Speaker 1: On the many nights of Christmas. The Guinness Storehouse brings
Speaker 1: to the Christmas Nights at Gravity This Christmas. Enjoy a
Speaker 1: truly unique night out at the Gravity Bar. Savor festive
Speaker 1: bites from Big Fan Bell, expertly crafted seasonal cocktails, and
Speaker 1: dance the night away with DJs from Love Tempo, Bread Taking, Fuse,
Speaker 1: amazing atmosphere, incredible food and drink My goodness, It's Christmas
Speaker 1: at the Guinness Storehouse. Book now at Guinness Storehouse dot com.
Speaker 1: Get the facts, be drink a where physic drinker where
Speaker 1: dot e meaning a live man like this man letting butterfly,
Speaker 1: flapping his wing, big down in on the forest.
Speaker 2: Man, it gonna cause the tree.
Speaker 1: Fall, letting five thousand miles away.
Speaker 2: Man, Nobody see it?
Speaker 3: Nobody else.
Speaker 4: Why you don't need no play with them?
Speaker 2: Like you follow and you get back. Don't black a dan?
Speaker 3: You don't okay?
Speaker 2: All right, Mark Mitchell? Look did the Jay Burden Show?
Speaker 2: How are you doing?
Speaker 3: Then? Doing well? We had some fun conversation before this thing,
Speaker 3: so I'm pretty stoked.
Speaker 2: Yeah, man, I'm looking forward to it. Obviously, I'm aware
Speaker 2: of you and your company and have been for quite
Speaker 2: a while. But I was really engaged by an episode
Speaker 2: that you did with Marty bent TFTC. I think is
Speaker 2: the podcast I'll drop it in the description, where the
Speaker 2: two of you discussed an ongoing generational breakdown in the
Speaker 2: broader right wing in America. This is something that I
Speaker 2: think myself and many of my listeners will be aware
Speaker 2: of on any number of issues. But I'm curious, right,
Speaker 2: what sort of motivated you to look into this? And
Speaker 2: I guess I should be a podcaster and lead with
Speaker 2: this if you could. You know, where are you coming from?
Speaker 3: Right?
Speaker 2: Why are you the person who can you know, speak
Speaker 2: about data like this.
Speaker 3: Yeah? So I'm a political polster, which is relatively commoditized,
Speaker 3: but I'm also like an honest, non establishment polster, which
Speaker 3: is not commoditized at all. There are actually very few
Speaker 3: of us. And the stuff I like to do best
Speaker 3: isn't really the political horse racing. It's hard, it's boring.
Speaker 3: I like polling on public sentiment, which is like, hey,
Speaker 3: you know, one hundred years ago, somebody said, well to
Speaker 3: people like chocolate or vanilla ice cream better? And somebody said, oh,
Speaker 3: I don't know, we'll ask them, and then the news
Speaker 3: thought that was interesting. But now what I pull on
Speaker 3: is like civil war, the death of the American dream,
Speaker 3: political violence, the weaponization of the justice system. And I
Speaker 3: find looking around that really nobody else is talking about
Speaker 3: those things, and that's because they've all been captured by
Speaker 3: a system that essentially wants to tell people what to
Speaker 3: think and not actually ask them. And that's why we
Speaker 3: wound up on the CIA's Naughty List and why you know,
Speaker 3: you're not allowed to ask questions about election integrity or
Speaker 3: vaccines or any of that stuff. And so so luckily
Speaker 3: with Twitter and you know, we've been pretty loud and
Speaker 3: vocal anti establishment voices because I think we can all
Speaker 3: look around and say, you know, this isn't Red team
Speaker 3: Blue team anymore. Like we're fundamentally not being represented in
Speaker 3: a way that feels like we're running towards a cliff.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I think that's sort of interesting. I had
Speaker 2: a conversation with gen X, conservative right, very intelligent woman,
Speaker 2: but it was interesting to hear the conversation break down.
Speaker 2: Me and a couple friends were talking to her about
Speaker 2: the election of Zoron Mamdannie, and she was very, very
Speaker 2: worried about this Islamic socialist that had taken over New
Speaker 2: York and my peers were by no means, you know,
Speaker 2: a fan of this guy for any number of reasons,
Speaker 2: but the concerns were entirely different. Like the word socialism
Speaker 2: was sort of this like dim mock right the death touch,
Speaker 2: and look, I'm by no means a socialist at all.
Speaker 2: But it's interesting that that term rights sort of a
Speaker 2: disqualifying feature for your political career. And when I say disqualifying,
Speaker 2: I mean clearly it isn't from Mamdani. He will be
Speaker 2: in office, but that stink has sort of faded. And
Speaker 2: I think that that is an interesting signifier of something
Speaker 2: more broad, which is this kind of you could call
Speaker 2: it almost like a civic religion, these sort of you know,
Speaker 2: moral precepts of what is and is not acceptable as
Speaker 2: fully and totally collapsed. And maybe it hit the right
Speaker 2: a little after it hit the left, but it is
Speaker 2: creating this sort of situation where it's almost impossible to
Speaker 2: talk across that divide for reasons like that it's sort
Speaker 2: of this thought terminating word like a socialist or you know,
Speaker 2: there are others right to attack people on the right,
Speaker 2: but it is this sort of interesting moment of fracture
Speaker 2: where the kind of previous political order, their terms no
Speaker 2: longer apply. If you see what I'm getting at.
Speaker 3: Mark, Yeah, no, one hundred percent. I mean, this is
Speaker 3: what is happening right now. There's a major political realignment
Speaker 3: and nobody in Washington, DC really wants to acknowledge it.
Speaker 3: And things are starting to move really fast right now,
Speaker 3: and I'm here for it. As a public opinion professional,
Speaker 3: measuring sentiment on this is going to be wild, because
Speaker 3: what history tells us is that there's periods where opinions
Speaker 3: change really, really, really fast. And for people who don't
Speaker 3: study history, I certainly don't. There is a book called
Speaker 3: The Fourth Turning that was recommended to me by Steve Bannon,
Speaker 3: who actually fifteen years ago wrote a movie about this,
Speaker 3: produced a movie, and he's very precient on many things,
Speaker 3: and this was one of them. Because when I read
Speaker 3: the book, I'm like, oh, this is kind of interesting.
Speaker 3: And then increasingly, just over the last year or two,
Speaker 3: I've seen more and more signs of this impending shift
Speaker 3: coming in my polling. And I think the most obvious
Speaker 3: example recently is people's opinions on Israel, but I could
Speaker 3: point to a ton of other examples too, and one
Speaker 3: of them like referring to the Mandami situation is to
Speaker 3: domestic versus foreign terrorism. And so it's like, Okay, Islam's
Speaker 3: a religion, like whatever. There's a lot of religions, but
Speaker 3: then okay, there's also this thing called islamis Islamic terrorism.
Speaker 3: And so when you look at Mamdani, he's got a
Speaker 3: really high favorability rating with under forty voters. Like the
Speaker 3: young people like him. The old people are like going,
Speaker 3: oh my god, socialism, that's terrible. And the young people
Speaker 3: like don't care. They just don't. And the older people
Speaker 3: are saying, oh, but he's going to be a Muslim terrorist,
Speaker 3: and they're like, no, he's not. I listened to him.
Speaker 3: He sounds authentic to me. And in the polling, I
Speaker 3: forget the numbers. I think younger people are more concerned
Speaker 3: about domestic terrorism. I just posted it this morning. But
Speaker 3: essentially they're like forty points apart younger people versus older people.
Speaker 3: Older people are overwhelmingly concerned with foreign terrorism because they've
Speaker 3: heard all this stuff. You know this, you know, we
Speaker 3: got to fight him over there, neo conservatives, George W.
