53
Speaker 1: them to Ukraine. Europe is right now trying to put
43:59
Speaker 1: this massive package of support for Ukraine. They try to
44:03
Speaker 1: have it ready one hundred and six billion dollars over
44:06
Speaker 1: time for Ukraine. They want to have this package ready
44:11
Speaker 1: for today, and it was blocked by Hungary. Remember the EU,
44:17
Speaker 1: everything is by everybody. Everybody has to vote for it.
44:21
Speaker 1: It's by unanimous appeal. An Aubonn of Hungary, the Trump
44:26
Speaker 1: Administration's favorite politician in the world, maybe except for Putin,
44:30
Speaker 1: blocked it. So how to tell exactly what's going to
44:35
Speaker 1: happen and how that gets unblocked? And how they aid
44:37
Speaker 1: actually makes it. I'm sure it will ultimately, but you know,
44:42
Speaker 1: it's it's complicated. Will know that today there were ceremonies
44:50
Speaker 1: commemorating the four years of war in Kiev in Ukraine.
45:00
Speaker 1: Not a single US administration representative was there. Nobody, Nobody
45:06
Speaker 1: representing the United States of America, Europeans, other countries around
45:11
Speaker 1: the world, not America. We do not stand with the
45:18
Speaker 1: people defending their freedom. We do not stand with the
45:20
Speaker 1: people defending their country from aggression. We do not stand
45:24
Speaker 1: with the people fighting for freedom for a system that is,
45:29
Speaker 1: you know, a liberal democracy, not bad. No, the Trump
45:34
Speaker 1: administration stands with the dictator. It stands with the aggressor.
45:39
Speaker 1: It stands with the authoritarian. It stands with the enemy,
45:48
Speaker 1: the enemy of what's the civilization, the enemy of America.
45:54
Speaker 1: Pretty disgusting. No, I don't think it's inappropriate have ceremonies,
46:00
Speaker 1: I mean semonies to respect the casualties that they've suffered,
46:05
Speaker 1: to commemorate this horrible event, the beginning of this horrible event.
46:09
Speaker 1: It's mainly kind of respect the people who have fallen
46:14
Speaker 1: in a recommitment to keep on fighting, to keep on fighting.
46:23
Speaker 1: Zelenski had a few choice words about Ouban blocking the support.
46:35
Speaker 1: As I've said the last few days, Ukraine is fighting
46:38
Speaker 1: back the last few weeks, and indeed, over the last
46:41
Speaker 1: three or four weeks they've liberated about four hundred square
46:44
Speaker 1: kilometers an additional hundred squa kilometers just in the last
46:48
Speaker 1: forty eight hours. So Ukraine is making small progress, nothing big,
46:55
Speaker 1: nothing major of small progress in trying to in trying
47:05
Speaker 1: to beat back the Russians. But without American support, America
47:08
Speaker 1: is giving them nothing. And this is this is really
47:12
Speaker 1: is a travesty, a massive injustice. And you know, renowns
47:19
Speaker 1: to the to the detriment of the United States. And
47:23
Speaker 1: I think a lot of Republican senators and congressmen know that,
47:28
Speaker 1: but they just won't stand up against Trump. They won't
47:31
Speaker 1: challenge Trump here again, Trump and the left agree that
47:37
Speaker 1: Russia are the good guys in this battle, all right.
47:42
Speaker 1: In the meantime, speculation abound about what's going to happen
47:45
Speaker 1: with Iran. Nobody knows. We had reports yesterday and today
47:51
Speaker 1: that the number one that the what is it, the
47:54
Speaker 1: head of the Joint Command, top general in the United States,
47:59
Speaker 1: has questions about an attack. He's worried about the US
48:03
Speaker 1: running out of AMMO and not being able to and
48:06
Speaker 1: end this being dragged out and becoming a regional war,
48:10
Speaker 1: and you know that this would be a disaster for
48:14
Speaker 1: the United States, and advising Donald Trump not to attack
48:18
Speaker 1: you on there's both the rumors that Trump wants to
48:25
Speaker 1: do something small just to kind of shake you on up.
48:30
Speaker 1: But then the advice is getting if they do something small,
48:32
Speaker 1: what if they retaliate big time? And then you're committing
48:34
Speaker 1: yourself into something much more major without really having it
48:37
Speaker 1: all planned out. And then you've got Jared Kushner and
48:42
Speaker 1: Steve Whitcoff who are going to meet with the Ranians
48:46
Speaker 1: later this week, and a lot of new stories are
48:48
Speaker 1: saying Trump's decision is going to be hinged on what
48:52
Speaker 1: Witcoff and Kushna tell him, and Cuff and Kushner want
48:56
Speaker 1: a deal, they don't want a war, and they've made
48:58
Speaker 1: it clear Whitcoff has financial interests at stake. Right, I'll
49:11
Speaker 1: just say this of the chat, America doesn't own Ukraine,
49:14
Speaker 1: and let's support That's true. America doesn't own Ukraine any support.
49:19
Speaker 1: America owes itself to support Ukraine. It doesn't, shouldn't do
49:23
Speaker 1: it for the Ukrainians. It should do it for itself.
49:27
Speaker 1: And why I think it's in America's rational long term
49:31
Speaker 1: self interest to arm the Ukrainians that they hilt to
49:35
Speaker 1: beat back the Russians. Check out my talks about the
49:39
Speaker 1: Ukraine Russian War. Why other than the Iran issue, this
49:43
Speaker 1: is the most important issue of the day. It's geopolitically
49:49
Speaker 1: crucial for American self interest and for the protection of
49:53
Speaker 1: American interests. And it will save us a huge amount
50:00
Speaker 1: of money and life and blood and weapons systems when
50:07
Speaker 1: we have to confront the Russians directly, so much better
50:10
Speaker 1: get it over with other people doing the fighting than
50:13
Speaker 1: having to engage in the fighting yourself. And the reality
50:17
Speaker 1: is that Donald Trump is not taking the United States
50:19
Speaker 1: out of NATO, and therefore, by treaty, we are committed
50:22
Speaker 1: to defending NATO countries. And if you think Putin is
50:27
Speaker 1: going to stop with Ukraine, you got to be kidding me.
50:31
Speaker 1: And it's the same with you on I don't believe
50:34
Speaker 1: the United States should be attacking you on in order
50:37
Speaker 1: to free the Iranian people. That would be great. Freeing
50:39
Speaker 1: the Iranian people is wonderful for the Ranian people, but
50:43
Speaker 1: we should not be sacrificing our treasure or lives for
50:46
Speaker 1: the sake of the Ranian people. However, it's in americans
50:50
Speaker 1: geopolitical self interest. It's part of protecting the life and
50:54
Speaker 1: property of Americans. That is necessary, essential, and it has
50:58
Speaker 1: been for forty years to take out the Ranian regime.
51:05
Speaker 1: We're not doing it for the Ranians, not doing it
51:07
Speaker 1: for the Ukrainians, dood for Americans. For the one job
51:09
Speaker 1: that America has, which is the protection of the individual
51:12
Speaker 1: rights of Americans, prevent bloodshed of Americans. Ukraine should be
51:19
Speaker 1: supported and Iran should be eliminated. And Trump is dithering,
51:29
Speaker 1: and he's letting military experts, including General Dan Kane, the
51:35
Speaker 1: Joint Chief of Staff Chairman, who is a by all
51:38
Speaker 1: accounts of competent in general but as always overestimating the
51:43
Speaker 1: strength of the enemy. They didn't learn anything for the
51:54
Speaker 1: Twelve Day War. They didn't learn anything from Israel's success.
52:01
Speaker 1: And they're dithering. And there's a good chance that the
52:04
Speaker 1: general and JD. Vance and Tulsi Gubbert supposedly within the administration,
52:10
Speaker 1: the two anti war people or JD Vance not surprising,
52:13
Speaker 1: Tulsi not surprising. An apologies for the Iranians forever. The
52:18
Speaker 1: two of them are the most adamantly anti war, and
52:23
Speaker 1: there's a chance that they convinced him. I don't know.
