Speaker 1: A lot of the funds of woe and an individual loss.
Speaker 1: This is the oh right, everybody, welcome to your one
Speaker 1: book show and this U what is it? Sunday, May fourth.
Speaker 1: I hope everybody's having a fantastic weekend. I am getting sick.
Speaker 1: Uh so, just just to let you know, I'm a
Speaker 1: little maybe I'll be a little slow today, and who
Speaker 1: knows what's gonna happen during the week. But it seems
Speaker 1: like every time I go travel somewhere, I come back
Speaker 1: with some virus, some kind of bug. And Michigan did
Speaker 1: not spare me. It seems like on the flight back,
Speaker 1: I that's something. Anyway, it just hit me yesterday, got it?
Speaker 1: You know, you'd think you develop immunity for these things
Speaker 1: like I've I've had. I thought every vibus that existed
Speaker 1: this season, and no, I got another one. So it's
Speaker 1: still at the beginning. So you know, I get a scratchy,
Speaker 1: sore throat and then it becomes a congestion. So I
Speaker 1: expect congestion to be what happens the rest of the week.
Speaker 1: But I will do as many shows as I can
Speaker 1: and drink my my hot tea while I'm speaking. All right,
Speaker 1: I thought today we take a break, well not really,
Speaker 1: but from all the horrible news and all the bad
Speaker 1: stuff happening, and the the the the the idiocy that
Speaker 1: basically is visit a doctor. You don't visit a doctor
Speaker 1: for cold. It's not what you do. So I thought
Speaker 1: we take a break from the idiocy. All morning or afternoon,
Speaker 1: I've been watching the latest interview the Trump gave two
Speaker 1: I don't know what network it was, but it's all
Speaker 1: over the place where he basically says he's asked about
Speaker 1: due process and the constitution, following the Constitution, and his
Speaker 1: response to all of that is, yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know. I have good lawyers, they take care
Speaker 1: of this. I don't know. Am I supposed to follow
Speaker 1: the Constitution? I don't know. Due process? Fifth, I don't know.
Speaker 1: And he says, you know, get used to only having
Speaker 1: two dollars instead of thirty. A good question to come
Speaker 1: back to President Trump would be, what about the kid
Speaker 1: who has two dollars now because they can't afford thirty
Speaker 1: and now goes to zero dollars? Is that acceptable? I
Speaker 1: mean the whole thing anyway. Yeah, there's a ton of
Speaker 1: depressing stuff going on, and I see a lot of
Speaker 1: people out there and on the chat here and in
Speaker 1: the super chat periodically kind of in a sense giving
Speaker 1: up or accepting that this is the end. And if
Speaker 1: you're young, I'm not gonna have a job, and I'm
Speaker 1: not gonna have a life, and I'm not gonna have
Speaker 1: a house. I never for the house, never for this,
Speaker 1: never for that. And overall, you know, America's finished, and
Speaker 1: America is going to be poor, and generally you know
Speaker 1: life is going to suck, and that the future is overwhelming, bleak,
Speaker 1: and so I want to talk about that. I mean,
Speaker 1: let's be clear, we're facing unbelievable problems, and there's going
Speaker 1: to be a real economic price to pay for what
Speaker 1: is going on right now. But if your horizon is
Speaker 1: a little bit more than two, three, four years, if
Speaker 1: it's close to five to ten, then I just I
Speaker 1: just want, I just want to encourage everybody to calm down.
Speaker 1: And even in the short run, we're not looking at AMAgeddon.
Speaker 1: So that is the case I want to make today,
Speaker 1: and that's the case I will articulate. I encourage you
Speaker 1: to ask questions. There's a lot to ask about. There's
Speaker 1: a lot going on in the world, there's a lot
Speaker 1: going on in people's lives. So ask me about anything,
Speaker 1: anything that is interesting to you or anything you'd like
Speaker 1: an answer for, and I'd be happy to try to
Speaker 1: answer your questions. That is the super chat. That's a
Speaker 1: way for you to value for value. You can also
Speaker 1: do stickers, which is another way. Sticker is a super
Speaker 1: chat without a question. It's another way to support the show,
Speaker 1: support you on book show. So I mean, there is
Speaker 1: a lot going wrong right now, and I'm not going
Speaker 1: to list it because you all know it, and if
Speaker 1: you listen to your on book show, you know that.
Speaker 1: But let me say few things about the US economy.
Speaker 1: This economy is incredibly robust. It has a huge amount
Speaker 1: of flexibility within it. And in spite of the fact
Speaker 1: that people generally don't seem to be very smart, particularly
Speaker 1: when it comes to abstract political concepts or philosophical concepts,
Speaker 1: the American businessman is incredibly productive, incredibly innovative, and incredibly
Speaker 1: flexible and forward looking. It is. You know, everything that's
Speaker 1: happening right now, as I've talked about in the past,
Speaker 1: is a direct attack on a businessmen. You know, we
Speaker 1: are destroying their supply chains, disrupting their businesses. We're forcing
Speaker 1: them to work much longer hours, I guess, all in
Speaker 1: the name of bringing back a fifty's economy, much longer
Speaker 1: hours in order not to be more productive, in order
Speaker 1: not to increase economic output, in order not to enhance
Speaker 1: the economy or their economy or their companies, but just
Speaker 1: to survive. And that is going to happen. And if
Speaker 1: you run a small to medium size or you are
Speaker 1: a senior executive in a large company, you are scrambling
Speaker 1: right now, and you're working much longer hours than we
Speaker 1: would like an offer goal of just getting around the
Speaker 1: regulations and controls that the government is imposing on you,
Speaker 1: because that's what these tariffs are, their regulations and controls,
Speaker 1: the taxes. But they have they have the impact of
Speaker 1: regulations and controls. So uh so that is all happening,
Speaker 1: and that is true. But I have a huge amount
Speaker 1: of respect for those businessmen and I actually think that
Speaker 1: they will find solutions. Now. The solutions will be costly.
Speaker 1: The solutions will involve, you know, dramatic shifts and some
Speaker 1: pain and stagnation because these are again changes that are
Speaker 1: not targeted and over towards growth. These are changes that
Speaker 1: are targeted over in towards just keeping things the way
Speaker 1: they are. So this is very much going to be, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, going to be We're looking at stagnation, but
Speaker 1: I don't think we'll look at collapse. And there are
Speaker 1: some things to give credit where credit is do. There
Speaker 1: are some things that the Trump administration I don't think Trump,
Speaker 1: but the Trump administration is doing. They will mitigate some
Speaker 1: of this. We'll talk about that. So first realize there
Speaker 1: while some industries, some businesses small, m medium, signarticularly, are
Speaker 1: going to go bust in the next few months because
Speaker 1: they can't source the materials they need from anywhere other
Speaker 1: than China, many businesses will somehow survive. They will survive
Speaker 1: by shifting their supply chains, by finding new sources, by
Speaker 1: paying more, but they will survive. Some products that we're
Speaker 1: used to buying easily and cheaply will disappear. But most
Speaker 1: of what we need, most of what we used to
Speaker 1: will continue to be available, if at higher prices. And
Speaker 1: what we're going to experience is a restructuring of the
Speaker 1: American economy to some extent, particularly in certain industries, in
Speaker 1: a direction of less efficiency, less productivity, less efficiency, less productivity.
Speaker 1: Now most of the economic growth that we get today,
Speaker 1: most of the real productivity gains, most of the progress
Speaker 1: that we see comes from, you know, broadly speaking, the
Speaker 1: tech sector. That sector has gotten a pass from Trump
Speaker 1: on many of the tariffs, So a lot of the
Speaker 1: electronics that tech sector needs in order to continue to
Speaker 1: build these products have been free of tariffs or a
Speaker 1: tariffs at a much lower rate, and therefore many of
Speaker 1: those jobs will be saved and the rest of the
Speaker 1: economy will have to adjust, will have to again reconfigure
Speaker 1: the supply chain. So we're going to see massive increases
Speaker 1: and importation for Vietnam from South America from other countries.
Speaker 1: Prices will go up. The ten percent tariff, at least
Speaker 1: for now, can be avoided, but supply chains will readjust
Speaker 1: to the fact that we will not be buying stuff
Speaker 1: from China. In addition, you will see you know, stuff
Speaker 1: coming in kind of illegally. You will see smuggling go up,
Speaker 1: particularly for those products that are essential, but again those
Speaker 1: involved prices going up now, smuggling will probably be relatively small,
Speaker 1: although I do see a profited opportunity here for the cartels,
Speaker 1: you know, why not smuggling some spare parts into your
Speaker 1: shipment a fentannyl across the US border. You've got the
Speaker 1: smuggling routes already figured out for the drugs and for
Speaker 1: so called illegal immigrants, and why not add some Chinese
Speaker 1: products on top of that. But you know that's not
Speaker 1: going to be a major effective. But here's what I
Speaker 1: do will happen. I do expect Trump to change his mind.
Speaker 1: I do expect as we enter or the threat of
Speaker 1: a session gets more significant if the stock market has
Speaker 1: another tumble. You remember it had that big tumble after
Speaker 1: deliberation Day. It's recovered most of that. Most of that
Speaker 1: is being recovered. Most of that has come back because
Speaker 1: the market expects Trump to change. The market expects Trump
Speaker 1: to cut some kind of deal that lowers lowest tasks
Speaker 1: on China. They expect him to cut some kind of
Speaker 1: deal with other countries. So at worse, the ten percent
Speaker 1: stays uh and the market doesn't believe the lutinx of
Speaker 1: the world than the vows of the world that there's
Speaker 1: a lot more still to come. The market seems to
Speaker 1: think that this is about it, and from now on
Speaker 1: it's only going to get better because Trump has learned
Speaker 1: his less and they have taught it. Maybe they're right,
Speaker 1: Maybe he is going to learn his lesson. I think
Speaker 1: he's going to get a lot of backlash from this
Speaker 1: fewer dolls. Today he said the kids will have like,
Speaker 1: instead of two hundred and fifty pencils, five pencils or something.
Speaker 1: So it's not just dolls. It's just some pencils and
Speaker 1: maybe those little cause for boys. Now I shouldn't be
Speaker 1: sexist here, but so I think Trump is going to
Speaker 1: reduce tariffs. I think he's going to pretend to cut deals.
Speaker 1: I wouldn't be surprised if in the next month we
Speaker 1: have frameworks for future deals. They're kind of empty of content,
Speaker 1: but at least give the market confidence that tabson are
Speaker 1: going up a more than ten percent and America will adjust.
Speaker 1: It is not about to fall off a cliff. Trump
Speaker 1: could push it off a cliff, but I don't think
Speaker 1: he wants to. I don't think of something he's a nihilist.
Speaker 1: I mean, there's elements of nihilism in it. He likes
Speaker 1: to see everybody groveling before, he likes to see everybody frantic,
Speaker 1: but he doesn't like to see everybody angry with him.
Speaker 1: He doesn't like that particularly, not CEOs of big companies.
Speaker 1: So I think he will adjust and he'll still do damage.
Speaker 1: An economy will go a lot less than it could have,
Speaker 1: and a lot of wealth will be destroyed, but we
Speaker 1: won't fall off a cliff. Now if you add to
Speaker 1: that the fact and this is where the trumpet Doina
Speaker 1: station is indeed doing good things. I mean, the story
Speaker 1: of it today, oh yesterday, that the EPA and the
Speaker 1: environment Mental Protection Agency basically shuttering whole departments. It's asking
Speaker 1: Congress for a lot less money. It's backing off dramatically
Speaker 1: from regulating US business and US production and US building.
Speaker 1: Now this is huge. Now, while a lot of businessmen's
Speaker 1: energy and focus and effort is going to have to
Speaker 1: go to getting around the tariffs or finding substitutes to China,
Speaker 1: there's a chance they will be liberated from trying to
Speaker 1: get around the environmentalist tariffs, which is very hard to
Speaker 1: do because they've been around for a long time and
Speaker 1: they've been solidified. And in addition to that, they're going
Speaker 1: to be other deregulations. Other departments will deregulate the there
Speaker 1: will be you know, other parts of the economy that
Speaker 1: become a little bit at the margin free which I
Speaker 1: think we all benefit from. I'll als to say, just
Speaker 1: from economic perspective, the Saudis are coming to our protection
Speaker 1: defense not so much if you're in the energy industry
Speaker 1: of Saudis are not helping you, But the rest of US.
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia today, I think another Opique meeting where they're
Speaker 1: announcing another increase in supply. So the Saudi's pumping oil out,
Speaker 1: they're happy to see it below sixty bucks a barrow,
Speaker 1: partially because they cost of production is very, very low,
Speaker 1: so they make money no matter what. They are basically
Speaker 1: preventing the US from engaging in a massive increase in
Speaker 1: production in the US because at under sixty dollars a barrow,
Speaker 1: it's just not economic for the United States engage in
Speaker 1: a massive drill, baby drill. And they're keeping all prices
Speaker 1: low so that all of you can drive this summer
Speaker 1: and that oil, which is a fact in production for
Speaker 1: a lot of things, will be cheap and companies can
Speaker 1: sustain reasonable profit margins in spite of everything going on
Speaker 1: because oil prices that is a vital input, will be lower.