Speaker 3: Bush kind of stuff. And so what I think happens
Speaker 3: and I think one of the things is going on too,
Speaker 3: is that people like to push values, and I think
Speaker 3: that when times get tough, values are pulled, and so
Speaker 3: people are saying, like, no, those values you're pushing on
Speaker 3: me don't work anymore. Vacuum needs to be filled. I
Speaker 3: like this better, and I think we're seeing that, and
Speaker 3: the Fourth Turning tells us this is happening, because the
Speaker 3: fourth turning crisis is that happen every eighty to one
Speaker 3: hundred years, are precipitated by a massive collapse and institutional
Speaker 3: trust because the old values mean nothing and have failed.
Speaker 3: And so increasingly you're going to see these older boomer
Speaker 3: values because boomers mostly built the system we're living in.
Speaker 3: They're sixty percent of federal elected representatives, and that's going
Speaker 3: to flip really soon. And boomers are saying things like, again,
Speaker 3: we have to fight them over there instead of over here.
Speaker 3: Pre market capitalism works, you just have to work harder.
Speaker 3: Israel is our greatest ally. We need NATO in order
Speaker 3: to fight against Russia, and increasingly the youth are just
Speaker 3: going to rebel against that because it doesn't work anymore.
Speaker 3: Conservatism itself is kind of a failed set of luxury beliefs,
Speaker 3: because what is it even conserved certainly not free market capitalism.
Speaker 3: And when you ask the under forty voters like do
Speaker 3: you like capitalism or socialism? They say capitalism better. But
Speaker 3: then even the conservative under forty voters, if you say, okay,
Speaker 3: well how about this socialistic thing like well, free distribution,
Speaker 3: even the conservatives like, oh yeah, okay, we kind of
Speaker 3: need that right now. So you have this No, I
Speaker 3: mean there is a very straightforward, one dimensional political axis
Speaker 3: right versus left. It doesn't work anymore. Increasingly we have
Speaker 3: the horseshoe of politics where right and far right and
Speaker 3: far left are meeting towards focusing on the failed system
Speaker 3: that doesn't work for everybody anymore. And that's why you
Speaker 3: see things like JD. Vance polling very well because he
Speaker 3: talks like economic populist and he gets beaten by Bernie Sanders,
Speaker 3: and the way those two people talk on certain things
Speaker 3: are not very far apart. It all just comes down
Speaker 3: to like, well, how are we going to fix it?
Speaker 3: So I think that's really what's going to define politics
Speaker 3: over the next couple of years, which is increasingly people
Speaker 3: are rebelling against the people in power, and the youth
Speaker 3: are going to win is just a matter of time.
Speaker 3: If they're fifteen percent of Congress right now, that's gonna
Speaker 3: and boomers are sixty that's going to completely reverse in
Speaker 3: like ten years.
Speaker 2: Well, and that's sort of why. And there's all these
Speaker 2: different colorful ways to describe it, you know, the one
Speaker 2: from four Chan, right is the day of the pillow.
Speaker 2: But we are it's a bit grim, but it is
Speaker 2: sort of funny. It is we are about to reach
Speaker 2: and depending on who you ask, it's either in four
Speaker 2: or six years. You probably know better than I. But
Speaker 2: the point at which we read fifty percent baby boom
Speaker 2: or mortality now, obviously, the way mortality tables work, it
Speaker 2: goes quickly, even in an era of you know, modern medicine, right,
Speaker 2: And I think that that that eighty year you could
Speaker 2: have like fourth turning. I think a large part of
Speaker 2: it as well. And this is something I've seen both
Speaker 2: on the left and the right, is that there's a
Speaker 2: large number of people who don't have the buy in
Speaker 2: necessary to assume the traditional conservative position of status quo defender.
Speaker 2: Because when you have young men who you know are
Speaker 2: for any number of reasons, you know, there's been a
Speaker 2: peace out and compact about this, but we're you know,
Speaker 2: locked out, you know to traditional ways of accumulating money
Speaker 2: and status. And then also just due to you know
Speaker 2: a combination of inflation and you know, high asset values,
Speaker 2: becomes very difficult to become a property holder, to have
Speaker 2: a stake in society. Literally, well you're going to see
Speaker 2: people sort of throw up their hands and say, well,
Speaker 2: let's turn the table, like, let's just set this back
Speaker 2: to zero. I stand proportionally a better chance. And I'm
Speaker 2: glad you mentioned domestic terror because you know, I've been
Speaker 2: kind of look, I sort of came into my you know,
Speaker 2: political awareness during you know, the first Trump term, when
Speaker 2: you know, left wing political violence sort of re emerge,
Speaker 2: and so for effectively my entire adult life, you have
Speaker 2: seen this sort of worrying spiral of violence. The one
Speaker 2: that I always mentioned that no one ever talks about
Speaker 2: is those you know, twelve guys who set up an
Speaker 2: L shaped ambush outside of an ice facility where it's like, okay,
Speaker 2: they weren't successful. You know, it's not like there's a
Speaker 2: huge body count. But you look at that and you're like, okay,
Speaker 2: well that's there's twelve guys with some semblance of organization,
Speaker 2: that's way more than admittedly tragic cases where you know,
Speaker 2: some guy reads Catcher in the Rye and decides to go,
Speaker 2: you know, take a scalp or something. And I think
Speaker 2: that as you and I, you know, maybe this is
Speaker 2: kind of left wing or you know, socialist messaging, as
Speaker 2: we could say, but when you have that sort of dispossession,
Speaker 2: when you have people who don't really have a lot
Speaker 2: to lose, you know, they don't have a mortgage that
Speaker 2: would go unpaid if they're in jail, or you know
Speaker 2: a wife who would go you know, hungry, well that
Speaker 2: those sort of drastic actions are incentivized, or at least
Speaker 2: less disincentivized. And I think that that's one of those
Speaker 2: things that I feel very frustrated talking to conservatives because
Speaker 2: it's like one, like, you know, what happens now, Like
Speaker 2: they shot one of your guys literally in four K video,
Speaker 2: they tried to shoot Trump twice, Like you know, where
Speaker 2: do you think this goes? And if you don't provide
Speaker 2: those people one a sort of harsh deterrent which has
Speaker 2: been lacking, and two, to be honest, something else to do,
Speaker 2: you know, something constructive to do, Like where do you
Speaker 2: think this political violence goes because it doesn't just stop
Speaker 2: because you're upset about it.
Speaker 3: No, it's coming. It's just a matter of how and
Speaker 3: who I think, really, to be honest with you, and
Speaker 3: that's why I've been screaming louder and louder, I want
Speaker 3: to avoid this scenario. The fourth turning crisises are almost
Speaker 3: always hot. There's almost always blood. Civil War, World War two,
Speaker 3: you know, the revolution going back. Probably some crap with
Speaker 3: the Indians and the French, I don't know, but like
Speaker 3: it's the numbers say that this is coming. Forty three
Speaker 3: percent of America thinks the Civil War revolution is coming
Speaker 3: in the next few years. It's a majority. I think
Speaker 3: the number was fifty six percent of under forty voters.
Speaker 3: That's not good. Number one concern right now in America
Speaker 3: is political violence. Ninety percent of people are concerned about that.
Speaker 3: That's more than inflation. I mean, it's just sick. They're
Speaker 3: over A majority of people thought that there was going
Speaker 3: to be a violent reaction to the twenty twenty four election,
Speaker 3: including leftists who think it's more likely that the right
Speaker 3: is going to pop off because of the January sixth
Speaker 3: psychological operation. That's never been healed, like where the hell
Speaker 3: is our jan six Commission? And I've been really outspoken
Speaker 3: about this because I think that the Republican Party is
Speaker 3: just completely mia like not fighting this, just a wall.