52:28
Speaker 1: I have no insight into what's happening, you know, beyond
52:36
Speaker 1: what I read in the media and my sources. But
52:40
Speaker 1: it looks like the generals against this, although Trump came
52:42
Speaker 1: out and said no, no, no, General Kane is not against
52:46
Speaker 1: the war. He you know, but go figure what's actually
52:50
Speaker 1: going on and what the reality actually is. I fear
52:55
Speaker 1: that they are all risk of us, and it could
52:56
Speaker 1: be that the general is saying I wouldn't be surprised
52:59
Speaker 1: if this was the case, in general saying, look, yeah,
53:01
Speaker 1: we could take the Ranians out quite easily, that won't
53:04
Speaker 1: be that hot. But do we really want to do
53:06
Speaker 1: it with Trump as a commander in chief. He's such
53:09
Speaker 1: a flake, He is so unpredictable, he is so emotional
53:16
Speaker 1: that maybe we shouldn't risk it with this guy as
53:19
Speaker 1: commander in chief. That is very possible. That could be
53:23
Speaker 1: what they're thinking. Anyway, we will see the meeting with
53:27
Speaker 1: witcough is I think on Thursday. You know, I'm not
53:37
Speaker 1: sure where the USS forward is. Let's see if we
53:41
Speaker 1: can find out. It's showing no sign that it is
53:53
Speaker 1: heading towards the Swiss Canal to cross into the Arabian
53:56
Speaker 1: c So it could very well be that it's just
54:02
Speaker 1: going to sit in the Western in the Eastern Mediterranean,
54:05
Speaker 1: off the coast of Israel and provide support for knocking
54:09
Speaker 1: down ballistic missiles and drones from there, rather than get
54:14
Speaker 1: closer to Iran and provide offensive firepower. So everything's in position.
54:22
Speaker 1: Trump could make the call at any time, at any date.
54:26
Speaker 1: And yeah, somebody says they've heard that the Ford is
54:32
Speaker 1: docking in Haifa. Well, it wouldn't dock in Haifa. It
54:35
Speaker 1: would dock off the coast of Haifa, and they'd use
54:37
Speaker 1: boats to let the Semen off. I wouldn't be surprised.
54:41
Speaker 1: The Semens sound like they need a break, they need
54:43
Speaker 1: to left us some steam before any war breaks out,
54:48
Speaker 1: and they might let them off in Haifer to do
54:51
Speaker 1: exactly that. But you know, we will see, we will
54:55
Speaker 1: see if Trump makes a decision, does he ever make
54:59
Speaker 1: a decision, and so on. It is interesting that you know,
55:06
Speaker 1: you know, this is a story in the Wall Seat
55:08
Speaker 1: Journal today weeks after Trump pardon Binan's founder. Binans was
55:12
Speaker 1: the crypto company, the company dismantled, the company dismantled probe
55:19
Speaker 1: and suspended UH. So there was a weeks after Trump
55:25
Speaker 1: pardoned the binanz found founder the UH. The UH. The
55:33
Speaker 1: people had been as fired staff who had flagged a
55:37
Speaker 1: one billion dollar move two Uranian sanctioned entity Iran entities
55:47
Speaker 1: that are sanctioned by the US. So they basically ended
55:51
Speaker 1: the incuovy in it, ended all the problems in it,
55:55
Speaker 1: and and let the money go. So again the people
56:00
Speaker 1: within Trump administration who are quite happy to see UH,
56:06
Speaker 1: to see Iran get that money and and and want
56:09
Speaker 1: to kind of deal ultimately with Ran. When when When
56:12
Speaker 1: when they want the business with the Iranians? I don't know.
56:22
Speaker 1: Here's another story. Now, I think a lot of these
56:25
Speaker 1: stories are just geared to trying to convince Trump not
56:28
Speaker 1: to engage in a war. But here's a story saying
56:30
Speaker 1: Israeli intelligence have concluded that even with the inminet arrival
56:33
Speaker 1: of USS Joe Ford, the US has has military capability
56:38
Speaker 1: capacity to sustain just a four or five day intense
56:42
Speaker 1: areal assault or week of lower intendencity strikes. Again, that
56:47
Speaker 1: seems strange to me. It's possible, but strange. Given that
56:50
Speaker 1: Israel managed to do twelve days without having aircraft carriers,
56:55
Speaker 1: without being in the vicinity of Iran. Israel has magnificantly
57:00
Speaker 1: more AMMO than the Americans. It doesn't have more planes
57:04
Speaker 1: that what America is brought into the region. So I
57:07
Speaker 1: don't know, and Israel doesn't. It B fifty twos a
57:10
Speaker 1: B two's very very tough to say, very tough to say.
57:21
Speaker 1: Another story says the amount of money transferred to Uranian
57:24
Speaker 1: entities was one point seven billion. That's a lot of
57:27
Speaker 1: money by bonnantz. All right, quickly, let's do these Uh
57:35
Speaker 1: we got three story, all right, let's do this quickly.
57:40
Speaker 1: A big chip deal happened today Meta An AMD AMD
57:46
Speaker 1: is a chip manufacturer, a chip designer. Meta is is
57:51
Speaker 1: of course Meta Facebook. They signed a deal too for
57:56
Speaker 1: AI chips. Am D is positioning itself as an number
58:00
Speaker 1: one competitor to Nvidia. This will be worth supposingly one
58:05
Speaker 1: hundred billion dollars. Meadow will probably land up owning about
58:10
Speaker 1: ten percent of AMD stock. And again, AMD has positioned
58:16
Speaker 1: itself to be a significant competitor to in Nvidia. Note
58:20
Speaker 1: that the government has put all its chips on Intel.
58:23
Speaker 1: Intel's not a player AMD is the player, and yet
58:27
Speaker 1: again the government is trying to pick winners and losers.
58:31
Speaker 1: Capital is flowing to Intel when it shouldn't be flowing
58:33
Speaker 1: to Intel. Intel's the loser here, but it won't lose
58:37
Speaker 1: because the government is supporting it in the meantime. Right now,
58:41
Speaker 1: note that AMD does not fabricate chips, It designs them.
58:48
Speaker 1: The chips are fabricated. The chips are fabricated by TSMC
58:53
Speaker 1: and Taiwan. And you know, we still have this situation
59:00
Speaker 1: and where ninety plus percent of all the high end
59:03
Speaker 1: chips that the United States uses, including for defense, are
59:08
Speaker 1: made in Taiwan, easily susceptible to Chinese assault, to a
59:14
Speaker 1: war with China. Apple is trying to remedy this, is
59:21
Speaker 1: working to remedy this. It's trying to push for chips,
59:27
Speaker 1: high end chips, the highest end chips to be designed,
59:30
Speaker 1: to be made fabricated in the United States. Indeed, right
59:35
Speaker 1: now in Phoenix, there is a stretch of land outside
59:39
Speaker 1: of Phoenix, about thirty minutes north of Phoenix, which is
59:42
Speaker 1: about the land is about two and a half times
59:45
Speaker 1: the size of Central Park in New York, a big
59:49
Speaker 1: piece of land. Right now, they're about thirty queens, and
59:53
Speaker 1: what they're doing is they're building a mammoth chip manufacturing
59:56
Speaker 1: facility where the hope is that TSMC, the Taiwanese company,
1:00:03
Speaker 1: will start building the highest, you know, most advanced chips.
1:00:12
Speaker 1: The reason TSMC is doing this is doing this partially
1:00:15
Speaker 1: they get a subsidy from the Biden era Chips Act.