Speaker 1: So again there's some offsetting factors in the world out
Speaker 1: there that make Trump's you know, uh, irrational economic decisions,
Speaker 1: less impactful and less destructive than they otherwise would be,
Speaker 1: then they otherwise would be. I wouldn't drive to Canada
Speaker 1: if I were you. Yeah, don't drive to Canada. First
Speaker 1: of all, the Canadians don't want you, and they won't
Speaker 1: be nice to you. Canadians are typically nice. They're not
Speaker 1: gonna be nice to you if you come from the US.
Speaker 1: And second, you know, it's spending time in any more territory,
Speaker 1: I'm not sure they'd allow you back in you you
Speaker 1: might be accused of treeson or something. I'm kidding. So
Speaker 1: so we've you know, so there is, there is. It's
Speaker 1: not all bad news out there. I'll add to that
Speaker 1: that there now at least five or maybe six. And
Speaker 1: next week we're going to be interviewing Larry Salzman, who
Speaker 1: is a party to one of these lawsuits. So at
Speaker 1: least five or six lawsuits with regard to the tariffs.
Speaker 1: So there are a lot of organizations, a lot of
Speaker 1: entities that believe that they have a good case to
Speaker 1: put in front of the Supreme Courts to basically void
Speaker 1: the basis on which Trump declared these tariffs, and that
Speaker 1: would basically void the tariffs, and he would have to
Speaker 1: either go to Congress or be much more selective in
Speaker 1: his tariffs. And in order to make the case that
Speaker 1: there's a national security issue, he can't just use this
Speaker 1: law that he's using that doesn't mention tariffs to have
Speaker 1: these global tariffs on every country in the world. So
Speaker 1: there's a chance that this part of Trump's agenda. Indeed,
Speaker 1: there's a chance that much of Trump's agenda is going
Speaker 1: to be blocked in the courts. And this is where,
Speaker 1: you know, I'm still positive about the Supreme Court. I
Speaker 1: still think they care about the Constitution. I don't think
Speaker 1: they're in Trump's pocket, and I think that they will
Speaker 1: want to reign in at least to some extent, not completely,
Speaker 1: but reign in at least to some extent. You know,
Speaker 1: some of Trump's abuses. And now this I think is
Speaker 1: true culturally as well. So this is true of other
Speaker 1: topics we've already seen at a federal court Trump appointee
Speaker 1: declare the Use of the Alien's Enemies Act as unconstitutional
Speaker 1: and and band it from use. This is going to
Speaker 1: go to Supreme Court. There's a chance that the use
Speaker 1: of this Act, so the incarceration of illegal immigrants in
Speaker 1: jails and Olsalvado will be ruled on constitutional and that
Speaker 1: will stop. So I think the courts are going to
Speaker 1: step in here at least slow down, if not completely,
Speaker 1: stop this administration from pursuing the path that they're on.
Speaker 1: You also have to think about these things a little
Speaker 1: longer term. What Trump is doing is gonna have negative consequences.
Speaker 1: It's gonna have negative consequences among others in the communities
Speaker 1: that he's supposedly trying to help. Right now, people are
Speaker 1: losing their jobs in manufacturing, in the manufacturing sector because
Speaker 1: companies can't build stuff because they can't get the parts,
Speaker 1: or companies are so uncertain about the future that they're
Speaker 1: shrinking in order to wait and see what happens. And
Speaker 1: it is quite possible that his economic agenda becomes incredibly
Speaker 1: unpopular in America. It already is. He already has the
Speaker 1: lowest favorability ratings in the polls of any press resident,
Speaker 1: including himself in his first term, to any modern president.
Speaker 1: So right now Trump is less popular than Biden was.
Speaker 1: He's less popular than he was because of all this nonsense.
Speaker 1: American people don't buy it, and as it starts sinking,
Speaker 1: in that the President of the United States is telling
Speaker 1: you you can't have as many dolls, as many cars,
Speaker 1: as many or as many you know, anything that you
Speaker 1: want that you would like. The government is basically that's
Speaker 1: all going to shrink. I think Americans are going to
Speaker 1: rebel against that. They don't like to be told how
Speaker 1: many dolls they can buy. Economic nationalism, there's a limit
Speaker 1: central planning, there's a limit. I've always said America would
Speaker 1: not become socialist, and there's way too much of what
Speaker 1: the Trump administration is trying to do or the way
Speaker 1: they're expressing themselves with smacks of socialism. So there's going
Speaker 1: to be a real backlash. And there's a real chance
Speaker 1: that in twenty twenty six and in twenty twenty six
Speaker 1: will likely to be really suffering from all these crazy
Speaker 1: economic policies. Then in twenty twenty six, the Americans vote
Speaker 1: overwhelmingly for Democrats. And not that I'm a fan of
Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, but I am a fan of divided government.
Speaker 1: I'm a fan of you know, stellmate, of not getting
Speaker 1: anything done in Washington, DC. And I'm suddenly a fan
Speaker 1: of sending a message to Republicans the people are none
Speaker 1: of this site, so good luck. I've always been a
Speaker 1: fan of good luck. Good Luck is good. The best
Speaker 1: combination of good luck is a democratic president of Republican
Speaker 1: House and Senate. I told you that before this election,
Speaker 1: the House and Senate were pretty sure to stay Republican.
Speaker 1: We just got the presidency won't. So there's a good
Speaker 1: chance the JD Events will not be president in four years.
Speaker 1: There's a good chance the Republicans lose the presidency in
Speaker 1: four years. That or if there is a Republican president,
Speaker 1: that there's somebody more seen, less nationalists, less MAGA, because
Speaker 1: MAGA will be discredited. Now maybe because Mega dominates Republican politics,
Speaker 1: maybe they'll still be the nominee. But then they'll lose.
Speaker 1: Then they'll lose, and some of the better things that
Speaker 1: are happening right now, for example, the shrinking of the EPA,
Speaker 1: it will be very difficult for Democrats to ramp that
Speaker 1: back up. I think about it. You know, a lot
Speaker 1: of these people, generally the people fired from government. That's
Speaker 1: all good that they're firing people from government, because at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, it doesn't solve our budgetary problem.
Speaker 1: But in the long run, it's going to be hard
Speaker 1: to hire them back. People will leave government and they'll
Speaker 1: find real jobs in the real sector, in that private sector,
Speaker 1: and they won't want to go back to a government job.
Speaker 1: So there really is a chance, there really is a
Speaker 1: chance that you know, the shrinkage that is happening haphazardly
Speaker 1: today will actually be rationalized and actually in the long
Speaker 1: run represent a shrinkage in the number of employees in
Speaker 1: the government. And yes, some of that is bad in
Speaker 1: the sense that some of the stuff that the government
Speaker 1: is going to do anyway it's going to do, lives effectively.
Speaker 1: Maybe you know, others other places, they'll just have less
Speaker 1: people to harass us and to take our stuff and
Speaker 1: to regulate us and control us. And yes, it does
Speaker 1: look like the ep eight is indeed shrinking. Now we'll
Speaker 1: see what happens in the budget when the budget process ends,
Speaker 1: but it does seem like the EPA is going to
Speaker 1: Congress and kind of asking for shrinkings and in the
Speaker 1: meantime firing people, so that Congress faces in a sense
Speaker 1: coming to kind of some kind of fad or complete
Speaker 1: some From an economic and political perspective, I don't think
Speaker 1: all is lost. We adomed we're going into spiral and
Speaker 1: we're going to lose all our savings and we're going
Speaker 1: to face a eight. We're not going into great depression.
Speaker 1: You know, part of the reason we're not going to
Speaker 1: great depression is that, you know, the Great Depression was
Speaker 1: the loge extent caused by Federal Reserve that didn't know
Speaker 1: what it was doing. Fed Reserve there was young that
Speaker 1: had no experience, that know what was happening. Now, I
Speaker 1: think generally the Federalserve doesn't know what it's doing. But
Speaker 1: there's a scope, right, the Federal Reserve is unlikely to
Speaker 1: make the kind of mistake that leads to a great depression.
Speaker 1: It's more likely to cause inflation, it's more likely to
Speaker 1: cause stagflation, but it's unlikely to cause a great depression.
Speaker 1: And a great depression of the thirties was very much
Speaker 1: a monetary phenomena, very much a phenomena of just unbelievable
Speaker 1: restricting of credit and money and distorting our prices and
Speaker 1: a collapse, a collapse of the banking system. We just
Speaker 1: we're just more sophisticated today and and and more equipped
Speaker 1: and more flexible to deal with a situation like the
Speaker 1: Great Depression, not in a healthy way, right, or we're
Speaker 1: giving up is we're giving up economic growth. What we
Speaker 1: got is I mean we are we have an economy
Speaker 1: geared towards stagnation, gear towards low growth. That's what kind
Speaker 1: of those are the kind of institutions we have established
Speaker 1: in America and now really in the global economy. Uh,
Speaker 1: capitalism is geared towards high and by the way, it's
Speaker 1: very flexible and can deal with crises in a private context.
Speaker 1: What we had in the nineteen twenties and thirties is
Speaker 1: an economy that still thought it was free capitalist, but
Speaker 1: it had given a massive amount of power to a
Speaker 1: new entity with no knowledge, no experience, fed a reserve,
Speaker 1: and it made, you know, massive mistakes both in the
Speaker 1: twenties and the thirties that were incredibly destructive, and the
Speaker 1: economy did not have the means to deal with them.
Speaker 1: I don't think that happens again. So not heading towards
Speaker 1: a great depression, We're more likely heading towards ongoing stagnation.
Speaker 1: And the risk is that we are heading towards more
Speaker 1: authoritarianism down the road. Trump will not be it. He
Speaker 1: is not smart enough, He is not ideological enough. Trump
Speaker 1: has no ideology. He hates trade. That's about it. That's
Speaker 1: the only thing. And he hates him. But I don't
Speaker 1: even know he hates immigrants because half the time I
Speaker 1: think he just he's appeasing pressure groups. The anti immigration
Speaker 1: pressure group is very, very strong in the Republican Party
Speaker 1: in America. Generally, he's appeasing them. The only thing he
Speaker 1: really I think he really believes in is he hates
Speaker 1: what do you call it. He hates inputs. He hates
Speaker 1: trade deficits. That's the only thing he really there's me
Speaker 1: consistent about hating. Does he care about regulation. No. That's
Speaker 1: why deregulation is happening, not because of Trump. Trump's not
Speaker 1: pushing it. Trump's not hecoveraging it. He doesn't talk about
Speaker 1: any interviews, he doesn't give speeches about it. It's happening
Speaker 1: because he appointed some good people, some good people. Most
Speaker 1: of the people not good, but a few good people
Speaker 1: in departments weren't matters like the e PA, like the
Speaker 1: Energy Department, like Interia, maybe a few others. You know.
Speaker 1: That's where they that's where the deregulation is happening now
Speaker 1: because of Trump, but because the people they appointed, like
Speaker 1: in the first term, the best stuff happened in the
Speaker 1: places where Trump wasn't paying attention. He let his people
Speaker 1: do the thing. Now that's where the best stuff happened.
Speaker 1: It's just the fewer good people and there's a lot,
Speaker 1: oh god, a lot of really really bad people. So
Speaker 1: that is so I think an economic fund, you know,
Speaker 1: the auto industry, they're going to figure this out. They
Speaker 1: have the resources, they've got the brain power. They're going
Speaker 1: to find ways to figure out how not to collapse.
Speaker 1: And if not, if they can't completely figure it out,
Speaker 1: they will go lobby Trump and he will give them
Speaker 1: some favor. He will give them a loophole. The you know,
Speaker 1: I think the real danger here is for the medium
Speaker 1: of small businesses, who will will try to figure it out.
Speaker 1: We'll scramble, we'll try to innovate, but for many of them,
Speaker 1: they just won't find it. I do not Let's just
Speaker 1: be clear, just in case there's any misunderstanding. I do
Speaker 1: not support the Federals of I think it should be
Speaker 1: abolished and it should be replaced by private banking, not
Speaker 1: by the Treasury, but by real private banking. What I
Speaker 1: said was in the Federals of in the nineteen twenties
Speaker 1: and thirties was much worse than the Federals of is today.
Speaker 1: It's just has more experience. It's still bad. It still
Speaker 1: should be shut down. It's still be a limit. Everybody
Speaker 1: there should be fired. So just as it is no
Speaker 1: because somebody here is spending lies, as people will do,
Speaker 1: they'll probably cut out a clip of me sounding like
Speaker 1: I'm pro federals of and send it to you know,
Speaker 1: all around God how anybody could think I was pro
Speaker 1: federals of is both aligns on dishonesty to even argue
Speaker 1: that no federalism should be dismantled. It's just less dangerous,
Speaker 1: less destructive than it was in the nineteen thirties because
Speaker 1: they've learned something. They've learned from their mistakes, and they
Speaker 1: learned from the mistakes in the seventies. So the likely
Speaker 1: we have really high inflation, you know, to the extent
Speaker 1: that to the extent that the Federals of has say,
Speaker 1: impacts it is less likely, all right, So I want
Speaker 1: to calm everybody down. I guess from the perspective of
Speaker 1: the economy, it's gonna be. It could get bad. There's
Speaker 1: probably going to be a recession. I don't know what
Speaker 1: the odds are. They're probably a little greater than fifty percent.
