Kind: captions
Language: en
Right now, we're in the middle of a
government shutdown. And to me, this is
a budget question. So, the government
has shown over and over and over for
whatever the last 30 years that we can't
pass a budget on time. I think the big
beautiful bill was reckless beyond all
measure. And now I see we're in a
shutdown. The Democrats want to add
things that will make it more reckless.
And I want to get your take on whether
you think the shutdown is actually about
the budget. Is it about something else?
Give me your take on how we have ended
up here.
>> Well, first of all, I think your comment
about the American dream is true and
it's sad. I mean, 70% of Americans
themselves have given up on the American
dream. And people say, well, we've got
better life expectancy, better medicine,
we have consumer gadgets. But the
reality is the American dream is about
your kids doing better than you. And
when you have Maxwell House Coffee
naming itself Maxwell Apartments, that's
sort of the commentary on the American
dream. And most people believe their
kids aren't buy a house.
>> They're not going to be able to have a
better job. And it's very sad to me as a
son of immigrants. My parents came here
when John F. Kennedy had called for us
to go to the moon and we were the nation
to be and we were humming and I was born
in Philadelphia, grew up with that
vision. So to me that's the central
issue of our nation uh and our time.
Look, I agree with you also on the big
ugly bill putting aside politics. It
takes the uh it takes the uh it takes
our debt uh def deficit to 8% of GDP in
peace time. We should have a debt
deficit of under 4% of GDP. And I think
there was way too much tax breaks in
there uh for people who uh don't need
them. That's that's my own view. uh in
the OC OECD which is all of the uh
European western democracies we are the
second lowest tax nation in terms of how
much we tax uh wealth and so to me we
can talk about where we need to cut
spending but that is the principal
reason we've got these deficits that are
at unsustainable levels now there's two
things in the shutdown one is why we're
shut down in terms of not paying and the
other is why Congress is shut down uh
and then Congress is shut down because
of the Epstein files. I mean, they don't
want to have a vote on the release of
the Epstein files. They don't want to
swear in uh at Alita Graala. So, they've
literally said for Congress not not to
vote. That's not why the government is
shut down. The government is shut down
uh because the Democrats want to get uh
extended premiums for the healthcare uh
affordable care act, the tax credits,
and that would uh if we don't do that,
premiums would double for 24 million
Americans. and the Republicans are
opposed to that and that's the central
debate in in the shutdown.
>> Okay. So, uh without getting lost in the
uh what they presented a clean
resolution and why don't we just sign
that as has been done a million times. I
think that debate's been had. I don't
expect us to get anywhere with that. But
what I do want to talk about is for me
the core issue is if you already have a
bill that we can agree is ugly precisely
because it increases the deficit, how
can you back something that increases it
even more?
>> Well, because I would say that I I have
a plan to reduce the deficit by debt the
debt by 12 trillion over 10 years. How
would I do it? Now, you may disagree
with some of these things, but I would
have a wealth tax on over hund00
million. I would have a small financial
transaction tax. I would take the
corporate tax rate up to 28%. I would
not let people pass on money uh to their
estate and then uh a Facebook stock of
$1,000 that becomes $100,000 and then
have their kids not pay capital gains uh
tax on that. Uh I would really restrict
these granter trusts where you have
billionaires basically passing on wealth
uh to their heirs without uh paying an
estate tax. Uh, I would have a tax on
stock buybacks. That would raise a lot
of revenue. And then I would cut the
Pentagon budget, which is over a
trillion dollars, 56% of defense. I
would cut Medicare advantage, which is
ripping off the American people by
saying we're sicker than we actually
are. I would cut fossil fuel subsidies.
I would cut duplicative programs. When
you do all of that math, you can save uh
up to 12 trillion over 10 years on on
the debt. uh you can bring our deficits
under 4% and you can still pay for
things like uh universal child care and
expanding the Affordable Care Act. And
so that's that's my view of how you get
the math to work.
>> So there's two things there. One, it'll
be good for us to in a second talk
values in terms of what's the value
system and the beliefs quite frankly
that drive your I think uh even in just
the way you listed it, you're a um tax
first, reduce spending second. We'll get
to that in a minute, but that's that'll
I think be very helpful. The other is
though when I look at this, I see
anything that adds to the deficit is
just a non-starter. So, um, from that
perspective, are you not worried about
adding costs back into the big,
beautiful, ugly, uh, bill that that's
going to make that even worse? What what
is driving the thinking of just get this
stuff back in and we'll deal with
everything else later?
>> Well, first there's the immediate,
right? I mean, people's insurance,
healthcare insurance, and go up double
uh if we don't if we don't do that. And
that is going to mean for people who are
already struggling economically,
enormous hardship, could increase
medical bankruptcies, could mean people
skipping treatment. But then there's the
uh the the the broader uh view which is
that we can reverse the the the the tax
breaks to in my view very wealthy people
that we shouldn't have in this country.
We can cut spending from other areas uh
to be able to fund healthare. And I
think there are two types of spending
that are deficit spending. One is
deficit spending that is productive and
one is deficit spending that is
nonproductive. If you have an investment
that has a rate of return that is higher
than uh the uh the amount spent then
that's productive investment and that's
that's appropriate. Uh I mean Paul
Krugman and others have written about
sort of productive investment. If you
just have money though that's not
leading to productive investment then uh
then that is uh that's a cause for
concern. My view is that investment in
people's health and education is
productive. I will agree certainly that
an investment that actually yields
improved health and actually yields
improved education results would be
wonderful investments to make. Our our
government has not shown in my
estimation any ability to yield those
results. You you don't have to look very
far to find the stats on us spending
more per person on healthcare to get
some of the worst outcomes in the world.
It's a developed world. It's absolutely
wild. Uh so and then education same
idea. So from that perspective where I
start to say okay the conversation we
have to have I think is around values so
that we can establish okay what is it
that's driving us in this lane. I don't
think you and I are going to um disagree
on the fact that we're not getting the
outcomes that we want now. And yet you
look at that problem and say, "But still
it's better to spend more money even
though we're not getting the outcomes
that we want." And I'm going to say,
"No, no, no. You have to balance the
budget first." And given that we have
not shown an ability to generate those
results, we and I teach entrepreneurs
all the time. And one of the things I'm
always telling them is you cannot assume
exponential growth if all you've ever
shown is linear growth. And that's what
this feels like to me. It's like, well,
we've never shown that we've been able
to get these results, but keep throwing
money at the problem, and somehow it's
just going to resolve itself. And so
then it comes down to, okay, well, we
each have a belief system, a value
system that's driving why we want to act
the way that we want to act. Um, so I'd
be very curious to hear what is like if
you had to break it down into some
really simple ideas that you filter
every bill that you pass or reject, uh,
everything that you're trying to
accomplish with your time in Congress,
like what is that small handful of
values that are your northstar that lead
you to vote the way you vote or endorse
the people that you endorse? Every
person in this country should have the
chance as I did to be able to live out
their dreams, their potential. That
means they should have health care. They
should have good public education. Maybe
they shouldn't have to take out as many
loans as I did, but live in a a safe
community, have people who support them
and believe in them. So, that's the
first principle. The second principle is
I I represent a district of $14
trillion. Five companies within 50 miles
of over a trillion dollars. Apple,
Google, Nvidia, Tesla, and Broadcom. We
are producing enormous wealth in
America. We can afford to make sure that
everyone has healthare, child care,
housing, education, the basics. That
that that's not an unachievable dream
for the wealthiest country in the world
that's going to be producing more wealth
than ever before. uh and I want a nation
where everyone has a chance uh to have
the basics to have the capability to be
uh who they can be and also uh to be
productive to contribute to be able to
start a small business to have a job or
uh to have a career to to to do
something that brings them pride and
satisfaction th those are sort of the
broad principles.
>> We'll get back to the show in just a
second but first let me tell you about
my non-negotiables. I do not compromise
on my standards. Not in business, not in
my relationships, and definitely not
with what I eat. With Paleo Valley beef
sticks, my nutrition standards stay high
no matter how busy life gets, or even if
I'm traveling. They are 100% grass-fed,
grassfinished beef, 6 g of protein, zero
sugar, no artificial preservatives, and
they're naturally fermented with organic
spices. There's no gluten, no soy or
corn, and they're paleo and keto
friendly. Your body does not care if
you're busy. The difference between
successful people and everyone else
often comes down to the standards they
refuse to negotiate on. Make your
nutrition one of those. Right now, you
can get 30 beef sticks for just $36.
That's maintaining your standards for
barely over a dollar per stick. Click
the link below to get your 30 beef
sticks for just $36.
All right, now let's get back to the
show. Uh, a lot of that makes sense to
me, but there's some devil hiding in the
details. One of the things you mentioned
a couple times is wealth. And so I think
it's really important for us to define
terms to see if we're saying the same
thing. So I think a wealth tax is
literal financial suicide for a country.
Anybody that proposes that, I'm going to
go uh campaign against that as hard as I
can. Uh but I think most people confuse
income with wealth. And so I'm just not
sure. I doubt that's you. I think you
know exactly what wealth is, but I want
to make sure that we define it. So I'll
define wealth as potential income. Maybe
one day it will happen, but it has not
been realized. And to realize that the
actual income on that wealth, you have
to destroy the asset, your possession of
it. So you take a share and you have to
sell that. You take a house, you have to
sell that or you'd have to take a loan
against it. And so those are the only
ways to liberate the potential from that
thing to be able to tax it. So if you
take wood, wood has heat energy trapped
inside of it, but to get it out, you
have to light it on fire. So to me, it's
like saying, "Hey, you have a whole lot
of wood, and so I want to tax you on
that heat energy by burning it." And
that's where you begin to um you
actually break down the engine of wealth
by forcing people to essentially light
that asset on fire. And so I'd love to
get your take on why tax wealth if you
understand the mechanism that I just
described.
Well, I view wealth as a person's total
net net worth. Now, I'm not for taxing
unrealized capital gain. So, I'm not for
okay, you get a stock option, that
option appreciates uh that we tax that
uh as a realization event. But if
someone is worth over $und00 million,
let's say someone is worth a billion
dollars, uh Elon Musk may be worth a
trillion dollars. So, I say let's have a
5% tax on on on on his trillion dollars.