1:00:21
Speaker 1: But maybe more importantly than that is that Apple has
1:00:24
Speaker 1: basically said Apple is TSMC's I think largest customer. Apple
1:00:31
Speaker 1: is basically said that it wants to buy the chips
1:00:33
Speaker 1: made in the American chip factory. My guess is they're
1:00:38
Speaker 1: willing to pay slightly higher price in order to get
1:00:41
Speaker 1: it in the United States. It's trying to I guess
1:00:49
Speaker 1: French shore on shore, it's supply chain and it is.
1:00:57
Speaker 1: It is planning to spend about six hundred billion dollars
1:01:03
Speaker 1: in the United States. Generally most of that going to
1:01:05
Speaker 1: be buying chips from manufacturers in the United States. TSMC
1:01:10
Speaker 1: is spending one hundred and sixty five billion to build
1:01:13
Speaker 1: six chip plants. Most of them are going to be
1:01:18
Speaker 1: in that Phoenix area. So chip manufacturing might be coming
1:01:22
Speaker 1: to the US. We will see. It's still we still
1:01:25
Speaker 1: got a long way to go. They still not only
1:01:27
Speaker 1: have to build the plants, they have to have the power,
1:01:30
Speaker 1: they have to have the water. This is Phoenix after all.
1:01:33
Speaker 1: They then have to have the employees, and it's going
1:01:36
Speaker 1: to be difficult to bring in employees from South Korea.
1:01:38
Speaker 1: We've learned that they're gonna have to find local employees
1:01:42
Speaker 1: who are qualified, who are trained to do this. And
1:01:47
Speaker 1: then it's going to I think customers will not be
1:01:49
Speaker 1: a problem because I think, you know, the Defense Department
1:01:53
Speaker 1: is motivated to buy these ships. Apple is motivated to
1:01:55
Speaker 1: buy these ships, so it is it is going to
1:01:59
Speaker 1: be is going to be interesting. Apple is also announced
1:02:02
Speaker 1: that it's expanding its Houston operations with a plan to
1:02:06
Speaker 1: assemble the Macmini in Houston. Now, in the past, in
1:02:16
Speaker 1: the past, when Apple has tried to build computers in
1:02:20
Speaker 1: the US, it's flopped and being a disaster, all right,
1:02:36
Speaker 1: just quickly, you know, there's this phenomena of prediction markets,
1:02:43
Speaker 1: people betting and different outcomes on prediction markets that are
1:02:46
Speaker 1: now legal and these now companies. You know, we have
1:02:52
Speaker 1: we have two companies that dominate the space right now,
1:02:55
Speaker 1: Kashi and poly Market. They are both they both raised
1:03:02
Speaker 1: a huge amount of money, and they're basically trading in predictions.
1:03:09
Speaker 1: Any prediction you want. Somebody wants to start a prediction
1:03:12
Speaker 1: about whether power or lower interest rates or not, there's
1:03:17
Speaker 1: a market to be made, or when you know if
1:03:22
Speaker 1: Trump will be impeached, or if Democrats will win the House,
1:03:26
Speaker 1: or who win the next basketball game, or who win
1:03:29
Speaker 1: the NBA finals, whose teams are going to be there.
1:03:33
Speaker 1: All of that you know from economic predictions about what
1:03:37
Speaker 1: the trade deficit will be, what the inflation number will
1:03:40
Speaker 1: come in, as what all of these things will be,
1:03:42
Speaker 1: to political predictions, to cultural predictions, there's a market in
1:03:47
Speaker 1: all of those people love to bet. And of course
1:03:52
Speaker 1: people like prediction markets because people are putting their money
1:03:55
Speaker 1: where their mouth is, so it's not just like a poll.
1:03:59
Speaker 1: This is what people are willing to bet. And the
1:04:01
Speaker 1: assumption is that the more you know, the more you
1:04:05
Speaker 1: have inside information, the more you'll be willing to put
1:04:11
Speaker 1: into the prediction. And therefore the prediction market is a
1:04:15
Speaker 1: well informed the market because it allows the inside the trading.
1:04:21
Speaker 1: Interesting that there seems to be an understanding of the
1:04:24
Speaker 1: value of insider trading when it comes to prediction markets,
1:04:26
Speaker 1: but not an understanding of insider trading when it comes
1:04:30
Speaker 1: to the stock market anyway, big financial institutions are getting
1:04:40
Speaker 1: involvedt es Quahana Capital, the largest options trading company in
1:04:43
Speaker 1: the world, has a new trading desk that places bets
1:04:47
Speaker 1: on events like from what bitcoin is going to be
1:04:51
Speaker 1: to Taylor swifts, how many people are going to attend
1:04:54
Speaker 1: the concert. You've got Wall Street companies testing and participating,
1:05:02
Speaker 1: and this has become this has become really really big business.
1:05:07
Speaker 1: I haven't seen any studies. I'm sure they have been,
1:05:09
Speaker 1: but it'll be interesting to see the studies that look
1:05:12
Speaker 1: at the efficaciousness of these prediction markets. One assumes that
1:05:16
Speaker 1: they're doing quite well in terms of actual accuracy of prediction.
1:05:19
Speaker 1: That's why people keep looking at them, participating in them,
1:05:23
Speaker 1: and quoting them. The volume of trade, the amount of
1:05:28
Speaker 1: money circulating has grown exponentially just in the just in
1:05:34
Speaker 1: the last few months. I mean, this is new. This
1:05:36
Speaker 1: really started in twenty twenty four and really has only
1:05:39
Speaker 1: picked up since in the middle of twenty twenty five,
1:05:41
Speaker 1: but is now, you know, way up there. Again. The
1:05:48
Speaker 1: two main markets are cull sheet and polymarket. So interesting
1:05:55
Speaker 1: something to watch. Uh and again raised a lot of money.
1:06:02
Speaker 1: They raised a lot of money just recently, just recently, right,
1:06:08
Speaker 1: I think three point seven billion went to those two
1:06:11
Speaker 1: companies just recently. All right, Finally, I've told you that
1:06:17
Speaker 1: there's warfare fraud everywhere, not just in Minneapolis, not just
1:06:21
Speaker 1: amongst them all these here's one, you know, I pick
1:06:25
Speaker 1: up these stories once in a while, and I think
1:06:27
Speaker 1: that this is worth reporting. The former head of a
1:06:31
Speaker 1: San Francisco homeless nonprofit, Homelessness nonprofit, San Francisco Homelessness. Surprise, surprise,
1:06:38
Speaker 1: they throw the money at it, nothing happens. That's because
1:06:42
Speaker 1: the money doesn't get to where's supposed to go. In
1:06:46
Speaker 1: this case, she's been charged with nine felonies. She admitted
1:06:54
Speaker 1: that she has hired, she hired her friends and family hired.
1:07:00
Speaker 1: She's actually placed friends and family into housing that was
1:07:04
Speaker 1: supposed to go to the homeless people. But there is
1:07:10
Speaker 1: a ton of this, just a ton, particularly, i'd say,
1:07:14
Speaker 1: in San Francisco among the homeless. Because so much money's
1:07:17
Speaker 1: been thrown it, you can tell where there's fraud. Anywhere
1:07:21
Speaker 1: the government is writing big checks to nonprofits to do
1:07:26
Speaker 1: what the government claims it's good to do, there's massive fraud.
1:07:31
Speaker 1: There's just no way that that is not fraudulent. There's
1:07:36
Speaker 1: massive fraud going on in the background. So no, we
1:07:45
Speaker 1: will you know, we will see how this all plays out.
1:07:48
Speaker 1: But you'll see more and more and more and more stories.