Speaker 3: I've been posting like the Shiel laboof, like just do
Speaker 3: this mean? Like what are you talking about? Why isn't
Speaker 3: anything happening? And I think the under forty voter also
Speaker 3: is most fixated on systematic reform. I've called it burn
Speaker 3: it down politics, and that sounds pretty inflammatory, nice pun,
Speaker 3: but I mean they want to replace a failed, unethical
Speaker 3: system with something that gets back to, in my opinion,
Speaker 3: core ethics of fairness and justice and honesty. And that's
Speaker 3: I think that that's the key to the under forty,
Speaker 3: the Zoomer and the millennial politics is they just want fairness,
Speaker 3: Like why doesn't this system just work? They want a
Speaker 3: restoration of integrity. And that's a pretty strong body politic,
Speaker 3: you know what I mean. Like, if you're an objective thinker,
Speaker 3: it's pretty easy to look at any policy and say like, no,
Speaker 3: that's stupid. We shouldn't be doing this transfer payment. No,
Speaker 3: we should get these people the hell out of the
Speaker 3: country because it's not better objectively, we have stats, and
Speaker 3: even the ones on the left like kind kind of
Speaker 3: talk like that. And so the problem I see here
Speaker 3: is that like Trump captured the youth zeitgeist, he got
Speaker 3: literally shot right right he got into power on retribution
Speaker 3: and building a golden age for America and draining the swamp,
Speaker 3: and he's literally delivered nothing on that. It's like he's
Speaker 3: the biggest person in America who forgot that he got shot.
Speaker 3: And I understand that's there's limitations. I understand that it's
Speaker 3: tough to arrest these people and get it to stick.
Speaker 3: But I think the way and I don't want to
Speaker 3: put words in your mouth, but zoomers want people arrested.
Speaker 3: And when they were happiest with Trump, it was during
Speaker 3: the peak Doge. You could literally go to Google search
Speaker 3: trends and type in doge and when it peaked on
Speaker 3: the last week of February, goes straight through as musse
Speaker 3: and reports dot com and look at Trump's under forty
Speaker 3: approval rating. It was sixty percent. And so every Republican
Speaker 3: in DC should have been like morally bound to understand
Speaker 3: why they finally did something that wasn't retarded and why
Speaker 3: the youth vote actually like Republicans for once, and they
Speaker 3: didn't care. They shut the doge down. And this was
Speaker 3: the same week Donald Trump is quoting Napoleon Bonaparte, And
Speaker 3: I mean, I just have poll after poll after poll
Speaker 3: first that shows that life is terrible for the under
Speaker 3: forty voters in a way that even you, like I
Speaker 3: don't know if you want to get into or not,
Speaker 3: like very much understated. This societalric is basically, the social
Speaker 3: contract's gone for the under forty. It's just gone. And
Speaker 3: I was, I'm forty five. I saw the whole thing
Speaker 3: fall apart, Like I had my career stolen from me
Speaker 3: by the HEB program that got passing the law into
Speaker 3: nineteen ninety. So this touches me too. But it's like
Speaker 3: if you're in power and you were given a mandate
Speaker 3: and that mandate has brutally reformed the government because everybody
Speaker 3: needs it. They're begging you. Only thirty percent trust the
Speaker 3: federal government. And then the reality is, well, the system
Speaker 3: doesn't work. We're never going to get any of these
Speaker 3: people arrested. They like, Comy's going to get off Scott
Speaker 3: free and that was just one arrest. Then I kind
Speaker 3: of think that you have an ethical obligation to get like,
Speaker 3: burn that system down, be an accelerationist arrest all these people,
Speaker 3: get the evidence out, and then fine, they're going to skate.
Speaker 3: I mean, there's an aspect of the processes, the punishment.
Speaker 3: But if our justice system is that gone, if the
Speaker 3: wealthy and strong and powerful people who rule us are unaccountable,
Speaker 3: why are we allowing this to persist? And I don't know,
Speaker 3: tell me if that you think that resonates with how
Speaker 3: younger voting no?
Speaker 2: And to see the common refrain I hear from my
Speaker 2: peer group, and look, you know, I talk to people
Speaker 2: on the internet professionally, so I realize in that context
Speaker 2: I have a non representative slice, but you know I
Speaker 2: do have a real life as well. The common refrain
Speaker 2: I hear over and over again is I did everything right.
Speaker 2: I did what I was supposed to do. You know,
Speaker 2: I don't have debt, I have a degree in a
Speaker 2: marketable field. And now what, I'm poorer than my parents
Speaker 2: and grandparents were at this stage, an ever greater portion
Speaker 2: of my take home income is taken for sort of
Speaker 2: the basic parts of life. And so the floor where
Speaker 2: you can start saving, where you can start building, is
Speaker 2: incredibly high. Now, look that depends on where you live obviously,
Speaker 2: cost of living, but that's an incredibly common refrain, right
Speaker 2: this feeling, I'm like, wait a minute, like I did
Speaker 2: what you told me to do. And now, as I'm
Speaker 2: sure you know, the data on job placement for new
Speaker 2: graduates is abysmal, particularly in STEM, particularly in these fields
Speaker 2: have been hit by H one b's. And then when
Speaker 2: someone says, well, the real issue is always you know,
Speaker 2: mass immig or sorry, illegal immigration, but if it's legal,
Speaker 2: it's fine conversation I had yesterday, you know, just personally,
Speaker 2: and you're like, well, okay, for you, it is right.
Speaker 2: These people, if they're here legally, are basically going to
Speaker 2: be your servants into retirement. But for me, now I'm
Speaker 2: competing against someone who gets deported if they quit their
Speaker 2: job and works for sixty cents on the dollar. And
Speaker 2: you know, due to a degree mill program in places
Speaker 2: like India, on paper has more qualifications and more years
Speaker 2: of work experience. Again, I say on paper, and so
Speaker 2: look like I spoke to uh Peruvian bowl. You know
Speaker 2: another guy, my a truly talented financial analyst unrelated, did
Speaker 2: not prep him for this is just something we were
Speaker 2: talking about mostly it was about housing prices, but I
Speaker 2: just asked him, I was like, hey, man, how many
Speaker 2: jobs have you applied for? His answer was six hundred.
Speaker 2: Mine is about that. I know guys who are you know,
Speaker 2: even well into gen X, who are sitting at you know,
Speaker 2: four digits, And it's this feeling sure, yeah, exactly, and
Speaker 2: it's you know, you can have a great resume, you
Speaker 2: can have work experience, and you're just sitting there like
Speaker 2: what the heck? Like I'm doing what I'm supposed to.
Speaker 2: I'm trying to get a job. I'm not trying to
Speaker 2: sponge up welfare. But at every stage it feels as
Speaker 2: if the game is rigged. And so, okay, sure is
Speaker 2: the individually correct answer to with your amount of power,
Speaker 2: you know, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, one hundred percent?
Speaker 3: It is.
Speaker 2: That is rational individual advice, Like if you were, you know,
Speaker 2: talking to a nephew or a son, you would say that.
Speaker 2: But on a political level, one that doesn't work, and
Speaker 2: two when you were passing through ever narrower gates. So
Speaker 2: for instance, right, I graduated high school in twenty seventeen
Speaker 2: and applying for college was incredibly incredibly I would say,
Speaker 2: humiliating in a weird way, because I'm sure you're aware
Speaker 2: any college for sure, we'll say, you know, we accept.