Speaker 1: It's probably going to be a recession, but it's not
Speaker 1: going to be depression, and it's not going to be
Speaker 1: you know, we're not falling off a cliff, falling off
Speaker 1: a cliff. But there's there's a point beyond this that
Speaker 1: I want to remind you all. I do this periodically,
Speaker 1: and it's good to do it periodically, and that is
Speaker 1: that your life is not the economy. Your life is
Speaker 1: not an American phone possy. I mean, let's just say something
Speaker 1: about American phone policy quickly. I mean, even there, Trump
Speaker 1: is awful and terrible, and he's flooded with being pro
Speaker 1: Putzin and anti Zelenski, and yet puts In is so
Speaker 1: thuggish and so bad that he is now pissed off Trump.
Speaker 1: And it seems like found posse visa. The Ukraine is
Speaker 1: going to be much better. Israel seems like at least
Speaker 1: not with you know, maybe I don't know. Every day
Speaker 1: I read about new explosions in Iran, like the port
Speaker 1: went out, and our pop plants are being exploded and
Speaker 1: different factories going up in smoke. I don't know if
Speaker 1: that's Israel, but there's a significant positive probability. It is
Speaker 1: ISOs not just sitting on his hands while the Trump
Speaker 1: administration negotiates a deal with Iran. It is doing stuff.
Speaker 1: I have no inside information about what it's doing and
Speaker 1: how effective it is, but it's doing stuff. The United
Speaker 1: States is incompetence. So the UTI's just you know, a missile,
Speaker 1: and the hutis just landed in Israel right next to
Speaker 1: the airport, so planes, you know, the airport was shut
Speaker 1: down for a little bit and a lot of phone
Speaker 1: fun airlines are stopping flying into Israel. But you know,
Speaker 1: Israel's going to get into that fight, and you know
Speaker 1: it'll cause the Huti's more damage in a day that
Speaker 1: the United States has probably in three weeks. You know,
Speaker 1: the other day, Israel did an extensive series of bombings
Speaker 1: in Syria, uh, basically to tell the Syrian regime to
Speaker 1: lay off the Jews population. So Israel's taking things in
Speaker 1: its own hands. It's just calling up reserves, its reservists
Speaker 1: now in order to expand its encosion into Gaza. I mean,
Speaker 1: it's a whole long story we'll get into one of
Speaker 1: these days, but so far on that, on those fonts,
Speaker 1: you know, I'd say phone policy has not done. It's undamaged.
Speaker 1: But again, like the economy, it's not damage that causes
Speaker 1: us to fall off a cliff, mainly because, as Luke says,
Speaker 1: evil is so incompetent that even our incompetence doesn't you know,
Speaker 1: it doesn't cause things to get as bad as I mean.
Speaker 1: The biggest WAI is at the end of the day,
Speaker 1: that Trump's incompetence leads to war with China. That is
Speaker 1: the biggest threat I think we face right now. That's
Speaker 1: the one thing we need to really watch. And I'm
Speaker 1: really worried about that. I wasn't worried about that in
Speaker 1: the past. I didn't think China was going to do anything.
Speaker 1: But I do worry that Trump's attitude and incompetence will
Speaker 1: lead to that. We will see. But I still think
Speaker 1: that Chinese are afraid because I don't think they I
Speaker 1: don't think they think they can win if they invade Taiwan.
Speaker 1: So even if I'm policy well, things are bad, will survive,
Speaker 1: We will survive, The Ukrainians will survive. I mean it
Speaker 1: could shift. I mean Trump tomorrow could again become Putin's
Speaker 1: best friend, so anything could change. But you know, I
Speaker 1: think so far, the West is surviving, and certain certain
Speaker 1: things that Trump has done that are really really bad
Speaker 1: are going to have positive outcomes. I think the best
Speaker 1: thing to come out of his feign policy is a
Speaker 1: resurgent Europe focused on its own self defense, focused on
Speaker 1: the need to grow economically, which might lead to some
Speaker 1: deregulations and to some economic growth in Europe. We'll see.
Speaker 1: Maybe I'm being overly optimistic about Europe, but suddenly a
Speaker 1: greater investment in defense is going to be a positive thing.
Speaker 1: And an independent Europe that can that can stand up
Speaker 1: to the Russians free of shackles placed on them by
Speaker 1: verous American administrations is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Speaker 1: So there's another positive that might come from all of this. Uh,
Speaker 1: trying to think anything else, anything else we want to cover? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean this is where I'm going to pivot away
Speaker 1: from Trump to remind you that only a portion of
Speaker 1: your life is dictated by the politics in Washington, DC. Yes,
Speaker 1: a recession could really hurt you, and you should be
Speaker 1: thinking about it, and you should be planning for it,
Speaker 1: and you should be thinking about what to do if
Speaker 1: you lose your job, what to do if I don't know,
Speaker 1: you don't get the bonus this year. What to do
Speaker 1: if prices go up. You should be thinking about your budget,
Speaker 1: how much you spend, maybe thinking about curtailing it a
Speaker 1: little bit. I mean again, depending on your circumstances. Maybe
Speaker 1: not if you're if you're in in tech and a
Speaker 1: good job and the industry she used to be going,
Speaker 1: if you're an AI and so on. So plan your
Speaker 1: life is that end of the day, you know you
Speaker 1: have the tools. We live in an amazing world. We
Speaker 1: live in a relatively wealthy world. We're all relatively wealthy
Speaker 1: in spite of all the negativity and that is out there.
Speaker 1: We're pretty rich now, not all of us. And therefore
Speaker 1: you have to plan. You have to think about your
Speaker 1: particular circumstances and think it through. I also think we're
Speaker 1: about experience a real revolution. I mean, it strikes me
Speaker 1: as amazing. All these all these idiots, I think I
Speaker 1: still call them idiots, idiots who are calling to reindustrialize
Speaker 1: in the United States. And you see what AI is
Speaker 1: capable of, and you see what these robots have just
Speaker 1: been watching videos of robots, and I mean, these robots
Speaker 1: are amazing. They can they can do martial arts. They
Speaker 1: have real dexterity, they have real capabilities now humanoid capabilities.
Speaker 1: Now I don't know if that's particularly useful for production,
Speaker 1: but if they can now get robots to do the
Speaker 1: kind of sophisticated movements that human beings can do and
Speaker 1: they're really cool, then forget about industrial jobs. Those are
Speaker 1: all going to be taken by robots, and that is
Speaker 1: going to boost productivity dramatically and can involve a real
Speaker 1: dramatic shift in the kind of jobs that make sense.
Speaker 1: And again that's true of that's also true of AI.
Speaker 1: So AI and robots are going to change the world,
Speaker 1: maybe within the next two to three to five years,
Speaker 1: maybe it's ten years, but they're going to change the world.
Speaker 1: And unless Trump bans them, which I guess is possible
Speaker 1: but very unlikely, he has no control over that. He
Speaker 1: has no control over that. So, you know, the the
Speaker 1: focus should be, given that that's going to happen, how
Speaker 1: do you take advantage of it? How do you position
Speaker 1: yourself to benefit from a world that's going to be
Speaker 1: changing in the next ten to twenty years. The world
Speaker 1: will change in big, dramatic ways, and obsessing about doing
Speaker 1: gloom will not help you make that adjustment will not
Speaker 1: make you help. You reoient towards where the opportunities are.
Speaker 1: And again, a lot of people's jobs are going to
Speaker 1: be destroyed, a lot of people's lives are going to
Speaker 1: be destroyed. There's a lot of bad that's going to
Speaker 1: happen that doesn't have to be you. The more prepared
Speaker 1: you are, the more thoughtful you are, the more you
Speaker 1: plan and think and consider, the better off you're gonna be,
Speaker 1: and the more you're gonna be able to thrive. No
Speaker 1: matter what you know, Trump throws at you. Again, Trump
Speaker 1: is not he's not a socialist. He's not a fascist
Speaker 1: in the sense that he doesn't have a driving ideology
Speaker 1: and those who do. I don't think the Americans will
Speaker 1: embrace it, not as a whole. I think they're going
Speaker 1: to lose. And yes, we constantly inch towards authoritarianism. Yes,
Speaker 1: at some point we won't be able to stop it.
Speaker 1: We're not there yet. This administration is not gonna be
Speaker 1: it now. I hope this is one prediction I'm right about.
Speaker 1: It could be the one I'm wrong about is no,
Speaker 1: you know, Vance overthrows Trump and becomes dictative of America.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's happening even in America today. I
Speaker 1: don't think we'd allow that to happen. And I'm encouraged
Speaker 1: by how many people are critical of Trump, how many
Speaker 1: people have woken up, people who voted for Trump and
Speaker 1: are now super critical and have come to realize much
Speaker 1: more the extent to which MAGA as a movement is
Speaker 1: thoroughly corrupt. I think Richard Hanania is a good example
Speaker 1: of this. He was critical of Trump before, but he said,
Speaker 1: like many people, look, at least Trump will sustain the
Speaker 1: market economy. He's really bad and MAGA stupid is really bad,
Speaker 1: but he's better than Kamala. And now he's like I
Speaker 1: was wrong, I was wrong. I should have never voted
Speaker 1: for him. He's really really, really instructive and really really bad.
Speaker 1: I mean, the more people wake up to that, the
Speaker 1: less chance you have that the Republicans can sustain power
Speaker 1: enough to become a sorbitarian. So that is my positive outlook.
Speaker 1: But again I'll end with this reminder. So much of
Speaker 1: your life is under your control. So much of your
Speaker 1: life does not depend on anything Trump or anybody else does.
Speaker 1: Your life is also and your control in a sense
Speaker 1: of how much attention, how much energy, how much focus
Speaker 1: you put on what's going on politically? Do you really
Speaker 1: need to Does it really enhance your life to be
Speaker 1: in Twitter NonStop, or to be watching the news, or
Speaker 1: to be in Fox, or to listen to bit Sha
Speaker 1: Puer every day for hours. Not that I'm against listening
Speaker 1: to Benhaview here's one of the you know, moderately better ones,
Speaker 1: but generally, how important is politics to your life to
Speaker 1: the day to day stuff, to how well you're doing
Speaker 1: it work, how productive you are, how much thinking you
Speaker 1: put into it, how ambitious you choose to be, how
Speaker 1: relevant is what is happening in Washington to the way
Speaker 1: you spend your time. Are you putting the kind of
Speaker 1: energy and effort into production, into being productive? Are you
Speaker 1: putting enough energy and effort into making your life the
Speaker 1: best that it can be? Are you devoting real thinking
Speaker 1: into how to improve your life given the political situation?
Speaker 1: To finding a romantic partner if you don't have one.
Speaker 1: I know a lot of you, a lot of the
Speaker 1: people listening to my show A Man. According to you
Speaker 1: Tube it's above ninety percent. I don't know if that's true,
Speaker 1: but according to YouTube, it's well of a ninety percent, Right,
Speaker 1: my men, How much energy focus that you're putting into
Speaker 1: finding your romantic partner, into dating? How much energy are
Speaker 1: any of you putting into what I've talked about often right?
Speaker 1: Making the world the part of the world that you control,
Speaker 1: your home, your office, your environment beautiful, a one that
Speaker 1: makes you put a smile on you when you walk
Speaker 1: into your home. How many of your focus on improving
Speaker 1: your skills so you know, learning how AI works? Now,
Speaker 1: this is one I'm guilty of, right, I should be
Speaker 1: spending huge amounts of time right now, feel on figuring
Speaker 1: AI out and on catching up on all the reviews,
Speaker 1: including Ali's book review, on the reviews that I owe
Speaker 1: you guys. So I need to catch up and I will,
Speaker 1: but particularly AI, I need improve my skills in AI.
Speaker 1: I'm going to be, you know, overtaken if I don't,
Speaker 1: and I think this summer that is my number one project.
Speaker 1: Once I get clear all the other stuff that I'm
Speaker 1: committed to doing, that is what I'm going to focus on.
Speaker 1: Luke says, did you want to figure out theon AI bought?
Speaker 1: Supposely it's still happening, right. I signed a contract with
Speaker 1: this company that's working on it. They we did the
Speaker 1: video session where they could they filmed some video of
Speaker 1: me so they can use the video and move my
Speaker 1: lips to say the things that they are. So I
Speaker 1: don't know where it is yet, you know. I hopefully
Speaker 1: this company survives. Hopefully they put it out at some point.
Speaker 1: Hopefully it will books. I haven't really been following it,
Speaker 1: but it's part of me not paying enough attention to AI.
Speaker 1: I should be paying a lot more attention to it,
Speaker 1: you know, are you? You know there are all these
Speaker 1: memes out there right now about oh went the fifties great?
Speaker 1: Where parents spend a lot of time with their children
Speaker 1: and their families, with families, and you can recreate that.