1:07:51
Speaker 1: And of course we know that the COVID COVID was
1:07:54
Speaker 1: was just just the COVID bailouts and the COVID checks
1:07:58
Speaker 1: and the COVID all the COVID programs were just climbed
1:08:04
Speaker 1: for faudulent activity. All right, that is the news for
1:08:11
Speaker 1: this Tuesday, February twenty fourth. All right, let's take a
1:08:16
Speaker 1: look at we'll move the super chat in a minute,
1:08:19
Speaker 1: but let me remind you one that I'm doing a
1:08:21
Speaker 1: seminar in London on Saturday, this coming Saturday, just a
1:08:25
Speaker 1: few more days. You don't have a lot of time
1:08:27
Speaker 1: to register. Please register. I have a room, I have
1:08:31
Speaker 1: more seats available, and I booked a slightly larger room.
1:08:36
Speaker 1: But it's going to be a small group. It's gonna
1:08:38
Speaker 1: be less than ten people. But it'd be great if
1:08:41
Speaker 1: we got another two, three, four people. That would just
1:08:44
Speaker 1: improve the dynamics of the whole experience. It'll be a
1:08:48
Speaker 1: lot of fun. We're talking about capitalism and it's against
1:08:54
Speaker 1: small group. Lots of time for questions, lots of time
1:08:56
Speaker 1: for back and forth. So join us in London if
1:09:01
Speaker 1: you're in the UK, take the train, come on in.
1:09:03
Speaker 1: It's Friday from one to five. You can find information
1:09:07
Speaker 1: about it on my website. You run brookshow dot com.
1:09:12
Speaker 1: You run brookshow dot com. Scroll down to the events
1:09:15
Speaker 1: section and then go to the London February twenty eight
1:09:19
Speaker 1: click on tickets and you can register. I'm hoping there
1:09:24
Speaker 1: are a few people out there listening right now. You
1:09:27
Speaker 1: know who you are in London who sign up and
1:09:33
Speaker 1: join us for the program? All right? At that Man
1:09:38
Speaker 1: Institute is holding their European conference this year in Porto
1:09:42
Speaker 1: Porto in Portugal, a wonderful city, so you guys can
1:09:47
Speaker 1: still sign up for it. It's in April mid April
1:09:49
Speaker 1: April weekend of April eighteenth. I'll be there on car
1:09:53
Speaker 1: and talk. It's funny. Well, I'll be speaking there. And
1:09:58
Speaker 1: if you're under thirty four you can apply for a
1:09:59
Speaker 1: score ship the And if you're not under thirty four
1:10:07
Speaker 1: or if you're not gonna apply for scholarship, you can
1:10:10
Speaker 1: get a discount ten percent discount. The discount code is
1:10:14
Speaker 1: twenty six YBS ten. Check it out. Iinran dot oag
1:10:18
Speaker 1: slash start here. Iinran dot oag slash start here right.
1:10:24
Speaker 1: And it's a really nice city, it's a really nice venue.
1:10:29
Speaker 1: It's going to be a great conference. Don't miss out.
1:10:31
Speaker 1: If you're in Europe, come on over. Even if you're
1:10:33
Speaker 1: in the East Coast in the US, it's not that
1:10:36
Speaker 1: long of a flight. Come on over. If you're in
1:10:38
Speaker 1: the UK, you should come on over. Alex Epstein is
1:10:45
Speaker 1: the number one leading authority on energy, electricity, fossil fuels, environmentalism,
1:10:51
Speaker 1: climate change. He has an amazing substack talking points by Alex.
1:10:57
Speaker 1: You'll learn so much about these industries. You'll learn how
1:11:00
Speaker 1: to talk about it. You'll learn facts that will defeat
1:11:04
Speaker 1: your opponents in any kind of debate. So check him out.
1:11:10
Speaker 1: Alex Epstein Epstein dot substick dot com, Alex Epstein dot
1:11:13
Speaker 1: substick dot com, hander shot Wealth dot com, slash ybs
1:11:20
Speaker 1: hander Shot Wealth the money managers that have a product
1:11:24
Speaker 1: that can save you a lot of money on on
1:11:28
Speaker 1: your capital gains tax liability. Capital gains tax liability. So
1:11:33
Speaker 1: check that out. You can find my interview with Robert Handershot.
1:11:37
Speaker 1: So if you've got stock that's appreciated, or you're going
1:11:40
Speaker 1: to sell a company, it has to be like seven
1:11:42
Speaker 1: figure uh profits where you're gonna pay six figure taxes.
1:11:49
Speaker 1: And so check out check out the interview I did
1:11:52
Speaker 1: with Robert it's on my YouTube channel and the playlists
1:11:56
Speaker 1: for sponsors. And check out the website hand ashot dot
1:12:01
Speaker 1: com and show wealth dot com to tease dot undershot
1:12:06
Speaker 1: wealth dot com, slash ybs. And then finally, Defenders of Capitalism.
1:12:11
Speaker 1: Definders of Capitalism is the program dot com Definders of
1:12:13
Speaker 1: Capitalism dot com. Check out the website, really nice website,
1:12:16
Speaker 1: lots of information there. It's a program to defend capitalism politically,
1:12:20
Speaker 1: economically and morally philosophically. Uh and uh it's it's the
1:12:26
Speaker 1: best program out there in the world defending capitalism. And
1:12:30
Speaker 1: check it out see if yeah, if it's applicable, if
1:12:33
Speaker 1: it's something you would like to bring into your company,
1:12:35
Speaker 1: you your group, and and and whether there's something of
1:12:38
Speaker 1: interest to you. Check out Defenders of Capitalism dot com.
1:12:41
Speaker 1: This is Michael Williams's project which I have worked on
1:12:46
Speaker 1: with him, and finally I haven't yet done it. Please
1:12:52
Speaker 1: become a monthly supportive view on book show. The monthly
1:12:55
Speaker 1: contributions are really valuable because I know exactly what's coming
1:12:59
Speaker 1: every month. You can do that on PayPal or on
1:13:02
Speaker 1: Patreon patreon dot com, just putting in your on book show.
1:13:06
Speaker 1: And you can do it at two dollars, ten dollars,
1:13:09
Speaker 1: five hundred dollars, one thousand dollars. The more the better,
1:13:11
Speaker 1: of course. But whatever you value the show at and
1:13:14
Speaker 1: whatever your financial abilities dictate, please consider supporting your on
1:13:19
Speaker 1: book show with the contribution. And yeah, I think I
1:13:26
Speaker 1: think that's my announcements. And now let's jump into the questions.
1:13:29
Speaker 1: I have a hard stop at some point. Let me
1:13:34
Speaker 1: also thank some of the stick up people. A lot
1:13:37
Speaker 1: of stickers up there. There we go, Greg, thank you,
1:13:42
Speaker 1: and Nick Enrich and Jackson, thank you, guys. Really appreciate
1:13:50
Speaker 1: the support. We got a bunch of fifty dollars questions,
1:13:53
Speaker 1: mostly by Dave. Thank you Dave, and and but not
1:13:56
Speaker 1: only by Dave, so thank you Dave. It's still with
1:14:00
Speaker 1: Remo sixty euro Thank you. Remo. Remo says thoughts on
1:14:05
Speaker 1: American right trying to hijack their US Ice Hockey gold medal.
1:14:09
Speaker 1: Why do so many Americans have to turn such a
1:14:13
Speaker 1: great victory into politics. Well, because you know, sports is
1:14:17
Speaker 1: often politicized. Look, it used to be that, you know,
1:14:21
Speaker 1: it was the US versus the USSR, and that was
1:14:24
Speaker 1: a huge thing, and that was politicized because they were
1:14:27
Speaker 1: good guys, and bad guys used to is always objectively bad.