That would be true.
>> But when you say worth, he's only worth
that because the potential revenue that
he could generate by selling his shares.
He doesn't actually have that money.
>> Sure. He may have some Well, some people
borrow against it and so they're uh
borrowing from the bank and then
financing their lifestyle and not and
avoiding tax. But let's just say he has
a billion dollars and let's just
stipulate it's all in stock or the vast
majority is. I don't think paying a 2%
tax on that, forcing the sale of 2% is
going to disincentivize
uh people from building more wealth, nor
do I think it will lead to capital
flight because uh 93% of American wealth
is invested in America. It could lead to
flight from, let's say, California to
New York, but people aren't going to put
their money in China. It's 20%
unemployment. It's got huge debt of uh
cities. They're not going to put their
money in India. And they're what are
they going to go to Europe? think your
president hasn't had a successful tech
company other than SAP for or or ASML
for for decades. So I think that America
is unique. We're not France. There's
extraordinary wealth generation and
having a tax of a few percent on them to
be able to finance uh the uh the the the
health care and the uh and and child
care that we need is is is worth it. I
mean that's that's my view. There are
other taxes we can look at as well, but
but you're right. I mean, I certainly
understand the distinction between
wealth and income, and a lot of people
aren't paying the income tax at that
level because they don't they don't have
a W2.
>> Now, help me understand. You said, "I'm
not for taxing unrealized gains, but
then you said I'm going to tax 2% of
their unrealized gains." How do I
reconcile those two statements?
>> Well, I'm I'm for taxing their total net
worth, uh, but not taxing. Some people
say, "Let's just tax unrealized capital
gains of everyone, right? of someone
over 100,000. We're talking about people
over a hundred million and we're not
talking about their total unrealized
capital gains. We're talking about uh
their total net worth at a given uh at a
given moment and just 2% of that. So if
if
>> but just uh this will be the last time I
say it and then I'll I'll let it go. But
I want to be very clear for anybody
listening that is taxing unrealized
gains. You may only be taxing a
percentage of their unrealized gains,
but net worth is not income. It's not
money in the bank. It'll be partly that,
but the VA like someone like Elon Musk,
what do they have? Half of a percent of
their net worth at most in a form that
would be um liquid and it would have
already been taxed unless they did it
through a loan, but it would have
already been taxed when they took it
out. Which is why in the year that Elon
liquidated a bunch of his shares, he
paid more tax than any human has ever
paid ever in all of human history. So,
here's what I'm mapping. Roana believes
that, hey, we've got Americans that have
health care needs. We've got Americans
that aren't getting the shot that you
got, largely from an education
standpoint. And the way that we're going
to get there is the wealthiest
individuals over a certain amount, we're
going to force them to liquidate assets
in order to pay roughly 2% against their
net worth. Is that a fair assessment?
Cool. The only thing I
>> I don't think that'll be enough. I think
we need other taxes too to get the the
the math to work just in fairness. But
>> you're losing me here. All right, we'll
get to that in a second. So the only
flag
>> one thing I think is important is for
politicians to be honest about their
math. You have all these people come in,
they they say, "I want healthare. I want
childare. Then how are you going to pay
for it?" And they don't have any
answers. My in my case, people may
disagree with where I stand, but the
math actually works. and I'm honest
about where I want to increase taxes on
the wealthy and what I want to spend it
on and how to get there.
>> Yeah. I mean, this is why you have the
reputation that you have and why I have
a feeling it's going to get better by
the day. Uh so, yeah. I mean, full
acknowledgement of um you got on my
radar for being the guy that you could
actually have a real conversation with,
somebody who has, I think, sincere aims
and is really trying to get there. Uh
so, full respect. um very grateful to
have people like you doing this. What I
want to get to is just mapping the cause
and effect of okay when we do this what
does history tell us is going to happen.
>> Um so where I come down just to so I'll
plant my the final flag then we'll move
on just to my side of the values
equation. So last thing is um you very
clear on what you want to do. We're even
going to need more but that is a tax
that will require people to sell things
getting into the value perspective. So
for me, I'm looking at everything from a
cause and effect perspective. And I'm
trying to figure out if we do one thing,
what is the thing that this is going to
yield? So if we take health care and
education as examples, I look at that
and go, oh, we've run the experiment of
does throwing money at those two things,
does it solve the problem? And the
answer is unequivocably no.
>> I agree with that.
>> We Yeah. So we know that just throwing
more money at this isn't going to do
anything. So then the question becomes
what is? So my guiding value is one
freedom. I really believe that freedom
is the backbone of prosperity. And so
for America which is declining in
prosperity literally by the minute. I
can't remember which one. You'll
probably know but there's a uh somebody
either in Congress or Senate that wears
like a button that shows the deficit
growing. Yeah, that's that's my friend
Thomas Massie is an MIT.
>> That was my guess.
>> And we did the Epstein file release
together. And I uh we were both actually
on Twitter saying that the that they
shouldn't interfere with MIT, the the
administration that let MIT figure out
how to select their own students and
faculty. And one of the points I said is
that yeah, the guy Thomas Massie who
went to MIT happens to have programmed
his own gadget at the deficit. He's a
brilliant guy and you should have him on
actually. He's he is a a thinker. We
come from He comes from the the right. I
come from the left. But we're actually
interested in ideas.
>> Yeah. I I am not at all surprised to see
you guys link up. This is what I hope is
the future of America. I have no
indications that it is, but uh getting
people to really map out. Uh again, I'll
just say cause and effect. Cause and
effect. Cause and effect. So Thomas
Massie, wears the button. uh at least my
interpretation of why he does that is to
make it clear to people that literally
America is growing less prosperous by
the minute uh because as we accumulate
debt and so this is part of my belief um
debt is the problem. Why is the American
dream gone? It's very simple. Debt debt
forces you to print money. Printing
money forces you to own assets. The only
assets people understand are a house and
we've made houses completely
unaffordable. that that is the crisis.
If you want to know why the middle class
is evaporating, it is precisely
inflation caused by debt forcing you to
own assets. And right now 10% of
Americans own 93% of the assets. So it's
like you you literally need no nothing
else. That's your problem. And so now
for me it's like okay what are if I
believe the freedom is the backbone of
the prosperity that will reverse that so
that America is getting more prosperous
by the minute then it becomes a question
of okay what are the things that we need
to do to actually increase freedom now I
actually don't consider myself a
libertarian but I am admittedly very
interested in seeing government be
smaller. I am very interested in seeing
us spend less money and be way more
disciplined uh and forcing every one of
us to accept Thomas Soul's brilliant
insight that there are no solutions only
trade-offs and so it becomes a question
of what are the trade-offs that we are
going to make and I think going back to
my values those trade-offs should be
driven based on the cause and effect of
what will actually generate more freedom
and thusly more prosperity.
So for me, balancing the budget by
reducing the cost of the government is a
must. And the reason I think that's a
must is any gains. So like Trump has a
don't worry, we'll grow our way out of
this strategy. Uh but that's all
hypothetical.
And the same is true for anybody that
wants to increase the budget because the
only thing we know is the budget's
definitely going to go up. The deficits
are definitely going to go up.
Everything else is a maybe. I'm trying
to get people to be honest about what
they're prepared to cut in order to
balance the budget based on where we are
today, which is already ridiculously up
from where we were in just 2017. What
are the things that you think government
should get out of so that we can start
reducing that deficit?
Well, first I agree with you that uh
inflation has led to the uh devaluation
of assets. uh uh devaluation assets go
up
>> but devaluation the devaluation of money
and making life more more expensive that
people are then taking it because
they're afraid of inflation that the val
they're putting but when you have
printed more money that money is going
in the hands of people who already have
capital uh capital and so they're uh
they're benefiting uh from uh uh more
money in the system and it's contributed
to income inequality but I don't think
it's the only thing that has I think it
is also the de-industrialization that
led to people not having jobs. It's also
people not having healthcare and
education. It's also the concentration
of industry. So I think that the com the
the the fact that 10% own 93% of the
assets the story of printing more money
is in my view one factor but there are
whole other set of factors that have led
to that income inequality that that have
to be addressed. And I don't think just
uh just the deficit reduction will will
do that though important to to do. I
mean that's
>> all right. Can I tease those out because
I think you're correct on everything
that you said. I'm going to give you a
speedrun of all the beats literally that
I think are all of the beats. And if you
think that I've missed one, let me know
and we can go into it. So debts force
the government to print money. Printing
money is inflation. It's it's not a
proxy for inflation. It is inflation.
>> Inflation causes prices to go up, but
they are two separate phenomenon. So
debts cause inflation. Inflation causes
prices to go up. You've pointed out very
smartly that offshoring everything,
globalization, letting China into the
WTO,
uh, NAFTA, all that stuff hollowed out a
lot of our manufacturing base. We lost
roughly 3 million jobs. That was one of
the biggest, actually far bigger than
what happened to um the unions that made
it impossible for Americans, American
workers to negotiate their wages. I even
in white collar jobs, you just go, uh,
I'll just outsource to somewhere else or
I'll import somebody that will do it
cheaper. Uh, and so that robbed the
average American of being able to
negotiate higher prices or higher wages
and therefore the real wages have not
gone up. So you've got inflation causing
asset prices to go up because that's
what happens. Every the people that
understand get out of cash, they get
into assets and then the only asset that
anybody understands intuitively is a
house. So, the average person could get
into the stock market, asset ownership,
but they won't because it's confusing
and risky. And those two things
together, the confused mind says no. And
so, they're not going to go after it.
When you couple that with they're unable
to get their wages to go up for the
reasons that we just covered, you're now
in a position where every time somebody
says add another thing to the budget
without removing something of equal or
greater value, you're pushing that
person's head farther underwater because
you've already made it impossible for
them to negotiate their wages in any
meaningful way. But inflation, as Thomas
Massiey's pin shows us, is growing by a
trillion dollar every 100 days. It is
wild. So,
>> a couple points to that. Uh I agree with
90% of that. What I would say is that if
inflation was matched by wage growth, uh
then of course you wouldn't have the
issue, right? It's that the that that
the prices are increasing over wages.