Speaker 1: How much time are you spending with your children? And
Speaker 1: by the way, I think parents spend maybe too much
Speaker 1: time with their children these days. You don't want to
Speaker 1: be a helicopter parent that is involved in every aspect
Speaker 1: here your child's life. One of the most important things
Speaker 1: to do in raising children is to let them be
Speaker 1: encourage independence. But if you want to have that fifties lifestyle,
Speaker 1: you can do it. So how much time are you
Speaker 1: spending with the people you love, with your friends, with
Speaker 1: your children, with with your family, with people you careful
Speaker 1: and care about. How much energy, focus, thinking time are
Speaker 1: you spending on making your life the best life that
Speaker 1: it can be. In other words, rather than worrying and
Speaker 1: obsessing and about the latest thing in the news, about
Speaker 1: the latest phenomenon. I told you, listen to your on
Speaker 1: book show for highlights of the news. Get depressed for
Speaker 1: an how and a half two hours, three hours, but
Speaker 1: feet off of my energy and drop it as soon
Speaker 1: as the show is over. Focus your life on you,
Speaker 1: on your life. We live here for a finite period
Speaker 1: of time. We have control over a finite part of
Speaker 1: our lives, no control of what happens in Washington for
Speaker 1: the most part. So stop obsessing about that. Obsess about
Speaker 1: your life, Obsess about how to be happy. Obsess about
Speaker 1: the things that you'll control. Your job, your family, your environment,
Speaker 1: place in which you live, that's where, that's where you
Speaker 1: should be devoting your energies too. So it's easy to
Speaker 1: be depressed right now. I'm tempted, but I'm too busy.
Speaker 1: There's too much to do, there's too many things to
Speaker 1: think about, to learn about too, there's too much work
Speaker 1: to be done, There's too many there's too many improvements
Speaker 1: I still want to make in my own life. Two
Speaker 1: spend obsessed by the nonsense moron like Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: engaged in. I guess today's not a new show, so
Speaker 1: I can call them a more on anyway. So I
Speaker 1: return to my theme of Yuan's Rules for life, and
Speaker 1: those of you not familiar with EON's Rules for life
Speaker 1: check them out there. And there is a whole playlist
Speaker 1: online of my rules for life. I think they're about
Speaker 1: twenty twenty shows that I dedicated to that and that
Speaker 1: is live your life and now sudden d Yes, there's
Speaker 1: a lot of uncertainty out there. Okay, deal with it
Speaker 1: and certainly should not cause you to crumble and suddainly
Speaker 1: is part of living. And again, figure out what you
Speaker 1: can control. Figure out what you can do, even if
Speaker 1: you're in business right now and you don't know what
Speaker 1: it's going to be, like, well, what can I control?
Speaker 1: How can I diversifind my supply Chaine from China? How
Speaker 1: can I find new supplies? How can I shift my production?
Speaker 1: So I get affected less by the craziness and watching
Speaker 1: in DC. It's hard work, it's not easy, and in
Speaker 1: some cases figure out how do I shut this down,
Speaker 1: maybe permanently, maybe for a while, but how do I
Speaker 1: continue to survive in spite of that? All goes to
Speaker 1: the quarry in the fountain Head. He faces a lot
Speaker 1: of uncertainty. He has no idea if he's ever going
Speaker 1: to be an architect. Again, I mean, I think he's
Speaker 1: pretty confident he is going to be. He is going
Speaker 1: to design buildings, but he has no idea when it's
Speaker 1: going to come from, where it's going to come from,
Speaker 1: how it's going to come. And he manages to thrive
Speaker 1: in spite of that. And that's your challenge. Your challenge
Speaker 1: is to thrive in spite of what the irrational you know,
Speaker 1: the irrational morons in Washington, d C. Do see I
Speaker 1: said moron twice and the number of people watching live
Speaker 1: goes down? All right, I don't think that's correlated. I
Speaker 1: think I got into the stuff about making your life,
Speaker 1: making your environment beautiful, and living your life for yourself,
Speaker 1: focusing on that, and it's too positive for people, way
Speaker 1: too positive for people. What can you He would win?
Speaker 1: You should too, You should too, and again you will win.
Speaker 1: Doesn't mean America wins, doesn't mean the economy wins, doesn't
Speaker 1: mean that you know, I don't know. Whatever wins, it
Speaker 1: means you win and most of what your life is
Speaker 1: is under your control. Again, we're not we're not throwing
Speaker 1: people in jail for being objectivists. We're not throwing people
Speaker 1: in jail for new wrong ideas. Yet, you can still
Speaker 1: express yourself. You can still you know, do what you want.
Speaker 1: You can still change professions. I mean, if you heard
Speaker 1: Ludwig today, he was saying, well, we need American manufacturing
Speaker 1: jobs where the father and the son and the grandson
Speaker 1: all working the same job for life and for the
Speaker 1: same company for life. He wants to bring feudalism and
Speaker 1: the guilt system back. We don't have it back yet.
Speaker 1: We're not living under that yet. Ludwig can fantasize, of course,
Speaker 1: he doesn't want that for his children. He doesn't want
Speaker 1: that for himself. He has never been in a manufacturing
Speaker 1: facility in his life. Probably, But let these idiots blather
Speaker 1: on and make the most of what you have, and
Speaker 1: yes there's a certainty. You take that into account and
Speaker 1: you keep living and you keep you know, that's what
Speaker 1: we have a rational faculty for. The rational faculty is
Speaker 1: there to make it possible to deal with uncertaintly. Now again,
Speaker 1: I'm not saying it's not hard. I'm not saying it's
Speaker 1: not challenging. I'm not saying there won't be negatives that happen.
Speaker 1: I'm not saying you won't have setbacks. You will, and
Speaker 1: you will have a lot of setbacks and are unjust.
Speaker 1: Unjust the bastards somewhere else again inflict on you. You don't
Speaker 1: let that get you down, because life is too short
Speaker 1: to be down. Get you back in your knees. The
Speaker 1: injustice has happened. It sucks, it's horrible, and yet you
Speaker 1: need to still live, and you need to be able
Speaker 1: to achieve whatever happiness you can. Focus everything on the positive,
Speaker 1: Focus everything on that, all right, Hopefully that helps out
Speaker 1: a little bit in terms of re orients some of
Speaker 1: you away from the overly pessimistic, overly narrowly political focus.
Speaker 1: Hopefully a little bit of inspiration for the weekend. A
Speaker 1: good Sunday summon is always good. Life's too short, guys,
Speaker 1: way too short, way way way way too short. All right,
Speaker 1: let's see what do we have. I want to remind
Speaker 1: you a few things. You can ask questions, anything you want,
Speaker 1: anything you want. We've covered the first hour. That's phenomenal.
Speaker 1: Thank you guys. That's great. We're going to be into
Speaker 1: the second hour here soon. We're well into the second
Speaker 1: hour in terms of contributions, so in terms of superchats.
Speaker 1: So but let's get to the number soon. I will
Speaker 1: go for as long as you ask questions, So keep
Speaker 1: them coming, particularly if you have twenty dollars or fifty
Speaker 1: dollars or big dollar questions that that is particularly particularly
Speaker 1: valuable right now. So particularly if you have those, bring
Speaker 1: them on. I want to thackt thank all the people
Speaker 1: did stickers. Really really appreciate that. It's a way to
Speaker 1: support the show without asking a question. I know not
Speaker 1: everybody has a question. Uh, so feel free to do
Speaker 1: stickers for a deem. Katherine Uh, let's see Katherine, Katheryn Dawson,
Speaker 1: different Katherine Jonathan Honing. Thank you guys for the stickers
Speaker 1: and uh and keep it coming. Marra Ben's is Who's
Speaker 1: Who's fantastic. You know, I think she'll be an amazing employee.
Speaker 1: Is looking for a job. She is way too qualified
Speaker 1: for the jobs you guys might offer her, but she's
Speaker 1: smart and hard working, so I would offer her a
Speaker 1: job in a heartbeat. If I had one available. So
Speaker 1: if you do have anything available, talk to Mary Ben.
Speaker 1: She is she is uh looking for something. She has
Speaker 1: abandoned her quest for a job in the sciences, sadly, tragically, horrifically.
Speaker 1: I will have answer your email movements. I apologize I
Speaker 1: haven't yet. I'm behind on everything, so just all right,
Speaker 1: let's see what do we want to do. I want
Speaker 1: to remind you of Alex Epstein as A. As A
Speaker 1: is a sponsor of the show. Alex Epstein dot substack
Speaker 1: dot com the best commentary you will find on all
Speaker 1: things related to energy, including what's going on in Trump
Speaker 1: administration of guarding energy. Best stuff you will find our
Speaker 1: climate change, and on fossil fuels and and uh drilling,
Speaker 1: but but importantly on electricity. I'm waiting for Alex to
Speaker 1: come out with like the definitive explanation for what happened
Speaker 1: in Spain and Portugal. I think I have now an
Speaker 1: idea of what happened. I might talk about it tomorrow
Speaker 1: on the show. Oh. I also want to remind you
Speaker 1: I will be on. I think I haven't got the
Speaker 1: zoom link yet, but i'll probably get in the morning.
Speaker 1: Hopefully I'll fill up to it, but I will be
Speaker 1: on Destiny Show tomorrow. If I'm not, it's because I'm
Speaker 1: I'm too sick. But I will be shown up on
Speaker 1: Destiny Show tomorrow from I think ten thirty am. So
Speaker 1: if you have access to it, join us and ask questions.
Speaker 1: And the iran in students a sponsor and they they
Speaker 1: still have available scholarships for ocon I think only a
Speaker 1: couple of days left. Maybe tomorrow at midnight is the deadline.
Speaker 1: So if you want to apply for scholarship for attending
Speaker 1: ocon ocon July first through fifth in Boston, phenomenal confidence fun.
Speaker 1: It's going to be interesting and fun. There can be
Speaker 1: a lot of talks, a lot of socializing, poker and yeah,
Speaker 1: so join us, join us at OCONN and if you
Speaker 1: can't afford it, apply for scholarship. They're available at iinran
Speaker 1: dot org slash start here Destiny the streamer, Yes, the streamer,
Speaker 1: so hopefully you have act to his stream. All right,
Speaker 1: let's jump in rational Ip with sixty euro Thank you,
Speaker 1: rational Ip. Some argue the consumer protection laws essential to
Speaker 1: balance the power asymmetry between consumers and business, especially in
Speaker 1: the context of standard form contracts. What is your view
Speaker 1: in this well, I'm obviously against it. I'm against any
Speaker 1: kind of government regulations of business that is not related
Speaker 1: to a real objective objective they identifiable risk to This
Speaker 1: idea that there's a power asymmetry is completely nonsense. You
Speaker 1: could argue that the consumer has more power than the producer.
Speaker 1: They can stop buying the goods, The consumer can choose
Speaker 1: the competitor. The consumer can just stay at home. So
Speaker 1: this idea that producers have more power than consumer, it's
Speaker 1: just nonsense. It's not unsure power. The producers offering a
Speaker 1: product and the consumer can choose to buy it or not.
Speaker 1: Now there is a you could argue there's an asymmetrical
Speaker 1: information because the producer has a lot more information about
Speaker 1: the quality of the product, its usability, the risks involved
Speaker 1: than the consumer. Now, there are number of ways in
Speaker 1: this which this can be solved. The consumer can demand
Speaker 1: that the producer reveal that information, disclose that information before
Speaker 1: they buy, and otherwise they won't buy. So the consumer
Speaker 1: can say, you know, I'm not buying this box and
Speaker 1: cereal until you list how many grams of sugar are
Speaker 1: in it. I'm just gonna I'm gonna buy something else.
Speaker 1: I'm just not gonna buy cereal anymore. And you know
Speaker 1: that's one way to get the producer to provide the
Speaker 1: information and the consumer wants that is not being made
Speaker 1: available and the consumer cannot find easily by themselves. That's
Speaker 1: one solution that the consumer not consumer, so they get
Speaker 1: what they want, and the consumers can band together to
Speaker 1: do that. They can do all kinds of campaigns to
Speaker 1: do that, lots of means by which they can do it.
Speaker 1: The other is that third parties enter the field. Third
Speaker 1: parties whose whole profit business model is to provide information.
Speaker 1: Think consumer reports on steroids. You're wired about the toy
Speaker 1: not being safe, Well, don't buy the toy unless it
Speaker 1: has a consumer Consumer Reports seal of a approval on it.
Speaker 1: Just don't buy things that don't have that seal of approval.
Speaker 1: Or you go to a website and find out exactly
Speaker 1: how much sugar that cereal has even if they don't
Speaker 1: list it. So no, there is no there is no
Speaker 1: need for consumer protection laws. Indeed, what I think consume
Speaker 1: protection laws do is they turn consumers into they turn
Speaker 1: consumers lazy, that is, they disincentivize consumers from actually engaging
Speaker 1: the kind of activity that is in their own self
Speaker 1: interest because they assume consumers assume that the consumer protection
Speaker 1: laws protect them, and therefore they don't engage in the
Speaker 1: kind of activity that would protect themselves and there is
Speaker 1: and what the consume protection laws us to do is
Speaker 1: they create a disincentive for third parties waiting entities, review
Speaker 1: entities from engaging in the process in actual review. So
Speaker 1: I'll give you an example. Imagine if food Inspector stopped
Speaker 1: inspecting restaurants, but we want a restaurant to be hygienic
Speaker 1: and clean. Imagine if Yelp as a business chose to
Speaker 1: do it themselves, and they would go to restaurants and say, look,
Speaker 1: we'll inspect and we'll give you a rating, and if
Speaker 1: you don't want us to, that's fine. We'll just let
Speaker 1: out reviewers know the people who use a service that
Speaker 1: you didn't let us inspect. Imagine, as part of yelp
Speaker 1: the services Yelp provide, they also provided a rating on
Speaker 1: how clean the kitchen was and how sanitary or whatever
Speaker 1: the behavior was. I think restaurants pay a lot more attention,
Speaker 1: would pay a lot more attention to Yelp ratings than
Speaker 1: they would to to Food inspect Us from the FDA.