1:14:32
Speaker 1: So the victory of the good over the bad was politicized,
1:14:34
Speaker 1: and that's good. However, in the Trump era, the bad
1:14:39
Speaker 1: guys happened to be the Canadians. Why are they the
1:14:42
Speaker 1: bad guys, I don't know, because Trump decided at some
1:14:45
Speaker 1: point piss them off. So the rivalry got a political
1:14:51
Speaker 1: tinge to it because of Trump, for no other reason,
1:14:58
Speaker 1: and so Canada was fill in for the USSR in
1:15:01
Speaker 1: this hockey game, and it played out like the famous
1:15:06
Speaker 1: game but in nineteen eighty between the US and the USSL,
1:15:09
Speaker 1: where the US won, and it played out very similar
1:15:12
Speaker 1: to it. The idea that the American right considers Canada
1:15:17
Speaker 1: the enemy is ludicrous and insane. But this is where
1:15:23
Speaker 1: the right is nationalism up the kazoo, and it's it's
1:15:28
Speaker 1: you know, on steroids, and it's a disgusting, horrible form
1:15:32
Speaker 1: of nationalism because it doesn't differentiate between truly evil countries
1:15:40
Speaker 1: and good countries, doesn't differentiate between friends, allies, and enemies. Indeed,
1:15:47
Speaker 1: Trump is much much, much, much much much closer to
1:15:52
Speaker 1: America's enemies than to America's allies and friends. So large
1:15:58
Speaker 1: extent should tell you everything you need to know about
1:16:00
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. Dave, thank you, Dave. Dave says put them hypothesis.
1:16:07
Speaker 1: Do you believe high functioning integrators are irrational for exchanging
1:16:13
Speaker 1: value for value with disintegrated, misintegrated minds. I mean no,
1:16:24
Speaker 1: I mean, look, I'm not exactly sure what you mean here,
1:16:29
Speaker 1: but the reality is that people of ability, in this case,
1:16:35
Speaker 1: the ability to integrate, you know, have not yet given
1:16:39
Speaker 1: up on this world and have not said it's time
1:16:43
Speaker 1: to go on strike. I mean, this is that alas
1:16:45
Speaker 1: shrug question. And as long as you're still engaged with
1:16:49
Speaker 1: this world, the only way to be engaged in this
1:16:52
Speaker 1: world is by engaging in win win value adding transactions. Trade.
1:17:01
Speaker 1: And yes, that means some of the bad guys win
1:17:03
Speaker 1: as a consequence, and you should minimize helping your explicit enemies,
1:17:10
Speaker 1: like don't give money to your alma mater, don't trade,
1:17:16
Speaker 1: be careful how you trade with universities in political parties.
1:17:22
Speaker 1: But other than that, it's just life. Acquires trade, life
1:17:26
Speaker 1: acquires production. Unless you're ready and willing to go on strike,
1:17:32
Speaker 1: I don't see what the option is. I don't see
1:17:34
Speaker 1: what the option is. Let me take Dave's three questions
1:17:42
Speaker 1: and then offer fifty dollars. Thank you, Dave. Do you
1:17:45
Speaker 1: believe that AI will be capable of auto judging the
1:17:48
Speaker 1: decisions made by public servants, politicians, or legal practitioners in general. Well,
1:17:54
Speaker 1: I mean I think that some legal decisions they'll be
1:17:57
Speaker 1: able to make. The ones that are basically explicitly clearly
1:18:04
Speaker 1: rules based, that you can go from the A to
1:18:09
Speaker 1: B to C and there's no judgment to be made.
1:18:14
Speaker 1: The judgment is just the sequence following the rules. Where
1:18:20
Speaker 1: AI cannot function is where the rules are are set
1:18:24
Speaker 1: in place where you have to make judgments about the rules,
1:18:30
Speaker 1: or where the rules ambiguous, oh, where the steps ambiguous.
1:18:34
Speaker 1: AI cannot deal with ambiguity. So I think that I
1:18:44
Speaker 1: think that, Remember, AI is not conscious, it's not reasoning.
1:18:49
Speaker 1: It's doing some kind of statistical manipulation and analysis, corellation
1:18:54
Speaker 1: and you know, running regressions basically kind of. And so
1:19:01
Speaker 1: it's amazing how well it works. It's amazing what it
1:19:04
Speaker 1: can do. But it can fill out forms, but it
1:19:08
Speaker 1: can't make real what we consider judgments, choices, decisions, And
1:19:14
Speaker 1: in that sense, no, it can't replace politicians. It can
1:19:17
Speaker 1: certainly replace an IRS agent, It can replace your accountant
1:19:22
Speaker 1: in many cases, but it can't replace the kind of political, philosophical,
1:19:29
Speaker 1: principled ideas about government and how that government should function.
1:19:37
Speaker 1: So it can't make legal values estimates. It can't do
1:19:42
Speaker 1: value estimates. It can only follow the rules. Only follow
1:19:48
Speaker 1: the rules. Davis asks, whoops, in your opinion, what does
1:19:55
Speaker 1: a selfish America look like in the context of global enterprise?
1:20:02
Speaker 1: I mean, a selfish America is an America that is
1:20:08
Speaker 1: completely open to trade. It has zero tariffs. It's a
1:20:13
Speaker 1: country that refuses to trade with its explicit enemies, but
1:20:18
Speaker 1: trades with everybody else with no barriers. Again, unilateral, zero
1:20:28
Speaker 1: tariffs America. A selfish America identifies its enemies, figures out
1:20:36
Speaker 1: the costs of dealing with them, whether it's better to
1:20:39
Speaker 1: deal with them through military confrontation, or whether it's better
1:20:43
Speaker 1: to deal with them through political and economic isolation, and
1:20:48
Speaker 1: deals with them honestly and up front. So, for example,
1:20:53
Speaker 1: Russia is not an enemy you want military confrontation with
1:20:56
Speaker 1: because of nuke's This is why it's good to let
1:20:59
Speaker 1: the Ukrainians do the fighting for you. Iran, on the
1:21:03
Speaker 1: other hand, doesn't have nukes yet, so it's much easier
1:21:07
Speaker 1: just to eliminate the regime, and you should do that.
1:21:11
Speaker 1: North Korea is tricky because they have nukes, so it's
1:21:15
Speaker 1: much better to isolate and build up a capability to
1:21:21
Speaker 1: destroy their nukes in case that was needed. So America
1:21:29
Speaker 1: needs to pursue its own interest in that sense, a
1:21:32
Speaker 1: true America first feign policy needs to be embraced, and
1:21:36
Speaker 1: that means you trade with everybody except your enemies at
1:21:41
Speaker 1: zero tariffs, and you establish a League of friend of
1:21:49
Speaker 1: free nations. You leave the United Nations, you stop funding
1:21:54
Speaker 1: the United Nations and all its various spinoffs, and you
1:22:00
Speaker 1: basically focus on what is truly long term, rationally in
1:22:06
Speaker 1: American self interest, and mostly that doesn't involve doing much
1:22:10
Speaker 1: protecting the shipping lanes, destroying a few enemies, and hunkering
1:22:15
Speaker 1: home and let trade rip. Yeah, all right, not to average,
1:22:26
Speaker 1: I'll go with them. Most of fifty dollars, Thank you, guys,
1:22:28
Speaker 1: lots of fifty dollars questions today. I really appreciate it.
1:22:31
Speaker 1: My parents never taught me reality is objective and noble
1:22:35
Speaker 1: through reason, or that I should pursue happiness. They taught
1:22:39
Speaker 1: me the exact opposite. Should I sever any contact with
1:22:43
Speaker 1: them trying to destroy my psychostomology at such a vulnerable age, Well,
1:22:49
Speaker 1: I don't think so, right, I mean, they didn't know
1:22:52
Speaker 1: any better. I mean whose parents actually taught them reason
1:22:57
Speaker 1: and a pursuit of happiness? Almost none. So you have
1:23:05
Speaker 1: to make the estimate of you know, they brought you
1:23:09
Speaker 1: into the world. You owe them something for that. You
1:23:12
Speaker 1: know your life is good, did overall they treat you bad?