And so one of the things that I believe
is we've got to figure out how do we get
wages up? How do we get people into good
paying jobs, productive jobs, uh to
match the the cost of living. The second
thing is I think that there's technology
has had some deflationary effect, not on
uh not on everything. Uh and the United
States being the reserve currency uh has
had a a deflationary effect. But so what
we see is that consumer goods have gone
down, products have gone down, but the
costs of health care, uh, of housing,
uh, of child care are up. Uh, and so,
uh, I think this is one of the reasons
we've not really had to confront
inflation because the we've been
buffeted being the, uh, the reserve
currency that's allowed us to keep
interest rates uh, relatively low. uh
and we've uh had technological proess
that hasn't shown up in ordinary
consumer goods. Though the story of of
the price inflation of healthcare, child
care, education combined with people not
making it as much is is really the the
crux of why the American dream is is
harder.
>> We'll get back to the show in just a
second, but first, let's talk about one
of the hidden distractions that is
killing your focus. Most people do not
realize how much mental bandwidth gets
stolen by small frustrations. That shirt
that rides up, the fabric that bunches,
the constant need to adjust. Every time
you're thinking about your clothing,
you're not thinking about your work,
your goals, or what actually matters.
That's why right now I am wearing a true
classic tea. True classic fits right
where it should. Tailored through the
chest and shoulders, relaxed where you
need it. You put it on right in the
morning and then you just forget about
it. That's the point. Zero mental
bandwidth wasted. The fabric feels
premium. The fit is tailored without
being restrictive and it holds up. Stop
letting bad clothing steal your focus.
Upgrade your wardrobe at
trueclassic.com/impact.
Again, that's trueclassic.com/impact.
And now, let's get back to the show. I
love that. And so another thing to look
at there is um when you start thinking
about okay technology is actually making
things cheaper every year but the
average American doesn't feel that the
question becomes why doesn't it now I
already think we've said so many things
that the average person is like I
already can't follow you but for
completeness let's put this final piece
uh on the table when the Fed says that
we want to maintain inflation at 2%.
What they really mean is we're going to
print so much money that we gobble
through all of that technological
innovation cuz your prices should be
going down, down, down, down every year.
And people will lie to you and they will
tell you that deflation is bad. It is
absolutely not bad. You want prices to
go down. We've eaten through all of that
by printing money plus 2%. And so people
are already rightfully up in arms when
they hear in the last 5 years alone
inflation has been 25%.
Uh but if they only understood that it's
dramatically more than that because
first we printed our way through all of
that uh innovation that you were talking
about plus 25% on top of it. But don't
you think that there's c that it's the
the price uh hikes and and declines have
been dependent on on on what we're
talking about? So, you know, a price of
TVs have come down, the price of
computers have come down, the price of
an iPhone uh or an Android have come
down, uh the price of knowledge has come
down. Today, every person has on their
fingertips the amount of knowledge
probably President Reagan had in the
1980s with all his staff. And so certain
things, the price of communication has
come down. But the price of health care,
the price of child care, the price of
education, those have skyrocketed. And
that uh that I think is the the biggest
challenge. And on healthcare, I agree
with you. We haven't achieved the right
option. I I would be curious what you
would think of having a singlepayer
health health system because I think it
would uh make it much easier for
businesses who don't have to deal with
it. You'd eliminate a lot of the dead
weight costs with middleman insurance
and you could still have have doctors
and nurses. But I I think the problem is
these these sectors where the costs have
skyrock skyrocketed.
>> There's no doubt that there are some
things where the cost is easier to get
down at a more rapid rate that people do
feel it. Uh my favorite quote though is
you can't eat a flat screen. So uh yes,
there there have been things that have
come down and those are wonderful and
we've gotten to take advantage of some
of them, but it creates this weird sort
of dystopian thing where it's like I can
get this the most advanced TV of all
time. However, my groceries have doubled
in cost, right? So um or even looking at
healthcare. So my take on that is the
areas where we just cannot get the price
down are the areas where the government
is most involved, not where the
government is least involved. And so
this is why I'm careful to plant the
seed for the very thing that I think is
the engine of prosperity is freedom. The
very thing the government takes away is
freedom. Now I think we actually want
some rails. I think that humans have a
tendency towards tyranny at the
individual and at the collective level.
I think if companies don't have any
checks and balances. We've already seen
what they do. They've got like
9year-olds cleaning chimneys. So, uh,
let us not pretend that humans will not
do dastardly things if they're not given
boundaries. I think boundaries are a
good thing. I think we want them. I just
think that it's one of these dances
where as you start putting more and
more, it's like, hey, this is a good
thing, right? We're trying to protect
people, right? And then you start
getting into the nanny state which ends
up breaking the mechanism that gives you
the freedom to actually get the
innovation.
>> But this is
>> Oh, go ahead. I don't want to interrupt.
>> Please. No, you
>> but but I just wanted to push on this
idea of freedom because uh this gets
back to sort of basic political
philosophy, right? There's negative
freedom and positive freedom. And I be
curious how you think about the negative
freedom uh which we can all agree on is
you don't want the state to say hey you
know you said the wrong thing on this
podcast or bro you I said the wrong
thing we're going to put put you in jail
or uh we're going to come and just
confiscate all your assets without due
process. That is the freedom to be
protected against the arbitrary use of
violence by the state. But that's not
sufficient, right? But to be tr truly
free and this gets the work of someone
like Amarthia Sen who wrote capabilities
theory or FDR on the economic bill of
rights. They say like that that a human
being to be free and achieve your
potential you needed an education, you
needed health, you needed uh the basics
uh to to to be who you are and that uh
the the that a society has an obligation
uh to help people achieve their
potential and that that is the positive
achievement of freedom. So it's not just
a state that is uh is is is uh allowing
you not to to face uh violence. It's a
state that's helping you uh flourish.
And then in a modern complex society,
family and civic society isn't enough.
The state has to play some role.
>> So what I would say to that is um all of
that stuff is wonderful, but there has
to be a point at which you say I'm
trying to do the minimal amount of this.
So Jordan Peterson has a really
interesting take uh on parenting and he
said you should use the minimal force
required to get your child to act in a
manner that is appropriate. Now of
course we could all debate appropriate
and of course we could all debate uh
what is the minimal force required but
that feels like pretty good guidance.
You cannot and from where I'm sitting
kids will not develop in a manner that
will make them productive adults unless
they have some boundaries. So hey
government needs to come in. The
government is the parent in this
situation. The government needs to make
sure that we become a productive
society. I love that. However, if a
parent is slapping their child around
and beating them, I think we all know
that there's going to be real damage
that's done. Even if it's not physical
damage, there's the potential for
massive psychological damage. And I
think the same is true to extend the
metaphor about as far as it will carry
that if the government is coming in and
it's doing too much that now you're
going to run into problems. So I I think
I mean I'll not have a hard time getting
you to agree with yes there is such a
thing as the government does too little
and yes there's such a thing as the
government does too much. So then the
question becomes okay what are we going
to use as the barometer to say the
government is now doing too little or
the government is doing too much and I
would say the answer is results nice and
easy just like in a business am I doing
the right things in my business I don't
know are you profitable yes I'm
profitable then you're doing the right
things now there's an element of could
you be even more profitable and then we
can start to optimize for that but if
your company isn't profitable you're
going to go out of business so I know
you're not doing the right things by its
very nature. You can get in to the like
nitty-gritty of well maybe if I'm not
profitable for two or three years like
I'm going to find the path. Let let's
not get lost in the complexities. If
your business is losing money, that is a
bad sign. All of your energy and effort
should be put to get out of that
situation as fast as you can. And so I'm
saying based on your metric, I'd be
curious, genuinely curious. So let's
look at Obama's Affordable Care Act,
right? So we know when he passes it in
2009 or 2010 that millions of Americans
30 20 30 million Americans who did not
have health insurance now have health
insurance. We know that people who had
pre-existing conditions uh diabetes or
heart disease now they're covered. We
know that young kids up till 26 uh who
didn't have health insurance now they
can get on their parents health
insurance. Now, we also know that
premiums have skyrocketed since then uh
and that that's a structural issue and
this is why I believe we need you know
Medicare for all. Would you acknowledge
though that yes on a results metric uh
the the Obamacare the Affordable Care
Act ended up improving health for many
Americans uh giving them the the health
care that they they they needed but it
came at a steep cost and this is a
values question then of whether we think
the cost is worth the improvement of of
health that happened for uh particularly
lower wage Americans.
Uh what I think the Obamacare act did
was give a ton of peace of mind to
people that we're going to reduce the
number of people that are um dying of
something acute. We're going to reduce
the number of people that are going to
go bankrupt due to medical costs. And I
think those are huge wins. And the other
problem is because we have and uh
probably just for the scope of this
conversation we'll leave vague but
because we have structural problems as
you said with the way that that is set
up um we're pouring money into a system
that actually isn't delivering the
result of making Americans healthier. So
I I will just say right now and I am
happy to take a debate with anybody on
this one. your health. Barring of course
there are going to be people that
tragically end up getting cancer either
because of genetics or they live near a
pollutant or they were you know just
something in their environment caused
it. I I I just I can't stress enough the
tragedy of uh cancer as somebody I had
skin cancer and I was a ghast because
I've been so careful my entire life. Uh
but I'm married to a Greek girl and so
I'm always in the shade in a very sunny
space. Uh so anyway, it played out the
way that it played out, right? And so I
will grant that same um grace to anybody
struggling. I get it. Anybody can end up
there. But if you want good health, it
comes down to what what you eat.
>> And so if you
>> Yeah.
>> What by by a factor of 10. So if if you
only let me control one variable, I will
just control what the person puts in
their mouth. And the the number of
ailments that I will be able to reduce
just by controlling what they eat, it
will be far greater than what I can
control by getting them to work out.
Now, if I can get them to work out like
an Olympic athlete, okay, maybe then
it's so hardcore that you can sort of
start to get where food matters a lot
less. Uh but oh buddy that that is
>> what would be your top three things I we
discussed I think before we were online
you said no car or low carbs if you were
to to be talking I mean we've had this
complex economic discussion but if you
said here are your three laws uh someone
changing their lifestyle tomorrow uh
what would be the top three things
>> don't eat sugar
don't eat sugar don't eat sugar
>> like it's it's and the problem is most
people don't understand
>> well car uh I I don't advise it, but
it's not nearly as problematic as sugar.