Speaker 1: Imagine if I mean, if just you know, help people
Speaker 1: who do Yelp reviews went into the kitchen and said, Hey,
Speaker 1: I'm writing a view. I'd like to I'd like to
Speaker 1: asso look at the kitchen. I mean a lot. There's
Speaker 1: so many ways in which proactively existing businesses and existing
Speaker 1: consumers can fill in whatever gaps exist to make it
Speaker 1: clear that we just don't need consumer protection laws and
Speaker 1: never have needed them, never have needed them. So no,
Speaker 1: I definitely don't think that. I think, if anything, consumer
Speaker 1: protection laws make it worse because they disincentivize both consumers
Speaker 1: to pay attention and alternatives like private alternatives, which would
Speaker 1: be better than government alternatives to arise. Thank you rational
Speaker 1: Ip Mike, thank you for the sticker. Really appreciate that. Okay,
Speaker 1: Molten Splendor has a fifty dollars question, Thank you Molten.
Speaker 1: I don't understand why Starcel over Is, have You and
Speaker 1: Malay are considered bad by objectives standards because they referred
Speaker 1: to themselves as libertarians. I don't hear them advocating anarchism,
Speaker 1: which is the biggest pushback on libertarianism right. I don't
Speaker 1: think anybody considers star Cel aver As and malay Bad.
Speaker 1: I think they we consider it the fact that they
Speaker 1: call themselves libertarians, and I don't think Alvers does, because
Speaker 1: I think Alvers understands this. By calling themselves libertarians they
Speaker 1: are in a sense they're not. In a sense they
Speaker 1: are They're sanctioning and enabling the worst elements within the
Speaker 1: so called libertarian movement. They are sanctioning and enabling the anarchists,
Speaker 1: even though they are not anarchists. So by not qualifying
Speaker 1: the use of the word libertarian and embracing the libertarian
Speaker 1: big tent, which doesn't just include the libertarians, but which
Speaker 1: is populated by many, many libertarians, and many of them
Speaker 1: in leadership intellectual particularly intellectual leadership positions, they are linking liberty, freedom,
Speaker 1: free markets, capitalism with anarchy. So they need to be
Speaker 1: able to differentiate themselves from the anarchists, either by using
Speaker 1: a different term or by making it very very clear
Speaker 1: that they are not anarchist. I have you Amlay is
Speaker 1: an anarchist. He claims he is. He advocates for it.
Speaker 1: That's the one, I mean, the probably two or three
Speaker 1: things I really dislike about me Lay, that's one of them.
Speaker 1: Starso is non anarchist and Gloria Alvarez is non anarchist.
Speaker 1: But I think Gloria is also very good and not
Speaker 1: self identifying as a libertarian because she realizes that when
Speaker 1: she does, she is sanctioning and embracing consciously or not
Speaker 1: embracing the anarchists, So she distances herself from it. And
Speaker 1: I think that's what they should all do. Stop using
Speaker 1: the word libertarian. Call yourself a free marketer, call yourself
Speaker 1: a classical liberal. Now that doesn't mean you know, you
Speaker 1: shun people. It means you don't self identify as the
Speaker 1: same as them. So you know, I've had at least
Speaker 1: one person on the show who's an anarchist. We didn't
Speaker 1: discuss that, but I don't consider myself in the same
Speaker 1: team as him, even though on the issues we discussed,
Speaker 1: we agree we're not on the same team because of
Speaker 1: his anarchy, and indeed I have debated him on anarchy.
Speaker 1: So my view is very very clear. So thanks Walton's splendor.
Speaker 1: Hopefully that gives you a sense of why why Why why?
Speaker 1: Right Andrew on Cost states that Ezra Klein's new book
Speaker 1: evades the difference between voluntary action and government force. Do
Speaker 1: people generally feel shame over initiating force. Does that factor
Speaker 1: into their willingness to evade force. I think at some
Speaker 1: level people understand the force is bad, they choose to
Speaker 1: present their views as not being forced out. Again, I
Speaker 1: don't think as recline, and I don't think let me
Speaker 1: rephrase that. I think a lot of people, while they
Speaker 1: know that force is bad, they also think it is
Speaker 1: essential for achieving what you'd call the common good. So
Speaker 1: they think that it's. Yeah, it's not good to force
Speaker 1: people to do what they don't want, but sometimes it's
Speaker 1: necessary because alternative is worse. So we have to force them.
Speaker 1: If we didn't force them, they'd be poor. If we
Speaker 1: didn't force them, they commit suicide. If we didn't force them,
Speaker 1: they do hubbable things. So we have to engage in
Speaker 1: force in order to make their lives better, or in
Speaker 1: order to make them, you know, to make them moral ethical.
Speaker 1: They won't do it by themselves, from their own initiative,
Speaker 1: so we have to force. And I think there's a
Speaker 1: lot of that. Sadly, there's the you know then, and
Speaker 1: I think a lot of that is is kind of
Speaker 1: embedded in an altruistic morality. Altruistic morality is not a
Speaker 1: morality that negates force. It's a morality that says forces
Speaker 1: used to achieve a good end I either well being
Speaker 1: of other people, then it's okay. It's our Christians justified
Speaker 1: slaughtering people in the name of Christianity or force or
Speaker 1: forced conversion. And it's how altruists, our communists explained why
Speaker 1: it was okay to kill tens of millions of people.
Speaker 1: As Lenin said, to make an omint, you have to
Speaker 1: break some eggs in order to achieve the goal common good,
Speaker 1: the public interests, something something, something collectivistic. We need a
Speaker 1: use force. And that's how they rationalized it and justified.
Speaker 1: But one of the reasons they rationalized and justified is
Speaker 1: because there is a general understanding among human being that
Speaker 1: in general, force is not good. Adam I kept track
Speaker 1: and in La County and cities with high East Asian
Speaker 1: percentage cultures where masks are customary for travel or if
Speaker 1: one has a sniffle had half the COVID cases relative
Speaker 1: to the whole country. Considering a mask for travel, I
Speaker 1: think what a mask helps is not so much in
Speaker 1: preventing you from getting sick, because that can be from
Speaker 1: touching things, it can be from you know, the lots
Speaker 1: of ways in which you can get sick, but I
Speaker 1: think it helps primarily if you are sick, not infecting others.
Speaker 1: So I think the mask is primarily a tool to
Speaker 1: prevent infecting other people rather than as a tool to
Speaker 1: prevent infecting yourself, and the Asians are very good at that.
Speaker 1: If the Asians have In Asian cultures, if you have
Speaker 1: the sniffles, you wear a mask, right, So you know,
Speaker 1: I don't know that wearing a mask will help, and
Speaker 1: there's a real inconvenience to it. So there's a question
Speaker 1: of would I rather get sick once in a while.
Speaker 1: I mean, if mask really helped, if they completely stopped it,
Speaker 1: then yeah, it would be worth it. But some of
Speaker 1: what I tend to get is clearly not an airbone stuff,
Speaker 1: and I am skeptical about how useful a mask is,
Speaker 1: particularly if it's not a what N ninety five or
Speaker 1: whatever they're called, and then where them as a real hassle.
Speaker 1: It's a real hassle. But again I think the courtesy
Speaker 1: of wearing one if you feel bad, that would be
Speaker 1: something that would be well worth adopting. Right. There are
Speaker 1: also other reasons why the Asian population might have gotten
Speaker 1: less COVID. You know, they were better at protecting the elderly.
Speaker 1: But look, I didn't get COVID. And this is the thing,
Speaker 1: and this is why I'm suspicious about my own immune system,
Speaker 1: because I didn't get COVID. For the first two years
Speaker 1: of COVID, I traveled throughout COVID. I went a restaurant.
Speaker 1: I didn't wear a mask much. I mean I wear
Speaker 1: a mask where I had to wear a mask. I
Speaker 1: didn't wear a mask much. Again, I traveled, I flew.
Speaker 1: I was going back and forth from California to Puerto Weeco.
Speaker 1: I went to you know, as soon as the country
Speaker 1: has opened up, I flew to Israel. You know. I
Speaker 1: know that I traveled because I used to go and
Speaker 1: have to get a COVID test every time before I
Speaker 1: got on a plane, right, you had to get a
Speaker 1: COVID test. I remember getting COVID test in all over
Speaker 1: the country, like in Colorado and California and other places.
Speaker 1: I figured out which labs to use, and which labs
Speaker 1: a lot to use, what good is good and what
Speaker 1: it's not. I did all that and then never got COVID.
Speaker 1: My wife got COVID. I spent ten days with her
Speaker 1: while she had COVID. Right, we didn't know she had COVID,
Speaker 1: never got infected, slept in the same bed, she didn't
Speaker 1: wear a mask, you know, in the house because she
Speaker 1: didn't know she had COVID. She only got NW she
Speaker 1: had COVID after the fact. So we still don't really
Speaker 1: understand how COVID transmitted and and all of that. So
Speaker 1: and a lot of it just has to do has
Speaker 1: to be with your own immune system. And that's why
Speaker 1: why we's me is not the travel I've traveled last
Speaker 1: twenty five years, three years. It's why I'm getting as
Speaker 1: often sick as often as I am. Maybe I'm not
Speaker 1: sleeping as well, maybe in my immune system is weaka, uh,
Speaker 1: that would be not good. So I need to figure
Speaker 1: out what's going on with my immune system. So I
Speaker 1: stopped getting as sick as often as I am. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I tested all the time with COVID, so I probably
Speaker 1: didn't have it because I was testing constantly, right, Because
Speaker 1: every time I traveled, I had a test, and I
Speaker 1: never had a positive test until two years later. Why
Speaker 1: I got it? Yeah, And I've been traveling, and I yeah,
Speaker 1: I would get sicked pretty much every season once or twice,
Speaker 1: but this is like the fifth time. I think it's
Speaker 1: getting ridiculous, all right, and I'm less positive than you
Speaker 1: right now, companies like mine holding off a new investment YEP,
Speaker 1: and that is not going away under Trump. And this
Speaker 1: is before trumpet places your own power with Navarro or Mirrion.
Speaker 1: So that's right, that's why there's no economic growth. Really,
Speaker 1: we're gonna stagnate. On the other hand, in tech there
Speaker 1: will be growth. AI will resulting growth. Deregulation of the
Speaker 1: EPA will resulting growth in energy some sectors, and energy
Speaker 1: there will be growth. So you've got stagnation, You've got
Speaker 1: literally some companies going out of business, and then you've
Speaker 1: got some areas where there will be growth. I mean,
Speaker 1: tech will growth, partially because they're gonna get the exclusion
Speaker 1: from tariffs and partially because AI is gonna make just
Speaker 1: everything more productive. Apple is not trimming its plans for
Speaker 1: new products going into the future. And there's a lot
Speaker 1: of money still flowing in Silicon Valley. There's a lot
Speaker 1: of InChI capital money still flowing. So yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: this is not gonna be a robust economy. We're not
Speaker 1: gonna grow. We could be in a recession. We could
Speaker 1: have slow economic growth, we could have negative economic growth.
Speaker 1: I just don't think we're heading to the Great Depression.
Speaker 1: I'm not trying to be Polyannio positive. I don't think
Speaker 1: this economy will grow. I just think it is not
Speaker 1: gonna collapse. It's not gonna fall off a cliff. And yeah,
Speaker 1: the tasks are gonna cost Apple, They're gonna cost everybody,
Speaker 1: and it's just a waste. It's just destructive destruction with
Speaker 1: no upside. All of that is absolutely true. Get angry
Speaker 1: and then get over it because you got a life
Speaker 1: to live. Got a life to live, and a lot
Speaker 1: of people lose their jobs, and they're going to lose
Speaker 1: their jobs because of Trump, and then they're going to
Speaker 1: lose their jobs because of AI. And the people who
Speaker 1: lose their jobs because of AI won't be able to
Speaker 1: find new jobs because of Trump. All of that is true.
Speaker 1: All of that is going to happen. All of that sucks.
Speaker 1: Get angry and move on. Protect your own life, figure
Speaker 1: out how to do the best that you can with
Speaker 1: what we have. Because Trump's not going away, and the
Speaker 1: bad policies for a while not going away. I think
Speaker 1: Trump is gonna cave he's got, you know things in
Speaker 1: that sense, it'll be better, be right thought coming out. Well,
Speaker 1: Trump cave into China wholesale. I think he will. He'll
Speaker 1: pretend he's won. He'll get some concessions from China. China
Speaker 1: will say, okay, we won't send FENTONYL to Mexico anymore.