1:23:16
Speaker 1: Even if they tried to destroy your psychostomology, they didn't
1:23:19
Speaker 1: do it on purpose. They didn't know that what they
1:23:21
Speaker 1: were doing unless you think they're vicious. If you think
1:23:23
Speaker 1: they're vicious, and yeah, cut them off. And then you
1:23:26
Speaker 1: have to think what kind of what kind of relationship
1:23:34
Speaker 1: do you want with them? What kind of relationship is
1:23:38
Speaker 1: a value to you? And it might be very minimal
1:23:43
Speaker 1: because you have very little in common with them, it
1:23:45
Speaker 1: might be more than very minimal. You have to make
1:23:49
Speaker 1: up the decision. But I wouldn't penalize them for something
1:23:54
Speaker 1: almost everybody does, and that they do it mostly innocently. Again,
1:24:07
Speaker 1: unless you know that they knew better and they did
1:24:09
Speaker 1: it viciously in order to cripple you. I doubt that
1:24:12
Speaker 1: that's the case, all right, Jamie from Canada leftist joke
1:24:19
Speaker 1: Ironrand Ron Paul and Rand Paul walk into a bar,
1:24:22
Speaker 1: they die from tainted alcohol due to zero regulation. Does
1:24:27
Speaker 1: state quality control inspections prevent accidental death in food that
1:24:33
Speaker 1: female kid can miss. Maybe, but it's very unlikely. It's
1:24:42
Speaker 1: very unlikely because the reality is that the best incentive
1:24:48
Speaker 1: to prevent to prevent accidental death from food is the
1:24:54
Speaker 1: risk of somebody will die from the food and sue
1:24:58
Speaker 1: you and drive you out of business. The reality is
1:25:05
Speaker 1: that there are so many ways in which the market
1:25:09
Speaker 1: can provide a better regulatory product than the government. So,
1:25:18
Speaker 1: for example, even today, supermarkets go to farms and make
1:25:24
Speaker 1: sure that the stuff they're buying from the farms is
1:25:29
Speaker 1: you know, clean and and not you know, doesn't have
1:25:35
Speaker 1: whatever E cola or whatever. And farmers generally, I'm much
1:25:39
Speaker 1: more worried about the supermarket inspectors than they are about
1:25:43
Speaker 1: the FDA inspectors, because the ft inspector has nothing to
1:25:47
Speaker 1: lose if he gets it wrong. The supermarket has a
1:25:50
Speaker 1: huge amount to lose if it gets it wrong. So
1:25:55
Speaker 1: the idea that if there was no government inspection, there
1:25:59
Speaker 1: would be no inspection, that if there was no government regulation,
1:26:02
Speaker 1: there would be no regulation, it's ridiculous. I generally think
1:26:09
Speaker 1: that food and products and workplaces would be far far
1:26:16
Speaker 1: safer without government regulations, would be far far safer in
1:26:24
Speaker 1: a truly free market. Imagine if YELP or Open Table
1:26:30
Speaker 1: or Rezi, any one of these places that recommend restaurants
1:26:35
Speaker 1: had their own food inspectors and gave restaurants, you know,
1:26:40
Speaker 1: grades based on their inspection, and they would list restaurants
1:26:46
Speaker 1: that don't allow their inspectors in and use a consumer
1:26:49
Speaker 1: would decide whether you want to go there or not.
1:26:53
Speaker 1: I mean, there's so many ways in which the market
1:26:55
Speaker 1: could solve this problem a thousand times better than the
1:26:59
Speaker 1: government can. Think about the incentive of a government FDA
1:27:03
Speaker 1: inspector going to a farm, or to a supermarket or
1:27:06
Speaker 1: to a restaurant, not much, James. One of the reasons
1:27:12
Speaker 1: that No Not Sea Party were successful was they were
1:27:18
Speaker 1: able to convince the public they were the only party
1:27:22
Speaker 1: strong enough to stop the Left. The same tactic MAGA
1:27:26
Speaker 1: is using will it work well, Not if what the
1:27:30
Speaker 1: public experiences from MAGA from Trump is so horrible that
1:27:34
Speaker 1: they're willing to risk taking on the left again. But yes,
1:27:39
Speaker 1: I mean, the two political parties today have nothing really
1:27:41
Speaker 1: to offer the voters other than we're not the other guys.
1:27:48
Speaker 1: We're not the crazy trump Ists or we're not the
1:27:51
Speaker 1: crazy leftists. Neither one has a positive, life enhancing agenda.
1:28:02
Speaker 1: All they can pitch is negativity. All they can pitches
1:28:05
Speaker 1: were not the other guy, James. The Republican Party has
1:28:13
Speaker 1: a Nazi problem, a Nazi problem, right. The GOP has
1:28:18
Speaker 1: become a haven for slogans and ideas straight out of
1:28:21
Speaker 1: the Third Way. Yeah, I mean it's still the fringes,
1:28:25
Speaker 1: it's among young Republicans, but it's definitely there, and they've
1:28:28
Speaker 1: got a real problem. And the consequence of that might
1:28:31
Speaker 1: be hopefully that they lose big time in the elections.
1:28:38
Speaker 1: But what happens long term. Somebody has to come up
1:28:42
Speaker 1: with a positive agenda or create a third party or
1:28:47
Speaker 1: some alternative to the crazies on the left and the
1:28:50
Speaker 1: crazies on the right. It ain't happening yet, and I
1:28:53
Speaker 1: don't see who is going to put it together. But
1:28:58
Speaker 1: it needs to happen lea two part question. When I
1:29:08
Speaker 1: went to England, I tried to convince people that the
1:29:10
Speaker 1: NHS seems to be completely private, needs to be completely privatized.
1:29:15
Speaker 1: From the reaction is received, I thought I may get lynched.
1:29:23
Speaker 1: Brits are religiously committed to communist healthcare system that kills them.
1:29:29
Speaker 1: It may take a few hundred years for Europe to
1:29:31
Speaker 1: become objectivist. American could probably do it in one hundred.
1:29:35
Speaker 1: You know who knows it's how to tell. These things
1:29:37
Speaker 1: can change very quickly, and different countries can change quite
1:29:41
Speaker 1: a bit. But there's no question that in Great Britain
1:29:44
Speaker 1: the NHS is religion. It is. I said this publicly,
1:29:48
Speaker 1: I've said it in the UK. I've of course debated
1:29:51
Speaker 1: this question of the NHS, and it is religion. They
1:29:55
Speaker 1: won't even consider. Yeah, you're at risk of being lynched
1:30:00
Speaker 1: if you argue against the NHS. And it's completely irrational,
1:30:06
Speaker 1: it's completely emotional, and it's completely devoid of any factual information.
1:30:10
Speaker 1: And when you try to bring facts, they stuff there
1:30:14
Speaker 1: is They don't want to listen. Shasbut if Iran is defeated,
1:30:21
Speaker 1: should it be renamed Persia? I don't know. The Iranians
1:30:28
Speaker 1: will get to decide that, the people locally there will
1:30:31
Speaker 1: get to decide how the rest of the world should
1:30:33
Speaker 1: call them Persians or Iranians. I don't know. I don't
1:30:36
Speaker 1: really know the history of the term iran where it
1:30:41
Speaker 1: actually came from. All right, Jamie, I guess a two
1:30:53
Speaker 1: part question follow up question from the other day. In
1:30:56
Speaker 1: your wage productivity video, you show graph where i'll compensation
1:31:00
Speaker 1: line excludes CEOs, but productivity line doesn't. If CEO wage
1:31:06
Speaker 1: was included, wage line would rise, and presumably if CEO
1:31:10
Speaker 1: productivity was excluded, that line would fall. So how can CEO,
1:31:14
Speaker 1: productivity in CEO and worker be represented on the same line.
1:31:18
Speaker 1: If one's tangible, one's not. Well, I did not say CEO.