It just depends on how much they have.
My I don't have the studies to back this
up, but my instinct is if you overeat
artificial sweeteners, you're going to
have microbiome problems that will be
severe. Uh probably not as detrimental
to your health, but you're going to get
things like itchy skin, irritable bowel.
So, look, they have their own problems.
So, I would advise people to eat whole
food whenever humanly possible. But
going back to the sugar thing, most
people just don't understand how many
things have sugar. So carbohydrates will
turn to sugar in your bloodstream unless
it's fiber. So um yeah, just that that's
the number one variable. People intake
so much glucose. It's wild.
>> Yeah. Well, and you have an expertise. I
was your whole whole company. And uh and
I I agree with with you on this point
that that that there has not been enough
focus in our society on on health on
wellness. You know, I I I had one of the
best educations uh you could have in
this country. And I was very studious.
And what amazed me is even though I went
to a great public school, even when I
got fancy degrees from the best private
university, Chicago, Yale, I did not
really know these simple things about
sugar and carbohydrates and diet until I
was in my 30s and read about this. So
the amount of one lack of health
wellness education that we have at least
in my generation I don't know if I don't
think it's become much better now uh in
our society is a huge problem and then
the amount of access that people have
just to regular uh health and wellness
in their communities is a huge problem.
>> It's interesting. So this is where we
get into like the the how do you
actually solve these problems? I don't
think that health is confusing anymore.
I think everybody knows exactly what to
do and it's just hard. So there are some
things in life I don't know your age.
I'm 49. You agree in the 1980s it was
not obvious like we would have you know
orange juice and uh Rice Krispies and
cereals and sodas. I I don't think at
least where I grew up in Bucks,
Pennsylvania, it was not as obvious uh
about the health knowledge we have now.
In the 1980s, the US government was
actively trying to kill its citizens.
My producer just laid his head on the
floor. He's not happy with that
statement. But that really is either out
of ignorance or malice. The food pyramid
is unforgivable. And every time that uh
the government wants to put a regulation
in place, I want to scream because
they're convinced they know best and
they do not. And so this is why I'm a
huge proponent of pointing out that
freedom is what leads to prosperity
because freedom is a bunch of really
selfish people competing to win the game
of capitalism by making something that's
better for you.
>> Meaning you want it more. the maha
movement and put aside where I disagree
with Robert Kennedy on the vaccines, but
this idea that, you know, Europe has
regulations on food and that we
shouldn't be having uh antibiotics in in
the uh the food we have. We shouldn't be
having food dyes, we shouldn't be having
as many preservatives that we uh that we
can do a lot to clean up uh our our food
system.
when you don't know the truth of
nutrition, the sort of first put no
weird thing in your food is a really
good strategy. So from that perspective,
while I have no idea if he's going to be
right about all the specifics, what I
hear him saying is my belief system, my
values, however you want to look at it,
tells me that putting exogenous weird uh
things in our food is unwise. And when I
just look around and I see how much
faster America got fat compared to
Europe and then I look at Europe and the
more they adopt Americanstyle food, the
more of a problem they have. We should
probably reduce the number of things
that we allow to be put in our food.
Yeah, as a knee-jerk reaction, that
seems very reasonable. Um, you can
probably simplify it even farther and
just go, you really want to be eating
things that look like it looked when it
was growing or roaming. And the farther
away from that it gets, the more likely
it should only be a snack, something you
eat on rare occasions, it should not be
like the core of your diet. This is why,
like, this goes back to my cause and
effect thing. Um, I can't explain human
biology to you, but I have I've lost 60
pounds like 15 years ago and have kept
it off. It is the easiest thing in the
universe because I simply know what to
eat and what not to eat based on what it
does to my own body. So, I'm like, "Oh,
if I eat that, I overeat it. I
overconume calories. I put on fat very
easily. Cool. This thing makes my joints
hurt. Cool. I'm not going to eat it."
Right? So, it's like, you don't have to
be a genius. You just have to pay
attention to am I in shape. Uh if your
body fat percentage is way out of whack,
your your diet is not the way that you
want it to be. So, but this this all
started you were talking about
education. I actually want to get back
to that. So, same idea.
>> Uh the way that you're educating the
kids, what what result is it yielding? I
would say it's yielding a terrible
result. I say that compared to
international results on standardized
tests. I say that what we spend per
person versus the
>> right and our reading and test scores
just they just came out. They've
stalled. They haven't done well and
there's just a national study on reading
scores, math scores. I mean what you're
saying is factually accurate that we
have not done uh enough uh well enough
for for education. And we've failed a
lot of people who don't get a four-year
college degree.
>> I'm very eager to see people not
accumulate debt. So, the four-year
college degree thing to me is just a
question of, well, can you do it without
accumulating debt? If you can, great. If
you can't, probably a terrible idea. Uh,
but let me put forward a radical idea
that I've never said out loud. I want to
see what you think about this.
uh if you want to fix education,
acknowledge that you live in the age of
AI and hire basically hall monitors
effectively babysitters to sit at the
front of the class, a very limited
number of them, but let's say one for
every 10ish students. Uh and then they
just interface with AI all day. and you
you give each school a budget to buy
their AI system and then you just let
the AI systems compete for who outputs
the best students. Uh and that alone
would be so much cheaper and so much
better than what we do now that we
should do it would it is immoral to not
do that. I'll go that far.
>> Here here's why I disagree with it. Not
not now I'm not saying that we shouldn't
use AI as tools to supplement teaching
but when I think of the teachers and I'm
curious when you think of your teachers
who had the biggest impact on you I
don't remember the details of what uh
books I read in nth grade English and I
probably don't remember the details of
the history I learned in 10th grade
social studies but I remember Mrs. Rob
uh believing in me encouraging me to
write challenging me to write I remember
Mr. long ago pushing me uh to care about
public service, to love public service,
uh to develop my ideas. And I think that
so much, yes, they're the hard skills.
I'm not going to uh to to to to say that
they don't matter, but to get someone to
be good at those hard skills, you've got
to give them purpose. You've got to give
them a sense of why it matters. You got
to get them to love things. And I think
that is not AI. That's emotional. It's I
had this conversation with Jensen Wong
at Nvidia and I said do you think AI is
going to really displace jobs and he
said yes it's going to displace jobs but
you know I spend most of my time as CEO
of Nvidia setting goals and uh talking
about resilience and uh inspiring people
uh and I I just think that that human
quality uh is ultimately the most
important in success. I imagine it was
the most important for you.
So, I love that and that's why I'm
saying you want more people in the
classroom, not less. Um, but you just
want to make sure that we accept that
the question has been asked and
answered.
Is it a good system to expect each
individual, each new generation to go
and train themselves to death and then
go in and teach? Or are we better off
with AI, which has been trained on the
entire corpus of human knowledge and
gets better every day and will most
likely on acute tasks like history or
whatever, always outperform an
individual human. You put them in place
to give the instruction. Right? This
experiment is being run right now in
schools in Texas where they're having
the kids spend two hours a day uh with
tailored because that's the thing the
even if it's one AI it can still tailor
its rate of progress to that exact
student and with two hours of AI
instruction those kids are like
outpacing their um classmates that
aren't using AI by like tremendous
degree. It's it's really incredible and
this is going to be the birth of
something beautiful,
>> you know, because I I certainly am
always a data person and want to look at
what we can do and my my I'm I'm not a I
represent Silicon Valley. I'm not a lite
or someone who says that let's not use
AI. Certainly, it's powerful tools and I
think the question is how do we how do
we blend the uh the uniqueness of
teachers going all the way back from
Socrates on to the teachers you and I
had uh with the tools of technology.
Yeah, I I agree. So, I want to see
humans in the class and I want to see
them um be people that can inspire a
child to dream bigger, to want more, um
to not be an indoctrination engine, or
if we're going to indoctrinate kids,
which we are inevitably, uh that we have
a nationwide curriculum from an
indoctrination perspective that
everybody agrees on. And it's just real
basic. For me, it's a growth mindset.
Just take everything Carol Dwek has ever
taught and just be like, "Here it is.
This is the uh
>> yeah you know you know one of the things
I was just in China that I thought think
we do so well in America to your freedom
point is we love to challenge right even
you know you you could be an
administrative assistant or a CEO in
this country and you perfectly uh can
say that the president is someone you
think is utterly wrong and believe that
your opinion matters just as much with
fervor and certainty. uh and it it's not
just that you have the freedom of speech
to do it that you have the
self-confidence to it. One of the things
I used to do as a student is I used to
love arguing that my teacher was wrong
about something and that now I argue
that people uh may be wrong and it it's
given me a ability to challenge the
system and so I I feel like that you
don't want too sanitized right like are
you going to say the AI is wrong or you
want to make sure people are developing
a a spirit of challenging the system
questioning authority uh taking risk uh
and I I think I know these things seem
soft and I we definitely need to get our
math reading and technology skills up.
Uh but I think it's actually what makes
America exceptional. I think it's why we
I am very bullish on the American
experiment long term.
>> Yeah, I could not agree more. It's one
of the things that makes me very nervous
about what I see happening in America
culturally, which is a move to uh a very
socialist stance of like we want to make
sure that everybody's outcomes are the
same. um you said what you believe which
is you want to make sure that people
have the same opportunity that you had
and I think that is absolutely critical.
I think it's immoral to do anything
other than that. Um but from the
perspective of God, the universe,
whatever it is that you believe in, uh
has seen fit to give us different
talent, intelligence, and so there's
always going to be different outcomes.
Um, so
having the ability to take a swing, to
think that you're right only works if
we're going to allow the marketplace to
slap you around and say, "Nope, you're
wrong." And right now, I believe that
America has lost the stomach for letting
people fail. And to make sure that we
catch everybody, we are robbing us of
what you're talking about, which is all
right guys, we're going to make sure
that you all get educated. All right,
guys, we're going to make sure that you
don't have to worry about your
healthcare. However, after that, this is
going to be a question of your talent,
your intelligence, your discipline, your
hard work. You've all got access to the
AI. You've all got access to the health
care. Let's go. But some of you are
going to get rich and some of you guys
are going to crash and burn. And by the
way, some of you are going to be lazy as
hell and you're not going to do
anything. You're not going to develop
yourself. No beef. But then we're going
to get a very uneven distribution of
outcomes. And I really think we have
lost the will for that. And there is and
I think it comes from things have gone
so well for so long that people think
that amazing outcomes and growth are a
law of nature not realizing it is tied
to exactly one thing and that exactly
one thing is entrepreneurship.