Speaker 3: Most medsays like I have to make myself sound mentally
Speaker 3: conformant with insane radical leftists academy of people. It's horrifying.
Speaker 2: Well, and the thing that I think many people and
Speaker 2: this is this has gotten unbelievably worse for guys who
Speaker 2: are just now graduating, where you would look on the
Speaker 2: website and say, oh, I'll sail in. You know, I
Speaker 2: clear these requirements denied denied. So you're looking at it,
Speaker 2: You're like, wait a minute, I'm and obviously college choice
Speaker 2: is not the biggest deal in the world. It feels
Speaker 2: very much like that when you're eighteen, you're like, wait
Speaker 2: a minute, I'm getting sandbaged. You know, I'm basically two
Speaker 2: tiers below what I should be. And you take that
Speaker 2: forward into hiring, you take that forward and everything, and
Speaker 2: I think you have an explanation on two levels. One
Speaker 2: why many particularly young men are basically saying like, well,
Speaker 2: screw this, who's going to fix it? I don't care how?
Speaker 2: And also, sadly, sadly, depending on your perscriptive, this is
Speaker 2: the rebirth of identity politics. Right, you have created a
Speaker 2: definite group of people who are unified by some immutable
Speaker 2: characteristic that's coming back to one way or another.
Speaker 3: I'll disagree with you thereon. Here's why. That's how the
Speaker 3: enemies of change will describe this. And yet I believe
Speaker 3: that deep down it's a profound obligation that younger men
Speaker 3: feel in order to fix a problem. They're filling a
Speaker 3: vacuum of leadership and have a moral imperative to fix
Speaker 3: this system that is so much more profoundly broken than
Speaker 3: I think anybody understands. And just I mean, just to
Speaker 3: rattle a few off, you said, like the kids are
Speaker 3: better worse off than their parents. Well I've pulled on that.
Speaker 3: Only twenty seven percent say today's children will be better
Speaker 3: off than their parents. Only like thirty five percent say
Speaker 3: they're better off than they were four years ago. Economic
Speaker 3: confidence is plunging. I have a sixteen percent under a
Speaker 3: thirty unemployment rate. I have fifty two percent under thirty
Speaker 3: voters say it's not possible for everyone who wants to
Speaker 3: find work to find a job. I have an over
Speaker 3: thirty percent of people under forty admitting that they've been
Speaker 3: diagnosed with a mental condition. I have horrifying polls on dating.
Speaker 3: I have like forty percent of gen Z thinks they're
Speaker 3: never going to be able to buy a house. Like
Speaker 3: I could just go on and on and on. And
Speaker 3: that's before even looking at any economic statistics at all,
Speaker 3: which are also horrifying. The forty year first time home
Speaker 3: buyer price age. I brought that up at the White House.
Speaker 3: Donald Trump was like, what are we what are we
Speaker 3: talking about here? People love the home, high home values,
Speaker 3: and so when the people who govern us have absolutely
Speaker 3: no idea that the real problem is that the social
Speaker 3: contract has failed. And I think why young men looking
Speaker 3: at that is because we are fighting war against entrenched
Speaker 3: interests that want the current status quo to continue, even
Speaker 3: though it's marching us down a path it's going to
Speaker 3: end violently. That's where this goes. You know, we'll probably
Speaker 3: have hyperinflation, We'll probably But like the wealth concentration, that's
Speaker 3: a problem. The corporatism, Like going after these corporations that
Speaker 3: are just concentrating power. There's no creative destruction anymore. These
Speaker 3: people just paper over retarded decisions. With the stock market
Speaker 3: and with bernanke Bucks, like everything is literally corrupt, and
Speaker 3: you're gonna have these massive corporations that act as like
Speaker 3: quasi like like global like like countries basically, and Amazon
Speaker 3: might as well be a country, right, it's unaccountable to
Speaker 3: the US government who's been captured by it. And the
Speaker 3: problem is is that we have a system of basically
Speaker 3: global welfare. We were propping up China with manufacturing jobs.
Speaker 3: We're propping up India with manufacturing and offshort labor. We're
Speaker 3: sending all the US aid to like Africa. We're backstopping
Speaker 3: the military defense of Western Europe because these people have
Speaker 3: an expansionist like pushed to want to take over Eurasia,
Speaker 3: like every single person. Like we're literally subsidizing all of
Speaker 3: South America with the freaking drug trade and it's all
Speaker 3: coming from the middle class taxpayer and the music stopping.
Speaker 3: And I think young men just fundamentally know that they're
Speaker 3: being called to action on this. And I'll tell you that,
Speaker 3: like the corporate situation is even more diabolical. So, like
Speaker 3: I said, thousands and thousands of applications, but I was
Speaker 3: able to see in real time. I have a weird career.
Speaker 3: I was like Navy, then like banking, then I went
Speaker 3: and got my MBA. Then I was VC, then I
Speaker 3: was in like tech companies. My last job as a
Speaker 3: Walmart corporate, I saw the HEB abuse. It's ten times
Speaker 3: worse than anybody says, but I saw in real time
Speaker 3: as the actual return rates all my applications diminished over
Speaker 3: a ten year period. Now, could I get a job, Like,
Speaker 3: could I go network to the C suite and like
Speaker 3: kiss somebody's rear?
Speaker 4: Yeah?
Speaker 3: I probably could. But like, we're the keep that should
Speaker 3: be fixing these corporations because of the objective decision making process,
Speaker 3: the lack of feeling of a need for everything to
Speaker 3: be agreeable, for this consensus seeking feminized behavior. So there's
Speaker 3: this crazy article that just came out that jd Vance
Speaker 3: referred to that everybody's looking at now, And it was
Speaker 3: in I don't know, you know the one I'm talking about.
Speaker 2: Yeah, it was Compact. It was the one I mentioned earlier,
Speaker 2: I believe.
Speaker 3: Oh okay, yeah yeah. So this is, in my opinion, the
Speaker 3: most important snippet. And that was a great article because
Speaker 3: it had a lot of stats, like you said, about
Speaker 3: white young men being replaced in all these companies. But
Speaker 3: what was interesting is it picked three industries. It was academia,
Speaker 3: it was TV scriptwriting. What was the third one, I
Speaker 3: don't know, but it was like a non H one
Speaker 3: B industry. None of these were even H one B industries.
Speaker 3: And that's even worse because over sixty percent of Walmart engineering,
Speaker 3: for instance, is Indian foreign national. But this is the
Speaker 3: part that tells me that young men need to really
Speaker 3: step up because the corporations who are one of the
Speaker 3: reasons that we've been so economically and competitively successful our
Speaker 3: ability to innovate and create amazing products that the world wants.
Speaker 3: So this is one of the vignettes that they were
Speaker 3: covering in this article. And I think this was, Oh,
Speaker 3: this was journalism. That was the third, and this was
Speaker 3: about a guy that works in journalism. Andrew, for his part,
Speaker 3: was unable to adopt the performative ally ship that had
Speaker 3: become expected in the newspaper. I always thought that I
Speaker 3: was an effeminate nerd growing up, but my way of
Speaker 3: expressing myself now puts me on the most masculine end
Speaker 3: of men in the media. I started to pick up
Speaker 3: on the fact that there wasn't much room for people
Speaker 3: who even speak in my timbre, and what does that mean, well,
Speaker 3: it's why I wasn't really wanted to Walmart Corporate either,
Speaker 3: because I would get in and my job wasn't about
Speaker 3: fluffing my resume and kissing my boss's rear and hugging
Speaker 3: it out with other teams, you know, patting ourselves on
Speaker 3: the back for saving ground people all over the world
Speaker 3: or whatever. Right, I would say, well, look, your team's
Speaker 3: screwing up. You messed up one hundred thousand customer experiences.