Speaker 1: We promise, and trumpull declared victory and do all kinds
Speaker 1: of other stuff. Look, I'm not making economic predictions because
Speaker 1: I don't know. What I'm saying is it's likely to
Speaker 1: be a recession. I think generally we're in for long
Speaker 1: term stagnation. I don't expect falling off a cliff. I
Speaker 1: don't expect great depression. I don't expect, you know, a
Speaker 1: financial crisis could happen. We'll see what triggers it. If
Speaker 1: a lot of companies start going bankrupt. If we start
Speaker 1: seeing a financial crisis, even financial crisis, Sadly, our central
Speaker 1: government knows how to handle so it doesn't become a depression. Sadly,
Speaker 1: I say, because maybe we need a depression to wake
Speaker 1: ourselves up. We will limp along. We will limp along,
Speaker 1: which means stagnation, stagflation, you know, maybe negative growth or
Speaker 1: very very very low positive growth. That's my prediction. It's
Speaker 1: being my prediction for the last twenty years that we
Speaker 1: will have slow growth. Now I think there's a possibility
Speaker 1: of negative growth, but it's not going to be negative
Speaker 1: five percent, Although there might be a quarter of negative
Speaker 1: five percent. I think over the long run it's close
Speaker 1: to zero, whether negative or positive. Michael, do you think
Speaker 1: Trump is feeling the pressure then many people in his
Speaker 1: own party are turning on him, many people in the
Speaker 1: business world who he wants to respect him of putting
Speaker 1: pressure on him to change course. Yes, I do think
Speaker 1: he's feeling the pressure. Less so from the political side
Speaker 1: of it, because I don't think the politicians have the
Speaker 1: guts to tell him what they think. But I do
Speaker 1: think he feels it from businessmen coming to him saying, look,
Speaker 1: we're heading to a recession. We're gonna have to lay
Speaker 1: people off. What you're doing, you know? Might you know
Speaker 1: they're sucking up to him and pretending that there's some
Speaker 1: good in it, but they're basically telling him that this
Speaker 1: is bad and he needed to change course. And I
Speaker 1: think that he feels you know, when Walmart and Target
Speaker 1: and Home Depot, I think came to him the CEOs,
Speaker 1: you know. I think that's when he did a pause
Speaker 1: on his so called reciprocal tarists, and I think you'll
Speaker 1: see more of that in the weeks to come, is
Speaker 1: more backtracking as he gets more feedback from the business
Speaker 1: community about how damaging what he's doing is rational. Ip
Speaker 1: in today's emotional follower driven culture, what practical steps can
Speaker 1: we take to store reason, individualism and leadership and how
Speaker 1: can someone strategically contribute to that long term shift. Look,
Speaker 1: there's only really one way to do it, and that
Speaker 1: is I mean too ways if you will. One way
Speaker 1: is to speak up. Is not to hide your views.
Speaker 1: It's the talk talk talk right right right. Use every
Speaker 1: venue available to you within your scope to speak up
Speaker 1: against what's going on and to present a rational alternative
Speaker 1: in whatever context you can. That's how cultures change. And
Speaker 1: at the same time, support the intellectuals who are who
Speaker 1: are who have bigger audiences, who can can you know,
Speaker 1: leverage their audiences to get your message out to more people.
Speaker 1: There's nothing else that can be done. Stay away from
Speaker 1: politics right now. I don't think it's helpful right now.
Speaker 1: But embrace speaking, Embrace better intellectuals, Embrace whoever you find
Speaker 1: online you know, and then use whatever means you have
Speaker 1: social media to amplify amplify the message from the intellectuals
Speaker 1: you follow. So take somebody like like Phil Magnus that
Speaker 1: we had on the show on Thursday, somebody again who
Speaker 1: calls himself a libertarian related to the question before. But
Speaker 1: take Phil Magnus and he writes really really good stuff
Speaker 1: on social media on trade and tariffs. Start actively sharing
Speaker 1: his stuff, liking and sharing it, and find some others
Speaker 1: who you support and actively share and like. And even
Speaker 1: if you think, oh, my audience already knows those stuff
Speaker 1: doesn't matter, every time you share, the algorithm pays attention
Speaker 1: to that and amplifies his reach. That's how you gain
Speaker 1: the algorithm. You game the algorithm by participating, by engaging
Speaker 1: what the algorithm cares about his engagement. So you know,
Speaker 1: I encourage you to just engage. Don't stay on the sidelines,
Speaker 1: don't swook quite. You can't afford to be on the sidelines.
Speaker 1: You can't afford to say quiet. A country's being taken
Speaker 1: away from us actively by both political parties, and right
Speaker 1: now bigause threat is Trump. Okay, but you have to
Speaker 1: not present just an anti Trump position. You have to
Speaker 1: present a positive position, and you have to do it
Speaker 1: in your own realm, in your own world, and then
Speaker 1: amplify the message of those intellectuals who support the kind
Speaker 1: of world you would want. I think those are the
Speaker 1: only two things you can do. For one who views
Speaker 1: himself as an individual, politics is important, but it doesn't
Speaker 1: define his essential view of the universe as auspicious to vout.
Speaker 1: For collectivists, everything is political, do you agree. Why is that? Well,
Speaker 1: because what is politics. Politics is how we how we
Speaker 1: deal with other people when it comes to force. For
Speaker 1: collectivists who believes in force subjugating the individual to the collective,
Speaker 1: you know this matters because it's all about the collective,
Speaker 1: and it was about my collective versus their collective. It's
Speaker 1: all about my tribe versus their tribe. And that means
Speaker 1: constant politics. It means his life is not important, so
Speaker 1: he's not going to devote time to thinking figuring out
Speaker 1: how to live the best life he can live. But
Speaker 1: instead he devotes time to how to manipulate the game
Speaker 1: so that he wins. His tribe wins and the other
Speaker 1: tribe losers. It's all win lose, and he's constantly gaged
Speaker 1: in political battles as a consequence. All right, Jennifer neil
Speaker 1: Put from the song Marathon. This is a quote from
Speaker 1: neil Put. You can do a lot in a lifetime.
Speaker 1: If you don't burn out too fast, you can make
Speaker 1: the most of the distance. First, you need endurance. First,
Speaker 1: you've got to last. Yeah, I mean, yes, you've gotta
Speaker 1: build endurance. But to do that, you've gotta you've gotta
Speaker 1: really push, You've gotta really try. You've got to really
Speaker 1: focus your mind on your life, on living, on doing
Speaker 1: the best that you can to having the best life possible.
Speaker 1: Put has amazing lyrics, amazing lyrics. You can see that
Speaker 1: the strong influence of iron Man. I mean, life is
Speaker 1: not a marathon. It's not a marathon. It's because you
Speaker 1: constantly engaged in spending. So it's a sprint with maybe
Speaker 1: some rest, and maybe a marathon and maybe then two
Speaker 1: sprints after one after the other, and then a medium
Speaker 1: medium jog and then a marathon and then lots of
Speaker 1: little sprints. And I mean often life is more like
Speaker 1: high intensity interval training, right, spent on off on. I mean,
Speaker 1: you can't view it. Oh, it's a marathon. I'm just
Speaker 1: gonna cruise, just gonna cause that's not the way it is.
Speaker 1: It's not life. Yeah, but it's it's not a good metaphor.
Speaker 1: It's not a good metaphor. In life. You've got to
Speaker 1: be willing to spend, and as you get better in spending,
Speaker 1: your long term prospects improve as well. It reguids continuous
Speaker 1: effort and effort at various levels of intensity, depending on
Speaker 1: what's going on. All right, Christas, Turkey seems to be
Speaker 1: as aggressive an expansion as to Russia, China. They invaded Syria,
Speaker 1: oppressed the Kords, and constantly threatening Israel in Greece. Why
Speaker 1: does the worst treat them as an ally? Thanks Christas?
Speaker 1: I mean because they're still under the illusion that Greek
Speaker 1: the Turkey is a Western Nising country. It is because
Speaker 1: of history, still a member of NATO, and they treated
Speaker 1: as such. I don't think it's quite as aggressive as
Speaker 1: Russia and China, and I don't have it has the
Speaker 1: military capabilities. But yeah, it's threatening as well. It's threatening Greece.
Speaker 1: It's not doing anything, but it is threatening, and it's
Speaker 1: definitely oppressing the Kurds. But it's been doing that for
Speaker 1: fifty years and nobody seems to care. The invasion of
Speaker 1: Syria Tola, nobody cares because they got rid of a
Speaker 1: horrible dictatorship or their proxies got rid of a horrible dictatorship.
Speaker 1: So uh, you know, people focus on the positive, I guess,
Speaker 1: which is getting rid of Ouside, rather than negative, which
Speaker 1: has increased Turkish power. But it was still on the
Speaker 1: illusion that Tooky is what it was in in in
Speaker 1: the past, which was a Western Nias country, and it's not.
Speaker 1: It's turned its back against the West and Western values.
Speaker 1: More importantly, what did I just do? Oh? I just
Speaker 1: may I just gifted some memberships, all right, Andrew. Reality
Speaker 1: doesn't require infallibility. In fact, consciousness efficaciousness depends on knowing
Speaker 1: one's mistakes to correct for the next similar circumstances whe encounters. Yes, absolutely,
Speaker 1: I mean failure is part of life. It just is.
Speaker 1: You're not going to have succeed in everything. You're going
Speaker 1: to fail. And the ability to succeed in the future
Speaker 1: is going to depend on how well you handle failures today,
Speaker 1: how well you deal with them. And the better you
Speaker 1: deal with the failures, the more you learn from them,
Speaker 1: the better the positive in your life is going to be.
Speaker 1: And says, you said that many people have been saying
Speaker 1: you're not objective about Trump. Did you mean lately or
Speaker 1: rather since Trump came unseen? Well lately one person told
Speaker 1: me that, But he happens to be a fairly large
Speaker 1: supportive of the show. But you know, I've been told
Speaker 1: that for ten years, in spite of the fact that
Speaker 1: I've been right about Trump for ten years. So I
Speaker 1: think I am objective about Trump. I think my constant
Speaker 1: negativity about Trump is one hundred percent justified. If anything,
Speaker 1: I might be a little soft on him. I think
Speaker 1: Trump everything Trump does, only seemingly, particularly the second term,
Speaker 1: is confirmed everything I've thought about him, everything I've said
Speaker 1: about him, so which suggest that maybe I've been objective.
Speaker 1: So people have told me that over the last ten years,
Speaker 1: you know, nobody again and recently it's obvious that my
Speaker 1: negativity abound Trump has cost me in terms of subscribers.
Speaker 1: That is because people don't want to hear it. That's fine.
Speaker 1: But I think I've been extraordinarily objective about Trump. I
Speaker 1: think I continue to be extraordinarily objective about Trump, and
Speaker 1: I think that reality keeps confirming that I'm right and
Speaker 1: have been right about Trump, and you know, you ignore
Speaker 1: reality at your own peral. I choose not to. I
Speaker 1: choose not to. And yeah, and hopefully more and more
Speaker 1: people are coming to the conclusion that they were overly
Speaker 1: positive about Trump, because I think that conclusion is demanded
Speaker 1: by his actions over the last since over the last
Speaker 1: hundred days, one hundred or so days. But in m
Speaker 1: okay of losing subscribers to these are not subscribers. I'm
Speaker 1: not losing contributors on a Monti basis. The Patreon is growing,
Speaker 1: you know, PayPal is stable, so you know, super chat
Speaker 1: has been really good. So I'm not losing the subscribers
Speaker 1: who support the show. I'm losing people who don't want
Speaker 1: to subscribe to. Somebody who is anti Trump, and that's fine.
Speaker 1: And Ben Shapiro, who criticizes Trump but does it more
Speaker 1: moderately and says good things about Trump, I think is
Speaker 1: the one being non objective because he's too positive about Trump.
Speaker 1: He's being non objective in that his criticism is to
Speaker 1: value free, value neutral. I am not value neutral. Well,
Speaker 1: Trump does affect my life, and I will reflect that
Speaker 1: fact in my commentary. I'm not value neutral about anything.