There is nothing else. Uh it's the only
thing that generates jobs. It's the only
thing that generates taxable revenue.
Like it is the whole game. It's the
thing that is innovation itself. Like it
just that is the thing. Uh and we're
losing sight of that to our detriment.
Uh and I see let's call it the AOC
Mandani wing as representing that. And
that one really scares me. Like I look
at that and I go this doesn't work.
>> Let me ask you this though. You know
what they're speaking to is the 70% of
Americans who have lost the dream, the
American dream, and they're saying,
"Look, we can't afford uh our housing.
We can't afford rent. We we we can't
afford healthcare."
And I agree with you on the
entrepreneurship and and the the
innovation, but don't you think some of
the issue was people
being subject to forces well beyond
their control that the the shop owner in
rural America who couldn't compete with
Amazon didn't know that it wasn't that
he or she didn't work hard. The factory
worker that couldn't compete with China
or Mexico, it wasn't that he or she
couldn't work hard. the uh you know
small town that couldn't compete because
all their kids were leaving for Silicon
Valley or Seattle. It's not that they
couldn't work hard. And so there have
been so many forces of globalization
uh automation that have hit the economy
that a lot of people are saying we did
everything right. You know, we worked
hard. We yeah, we're not
entrepreneurial. I mean, not not
everyone can start a business. That's
why one or two% of people in this
country do that. I don't know. It's a
little bit more. You would know the
statistics. We didn't put everything in
our job. We we we had pride in our job
and then we wanted to support our
family. We wanted to go to church. We
wanted to coach little league. Uh and
every my our grandparents did that. Our
parents said that. And we couldn't do
it. And now we see no possibility for
our kids doing it. And it's not because
we're not working hard. It's because the
system screwed us. And I I really think
that's a large part of what explains
whether it's Trump, whether it's Bernie,
whether it's a it's this righteous anger
at a system that people feel has failed
them even if they're willing to work
hard.
>> You and I are in violent agreement about
that. So that's why we started the
interview where we started it. I want
people to understand it is not unknown
forces. It is it is a force. I can walk
you through it over and over and over.
It is I'll oversimplify again, but it's
debt and inflation. That that is what's
robbed you uh of this. If you make homes
unaffordable and then put people in a
position where you are creating
inflation and the only way to hide from
inflation is to own assets and the only
asset you understand is a home and
that's unaffordable. You you are saying
I I the government am going to put a
boot on your face and I'm going to stamp
on it forever and that's it. like it. I
I really want people to understand that
is what has happened. And so now the
question becomes how do we undo that?
Now you're one of the few people that um
I really hear banging the drum
eloquently and so I want to just amplify
this as much as possible. You've you
have talked about this as um economic
patriotism. We need to get people to
understand you've got to bring some very
meaningful percentage of manufacturing
back to the United States. An absolute
must for a whole host of reasons by the
way. Uh national security being one of
them. Uh Thusidity's trap. If people
don't know it, look it up. Uh it's a
very real thing. China's going to be a
real China is a real thing. Uh so uh
you're preaching to the choir. Amen,
brother. Like keep going with that. Uh
but getting people to understand nothing
nothing comes even close to matching as
long as the government is deficit
spending your
neck is being stepped on. And if we
don't stop deficit spending because of
the the physics of the economy you're in
a just a horrible position. Now there
are things I think thing number one stop
deficit spending. Thing number two
there, it's so simple to make houses
more affordable,
>> which is
>> and that is free market, baby. Let
builders take a risk to go build a whole
bunch of apartment complexes in that
neighborhood that you really don't want
apartment complexes and they will find
that balance. Like if you look at there
are several places
>> I I agree with this in terms of we got
to double our construction of housing in
in this country. I mean that that that
to me and I I I think there's more and
more recognition in California. We
messed that up. I mean for until now I
mean now finally Scott Weiner and had a
bill to say okay let's uh have more more
housing. But look at my district in
Silicon Valley prime example. You got $5
trillion companies uh in the in the
place that have arisen in the last 20
years 25 years. And yet the place from a
housing perspective still looks like the
valley of the hearts to light with
orchards. like how you can't have that.
You can't have uh the most economic
activity in the world and housing growth
be restricted. And so it's not a
surprise that you have all these
multi-millionaires
now bidding up the housing prices uh so
that a the working class can barely
can't live there. Uh and I I I do think
that the debt and inflation uh is one of
those causes, but restrictive zoning has
been another reason. And the fundamental
income inequality I think is also a
reason. If you're if you're living as a
plumber or as a teacher uh and everyone
around you is li working at Google as
and had stock uh and it just so happened
we had this tech boom. Well, you know
that that makes it hard to have housing
be affordable.
>> Uh I totally agree. And so the good news
is you're being very specific and once
something is specific then we can look
at the cause and effect and we can say
what exactly do we need to do? Uh for
people that don't know yimi it would be
yes in my backyard. So uh nimiism which
is the thing that you'll hear most
commonly is not in my backyard meaning
yeah yeah yeah you can go do it
somewhere else but don't build those
apartments in my neighborhood. Um so I
think that there's a lot of things that
we could do with that to make sure that
we're getting more housing. Houston is a
great example. Houston just says, "Yeah,
it's easy to get a building permit. No
problem. Go do your thing." Uh and
because of that, housing prices in uh
Houston have been ridiculously stable.
And so people that want that number to
go up, yeah, they're buming because it's
just sort of a steady across line. Um
but it does mean that people can
actually get onto the property ladder.
And again, given the need to get on the
property ladder to have an asset that
you understand, uh you got to do it.
It's one of those like I keep coming
back to the government has certain moral
obligations. One moral obligation would
be to give people access to uh a home
that is affordable for call it the
median income in the country. So it's
like bro you can't put people in a
position where they cannot get into
assets unless you're prepared to not
inflate the currency. So you can't both
inflate the currency and make it
impossible to get into an asset. So pick
your poison. if you want to reharm the
currency.
>> I I agree with you on the Houston uh
permitting and building and I from the
things I've read that Houston has been
better than some of the places in in in
California on that. Would you do
anything more though? Would you you know
some people for example say for
firsttime home buyers uh at a certain
income level, help them with their down
payment, lower their interest rates at 2
to 3%. Uh other people say no, you know,
if you do this too much, you're going to
create a bubble. And that that that at
its extreme is what led to the 2008
crash. I mean, where are you and how
much do you help beyond building people
get into homeowner ownership?
I
>> I'll come down to cause and effect on
it. So, if somebody can show me that,
hey, um the government getting involved
uh can really do something if the
program fits these metrics, I'd be all
for it. My gut instinct is it won't
work. When the government gets involved,
they do create bubbles. They create
distortions. They give rents to the
wrong people. Uh housing developers
know, oh, I know you're going to be able
to get a loan for this amount. They'll
know that loans get handed out in
certain bands, so they're only going to
build houses that match those bands or
they're only going to price houses in
those bands. Like, it creates
distortions in the market. It is
probably much better to make sure that
everybody's getting their education,
that we're not inflating the purchasing
power of their dollar away, that we're
not sending all of their jobs overseas,
that we're not importing cheap labor.
And then we say, "Okay, and now we're
relaxing some of these restrictions so
that the people in the local market who
are capitalists, who are just trying to,
they're going to take a risk and they're
going to say, "I can build a better
house than the next person. Uh, I can
get better loans than the next person."
and so I'm going to win in this housing
market. You let all those guys compete
with each other. Some of them are going
to go out of business. They're going to
go bankrupt and the the buyers will get
to take advantage of that jockeying and
that competition. Um so that when
you're uncertain about something,
letting the free market do its thing is
almost always the right answer.
>> Where where in the I mean I would on
housing I agree on the doubling the
housing construction. And I agree on
expediting permitting for building, but
I do think we need to stop sort of
private equity, subsidizing private
equity to be buying single family homes.
>> Yeah. Stop stop ridiculous competition
where you're letting people just gobble
that stuff up or have some sort of
progressive system where it's like all
right if you want to buy that third
house like go for it but damn like
you're paying some crazy like tax or
whatever facts like a consumption tax
where it's like oh if you want to get
into that thing like we we are trying to
save let's make no bones about it we are
trying to save these houses for
firsttime home buyers and so if you're a
third time home buyer, they're going to
be like just you can do it because fine
having 50% tax or whatever. Uh is great.
We can do amazing things with that. So
that kind of thing I have no problem.
>> Well, and and that's an interesting
idea. I didn't even thought of it. Maybe
I'll I'll have my team look at that. But
consumption tax whether it's for private
equity or a second or third third home.
uh and then some some sense of a in my
view a well-crafted uh program for
first-time home buyers. But let me ask
you this on a broader philosophical
level. Most people think sort of the New
Deal, the GI Bill when when we came back
uh to the United States. Well, let's
start before that. Europe didn't allow
uh everyone to go to high school. High
school was an elite thing in Europe. 20
30 40% of people went to high school
between 1910 to 1940 in Germany, in
France, uh in in England. The United
States had no high school for everyone,
public high school for everyone. It it
helps us uh become the dominant
postworld war economy. We make that bet.
And then we have the GI Bill and we say,
you know, we're going to help people who
served in the war uh get housing, get
education, and that's credited for our
our economic development. Are there
fundamental things that you would say in
the last hundred years or last 50 years
that the federal government has done
really well uh or where you say, "Yeah,
that is something that is foundational
to the American dream or are you are you
just deeply suspicious of the the
federal government and uh and if so, how
far back? I mean, where where do you
think uh where what are the programs
that you think the federal government
should have and and is doing well?"