Speaker 3: Why isn't that fixed yesterday? And when are you gonna
Speaker 3: fix it? Why didn't you put that on the roadmap already?
Speaker 3: And how many times are'm gonna have to follow up
Speaker 3: with you? You retard, like that's what should happen in
Speaker 3: a corporation or any mission seeking organization that is trying
Speaker 3: to service shareholder value or you know, defend the United
Speaker 3: States of America or whatever that be, right. And so
Speaker 3: my big concern is that it's all going to fall
Speaker 3: apart because I mean, just look at look at what
Speaker 3: Cracker Barrel did. That's gonna happen in every corporation and
Speaker 3: every academic and just in the military, maybe even judiciary.
Speaker 3: It's all performative, fake decision making. Based on optics and feelings,
Speaker 3: and it has to end to where we are literally
Speaker 3: going to get picked apart by the rest of the world.
Speaker 2: To to sort of bolster that point, I have a
Speaker 2: good friend of mine, I won't say anything more than that,
Speaker 2: who works in the you know, finance department of a
Speaker 2: large company right in the healthcare space. And you know,
Speaker 2: he's kind of on his own island, but you know
Speaker 2: he hears things from everywhere, and so he's working on
Speaker 2: this and you know, preparing financial reports, and it was grim,
Speaker 2: things were not going well. And you know, he prepares
Speaker 2: the report, sends it off to his boss, and then
Speaker 2: you know, two or three weeks later, when he's in
Speaker 2: the meeting, it has been recast. And this phrase, which
Speaker 2: I've heard now echoed elsewhere, well we're not doing we're
Speaker 2: not doing well, but we are doing good, was sort
Speaker 2: of the way to spin it. The idea that the
Speaker 2: mission is not necessarily what it says on the tin
Speaker 2: right to be a X y Z company to service
Speaker 2: those sort of needs, but it's too kind of service.
Speaker 2: This broader, ill defined good. You know, that is sort of,
Speaker 2: as you've said, completely and totally performative. And look if
Speaker 2: that's one company, even if it's in a small market
Speaker 2: where it's important. If it goes away, something will replace it.
Speaker 2: But when that becomes every company all at once, you're
Speaker 2: sort of starting to look at this and you're saying, well, like,
Speaker 2: where does this go? Because you're creating this bizarre situation
Speaker 2: where you have this sort of untapped talent pool people
Speaker 2: who are capable and competent who are doing something now
Speaker 2: they might not be doing something particularly productive. In fact,
Speaker 2: I think this is a large part of the reason
Speaker 2: you've seen the growth of like social media influencers, as
Speaker 2: it is a way you can make money. You know,
Speaker 2: it is a you know, rough meritocracy. And look, like
Speaker 2: I realized the irony of making this point on you know,
Speaker 2: a podcast that I have, but like that is individually rational,
Speaker 2: But then you have that person not doing something actually
Speaker 2: productive in the system that makes the world better, not
Speaker 2: producing something, And so it's this brain drain. And that's
Speaker 2: even assuming it's something relatively innocuous. But you are both
Speaker 2: harvesting out, you know, the sort of IQ and the
Speaker 2: sort of functionality out of existing institutions, pushing it to
Speaker 2: the outside and giving those people no direction. To me
Speaker 2: that seems fundamentally unstable, even setting aside the sort of
Speaker 2: national concerns you mentioned earlier, which is other countries are
Speaker 2: not making this mistake.
Speaker 3: Yeah, there's going to be a major competitive problem one
Speaker 3: hundred percent, and you're seeing it across all industries. Go
Speaker 3: no further than like what's going on at Disney with Marvel.
Speaker 3: This is you can literally chart the retardedness of Marvel
Speaker 3: movies and it would track one to one with and
Speaker 3: I'm not making it about race or age, but with
Speaker 3: getting rid of and pushing out objectively meritocracy. You know,
Speaker 3: the top of the heat people they get, they got
Speaker 3: rid of them. Now we have doors falling off Boeing planes, Right,
Speaker 3: we have government that just is absolutely incapable of doing anything,
Speaker 3: like even the military too. Right, nobody's been fired for
Speaker 3: that crisis in Afghanistan. How does that even happen? I
Speaker 3: think you'll just look at every industry everywhere, and there's
Speaker 3: a lack of integrity and objective decision making. And not
Speaker 3: only that, it's like, okay, we've robbed people's agency because
Speaker 3: we have supported a system that concentrates power. So you
Speaker 3: can't open up a retail store. You're competing against Amazon
Speaker 3: because the government refuses to go after anti competitive behavior
Speaker 3: with them, AI is going to increasingly be a problem.
Speaker 3: And I'm sorry, but the right has to have an
Speaker 3: answer for this, or even the conservative youth, they say
Speaker 3: when you ask them, well, if AI takes away jobs,
Speaker 3: are we just going to have to go to universal
Speaker 3: basic income? And everybody says yes, And I think even
Speaker 3: Elon is talking about that right now. And I think
Speaker 3: that's a horrible decision because of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
Speaker 3: How are people going to self actualize if there's no
Speaker 3: tangible way to prove that through hard work you can
Speaker 3: achieve more? Are we just going to give up on
Speaker 3: that as humans? And if the answer is no, then
Speaker 3: the conservative movement has to understand that we need drastic, rapid,
Speaker 3: systematic reform. We need independent government that's willing to go
Speaker 3: after these corporations. We need to have the ability to see,
Speaker 3: like things that suck fail, and Donald Trump's not that person.
Speaker 3: I've gotten a lot of dms from disaffected three time
Speaker 3: MAGA voters who are not Republicans, who are like burning
Speaker 3: their hats and fifty five gallon drums out back, and
Speaker 3: one of them said, I thought Trump was going to
Speaker 3: be our Franco. But I guess I'm going to have
Speaker 3: to keep waiting because, for instance, the Chinese students. We
Speaker 3: have Chinese students like stealing bio weapons and sending IP
Speaker 3: back and probably half of them are CCP agents. Then
Speaker 3: they're propping up places like Brown University has a lot
Speaker 3: of Chinese believe it or not, students on visa. And
Speaker 3: there's these Marxist organizations where conservatives are dying and not
Speaker 3: getting accepted and it's just harfying, like literally everything has
Speaker 3: been broken and there's there's no systematic fix. And so
Speaker 3: when you have a situation like this that's untenable again,
Speaker 3: a vacuum is gonna get filled and if it has
Speaker 3: to get bloody, that's probably where it's going to go.
Speaker 3: But we can't dollars marching to financial ruin. And it's
Speaker 3: almost looking at Trump as like he's like, we're in
Speaker 3: such a dangerous situation because he keeps pushing the Overton
Speaker 3: window right, the Overton window. Your audience probably is familiar
Speaker 3: with the concept, but the Left is good at systematically
Speaker 3: using like uniform talking points and non government organizations and
Speaker 3: marketing to unify on a message they have very powerful
Speaker 3: online hive minds in order to continuously move everything more
Speaker 3: left and radical, and the right doesn't have any counter
Speaker 3: manning forces. There's no opposite, equal and opposite push on
Speaker 3: the Overton window. Now influencers and Twitter are kind of
Speaker 3: filling that void a little bit, and then Trump just
Speaker 3: posting random stuff on true social But when you push
Speaker 3: the Overton window right, and yet there's no political weight
Speaker 3: or backing to any of this, that creates an issue too,
Speaker 3: because these radical people are going to get increasingly increasingly
Speaker 3: desperate to prevent the sliding ubiquitously to the left. So
Speaker 3: Trump's out there tweeting about Heartseller like that's a really
Speaker 3: big deal. His State Department is talking about the death
Speaker 3: of the West in Europe and the kinds of things
Speaker 3: that they said and that release that they came out,
Speaker 3: like these are things that matter and are going to
Speaker 3: make a really big deal when continuously they find people
Speaker 3: find that they can't vote for that in the Republican Party.