1:31:23
Speaker 1: What I said was all managerial is excluded, and you
1:31:30
Speaker 1: can on the productivity line you can look at total
1:31:36
Speaker 1: fact total productivity. You just can't separate it out in
1:31:41
Speaker 1: terms of work and CEO. But on the income line
1:31:43
Speaker 1: you can separate it out. So all you need to
1:31:48
Speaker 1: do is include in that income not just CEOs programmers.
1:31:53
Speaker 1: I mean that was blue collar. I can't remember the
1:31:58
Speaker 1: exact specification, but it didn't include the high productive jobs
1:32:03
Speaker 1: over the last twenty years, you know, and the number
1:32:07
Speaker 1: of jobs in the line of wages shrunk during the
1:32:11
Speaker 1: period while those people left and got more productive jobs
1:32:16
Speaker 1: or the kids did in technology for example. So tech
1:32:20
Speaker 1: jobs are not included there. So it's not the CEO,
1:32:25
Speaker 1: it's everybody. It's everybody other than the kind of hourly
1:32:31
Speaker 1: worker blue collar worker. But you still you can count
1:32:38
Speaker 1: the CEO in the productivity number. What you can do
1:32:41
Speaker 1: is separate out, I think explicitly what share of the
1:32:46
Speaker 1: increased productivity is attributable to the CEO. That's I think
1:32:51
Speaker 1: what I was arguing the other day. Thomas says, I
1:32:55
Speaker 1: share your antipathy for the Uranian regime. However, two things. One,
1:32:58
Speaker 1: I don't trust Trump to conduc any military action honestly
1:33:01
Speaker 1: and competently. He is utterly unqualified to be commander in chief. Yeah,
1:33:06
Speaker 1: I agree. I one hundred percent believe that it is
1:33:10
Speaker 1: foundational principle of the Republic that the president cannot make
1:33:14
Speaker 1: war merely at his pleasure. Congressional approval is quiet. I
1:33:17
Speaker 1: agree with that as well, and he should take it
1:33:19
Speaker 1: to Congress, get a resolution approved, and do it. Luckily,
1:33:23
Speaker 1: I don't think that Trump himself actually would manage the war,
1:33:27
Speaker 1: and his generals are quite competent, and maybe if he
1:33:30
Speaker 1: includes these rallies, these rallies will take care of business
1:33:33
Speaker 1: no matter what the Americans do. So yes, he absolutely
1:33:37
Speaker 1: has to take this to Congress, get congressional approval. And
1:33:41
Speaker 1: then I'd rather see a war than not even with Trump,
1:33:47
Speaker 1: because he's going to screw up the non war and
1:33:52
Speaker 1: that might be a biggert screw up than screwing up
1:33:55
Speaker 1: the war itself. But yes, there should be a congressional
1:34:00
Speaker 1: declaration of war. Hasn't happened in a long time, needs
1:34:04
Speaker 1: to happen. James, how was the Enlightenment able to beat
1:34:09
Speaker 1: Nazism communism despite all its flaws and incompetence in completeness
1:34:15
Speaker 1: because it fundamentally leaves the human mind free to innovate, produce,
1:34:20
Speaker 1: and fight for its freedom. Freedom or beat authoritarianism every
1:34:25
Speaker 1: single time because the mind requires freedom in order to produce,
1:34:30
Speaker 1: particularly at the high level required to innovate in wartime.
1:34:35
Speaker 1: So it doesn't suffice me at all. Enlightenment, with all
1:34:38
Speaker 1: its flaws, can beat something as flawed and disastrous as
1:34:43
Speaker 1: Nazism and communism. The question should be how did the
1:34:46
Speaker 1: Nazism and Communism even get any success against Enlightenment values.
1:34:54
Speaker 1: That's the question that should be asked, not you HAVEVVIS algorithm. Well,
1:35:00
Speaker 1: Israel has high taxes and socialist healthcare. I heard Israel
1:35:04
Speaker 1: has less of a welfare state because they need people
1:35:07
Speaker 1: independent and working to sustain the countries surrounded by enemies.
1:35:13
Speaker 1: Is that a joke. I'm laughing aloud, which is pretty rare,
1:35:18
Speaker 1: because that's that's funny and not not. I'm not laughing
1:35:22
Speaker 1: at you. I'm laughing at the statement. Absolutely not. Israel
1:35:25
Speaker 1: has a robust, large welfare state and it's had it
1:35:32
Speaker 1: since it's founding. And you know, Isel used to be socialist.
1:35:37
Speaker 1: You know, the unions in Israel used to be all
1:35:40
Speaker 1: powerful and they used to actually own the means of production.
1:35:43
Speaker 1: The unions owned the factories. So no, Israel has a
1:35:48
Speaker 1: very robust welfare state. And it's it's it's less robust
1:35:53
Speaker 1: than it used to be. It's being trimmed a little bit.
1:35:56
Speaker 1: But but yeah, there's definitely a welfare state in Israel.
1:35:59
Speaker 1: I wish it didn't. Roman Prediction markets are information trading.
1:36:05
Speaker 1: The more they mature, the more inside information will enter
1:36:08
Speaker 1: the public space and improve decision making, Yes, but stock
1:36:12
Speaker 1: market's information trading too, So why won't we allow inside
1:36:16
Speaker 1: information there? There's no difference, Dave, Thank you, Dave. Should
1:36:25
Speaker 1: democratizing you on be a national security goal for the
1:36:27
Speaker 1: United States? Not? Really. What we want is a regime
1:36:31
Speaker 1: that is friendly to the US, and that could be Ideally,
1:36:35
Speaker 1: that would be a kind of democratic regime, but it's
1:36:41
Speaker 1: not essential. Democracy is most stable than let's say, another Shaw,
1:36:47
Speaker 1: So that would be the ideal, but I wouldn't. I
1:36:50
Speaker 1: wouldn't risk the lives of troops in order to attain it. Right,
1:36:54
Speaker 1: So more important is to get rid of this regime,
1:36:58
Speaker 1: to get rid of any armist regime, because the starmist
1:37:01
Speaker 1: regime is a threat to the United States. What replaces
1:37:04
Speaker 1: it is less of an interest in terms of willingness
1:37:11
Speaker 1: to use force in risk lives of Americans. Hoper Campbell
1:37:19
Speaker 1: would Trump ever threaten or intimidate the Supreme Court? Is
1:37:24
Speaker 1: the Court afraid of him or just thinks that he's
1:37:27
Speaker 1: a clown? I think some of the Supreme Court think
1:37:30
Speaker 1: he's a clown. Would he threaten to intimidate the Supreme Court? Potentially?
1:37:35
Speaker 1: We will see. I mean, he already is implying threats.
1:37:40
Speaker 1: He's ridiculing them. But we'll see if he's willing to
1:37:45
Speaker 1: literally threaten them. I mean he might tonight. Let's see
1:37:49
Speaker 1: what he says tonight, Hopper Campbell. Administrative warrants like the
1:37:57
Speaker 1: ones Ice used invalid. Only judicial warrants are legitimate. Yes,
1:38:02
Speaker 1: they're not valid. They shouldn't be valid. Put it that way.
1:38:05
Speaker 1: This is granting the executive branch way too much power,
1:38:11
Speaker 1: way too much power because they're not part of the judiciary.
1:38:14
Speaker 1: That part of the executive branch. The people who issue
1:38:17
Speaker 1: these warrants that part of the administrative state. And absolutely
1:38:23
Speaker 1: that is wrong. And I hope a court case comes
1:38:26
Speaker 1: in front of the Supreme Courts. The Ghostige can right
1:38:30
Speaker 1: a scathing opinion about it, all right, the left this
1:38:36
Speaker 1: is newly Then, the left claims that AI data centers
1:38:39
Speaker 1: are focusing forcing residents of that area an increase of
1:38:44
Speaker 1: energy bills. The right and left believe AI will become
1:38:48
Speaker 1: the terminator. Yes, generally there's agreement between left and right
1:38:52
Speaker 1: about the evils of AI. Sadly, but not surprising at all. Sposedly,
1:39:00
Speaker 1: Trump will announce today in the State of the Union
1:39:04
Speaker 1: that the AI companies have agreed to pay for their
1:39:09
Speaker 1: increased usage of electricity separately, so there would be price
1:39:14
Speaker 1: discrimination between what these companies pay and the rest of consumers.