Well, so again, if I go back and look at
the results, uh, then it is undeniable
that the setup post World War II was
amazing. So, we had the incredible baby
boom that we had, baby boomers really
came in to like some good stuff for a
reason. Uh, thanking our troops,
honoring their service, you're always
going to get big applause from me. So
doing a GI bill and saying, "Hey, thanks
for risking your life to protect our
freedoms." Yes, we're going to make sure
that you get educated and all the other
benefits. Love that. Totally here for
that. Um, so when you look at that boom
period, some of it is demographics and
that becomes very it becomes impossible
to replicate. But nonetheless, they made
some really good moves there. I'm also
very impressed with what the US did to
establish itself as a reserve currency.
the even though I absolutely despise and
think that it evil is probably the right
word though everything's a trade-off so
there are certainly upsides but in 1913
when we passed uh the Federal Reserve
Act we did people all the dirt of
inflation so uh I don't love that one
but we we made America America is
amazing so my thing is you and I are
exactly the same age. We were both born
in 76. And I'm like, yo, growing up in
the '8s was dope. Being 12 in 1988 was
dope. I believed I could become anything
I wanted to. I have so many memories of
like cuz the easiest way to explain how
I grew up, I didn't have cows, but my
neighbors did.
>> Where did you grow up?
>> Tacoma, Washington.
>> Okay.
>> So, I was almost rural. And even being
that kid, I was like, I can be anything
I want. This is amazing.
>> And you did pretty well. You did pretty
well.
>> Extraordinarily well. And so I want
everyone to have that same feeling. I
don't expect everyone to actually win.
To your point, not everybody wants to be
an entrepreneur. It's very stressful. Uh
I don't recommend it for everybody, but
I want people to believe, okay, the game
is not rigged against me. It did not
feel rigged against me when I was a kid.
And right now it is provably rigged
against people. So I feel like we had a
great run there for a minute. The debt
accumulation caught up to us. We made
some very troubling uh decisions with
letting the government uh basically back
a lot of loans in housing, back a lot of
loans to students to get educated. And
that came home to roost. And so there
are obviously other issues, but like you
start stacking those things up and it it
starts getting bad, but I dude I'm the
most patriotic guy you're ever going to
meet. Like my mission is literally to
get people to feel the way I felt when I
was 12 in 1988. Like I want
>> I know you're not we share the same
aspiration. We share the same kind of
hope about America, right? Even though
we have such different backgrounds. My
grandfather spent four years in jail
alongside Gandhi, fighting for India's
independence. My parents are immigrants,
but I grew up in Bucks County,
Pennsylvania. 99% white,
Indian-American, Hindu faith, going to
Philly's games at the 700 level at the
vet, watching Rocky movies, believing
you could do anything in America. And
then this country elects me to represent
arguably the most innovative place in
the world at the age of 40. Obviously,
you can't have a story of like mine and
or like yours and not believe in the
American experiment. Uh, and it it it
pains me that the country my parents
came to, the country I grew up in, that
there's not that same confidence.
There's not that same hope. There's not
that same spirit. That's what I want uh
to invoke and and to build in the in
this country. We're both doing similar
work from different angles and perhaps
different ideologies.
Who do you think putting you're not
political but is there a president in
your lifetime who spoke to that who you
said you know what that's the that's the
direction I want America to go or have
you just been think that we made
mistakes over the last 50 years
>> 90s Clinton minus the like that
you you had me at hello that felt dope
like when it was happening it felt
awesome
>> uh now behind the scenes I'm sure in
terms of presiding over what was going
on with China and all of that that there
are mistakes obviously that we would
look back on but being fiscally
conservative ironically as a Democrat
dope building the I mean they were
basically saying doy things back in the
'90s
>> Clinton reinvented government 300,000
federal workers were either uh you know
reassigned or or or or let go in terms
of but it was done with Congress it was
Al Gore's reinventing government and the
challenge with this Doge thing is they
were like, "Oh, we don't have to work
with Congress. We can just do whatever."
And uh and and they uh didn't really do
much. I mean, in terms of the actual
>> Here's here's my whole beef. This is a
populist moment.
>> Yeah.
>> And in a populist moment, there are very
predictable psychological things that
are happening. And those psychological
things are um there was a cross-cultural
study done that showed if people in
times of wealth inequality if people can
vote for something that will help the
poor
um they won't do it as readily as they
will vote for something that punishes
the rich. So if they have two if they
have two and this is cross culture
something
>> I got to interrupt her because you're so
spot on. There was a study about when
Elizabeth Horn would talk about we can
have child care at $10 a day or
whatever. I mean I for that and then
she'd say and we will tax the wealthy to
do it that the collapse would be more
for taxing the wealthy than for the the
program. So it's it's interesting that
study. It's fascinating. Yes, it is
heartbreaking because this is the thing
that's driving us apart. So, my whole my
whole mission is to pull people back to
the middle.
>> You you have to be in the middle no
matter what. These are our countrymen.
These are fellow human beings. We share
a uh you know geography. Uh we've got to
understand you're going to compromise. I
don't care what side you're on. Uh just
like I compromise with my wife even when
I think that she is just not looking at
the world the right way and she
compromises with me when she thinks I'm
not looking at the world the right way
because we're married. And so it's like
we don't want to self-destruct. So
anyway, I'm trying to get people back to
the middle. But um the way that we're
going to get there has to be grounded in
what is real. And in a populist moment,
we have to recognize what is real is
that people want to punish the wealthy
more than they want to help the poor.
And when you understand that, all of a
sudden, the voting and the cheering and
all of that, it all starts to make
sense.
>> But do they want to punish the wealthy
more or do they want to punish society's
enemies? So, you know, Trump comes in
and says it's not just the wealthy. He
blames China. He blames Mexico. He
blames immigrants. He blames trans kids.
He blames it that that they want a
villain of of some kind. And and you
could say my party has says that the
wealthy should pay more. And maybe maybe
it's punitive, but uh there's a populist
right that is also uh looking for for
things to blame.
>> 100%. So uh who's the villain? This is
why people always talk about um you
know, if only we could have an alien
invasion and then we could all be united
uh being against the alien. I don't know
if you've ever read it, but there's a
comic book called The Watchmen and
spoiler alert though it is like 40 years
old. So, um and all that stuff,
>> bro. I I am a big believer in the power
of myth. And so, what you see behind me
are some of my favorite myths.
>> Someone once asked me to to young guy to
like start to explain the difference
between the Justice League and Avengers.
And I started going down the rabbit hole
on chat GPT. And I can tell you I can
talk for two hours on economics, but I
was just I was confused. I left. I left
not being able to piece that that
together and and and so I've given up on
that on that goal.
>> That's hilarious. Yeah, I think it it
speaks to a certain personality type.
It's definitely not something I expect
everybody to get into. Uh but it's
humans are meaning making machines and
we tell ourselves stories as ways of
transmitting a whole lot of very
important information in an emotional
fashion that's easy to remember. That's
why religion works. That's why Star Wars
works. Um that's why the story I was
talking about with um the Watchmen
works. And in that story, basically a
guy fabricates an alien invasion to try
to bring people back together. And it's
it's a very fascinating story and it's a
very big question as to whether he was a
villain uh or whether he was um somebody
actually saving America. It's it's uh or
the world. That's very very fascinating.
So yeah, we we have to be very careful
right now. People want a villain.
They'll get a villain no matter what.
And so how do we talk people down? Now
for me,
>> mom Donnie is a villain
>> really.
>> And
you have you met him?
>> Yeah. Yeah. That's this is the part uh
where I wanted to talk to you the most.
You're a very sensible, very smart man.
>> You know, I've endorsed him. I' I've
gone to campaign for Abigail Spanberger
who's running for governor of Virginia.
going to campaign for Mikey Cheryl and
I'm going for Mandani November November
1st. So I uh you know all cards on the
table I I I'm supporting him. So let's
let let me ask you why you uh why you
feel that way
>> because policies go ahead.
>> Well I I I would you be open to having a
conversation with him or
>> No. Yeah.
>> Yeah. Let's have a convers Let let me
let tell me why. Let me tell you, let me
make the case for Mani's
rise and you tell me where where you
have the strongest objections. Mandani
says, "Look, uh, New York, uh, we think
of it as as as as Goldman Sachs and
Broadway and finance, but you know, the
real people, uh, building New York City
are the uh are also the construction
workers and the cab drivers and the uh,
Bedo uh, owners. And costs have gone
skyrocketed for them, and they aren't
being appreciated. And I I want a New
York City that's for young people and
working people and that celebrates it as
much as for uh the billionaires who are
making the financial engine of the
United States and country work. And I
really think uh he galvanizes folks on
that. And then he galvanizes folks on on
of course the Israel Palestine issue
which which we can get into if you have
an opinion on. But those are the two
things I think animating uh his
campaign.
>> Yeah. So, the part that you just
represented, I'd be like, "Yo, this he's
my guy. Who's this guy? I got to meet
him. Like, this is what I'm about." Uh,
I love that. I love that he's honoring
hardworking people that really are
helping build the city, and there's no
doubt about that. Uh, but once if you
try to map what he's actually talking
about from a policy perspective with the
words you just said, you're going to be
very confused cuz it's like, wait, but
the things that you're going to do are
going to hurt all of those people. Uh,
and once you map him from, oh, you're
tapped into the resentment of all of
those people and you're the populist
leader who's going to promise the
socialist things that lead to uh, first
just the destruction of the economy, but
after the destruction of the economy, it
leads to death. And um I am I'm not a
scholar, but oo am I getting close every
day uh to being a scholar of the
atrocities of the 20th century led by
Marxist thinkers. Uh and he embraces a
very distressing number of their ideas.
Uh and so I'm just like he's going to
hurt the very people he propo purports
to want to help. And so he only makes
sense when you think of him as somebody
who resents the wealthy. far more than
he wants to help the poor.
>> But what about if we're in a uh FDR like
moment in this country? You know, we've
gone in income inequality from 53rd in
the world to 128th. We've got
extraordinary wealth generation. You're
a example of it through hard work,
through entrepreneurship. Uh and we've
got a lot of people for uh struggling
and for reasons, you know, that you've
discussed in terms of uh debt and
inflation and that we've discussed in
terms of globalization and uh and
automation and the decline of unions uh
and the neglect of of of uh rural and
factory towns and the working class. And
what if Mdani is saying we need a
correction to to this capitalism and you
know FDR and his coalition at socialists
and FDR had saved basically capitalism
from itself. And if if what we need is
uh to take seriously the critiques of of
capitalism of unfettered capitalism to
have our own vision of uh of a free
enterprise system that that is going to
work and reduce some of these
inequalities. I call it progressive
capitalism, moral capitalism. I imagine
you would have at the central pre
premise of that reducing debt. But but
even if if that's not my central
premise, what do you just think about uh
the goal of capitalism correcting itself
and pointing out that it must correct
itself uh or or we're going to have
massive resentment.