Speaker 3: And yet when you vote for the left now it
Speaker 3: is going to be a vote for democratic socialism. They
Speaker 3: know that their political movement, even though it seems fragmented
Speaker 3: and it's full of really bad national political figures. They
Speaker 3: have piled in behind democratic socialism. There aren't really moderate
Speaker 3: Democrats anymore in the party, like in a meaningful way.
Speaker 3: They'll lose because they have a nice little system of
Speaker 3: carrots and sticks that you know, reinforce people staying in line.
Speaker 3: And the Republican Party is still just it's just anchored
Speaker 3: in this performative conservatism that's good for big business and
Speaker 3: big business one like, this is the problem here. There's
Speaker 3: a corporate oligarchy that has captured the Democrat and the
Speaker 3: Republican Party. You call it corporatism, call it like neo global,
Speaker 3: homo corporatists, Like, I don't even know the word for it,
Speaker 3: but it's perverse, and I think everybody fundamentally understands under forty.
Speaker 2: So several things there. You mentioned, You mentioned Franco and
Speaker 2: one of the stories you've sort of seen this it
Speaker 2: gets head up every three or four years, is the
Speaker 2: idea that and it's normally expressed in a breathless tone.
Speaker 2: It's like, oh, you younger people don't care about democracy.
Speaker 2: I get think of an example, when you know a
Speaker 2: teacher basically you know, pulled the room of you know,
Speaker 2: thirty kids and said, oh, you know, would you prefer
Speaker 2: you know, would you prefer And this is kind of
Speaker 2: funny to think about now Hillary Clinton or you know,
Speaker 2: a right wing dictator. Now admittedly right some people are
Speaker 2: doing that to create a reaction, of course, but it
Speaker 2: was I mean, I think there was one or two
Speaker 2: exceptions who said, no, we'd prefer this kind of you know,
Speaker 2: baseline neoliberalism. So one, if you could, could you talk about,
Speaker 2: you know, in the face of these you know, sort
Speaker 2: of dramatic challenges facing the nation and facing younger demographics,
Speaker 2: where do we look on issues like democracy? Because I
Speaker 2: remember one of the things you you brought up that
Speaker 2: I thought was interesting is the relatively high number of
Speaker 2: people who were all right with the idea of an
Speaker 2: AI dictatorship for whatever that is. And so if you could,
Speaker 2: could you speak to that trend as well?
Speaker 3: Uh yeah, let me try and pull some of this
Speaker 3: up while I'm talking the you know, it's tough to
Speaker 3: pull on labels, for instance, conservatism, like what does that
Speaker 3: even mean right now? I would be hard pressed to
Speaker 3: define it. And the polling shows that younger voters like
Speaker 3: behave outside of how they label themselves. So I ask
Speaker 3: these people are you Republican, are you a Democrat? Or
Speaker 3: your conservative? And then when you ask the questions like
Speaker 3: you're getting responses that don't really make sense. And then
Speaker 3: when you ask questions about things like this, which political
Speaker 3: party is the biggest threat of dictatorship or tyranny coming
Speaker 3: from Republican or Democrat party, Well you basically just get
Speaker 3: an exact even split, and it's like it's Mets versus Yankees. Well,
Speaker 3: my team's not going to do what your team is.
Speaker 3: So like, there's those kind of trends that make it tough.
Speaker 3: But what illustrating these things with sort of like ridiculous
Speaker 3: obtuse questions where you're like, oh man, people believe that
Speaker 3: has been very powerful and so again, and so you
Speaker 3: have Doge being extremely powerful popular with voters under forty,
Speaker 3: that was a big one. Then you have we asked
Speaker 3: everybody if you agreed or disagreed that he who saves
Speaker 3: his country violates no laws, and under forty is agreed
Speaker 3: with that most I think it was fifty six or
Speaker 3: fifty seven percent. It was almost like three to one.
Speaker 3: I think. Then we've asked about arrests. Under forty voters
Speaker 3: want arrests more than anybody the AI question, and that
Speaker 3: was weird. It was the conservatives under forty. It wasn't
Speaker 3: the liberals at all. And the question was like, hey,
Speaker 3: AI is getting more advanced and people are frustrated that
Speaker 3: our government is less capable of making the decisions that
Speaker 3: we need or something like that, would you support giving
Speaker 3: control of governance and legislative ability to and advanced AI?
Speaker 3: And it was fifty five to forty among under forty conservatives,
Speaker 3: a pretty strong signal. And then you see things again
Speaker 3: and I think that this would be the same with democracy.
Speaker 3: Is that okay? Well, which is better free market capitalism
Speaker 3: or socialism? And people say the right answer, They say
Speaker 3: free market capitalism. I think it would be like probably
Speaker 3: about seventy to twenty roughly off the top of my
Speaker 3: head with under forties. But then it's like, okay, well,
Speaker 3: you take the Trump voter under forty and you ask them, well,
Speaker 3: would you support or oppose nationalizing major industries like healthcare, tech,
Speaker 3: and energy? And like three corners of them of Trump
Speaker 3: voters say yeah, of course, why wouldn't we do that,
Speaker 3: like we should have done that yesterday? Would you support
Speaker 3: or oppose a program that confiscates excess wealth like second
Speaker 3: houses and boats from older people to help first time
Speaker 3: home buyers. It's like fifty I think that was fifty
Speaker 3: six percent of Trump voters under forty. So these people
Speaker 3: are not They're just they don't act conservative. It doesn't
Speaker 3: even matter what they say or not. So when you
Speaker 3: hear these things like oh, gen Z is more conservative
Speaker 3: than any generation, Like by what measure? They want you arrested,
Speaker 3: Like that's canservative, I guess like they're ready to. We
Speaker 3: had a skynet question. We literally said, would you support
Speaker 3: giving control of the world's militaries to an advanced AI
Speaker 3: in order to reduce the number of people killed in war?
Speaker 3: And conservatives under forty it was forty ninety percent, And
Speaker 3: of course the liberals are like, no, like you shouldn't
Speaker 3: do that. That's a bad idea. Maybe we shouldn't literally
Speaker 3: like literally launch Skynet. And so I think there's this
Speaker 3: aspect of the like they want brutal reform and they
Speaker 3: want it yesterday. The arrests, ignoring the judges and peaching
Speaker 3: the judges. Yeah, they're and they're not going to get it,
Speaker 3: and this like this was their best chance. And so
Speaker 3: my advice to Donald Trump was like, this isn't enough.
Speaker 3: You can't do a mission accomplished and say that we
Speaker 3: fix the economy when fifty percent of all retail sales
Speaker 3: is the top ten percent of income earners and people
Speaker 3: have to work twenty two years to buy a house,
Speaker 3: and uh, we give all our jobs to India. Like
Speaker 3: what the system is? It doesn't work. It's like the
Speaker 3: most precient thing ever written was apparently Atlas Shrug because
Speaker 3: we literally Gen z and Millennials are basically hank reared,
Speaker 3: like they're trying their best. They know the path. It's
Speaker 3: not just like they listen to the boomers dutifully. It's
Speaker 3: like like, no, like this PAS has been laid out,
Speaker 3: I'm gonna follow it because it's the right thing to do.