Speaker 1: Values what everything is about being objective means being objective
Speaker 1: about my life doesn't mean not knowing what's a threat
Speaker 1: to my values. So you know, Ben Shapiro is very
Speaker 1: careful not to alienate too much of his audience. Not
Speaker 1: because I'm going to tell you the truth. I'm going
Speaker 1: to tell you what I think. I'm going to tell
Speaker 1: you what my values are. I'm going to judge, and
Speaker 1: then you judge me, and some of you judge me
Speaker 1: to be non you know, not interesting, or not objective
Speaker 1: or not balanced thoughever you want to call it. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's you're right, Andrew. Don't let others determine your metaphysical attitude. Yes,
Speaker 1: so what I just said, thank you, Andrew Michael. What
Speaker 1: are the aspects of due process for illegal immigrants? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, so, okay, you're illegal. Due process requires that
Speaker 1: we discover whether you really are illegal? Right, So first
Speaker 1: is are you illegal? Right? Give you an opportunity to
Speaker 1: show that you're not, that you illegal, that you got
Speaker 1: silent papers that you got, you've applied for legal status
Speaker 1: and your whatever. Our immigration system is complex enough that
Speaker 1: the distinction between illegal and legal is not that clear,
Speaker 1: and you need due process and I'll discover that. Second,
Speaker 1: given that some of these illegal immigrants are being sent
Speaker 1: to prisons, not just deported, but sent to prisons. Are
Speaker 1: you a clonel if you're not a criminal, by what
Speaker 1: right does the government send you to a prison? Being
Speaker 1: an illegal immigrant means deportation doesn't mean incarceration, and it
Speaker 1: ourselve adobi in jail. So you need due process to
Speaker 1: established whether somebody is really a criminal and deserves to
Speaker 1: be incarcerated. So those are two aspects. I mean, it's
Speaker 1: not an accident because we don't have due process. People
Speaker 1: who are not illegal immigrant and have been deported, and
Speaker 1: people are not criminals have been sent in El Salvender
Speaker 1: in jail. Michael, it seems the best way to implement
Speaker 1: socialist policies is by running on a platform that you
Speaker 1: hate the left. It does, doesn't it. The best way to,
Speaker 1: you know, impose socialist policies is by pretending you're not
Speaker 1: a socialist. But remember the Nazi Party was the National
Speaker 1: Socialist Party. Everybody was a socialist. I mean everybody on
Speaker 1: the right end the left was socialists, you know in
Speaker 1: those days, and maybe everybody on the far far right
Speaker 1: and the far left are still socialist. Listen, Depth started
Speaker 1: reading Starship Troopers. Any thoughts on Handline or science fiction
Speaker 1: in general. I mean, I'm a fan of Handlines at
Speaker 1: least I was. Time I read Headline, I was probably
Speaker 1: in my thirties, so I haven't read his book in
Speaker 1: a long time, but I really enjoyed them in my
Speaker 1: twenties and thirties. Starship Trooper is one where he's flirting
Speaker 1: with fascism, so you just have to be aware of that,
Speaker 1: and I think you'll see it. But it's still interesting
Speaker 1: and it's still cause you to think and think about
Speaker 1: what citizenship means, white people go to army voting, the
Speaker 1: role of voting, who should vote, So there's a lot
Speaker 1: of things to think about that. That's the virtue of onlines.
Speaker 1: Novel books always causes you to think, you know, strange
Speaker 1: and the strange land will cause you to think a
Speaker 1: lot about sex relationships, how we treat unknown, who moons?
Speaker 1: Alish Mistress is very political. There's a Randian character one
Speaker 1: of the heroes. There's a Randian influenced by Rand. I say,
Speaker 1: inline Red Rand. There's no question. My favorite is Time
Speaker 1: lefl Love. Time Enough of Love was my favorite Headline book.
Speaker 1: It was the most benevolent it was the most fun interesting,
Speaker 1: also caused you to challenge a lot of preconceptions. So
Speaker 1: I'm a big fan. Generally, I like science fiction. I
Speaker 1: don't read enough of it, but because it provides you
Speaker 1: with an opportunity to play around with, you know, different
Speaker 1: political schemes, different types of characters, different type of challenges,
Speaker 1: different types of values. So I think there's a lot.
Speaker 1: There's a lot that can be done with science fiction.
Speaker 1: I think there's a lot of very talented science fiction writers.
Speaker 1: I think they're whatever. I think a lot of the
Speaker 1: more romantic writers and the better writers turn to science
Speaker 1: fiction and away from call it serious fiction, which is
Speaker 1: in the hands of the more morbid, less interesting, naturalistic writers. Michael.
Speaker 1: First they take the mind, then they take the body. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's much much easier to take the body once they
Speaker 1: take the mind, much much easier. But it's a harder
Speaker 1: to take the mind. But in the mind they often
Speaker 1: take without knowing, right, so by spreading ideology, but they
Speaker 1: don't really realize the impact of it. Jacob, what would
Speaker 1: laws acts would be needed to make American cities be
Speaker 1: truly great? Eliminate railroad regulations, zoning, interstate highway funding, labor controls,
Speaker 1: and construction anything else. Yeah, I'm sure there's a lot
Speaker 1: of a lot of related to zoning, land use restrictions
Speaker 1: that would need to be lifted, a lot of the
Speaker 1: city planning would have to be eliminated. And then the
Speaker 1: other thing that cities and counties could do is privatize
Speaker 1: a lot of their services, figure out how to create
Speaker 1: business models that allow trash collection and utility provisioning and
Speaker 1: all that to be for profit competitive in the private sector.
Speaker 1: But you know, if they got rid of railroad regulations,
Speaker 1: zoning in a state, highway funding, labor controls, and construction,
Speaker 1: but also all the other things about construction. There are
Speaker 1: a million different regulations regarding construction. For example, how many
Speaker 1: bathrooms per bedroom are you allowed to build in an
Speaker 1: apartment or a house? Minimals quite footage you can't build.
Speaker 1: You can't build apartments that are smaller than x exists
Speaker 1: in New York City. I think, what else all kinds
Speaker 1: of other things that make housing really really expensive. So
Speaker 1: a lot of the construction regulations, not with regard to safety,
Speaker 1: but with regard to what they consider like living minimal
Speaker 1: living is it needs to be eliminated. A lot of
Speaker 1: regulations regarding housing and construction. They need to be eliminated. Michael.
Speaker 1: If one single person does not have the right to
Speaker 1: do process in your country, neither to you. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean you can't. Everybody has a right to do process.
Speaker 1: So nobody has it. And this is why. First they
Speaker 1: come for the illegal immigrants, then they come for the
Speaker 1: you know, legal immigrant, and then they come from the
Speaker 1: American born. So you know there's no limit. You know,
Speaker 1: they'll come for the journalists, that'll come for the people
Speaker 1: who criticize them. Now, once you eliminate due process, Yeah,
Speaker 1: so slippy slope. Slippery slopes exist. Wes, thank you for
Speaker 1: the fifty dollars. Really really appreciate that fifty dollars sticker.
Speaker 1: That is fantastic. Michael. I don't like jd Vance. I
Speaker 1: don't think jd Vance could win. He's not charismatic, bad
Speaker 1: at lying, and rather unlikable. I think that's probably true.
Speaker 1: He didn't win a center campaign in spite of that.
Speaker 1: He was elected vice president in spite of that. So
Speaker 1: never say never, but particularly given the bad performance of Trump,
Speaker 1: I think, you know, economic performance another I don't think.
Speaker 1: I think Jad Evans is probably not going to be
Speaker 1: able to win, which is really good news. There is
Speaker 1: just Hawley there out there to be afraid of them.
Speaker 1: Here on. Since you've been into art for so long,
Speaker 1: did you ever come across the term shape language? I
Speaker 1: find it weird how it's been introduced to me as
Speaker 1: something people have evolved to respond to. No, I never have,
Speaker 1: and it sounds like BS to me. It sounds like, yeah,
Speaker 1: just something that people make up to justify the non
Speaker 1: objective arts that they want to hoist upon us and
Speaker 1: pretend that has that it has meaning. Luscinda got to
Speaker 1: go to a call with a friend. Will watch the
Speaker 1: rest of the show later. Everyone. Remember to reach the
Speaker 1: witch It goal and remember you can send stickers. Thank you,
Speaker 1: Lissenda really appreciate it. Listenda doing a little bit of
Speaker 1: marketing for me, and I appreciate that. We're about a
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty dollars short of the stretch goal,
Speaker 1: the three hour goal. There's a chance we will reach
Speaker 1: past the two hours. We'll see. Still got a few
Speaker 1: questions left. When you feel like stopping, think about why
Speaker 1: you started. That's from Michael. Yes, find motivation in the
Speaker 1: motivation you had to start. Why did you have start? Now?
Speaker 1: Sometimes stopping is the right thing to do, right, not
Speaker 1: everything he started worth while continue, but regain that motivation
Speaker 1: to really objectively assess whether you should stop a start. Michael,
Speaker 1: how do these tariffs affect Boom Airlines? It could be
Speaker 1: the case that the disruptive and transformative nature Boom saves
Speaker 1: the stock market and boost economic growth despite statism. Well,
Speaker 1: I don't think any one company can do that. I
Speaker 1: don't think Boom's market share, even potentially is that big us.
Speaker 1: I think Boom's real productive contribution to the world is
Speaker 1: still five years away at least probably a decade away
Speaker 1: in terms of real impact. So I wouldn't I wouldn't
Speaker 1: put too much onto the Boom shoulders. How much could
Speaker 1: it affect it? I don't know. My guess is that
Speaker 1: some parts that go into the Boom engine or go
Speaker 1: into the Boom fuselage or whatever, probably made in China.
Speaker 1: There's probably some effect from China onto that. At this
Speaker 1: point they're not mass producing, so right now it doesn't matter,
Speaker 1: probably doesn't affect the next few years as they build
Speaker 1: a prototype. My assumption is that they can build a
Speaker 1: prototype without any problem. Right So, but if the if,
Speaker 1: the if it remains long term they will have. They
Speaker 1: will have a problem in scaling up and producing hundreds
Speaker 1: of jets. Michael says, hang in there it gets worse. Well,
Speaker 1: if it gets worse, why should I hang in there?
Speaker 1: Thank you Robert for the sticker. Thank you, Liscinda, Thank you, Jeff,
Speaker 1: really really appreciate that. I think they're getting on a
Speaker 1: dollar ninety nine sticker. Maybe everybody who's on the show
Speaker 1: right now do a dollar ninety nine sticker, like that's
Speaker 1: less than a cappuccino. And yeah, that'd be fun to
Speaker 1: see a bunch of dollar ninety ninite stickers. Of course
Speaker 1: you can also do Jeff's three Canadian dollars. But Liscinda
Speaker 1: did a U O ninety nine and Robert did it
Speaker 1: buck ninety nine, So keep it coming. Andrew Rand reacted
Speaker 1: to Mike Wallace asking if she was a pessimist with
Speaker 1: and could do it incredulity. Not not at all. She
Speaker 1: said she viewed trying to spread a philosophy as evidence
Speaker 1: of optimism, and she was Nopolianna. Yeah, it was also,
Speaker 1: what is it fifty years ago? There's us a long
Speaker 1: time ago, so a lot of bad things have happened
Speaker 1: since then. But I agree I'm not at a pessimist.
Speaker 1: I am and I'm positive. I think things can change,
Speaker 1: they can get better. I don't think we're doomed. I
Speaker 1: don't think we're falling off a cliff. And I expect.
Speaker 1: I expect the world will be a better place in
Speaker 1: one hundred years than it is now. I don't know
Speaker 1: about twenty but in one hundred years, I do. Frank
Speaker 1: Musk said patents are for the week for those who
Speaker 1: innovate slowly. There should be no patents. Most inhibit innovation,
Speaker 1: not help. But please comment. I mean, I don't have
Speaker 1: time to get into this. It's a huge topic. But
Speaker 1: I obviously disagree with Musk. I think patterns are essential
Speaker 1: for economic growth. The patterns system was very robust in
Speaker 1: the United States during the nineteenth century when and early
Speaker 1: twentieth century, when economic growth was very fast and very innovative,
Speaker 1: and there's a lot of innovation and big innovation and
Speaker 1: innovation in atoms, not just in electrons, and big and
Speaker 1: good stuff happened so empirically, it's just not true America
Speaker 1: is the people who use patents were were not the weak,
Speaker 1: and you so massive and successful you cannot go to
Speaker 1: in that period so just historically it's not true, and
Speaker 1: theoretically it's not true. Patents of form protecting property rights
Speaker 1: and property rights are an essential building block of the
Speaker 1: capitalism of markets, and I've had I've had Adam massafon
Speaker 1: several times to talk about patents over the years. I'm
Speaker 1: sure I'll have him on again. But if you're interested
Speaker 1: in digging deeper into patents, check out Adam Mossoff on
Speaker 1: online adif. Thank you for the sticker, Paul, thank you
Speaker 1: for the sticker. Stephen Harper, thank you, no one, thank you.
Speaker 1: So we got a bunch of one ninety nine going,
Speaker 1: we got a two, we got a four euros. So yeah,
Speaker 1: buck ninety nine from everybody, let's do it. You got
Speaker 1: one hundred and fifty people watching this. Bonnie just did
Speaker 1: another buck ninety nine. This. It's good. I love it.
Speaker 1: Just just chipping away like that and getting all of
Speaker 1: you involved. It's a blast and value for value you're watching.