1:39:20
Speaker 1: I always thought that was illegal, so I'm not sure
1:39:21
Speaker 1: how exactly he is implementing that. But if the law
1:39:27
Speaker 1: allowed for price discrimination, then it would be easy you
1:39:31
Speaker 1: charge more money for the increased load that the AI
1:39:35
Speaker 1: plants generate. So Trump supposedly is solving that problem as
1:39:40
Speaker 1: part of his affordability attack on affordability or lack of affordability. Newly, then,
1:39:49
Speaker 1: is common sense the same as that which is self evident? No?
1:39:55
Speaker 1: No self evidence is a tricky concept because there's very
1:39:58
Speaker 1: little that's self evident. But common sense is primitive reasoning.
1:40:06
Speaker 1: It's low level logic. It's like simple rationality. It's not
1:40:16
Speaker 1: a useful term. It's not a useful term. Did I
1:40:25
Speaker 1: say Thomas would write the scathing review of it? I
1:40:28
Speaker 1: meant ghost it. If I said Thomas Clouk. I initially
1:40:33
Speaker 1: believe Trump was not an ideologue, that he only cared
1:40:36
Speaker 1: for prestige and attention, not arbitrary power. But his power
1:40:39
Speaker 1: lust is manifesting, manifesting chaotically. Again, I don't I don't
1:40:43
Speaker 1: think he's I don't think he's an ideologue. He likes power,
1:40:48
Speaker 1: he likes to exert power, but he doesn't have some
1:40:52
Speaker 1: grand ambition, and he does it chaotically, partially because he
1:40:58
Speaker 1: has nothing to guide him, no ideology. The guide is powerless.
1:41:06
Speaker 1: Clark Well, Trump diminish the tariffs he is allowed to
1:41:10
Speaker 1: still apply if it really hurts the stock market, and
1:41:12
Speaker 1: his associates in the business community tell them to stop. Probably,
1:41:17
Speaker 1: although the stock market seems to have done okay in
1:41:20
Speaker 1: spite of the tariffs, it seems to it seems to
1:41:23
Speaker 1: not be affected by his tariff moves a lot. I mean,
1:41:29
Speaker 1: I'm sure at the margin it is. It would have
1:41:32
Speaker 1: to be a pretty big move by the stock market
1:41:37
Speaker 1: to impact Trump's decision making like it had in April
1:41:42
Speaker 1: of last year. Ian, what exactly are you referring to
1:41:46
Speaker 1: by Apple trying to make chips in the US. I
1:41:49
Speaker 1: can't find evidence of that. They did use Motorola and
1:41:53
Speaker 1: Intel chips. No, these are TSMC chips, but they will
1:41:58
Speaker 1: buy them from Ta SMC plants in the United States.
1:42:02
Speaker 1: So they're investing money telling TSMC that they will buy
1:42:06
Speaker 1: the chips. The TSMC producers in the US and giving
1:42:09
Speaker 1: them an incentive to do so. It's in the Wall
1:42:12
Speaker 1: Seat Journal today or yesterday. I think it's today. So
1:42:18
Speaker 1: it's not that they will fabricate the chips themselves. They
1:42:21
Speaker 1: already designed the ships themselves. They won't fabricate the chips.
1:42:25
Speaker 1: They will they will buy them from TSMC based on
1:42:29
Speaker 1: Apple designs, but from plants manufacturing plants in the United States,
1:42:35
Speaker 1: at least, that is the story. I like numbers. Isn't
1:42:45
Speaker 1: private sector regulation an an cap argument, No, not at all.
1:42:50
Speaker 1: Regulation is not the world of government. There's no role
1:42:54
Speaker 1: of government in regulating business. The market regulates business. The
1:42:58
Speaker 1: market uh uh you know, uh provides the kind of
1:43:07
Speaker 1: the function of what do you call it? Quality control
1:43:14
Speaker 1: and uh and safety control and all those things. That's
1:43:16
Speaker 1: not and campt that because it's not a policing function.
1:43:19
Speaker 1: Regulations are not policing. An kept say police should be
1:43:24
Speaker 1: market and that is wrong, and and and the judiciary
1:43:28
Speaker 1: should be marketed, and that is wrong, Gail says. In Canada,
1:43:32
Speaker 1: universal health care is religion too. Yeah, it's just a
1:43:34
Speaker 1: much younger religion. In in Britain, it goes back to
1:43:39
Speaker 1: the post World War two era. Got a long history.
1:43:46
Speaker 1: No Thomas is an awful as somebody says, you said
1:43:49
Speaker 1: ghost I said, Thomas is usually more reliable. No, Thomas
1:43:53
Speaker 1: is awful. Look at his Look at his ruling on Friday.
1:43:56
Speaker 1: It was it was just. I mean I used to
1:43:59
Speaker 1: respect Thomas. I thought he was the best judge in
1:44:01
Speaker 1: the court, you know, ten years ago. But he has
1:44:05
Speaker 1: just descended into Trump's zombie land. He will just he
1:44:10
Speaker 1: wrote the worst opinion on Friday. Gussich is now by
1:44:15
Speaker 1: far the best justice on the courts on most issues. Suddenly,
1:44:20
Speaker 1: on issues related to the administrative state, he is far
1:44:23
Speaker 1: better than Thomas. Thomas is a complete sellout to the
1:44:28
Speaker 1: state as long as the state is run by Trump.
1:44:33
Speaker 1: So I have now gone from fairly high respect for
1:44:37
Speaker 1: Thomas to basically close to zero respect for him. He's
1:44:39
Speaker 1: terrible and he's completely unreliable. I mean, Ghostich has problems too,
1:44:44
Speaker 1: but on the administrative state stuff, he is the best
1:44:47
Speaker 1: by far on the Supreme Court. Thomas doesn't come even close. Rufel,
1:44:53
Speaker 1: would you advise my sister to move out of Mexico.
1:44:55
Speaker 1: She's contently in Escondido, I mean not yet. I would
1:44:58
Speaker 1: want to see what happens and how this evolves it
1:45:01
Speaker 1: doesn't evolve into a civil war. If it does, then yeah,
1:45:04
Speaker 1: I would get out of there. She might want to,
1:45:06
Speaker 1: you know, leave right now and go on vacation somewhere,
1:45:09
Speaker 1: come visit you in Portugal for a couple of weeks
1:45:12
Speaker 1: to see how it all pans out. But I wouldn't
1:45:15
Speaker 1: necessarily say the long term this is going to have
1:45:19
Speaker 1: a huge impact on her life. I think we have
1:45:22
Speaker 1: to wait and see, and she should protect herself now
1:45:27
Speaker 1: and then make a decision with more information. Thank youfell
1:45:33
Speaker 1: Thank you guys. I will see you all tomorrow. Don't
1:45:36
Speaker 1: forget if you're in the UK to sign up, sign
1:45:39
Speaker 1: up today to the Court on Capitalism that I am
1:45:44
Speaker 1: giving on Saturday in London on Saturday, the twentieth of February,
1:45:50
Speaker 1: so just in five days, and I am hopeful that
1:45:55
Speaker 1: I will see you all tomorrow. You know, we'll do
1:45:57
Speaker 1: a short show, relatively show show just before my flight.
1:46:01
Speaker 1: Have a great rest of your weak. If I don't
1:46:03
Speaker 1: see you otherwise, see you tomorrow. Bye everybody. H