Speaker 3: I'm trying to support the social contract and not only
Speaker 3: provide for a family, but provide for the rest of
Speaker 3: the world because that's what the American taxpayer does. The
Speaker 3: rest of the world is a freaking dead beat, and
Speaker 3: we got to cut them off because we're like, literally,
Speaker 3: I mean it's gonna get dark here. You know. We
Speaker 3: got Western Europe that wants to build a fourth Reich
Speaker 3: and get in a war with Russia. You have I
Speaker 3: know that's going to be increasingly embolden as its economy
Speaker 3: starts to fall apart and it needs to take drastic action.
Speaker 3: You have South America, who's probably been influencing so much
Speaker 3: of what we see behind the scenes, and now they
Speaker 3: have a naval flotilla surrounding them, like you have India,
Speaker 3: who's an ascendant economic force and essentially owns the engineering
Speaker 3: departments of every one of our fortune one hundred companies
Speaker 3: like there. I look at this situation and I wonder
Speaker 3: what the path out is. But if it, if you don't,
Speaker 3: if we don't break from the path, now it's gonna
Speaker 3: get really bit.
Speaker 2: Just a brief aside, I've never entirely understood how the
Speaker 2: engineering department at every major corporation in America can be
Speaker 2: majority Indian and yet India looks like India sidebar issue
Speaker 2: won't come back to it, uh, but I think a.
Speaker 3: Large part of it.
Speaker 2: But to go back to your to your point about
Speaker 2: this kind of you know, desire for justice and desire
Speaker 2: for kind of a fair shake. It's sort of this
Speaker 2: this pinsion pull of you were competing for your job
Speaker 2: against the poorest person in the world, and competing for
Speaker 2: your home, competing for your assets against the wealthiest people
Speaker 2: in the world. There are variables you can adjust there.
Speaker 2: And if the answer is, well, you know, will restrict
Speaker 2: access to labor, okay, that's one answer, or you can
Speaker 2: get you know, restrict to how much capital we can have.
Speaker 2: And I think conservatives look at those two options and say, well,
Speaker 2: I'm much more comfortable with one than the other. But
Speaker 2: if you don't choose, you're probably going to get both,
Speaker 2: or alternately, this thing becomes so unwieldy that it just
Speaker 2: descends into Brazilification. But fundamentally, staying in the middle is
Speaker 2: not an option. Just freezing this forever, because as you said,
Speaker 2: the demographic can can tend. The demographic trend excuse me,
Speaker 2: of the baby boomer generation passing away is going to
Speaker 2: push the country into the hands of the youth. We
Speaker 2: understand the relative voting patterns here, and so I've especially
Speaker 2: frustrated with older conservatives because it's like, look like, is
Speaker 2: the answer quite simply, you know, frozen corporate conservatism for
Speaker 2: as long as we can hold onto power, and then
Speaker 2: whatever happens after I die is indeterminate. Is that what
Speaker 2: you want? Because that doesn't seem to be a particularly
Speaker 2: conservative idea idea conceptually, I guess, but also right, you've
Speaker 2: got to understand that, you know, if you're one of
Speaker 2: the last guys there, things will be fairly unpleasant for you.
Speaker 2: You know, we've already seen this with the rhetoric towards
Speaker 2: the Trump administration, like Pete Hegseth has been threatened with
Speaker 2: you know, being sent towards the Hague, right, yeah, let
Speaker 2: alone the political violence. So like, even from sheer personal preservation,
Speaker 2: you'd assume that people would understand that there is a
Speaker 2: lot of anger here.
Speaker 3: And yeah, and I guess i'd answer this the answer
Speaker 3: it this way. Everybody knows that morbid obesity makes you
Speaker 3: like six times more likely to die by the age
Speaker 3: or whatever. Everybody knows that's sitting around on the couch
Speaker 3: and yourself day after day after day will kill you.
Speaker 3: And yet how many people die on the couch that
Speaker 3: overweight with heart disease? And I look at the Republican
Speaker 3: Party and I think it's basically that, you know, everything
Speaker 3: that comes out of their mouth's a bunch of bs
Speaker 3: about how they're going to start a couch to five
Speaker 3: K program maybe someday but it's like, dude, you just
Speaker 3: got to stop eating. It's not hard. People do this
Speaker 3: all the time, but it's like the political will is
Speaker 3: not there. And the reason I'm successful at my job
Speaker 3: as actually I'm not a DC insider. I came from
Speaker 3: outside of politics, and the polling ask actually wasn't that
Speaker 3: hard if you're not trying to, like basically shill for
Speaker 3: a broken system. And I go down there and I
Speaker 3: visit and I talk to Republicans and I'm just not
Speaker 3: it's not working. I talk to a Republican congressman on
Speaker 3: the hill, and I think a lot more of them
Speaker 3: are principled than you would think. And obviously they have
Speaker 3: ties to big interests and they're going to make decisions
Speaker 3: that are in the best interest of those people first, obviously,
Speaker 3: but they will push back again these problems. But there's
Speaker 3: no force or weight or strategy or unity. There's no
Speaker 3: system saying well, this is what conservative means, and we
Speaker 3: have to do this right now. And so Trump has
Speaker 3: filled that vacuum with MAGA, which increasingly appears to be
Speaker 3: just whatever the hell Trump wakes up and thinks about
Speaker 3: on a daily basis, depending on who he talks to
Speaker 3: and Unfortunately right now who he's talking to is Lindsay Graham,
Speaker 3: Sean Hannity, Larry Ellison, and Miriam Maidleson. And so that's
Speaker 3: the kind of governance we're getting. And the problem is
Speaker 3: it's getting way too late in the hour for freaking
Speaker 3: Miriam Madelson and Sean Hannity to be the president of
Speaker 3: the United States. And so that's the problem. I went
Speaker 3: to the RNC again, nice people. Joe Gruders is new there.
Speaker 3: He seemed kind of cool. But when I talked to
Speaker 3: the political and communications directors there and then seeing them
Speaker 3: interact with their grassroots, it was just like, hey, we
Speaker 3: got the right message, we just got to vote harder.
Speaker 3: It's like you're going to lose. Then I talked to
Speaker 3: grassroots organizations and they say, oh, there's so many grifters.
Speaker 3: All this money he goes to, like people like Scott
Speaker 3: Presler and he comes in and just takes credit and leaves,
Speaker 3: and no money's going to the people who actually knock
Speaker 3: on doors. And then they look at the state and
Speaker 3: local Republican parties and it's like, oh, these people stand
Speaker 3: for nothing. All they try and do is get their
Speaker 3: establishment people to run. All it is is an elaborate
Speaker 3: donor harvesting scheme. And you got to respect the left
Speaker 3: for this. I mean, one of the grassroots people I
Speaker 3: work with said, well, at least with Democrats, if you
Speaker 3: give them a dollar, like ninety seven percent of it
Speaker 3: is actually going to go to buy votes and to
Speaker 3: like advertise and to go towards the actual you know,
Speaker 3: cause if you give like buck to Republicans, half of
Speaker 3: it's just going to go in consulting pockets. In fact,
Speaker 3: they will make up like fake things to spend money
Speaker 3: on just for the donor kickbacks, and so it literally
Speaker 3: stands for nothing. And what you're seeing too now is
Speaker 3: that there's basically an anti America first coup within the party.
Speaker 3: And I thought that they would wait until after the midterms,
Speaker 3: but they it was so bold, it happened so fast.
Speaker 3: The second Trump slipped up a little bit, they completely
Speaker 3: reasserted themselves and you saw it back and like right
Speaker 3: after the Tucker Nick Fuentes interview, people were trying to
Speaker 3: push Ronda Santis again on the internet and they're going
Speaker 3: after JD. I think that going after Tucker was sort
Speaker 3: of like a tangential way to try to attack JD.