>> So the way that I approach all of this
is from cause and effect. So economies
have physics. And when I hear somebody
go, "Okay, we want to we want to get to
Mars,
uh, and we have tried everything and
nothing has worked." And so guys, I'm
telling you, we got to point the rocket
down. I'm going to be like, "Hey, I
understand you want change. Hey, I get
it. Things aren't working. Heard we're
totally on the same page, but pointing
the rocket down is the only thing
guaranteed not to work." And so this is
where I always ask people to read a
series of books which will make clear
exactly what happens when you try these
policies. Oh, and by the way, so I'll
list the books in a second. Uh you don't
have to go any further than the 70s and
80s in the Bronx. His very policies, the
very things that he's saying that he
wants to do now have already been tried.
So my number one lesson to entrepreneurs
is, "Oh, cool. You're about to do a
thing. The number one question to ask
is, "Has anybody tried this before?" And
if the answer is yes, go find out what
happened because
>> what about this idea though he has on
free buses, right? His point on that is
a lot of the people on these buses
aren't paying their bus fair anyway. Uh
and it's kind of a a deterrent uh to to
some. And so if you made it free, it's
something that the city can afford and
makes public transportation easier. It's
not a huge revenue loss. I mean is is
are you are you opposed to all his ideas
or are there specific ones and I don't
you know I mean I obviously have my own
platform and and want to be accountable
for my my ideas and I work with Mandani
I work with Nassie I sort of trying to
build a a unique coalition of what what
the time requires. I I I'm curious.
Obviously, his he he uh does his
platform concern you more than Donald
Trump's platform?
>> His platform does concern me more than
Donald Trump's platform, but Donald
Trump is doing his best to make me more
concerned with every passing day. So, uh
>> if it's Mandani versus Trump, who do you
vote for?
>> Oh, Trump for sure. When when uh Trump
did the big beautiful bill, he lost me.
Um,
so yeah, any anybody that's trying to
map me as like, "Oh my god, I love Trump
so much." They're always going to be
confused.
>> No, I mean, I'm You're an independent
thinker and you're not political. I'm
just I'm I'm asking him more one of the
things I've loved about this
conversation is it's sort of
intellectually open and curious, which I
think we don't have in our politics. I'm
asking him more as, you know, you would
as a friend over dinner, not not and try
to, oh, you're a Trump supporter.
>> Yeah. So uh the talking about mom dani
specifically the even if I map him is
like no he's really well-meaning if he's
well-meaning he does not have any
historical context. So to the bus thing
one thing you learn as an entrepreneur
very fast is every division needs to be
a self-sustaining economic engine of its
own. Why? Because anything that can't
output something that is more valuable
than its inputs, so the labor costs, the
parts, the whatever, it tells you the
world does not want that thing. And so
when you use other things to cover the
losses from that area, you're really
just doing an an emotional thing.
There's no logic to that. The world has
been asked and has given you an answer
as to whether it wants that thing at
that price. And the answer is no, I do
not. But they're public goods, right? I
mean, we have public schools, we have
public health. I mean, there are public
goods where we don't take that that
view. Public roads.
>> Sure. So, when you're talking about
something like the roads, you're saying,
"Okay, everybody, we've got all this
infrastructure. We are going to be
taxing people, and then we're going to
efficiently deploy that to build the
things that we think are going to give
the maximal output." And what you're
running into is, "Okay, we have an
unbalanced budget." Because if you have
a balanced budget and you just want to
say, "Pick anything. We want to make
buses free. We want to make ice cream
free." Whatever. Then it doesn't matter
because you've got a balanced budget and
that's the thing you've decided that you
want to allocate funds to. And people
can argue, "No, no, no, I don't want
buses for free. I want taxis for free.
Or I don't want ice cream for free. I
want the subway for free." Whatever. And
then I think most people go, "Well, the
subway, the buses, those are better
because more people can move around from
it'll open up job opportunities and
things like that." And you'd hear me be
like, "Yeah, that's way better than ice
cream." Uh, when you have an unbalanced
budget, then I'm like, "Hold on. You
have to figure out why this thing is not
able to make money in and of itself."
And so I have a feeling you're going to
come down to your housing is the problem
and you need to address housing. You
need to make housing affordable. So, I
think a big problem that I'm going to
have with Mom Donnie is that he is
speaking to people's emotions. And I
unfortunately I only care about emotions
in as much as to get people to do the
right thing. You have to meet them where
they are. So, they have to understand
that you get how bad things have gotten
for them. But then you've got to walk
them through what's actually going to
solve the problem. Mom Donnie, in my
opinion, is on the uh Civil War
Revolution path. So, if we follow his
policies, well-intentioned or not, they
end with more deficit. They end with
violence breaking out. Keep in mind,
every country except Japan that has ever
been over 130% debt to GDP for more than
it's like 18 months has ended up in open
conflict. So, I think given we're
already seeing political assassinations,
we're already seeing riots, we're we're
not going to be Japan. We're not going
to be the next country that can stay
over 130%. We're at 122%. So, I think
he's got the most energy in the
Democratic party. So, I don't look at
this and go, "Oh, but it's isolated to
New York." I go, "No, no, no. This is
where the country is moving. This
certainly is where the Democratic Party
is moving." And through the physics of
the economy, this becomes a problem. So,
>> what would you do in So, let's say Mani
now wins. He's a reasonable guy. He
says, "Okay, what should I do to bring
down housing costs, grocery costs,
busing costs, you know, he can't deal
with the federal debt that's out of his
hand as mayor of New York. What would
you tell him to do?"
>> Okay, so one, I want to make clear if he
becomes the elected um mayor of New
York, I want him to do well. I want him
to succeed. I want him to make life. No,
no. This this is like the most atypical
thing for somebody to want. Most people
I just said he's a villain. So if the
villain gets elected, I still want him
to win for New Yorkers. So let's start
there. So I would come with sincerity
and say, "All right, listen, man. This
is all about cause and effect. This is
all about physics." So if your deficit
spending, you're going to have a
problem. Please look at the laugher
curve. There's only so much that you can
tax people before they leave and you
actually end up taking in less tax. The
US post World War II had a 90% prot uh
progressive tax rate. We collected less
tax per taxpayer than we do now per
taxpayer. So it it isn't a winning
solution. So let's be very careful. But
hey, if you've got ideas and you want to
tax people a little bit more cuz he's
saying, "Look, it's only 2%." Okay, rad.
So 2% I think it's liveable. I don't
think you're going to see a ton of
flight. But if they're seeing things
play out poorly elsewhere, they're
seeing they're not getting a return on
their investment or they see that you're
that's really just a Trojan horse, you
want to do more. You've got to be very
careful. So, number one, hey, I'm
sitting in the lobby of your office just
to get one thing across. Make housing
affordable. Make it affordable. Don't do
rent control. It will make it worse. You
need to only look at the Bronx.
Literally 70s and 80s Bronx, baby. We
tried exactly this. It doesn't work. So,
we both agree we want to make it
cheaper. Don't do it through rent
controls. That would be like if I was
going to give them one thing across the
board, it would be that.
But it my understanding is New York like
half the apartments already are rent
rent controlled or like below is the
problem. That's why it's too expensive.
>> But the very thing he's railing against,
his right to rail against it, his
solution is the only thing that's going
to make it worse.
>> I I I think if the point is that we need
to build more housing in in New York, I
think he could be open to it. I my sense
is
>> that uh you know he's been open to the
abundance agenda. I don't know if you
read sort of Ezra Klein and Derek
Thompson's book, but they've been
talking about we got to build more. We
got to uh have expedited permitting. So,
I I I don't think he's he'd be uh it'd
be out of the question for him to to to
support that as he talks about the rent
control departments that already exist.
He doesn't want their their rent to go
up. And that that I think is uh you
know, Basio, I think, did it three years
or something. I mean, it's it's it's
already in place in New York. But I I
hear you that you know, his challenge I
I think is going to win the election.
And I think his challenge will be okay
now how do we in the next year really
show uh in New York City that costs are
going down uh because uh it's it's
governing is very different than
campaigning
>> as you well know yes that that is a very
big thing and so that brings us to the
other part is uh the DSA is hypertoxic
in my opinion uh and part of the reason
it's hypertoxic is they reject ideas
that I think are evolutionarily placed
in us. And the easy one to round to is
the family. And they held an event where
they were talking about abolishing the
family. And this is in the last like six
months. Um so
>> that I didn't I didn't see that.
>> Oh god. It it might have even
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It might have even
been the name of their uh meeting. So it
won't be hard to find. But um so I don't
know how much he goes in on that kind of
thing. I would have to see that play out
over time. But I would want to see him
bring people together in the middle. Uh
I I want that of every politician. This
is my huge complaint with Trump is he's
constitutionally incapable of um
bringing people back together in the
middle, which is wild because he's uh
>> bringing people.
>> Yeah. internationally. He's But I think
there it works because um it's just
carrot and a whole lot of stick
>> and that's not going to work with your
own populace. Or maybe it will and I
just am blind. I don't know. He strikes
me as the wrong person to help us find
the middle in America.
>> So what is your advice to someone like
me who works with Massie who's kind of
obviously I've got a progressive
capitalist view. There are places where
you disagree with me on wealth tax or
maybe Medicare for all. Uh there are
places you may agree with me which is
that that we need to support
entrepreneurship, innovation. We need to
uh create economic opportunity in places
and for people who haven't had them. And
I'm building this coalition where I'm
supporting Mumani. I'm supporting uh
moderates like Mikey, Cheryl, Abigail,
working across the aisle with people
like Massie. what as a citizen uh would
say you know I don't agree with Ro 100%
but I I can see being supportive of his
efforts uh where my real goal is to try
to figure out how do we bring this
country together and Mani speaks for 30%
at least in the Democratic party and uh
and and you know Massie speaks for a
percent and Marjorie Taylor Green speaks
for a percent I mean what would you want
to see from someone like me uh even
where we have ideological disagreements
>> lead them to the physics. So follow the
money. How does this actually work? It
really is the economy. Everything is the
economy. So what people are actually
lamenting is the economy. I can't afford
the things that I want. I don't think my
life tomorrow would be better than it is
today. And I don't think my kids lives
will be better. Oh, and by the way, I
don't even feel like I can afford kids.