Speaker 1: You're getting something out of the show. Show the value
Speaker 1: in return. Luke thought i'd send something because how often
Speaker 1: you respond to my chats today, first super chest, first
Speaker 1: super chat excellent, Thank you, Luke? Did it tell me
Speaker 1: it was your first chair. I didn't notice that, so congratulations,
Speaker 1: thank you. I very much didn't say it was the
Speaker 1: first jubis Het interesting, thank you, that is amazing. I
Speaker 1: like numbers. Haven't you predicted stagnation for a few years, Yeah,
Speaker 1: and we've had pretty low I've predicted stagnation for twenty
Speaker 1: years since the Great Financial Crisis. I said, the bailout
Speaker 1: and the Great Financial Crisis, the result would be slow
Speaker 1: economic growth. Now we haven't had. We've had slightly higher
Speaker 1: economic growth than I would have expected. So it's been
Speaker 1: to three percent, closer to two under Obama and the
Speaker 1: Trump under Biden. Now I expect lower, So I wouldn't
Speaker 1: be surprised if if stagnation manifests itself one percent. Now
Speaker 1: remember that I believe the economy could got five six percent,
Speaker 1: So two percent growth is stagnation from my perspective. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I've been predicting stagnation for a long time. Milko, Milko,
Speaker 1: thank you, Hey you on thanks value for value. I
Speaker 1: appreciate that. I'm still waiting to hear from you about
Speaker 1: it's a leader summer. If we're doing something, if we're
Speaker 1: meeting up and if we're doing an evanded MODERNA and
Speaker 1: if we're doing something. Let me know. Thank you, Milko,
Speaker 1: let's see I got that, Gail, thank you for the sticker, Alan,
Speaker 1: thank you for the sticker. All doing one three dollars? Yeah,
Speaker 1: this is great. This is great. We're already only only
Speaker 1: eighty one short from the stretch goal. This is fantastic. Frank,
Speaker 1: what's your take on the banner as a tool of
Speaker 1: free speech? Wouldn't often be reckless? Also? Is dollar a
Speaker 1: week or strong? If I pay eighteen dollars for fifteen
Speaker 1: British pounds the banner? I mean, there is no such
Speaker 1: thing as a tool of free speech. There's no such
Speaker 1: thing as a tool of free speech. The banner has
Speaker 1: free speech. It's free speech needs to be protected, and
Speaker 1: it's protected through the government needs to protect it by
Speaker 1: not using force against it. Might not use allowing other
Speaker 1: people to use force against it. But it's not a
Speaker 1: tool of free speech. And was it often reckless? Yeah?
Speaker 1: I was often reckless and wrong, but there's not You
Speaker 1: have a right to be reckless up to a point
Speaker 1: unless you're endangering people physically. Is the dollar week of strong?
Speaker 1: It's still strong, historically weaker than it was three months ago,
Speaker 1: six months ago, I haven't got the shot in front
Speaker 1: of me, but still relatively strong. They have been periods
Speaker 1: in history where it's being weaker. It's all relative, right,
Speaker 1: It's still pretty strong, you know, from historical perspective, which
Speaker 1: is all we really have to go on. Raphael Hi
Speaker 1: you Ron, Can you explain what happened to Hypatia? Who killed?
Speaker 1: Who killed? An historical context? Just finished a Goa movie
Speaker 1: and really enjoyed it. Yeah, the Goa movie is excellent.
Speaker 1: You know, I don't know the details of the history.
Speaker 1: I know that Goa movie is not historically correct. That is,
Speaker 1: it takes a lot of liberties with history, which is
Speaker 1: fine because it's a movie and you should be able
Speaker 1: to do that in a movie in order to dramatize.
Speaker 1: It's not clear that that's when the library was burnt,
Speaker 1: and those were the circumstances, and probably once and and
Speaker 1: I don't remember how she died or who killed her. So,
Speaker 1: but she was a female philosopher, one of the last,
Speaker 1: uh you know, one of the last who before the
Speaker 1: kind of the beginning of the Dark Ages and the
Speaker 1: end of Rome. So she's still at the at the
Speaker 1: edge of the Roman Empire. This is in Alexandria. She's
Speaker 1: still a pagan, she has not, but the Christians are
Speaker 1: slowly taking over. Destroying the library is destroying the learning
Speaker 1: and destroying the the the whole idea of philosophy CoA philosophy.
Speaker 1: And you know this is this is Bethia's death is
Speaker 1: part of that decline of Western civilization into a Christian
Speaker 1: dark ages. Andrew, there are no there are no people
Speaker 1: in the world who could compete with us in any
Speaker 1: area of production, including manufacturing. If American ingenuity was combined
Speaker 1: with Las fay rational or American bravado, I'd say American bravado.
Speaker 1: I mean, is that really true? Right? I mean? And
Speaker 1: what are you comparing to you comparing to other countries
Speaker 1: having laz a fair as well? The Germans are pretty
Speaker 1: damn good at at manufacturing certain things that America has
Speaker 1: never been particularly good at. Americans have very particularly good
Speaker 1: at so textiles in mass and cheaply. Chinese are probably
Speaker 1: better than America, even even if America was laser fair,
Speaker 1: and we wouldn't want to produce it. Part of the issue, right,
Speaker 1: So it's not clear what that even means. It's a
Speaker 1: very collectivistic view of the world. We are better at manufacturing?
Speaker 1: Who's we? What does it mean? How do you measure that?
Speaker 1: Would we make everything ourselves? Obviously not so how do
Speaker 1: we'd even know? It's just a meaningless and it's sorry, Andrew,
Speaker 1: but it's just a meaningless statement driven by collectivism, a
Speaker 1: collectivistic view of economics, which is all around us, so
Speaker 1: it's easy to get captured by it. David, thank you
Speaker 1: for your first super Chat as a sticker, but really
Speaker 1: really appreciate. Linda, Thank you for the super Chat. Timmy Cochrane,
Speaker 1: thank you for the super Chat. You guys are great,
Speaker 1: really really appreciate it. Only fifty one dollars away from
Speaker 1: the stretch goal, listen to thanks to YBS and AAR,
Speaker 1: I can focus less on politics and most of my
Speaker 1: time on studying, reading and my other hobbies and values.
Speaker 1: And thank you and thank you for supporting the run
Speaker 1: book show. I really appreciate that. All right, Andrew? Do
Speaker 1: you interpret that? When interpret that? When someone tries to
Speaker 1: sum up what you're saying in a pithy generalization in
Speaker 1: super Chat, the essential motivate work is to help him
Speaker 1: integrate the essence of what you're saying. Yes, yeah, absolutely,
Speaker 1: I mean, uh, pithy short ways. I mean, that's that's
Speaker 1: really good ways to summarize it. And sometimes I critique
Speaker 1: it because it's not fully understood. Maybe I didn't express
Speaker 1: myself well first time. But yeah, I've I think it's
Speaker 1: I do interpret it that way. Richard, Thank you twenty dollars.
Speaker 1: I'm studying AI after forty years in tech and find
Speaker 1: it's like working on a move with continuous script rewrites,
Speaker 1: on a movie with continuous script rewrites. I suggest that
Speaker 1: you project how you will use AI, for example enriching
Speaker 1: your knowledge. Yeah, I have an idea how I want
Speaker 1: to use AI for marketing help primarily summarizing like i'd
Speaker 1: love to be able to, and I know this is possible.
Speaker 1: Basically feed the AI my show and have it summarize
Speaker 1: it for me and then include the summary in the
Speaker 1: description of the show and in the marketing material like
Speaker 1: on Twitter and stuff when I market the show. So
Speaker 1: that is step one that I would like to do.
Speaker 1: But there's things like that that I would like to do.
Speaker 1: And then there's also stuff about just enriching my knowledge
Speaker 1: that that is a lot easier, and I still I
Speaker 1: am not quite ready to replace book reading with AI.
Speaker 1: Why do we believe financial markets are efficient when institutional
Speaker 1: investors is mostly run by Keynesians or other variations of
Speaker 1: pseudo economics, Well, because I don't think it is run
Speaker 1: by Kansian I think that most that the investors that matter,
Speaker 1: the investors of matter are the marginal investors, the investors
Speaker 1: that are willing to buy a sell as price changes.
Speaker 1: The long term holders of stocks don't matter for prices.
Speaker 1: Most institutional investors are just by hold investors. Really, the
Speaker 1: people who make a difference are the hedge funds and
Speaker 1: the one buffets of the world. And I can tell
Speaker 1: you none of those are Kansian, certainly not the hedge funds.
Speaker 1: And because they are the ones that are constantly price searching,
Speaker 1: price seeking, looking at prices and trying to evalue it.
Speaker 1: Soelo by it by yourself, they can do both. They
Speaker 1: can short, they can long. They're the ones who actually
Speaker 1: determined prices. And to the extent that they're successful, over
Speaker 1: time they grow and therefore they have more market power.
Speaker 1: To extent that they're failures, over time they shrink, they disappear,
Speaker 1: and they have less market power. So the market reinforces
Speaker 1: the good within it. All right, last two questions with
Speaker 1: thirty one dollars away from the target from the stretch
Speaker 1: Tugget Fendhoppers, speaking of science fiction, just finished Hitchkiker's Guide
Speaker 1: to the Galaxy. I found it hilarious, but I've learned
Speaker 1: to laugh at cynicism. It's absurd cynical. Haha. Have you
Speaker 1: read it? I have not. I have now read it.
Speaker 1: Never appealed to me the kind of absurd cynicism that
Speaker 1: it embraces. I know a lot of people who love it.
Speaker 1: All right, last question from rational Ip. Thanks for any
Speaker 1: insights today. They are very inspiring. I'm really enjoying my
Speaker 1: journey into objectivism. To end on a light note, what's
Speaker 1: one tech company you admire and why does it stand
Speaker 1: out to you? I mean the obvious one is Apple,
Speaker 1: as I think everybody knows, I admire Apple. Steve Jobs
Speaker 1: is one of my all time business heroes. He is
Speaker 1: a I think he was a real giant, and I
Speaker 1: like the way he carried himself. I like the way presented.
Speaker 1: I like the his strategic thinking. I liked this long
Speaker 1: term thinking. The guy had vision and he understood what
Speaker 1: was important and he changed the world. And Apple is
Speaker 1: still has some of that DNA in it. It's not
Speaker 1: quite as innovative. It is an exciting as it was
Speaker 1: when Jobs was alive, but it's well damn good. And
Speaker 1: and Tim Cook is more of an operator or an executioner,
Speaker 1: a more supply chain guy and a manufacturing guy. But
Speaker 1: you have to admire that as well. And and uh
Speaker 1: probably more political than diplomatic than Steve Jobs would have been.
Speaker 1: Uh So, I I you know, I love that company
Speaker 1: and I respect that company. You know, I'm a little
Speaker 1: detached to other tech companies that I admire. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: not a big social media person, you know. I I
Speaker 1: love Amazon. I love Amazon. Amazon has changed our lives
Speaker 1: in dramatic fashion. And yet everybody takes it for granted
Speaker 1: and loves to hate it. And yet they're real heroes
Speaker 1: at Amazon, and they've they've made the world a better
Speaker 1: place for all of us. They've they've changed the way
Speaker 1: we think about shopping, the way we think about storage,
Speaker 1: you know, think of cloud computing. Yeah, I mean, Amazon's
Speaker 1: another great, great company. It's hardware is a mixed bag,
Speaker 1: but again it's you know, it's just changed the way
Speaker 1: you do things. I mean, think about how much you
Speaker 1: get if you buy one of those Amazon firesticks. How simple, easy, small,
Speaker 1: and cheap that is, and how much value it contains
Speaker 1: on it. I mean to be able to stream Netflix
Speaker 1: and all those things. It's just, yeah, it's amazing how
Speaker 1: much value Amazon provides. Friend Happa, thank you for the sticker.
Speaker 1: And we're dollars short of our goal. Maybe somebody can
Speaker 1: do a dollar sticker. Okay, we've got two additional questions. Hey,
Speaker 1: Ron Destiny has some serious sexual allegations against him. In
Speaker 1: case you didn't know, neihverhood that mentioning, so it's not
Speaker 1: a surprise if it comes up in any capacity. Thanks Nick.
Speaker 1: I did not know that, and I have no idea
Speaker 1: how seriously. I assume if they're seriously'll be prosecuted around them.
Speaker 1: But thanks for giving me the heads up. Michael, what
Speaker 1: if they What will Trump do if the Supreme Court
Speaker 1: throws out his tabs this fall? I think you'll have
Speaker 1: to retrench and you'll have to come back with something different.
Speaker 1: I don't think that Trump wants to negate the Supreme Court.
Speaker 1: He will sideline, and he will hesitate, and he will
Speaker 1: they as much as he can for as long as
Speaker 1: he can. But in the end, I think he will
Speaker 1: accept the rulings of the Supreme Court and live by them.
Speaker 1: I hope I'm right. I'm not sure i'm right, but
Speaker 1: I hope i'm right. All Right, Andrew just did a
Speaker 1: stick out to get us past the goal. Really really
Speaker 1: appreciate that. Thank you, guys, Thank you everybody for being
Speaker 1: so generous. All Right, show tomorrow at two or three
Speaker 1: pm EASCAN time partially depends on how the Destiny thing goes,
Speaker 1: or maybe it'll be in the evening because I don't
Speaker 1: think I have an interview guests for tomorrow evening, so
Speaker 1: maybe I'll move the news show to the evening if
Speaker 1: my voice is going after after tomorrow, we'll see. But
Speaker 1: for now, thank you. I'm going to try to get
Speaker 1: some rest so I can keep going tomorrow. I will
Speaker 1: thank you Duffy Sutton for the sticker. Appreciate it. Thank
Speaker 1: you all, and yeah, see tomorrow thanks to the super chatows.
Speaker 1: Have a great rest of your Sunday. Bye.