Um so yeah, I mean
>> the same exact diagnosis of the problem.
We have a very similar read on the
cultural challenge of America. We have a
very similar read on the aspiration of
America and we have very similar life
experiences being the same age and you
know I think you would embrace economic
patriotism and making America dynamic
and humming again and I think it's the
mechanisms your cause and effect it's
the specifics that uh where where we may
have certain disagreements and and need
to figure out and but but it's specifics
of of how do you build that kind of
coalition with where where you can get
the brought 50 plus% of Americans on
board because otherwise you can't get
things through a Congress and a and and
a Senate. And I I think that uh the
physics matter of the economics, but my
sense is in this country right now, the
temperament may matter the most and that
this country is exhausted. We're tired.
We're looking for inspiration. We're
looking for a common purpose. We we want
to believe in the American dream again.
Uh and we're desperate for people in the
House and the Senate leaders who were
who are going to take that as opposed to
just uh villainizing things and and
pretending that that's going to bring
back the American dream.
>> Yeah. I mean, honestly, getting more
people like you is probably the only
answer. Uh and when I say like you, I
mean very specifically. You I think will
respond to results. And as long as
people are responding to results,
nobody's going to get it right out of
the gate. Um, but I love that you have a
Trump, you took Trump's words, I
believe, from the executive order, and
we're like, "Cool, I'm going to turn
this into a bill and let's see what
happens."
>> The bad news is I don't think you're
going to get
>> Republicans and Democrats on board with
it because the political moment we're in
is so dumb. So crazy for yesterday I I
did a I had reached out to to Benny
Johnson who was friends with Charlie
Kirk and I'd reached out to him just
saying you know I know this is a
terrible time in your life and I'm uh
sorry for your loss and horrific what
happened to Charlie and he said well
come on my podcast let's talk about it
and he was very fair was a halfhour
conversation about condemning violence
figuring out how we lower the
temperature and you know If you look at
my ex feed, it's sort of Ron Kana,
you're going and talking to a Russia
paid agent and why are you going over to
the other side and I we just live in
this in this moment where if I say
anything that positive about Trump like
I gave him credit for the hostage deal,
you get attacked. And I I think what
people want is just bolds and strikes
and you know and and and being honest,
right? It's like if I came here and I
didn't talk about the support of a
wealth tax, that'd be pandering. It'd be
like, I I know your politics and but
they want someone who's going to say
what they believe, be consistent about
it, let their cards out there, and call
balls and strikes. And I think we're
just so caught up in uh the gamesmanship
of politics.
>> Ro, I think you're wrong. So, I think
there is a certain type of person, I'll
definitely include myself. I want balls
and strikes. I don't trust myself to be
right. So, I'm glad that when you think
differently, you're going to tell me you
think differently, and you're going to
make me think about that. And if I can
follow your logic, then at least I'm
just dealing in cause and effect. But
what makes populist moments rhyme all
throughout history is human psychology
doesn't change. So, the times, the
circumstances, they change, but the way
that people respond to wealth
inequality, for instance, you can see it
in monkeys. Monkeys respond to unequal
pay. So if you give a monkey a cucumber,
they're both happy to do the task for a
cucumber, but you start giving one of
them a grape, which they prefer over
cucumbers for the same task, and the
cucumber monkey goes ballistic. So this
kind of thing is just baked into our
DNA. And what I think happens in
populist moments is economic insecurity
makes people afraid. Being afraid sucks.
And so we transmute the emotion of fear
into anger. and we seek a populist
leader who points it at somebody like
you were saying, they give us an enemy
and now I can focus on that enemy and I
at least feel good. Now, this study I
hope distresses you as much as it
distresses me, but neuroscientists took
people who had their skulls opened and
so they were putting electrodes in their
brain while they were having surgery and
they stimulated all the different
emotions and then they asked them love,
happiness, uh, fear, anger, all that,
which one do you want me to stimulate
again? The answer was universally anger.
Anger is the emotion. When we're given
the option to hit it, we will. And the
reason I think is anger is devoid of
anxiety and uncertainty. And the thing
that people hate is being anxious and
uncertain. But when you're mad, you have
clarity. You know exactly what to do.
You feel right. You feel righteous. You
are ready to move. And so when you get
in a populous moment,
what those leaders write on is they're
able to capture all of that anger that
feels so good and they stoke it and you
feel even better. And they tell you,
"Ooh, I'm going to go slap that other
side around. I'm going to get you what
you want. I'm going to get it to you for
free." And people just go gaga for it.
And in these moments, the person that
sounds like you is like, "Well, you're
not making me feel angry. I want to feel
angry, bro. What the hell?
>> Well, you you would uh you could rise in
a populist moment with anger at the
debt, right? I mean, that's your
villain, the debt.
>> And I have to be careful of that.
>> That's why I have a um an internal
mandate that if I want to respect
myself, I have to be pulling people back
to the middle. If I whip them into a
frenzy in any direction, debt or
otherwise, I don't get to respect myself
because I will just be making it worse.
>> What do you think breaks the populist
moment from your reading of history?
What and how do you think we break that
moment in this country other than
solving the fundamental issue of
>> do you want to know what history tells
me or do you want to know what the sort
of fantasy land of unwinding it would
look like?
Well, what do you think is a practical
way forward to to to heal kind of the
extremism, the division in the country?
>> There's only one. It's called a
beautiful deleveraging. It's Ray
Dallio's um so Ray Dio, if people don't
know him, he is the most successful
hedge fund manager of all time. He built
the largest hedge fund in the world. And
he built it by understanding this big
debt cycle that I'm talking about. And
he said, "Every empire has gone through
it. It's all very predictable." And so
he mapped out every empire over the last
500 years that's gone through this. And
he said there's six phases and they go
through it. And he said there's only one
way to back out of it. And it's what he
calls a beautiful deleveraging. And it's
basically economic pain in four flavors
done in just the right way that people
don't riot in the streets. uh not all of
the capital flees and you restructure
the debt to keep going and so you tax
the wealthy more. You um forgive a bunch
of debt. You restructure the debt. Uh
you print money and you do austerity and
you you have to do them in like oh god
like these micro little adjustments to
watch to see how it happens. Um because
when you forgive a debt for instance
that's somebody else's money and so
you're just saying sorry you don't get
any of your money back you just got
wiped out obviously that person is going
to freak out so you can only do that
>> forget the federal debt you're saying
forget parts of the federal debt or
>> yeah but I think people forget the
federal debt is owned by individual
citizens I mean the world over but many
like I own a ton of federal debt bonds
>> yeah exactly so this there's not some
amorphous thing out there. Um it's real
people ultimately. It could be the
people of China though they are
divesting about as fast as they can uh
for reasons
>> owns more of our debt at this point
>> and they are divesting as fast as they
can. So it is if you look at the price
of gold in the last year it's hilarious.
It's gone from like 2500 to 4200. That's
insane. The last time gold moved like
that was the 1970s. Guess what was
happening in the 1970s? Inflation. So,
yeah, this stuff just rhymes, man. It
rhymes. It makes me very sad. Makes me
very sad, bro. Ro, how do we solve it
all? What's What's your answer? If you
were going to nutshell it for us, you're
in the mix. I'm out here. I'm just a
pundit. I I don't have to actually get
votes. So, in the thick of it, what
what's the answer?
>> Well, I believe the answer is economic
patriotism. I think it is uh figuring
out how do we uh get people to have uh
productive jobs that can support a
family. Uh how do we make sure that they
have basic healthcare and education that
that allows them to be able to produce
wealth to be able to build wealth to be
able to feel like they're participating
in a modern economy and not that wow you
got a bunch of people in Rose District
that are getting obscenely wealthy uh
while my life is getting uh getting
worse. So to me that is the the key and
while we do that we've got to have a
plan a path to lower the uh lower the
debt and and that plan is going to be
taxing the wealthy more but also looking
at the biggest ticket items like
Pentagon budget. You you can't lower the
debt without 50 when 56% of the
discretionary spending is on on the
military without touching that uh and
figuring out a a a path that we slowly
lower the debt. But that lowering the
debt is something that's abstract. I
think in the immediate we've got to give
a people a sense that they can build
wealth, build jobs, build
entrepreneurship, uh, and and
participate in in the modern economy.
And and that to me it should be our
highest mission, the economic success of
every family and community in the 21st
century.
>> I love it. Ro, this conversation has
been extremely enjoyable. I thank you
for taking the time and I certainly
>> appreciate I learned a lot and I
appreciate cause and effect and results
I think is a underappreciated value in
our government. I mean we'd be all
better off if there was a results focus
regardless of the ideological lens you
start with.
>> Man, I agree. Where can people follow
along with you or engage with what
you're doing politically? You know, at
Rokana is great on on on all almost all
the social media platforms and on X. I
often reply to folks and so uh or they
can email me at rowana.com.
>> Awesome. Ro, thank you for your service,
man. I mean that sincerely. I really
appreciate you taking the time and uh
yeah, I wish you the best in making
America uh a better place. It's
wonderful.
>> I appreciate it, Tom. I appreciate what
you're doing for so many folks. Uh it's
it's really interesting talking to
someone who shares a similar view. But
of course you went out and did a lot
made a lot more money than I ever did
and you're you're doing great things in
in terms of inspiring others. But maybe
we'll get a meal if you're ever in
Silicon Valley or DC.
>> Oh, dude. I would do that in a heartbeat
for sure.
>> Thanks for having me.
>> All right, bro. Thank you. Take care.
>> Take care.
>> All right, everybody. If you haven't
already, be sure to subscribe. And until
next time, my friends, be legendary.
Take care. Peace. If you like this
conversation, check out this episode to
learn more. I'm looking at America and
I'm saying that we're really going
through something. We are in decline. I
would use even more dramatic words than
that, but I don't want to get trapped in
a linguistic game. Okay.
>> So, I'll just ask, do you think America
is declining on any measure any
meaningful measurements? I would push.