Speaker 3: Like they were going after the head of the Heritage
Speaker 3: Foundation because of basically two words he said, and he
Speaker 3: was one of the first MAGA guys, like the idea
Speaker 3: that the Heritage Foundation this blows my mind. So you
Speaker 3: can see some people are trying and Washington, DC is
Speaker 3: resisting every iota change. The guy that they're trying to
Speaker 3: oust from the Heritage Foundation, Kevin Roberts, who called some
Speaker 3: people a venomous coalition, actually got on stage two days
Speaker 3: ago and said the word corporatism. I can't over emphasize
Speaker 3: how profoundly bold that is, because my experience with all
Speaker 3: the think tanks is that Republican policy is literally just
Speaker 3: there to do as little as possible that they're able
Speaker 3: to get away with while keeping the major corporations happy.
Speaker 3: And like, that's literally it. That's the game. That's what
Speaker 3: all the money on the right in Washington, DC goes to.
Speaker 3: And you're starting to like, see, you know, I talked
Speaker 3: to the John Burds Society guy there and fest and like, Okay, yeah,
Speaker 3: he's saying the right things. They're starting to wake up,
Speaker 3: but it's just so hopeless. And I was like, really
Speaker 3: anti elon America party just six months ago. I was
Speaker 3: pulling on it, and I said, no, it's going to siphon.
Speaker 3: It's going to siphon votes from the Republicans. It's going
Speaker 3: to make the Democrats win. Now, I think it's time
Speaker 3: they just need to put a bullet in this beast.
Speaker 3: They need to fund the American Party, burn down the
Speaker 3: Republican Party. We're probably gonna everything's going to be censored.
Speaker 3: They're going to throw us into camps. But it's like,
Speaker 3: let's just rip the band aid off. I hate to
Speaker 3: be nihilistic, but the Republican Party just is not structurally
Speaker 3: capable of competing against them pending wave of and the
Speaker 3: bar so low. Their leaders are terrible. AOC is going
Speaker 3: to be the president because and JD should beat the
Speaker 3: hell out of her. But the Republicans have. The Republicans
Speaker 3: right now are watching Turning Point and being like, hey,
Speaker 3: that's our future, and it's like, Okay, it's one political organization,
Speaker 3: but what about your entire game. Did the year to date,
Speaker 3: just in the first three quarters, Act Blue, the criminal
Speaker 3: organization Act Blue allegedly raised one point three billion dollars.
Speaker 3: It's on track to do almost two billion this year,
Speaker 3: and it's going to have probably about three and a
Speaker 3: half billion by the time the midterms roll around, and
Speaker 3: they this thing could have been under investigation five years
Speaker 3: ago and it's just not. And so it's like they're
Speaker 3: going to impeach Trump. There's going to be an anti
Speaker 3: corruption investigation into every single one of its combinet heads.
Speaker 3: They're going to have an Epstein commission on the very
Speaker 3: first day, and we're to whitewash all the Democrat stuff
Speaker 3: out of the Epstein file. They're gonna have commission after commission.
Speaker 3: They're gonna have like hoaxes. They're gonna probably try to
Speaker 3: shut down Twitter like it. I mean, the writing is
Speaker 3: on the wall. So I mean, this is the big year.
Speaker 3: Are we going to really go into the mid terms
Speaker 3: without a single person being arrested? I'm giving Pambondi another
Speaker 3: two months.
Speaker 2: It's like, well, at a certain point, it becomes like
Speaker 2: furor bunker stuff, you know, like hypothesizing ways that you could,
Speaker 2: you know, you can win it all back. And to
Speaker 2: your point, that was the thing that I found really
Speaker 2: sort of exciting about Trump two point zero is that,
Speaker 2: you know, it seemed as if you know, after you know,
Speaker 2: he was shot, that there was this flurry of activity
Speaker 2: doing the sort of things that you would do if
Speaker 2: you had decided to be a serious political party. Again, right,
Speaker 2: going for those kind of body blows. We were going
Speaker 2: after usaid all of these funding networks, the things that
Speaker 2: would prevent what this backlash which is likely to come.
Speaker 2: And then very quickly it seems as if all that
Speaker 2: momentum died. And even in the face of you, as
Speaker 2: we both said, many of these people going to jail.
Speaker 2: I mean, look like Trump and his entire family, even
Speaker 2: down to Baron, who's nineteen, can't get a bank account.
Speaker 2: Like you think that they're going to be nicer this
Speaker 2: time around. And again there's this great phrase I've stole
Speaker 2: from one of my buddies, bog Beef, where he talks
Speaker 2: about the Republicans as you know, the Washing Washington generals
Speaker 2: of politics. Right, they've just existed as an organization to
Speaker 2: get stunted on so that they can, you know, theatrically
Speaker 2: allow the Democrats to win, because it seems as if
Speaker 2: the stated and revealed preference don't line up. The stated
Speaker 2: preference is to be a real political party for conservative
Speaker 2: values and all this, but what they actually do, their
Speaker 2: revealed preference is exactly what you've said, it is entirely
Speaker 2: based off of the system of donors and consultants who
Speaker 2: basically view every Republican administration as a way to harvest
Speaker 2: and effectively, the Democrats get to rule and the Republicans
Speaker 2: get to collect a danegeld whatever you want to call
Speaker 2: it from fly over America, and look, that system works
Speaker 2: for you, assuming the country works, assuming that the economic
Speaker 2: engine was drive. All of this hits that bare minimum
Speaker 2: threshold to keep running. But ultimately you're adding drag. You're
Speaker 2: adding drag, You're adding drag, and so like, look like
Speaker 2: if you start your car, unscrew the oil cap and
Speaker 2: like put in like a few grains of sand. It's
Speaker 2: not good for it, but it's probably fine. But at
Speaker 2: the point where you've got a funnel the pouchful of
Speaker 2: miracle grow dumping it down into the engine, it's like, well,
Speaker 2: guess what, bud, that doesn't work anymore, both on the
Speaker 2: level of sheer voters and also the fact that, like,
Speaker 2: if you don't have an economy, you don't get to
Speaker 2: collect money anymore. And the thing that I find so
Speaker 2: frustrating in this is that I incorrectly bet on simple
Speaker 2: I guess you could say selfishness incorrectly bet that you know,
Speaker 2: the freight train ten yards down the track would be
Speaker 2: more interesting than the penny, you know, sitting in between
Speaker 2: the rails. And apparently, no, apparently they will quite literally
Speaker 2: cut off their nose to spite their face. I have
Speaker 2: a someone unfinished essay on exactly this topic called the
Speaker 2: you know, the Republican Samson option, because it's sort of
Speaker 2: this thing of like, well, rather than let this party change,
Speaker 2: I will destroy it. I will I will keep my
Speaker 2: sort of control over this hill of ash. And I'm
Speaker 2: glad you brought up JD and Tucker because to me,
Speaker 2: this is something I found really interesting where you could
Speaker 2: sort of see it coming that it was first, you know,
Speaker 2: Nick found has the nick one has to Tucker. Then
Speaker 2: it was nick one has to Tucker to JD. Van's
Speaker 2: and now we've just discarded all of the other things,
Speaker 2: and it's just JD. Van. You've seen this with you know,
Speaker 2: this sort of discussion about the so called woke right,
Speaker 2: where they're very cynically trying to say, oh, you know,
Speaker 2: now the right has become just as woke as the left,
Speaker 2: obviously completely torturing that term. But it's so baffling to me,
Speaker 2: because the alternative is this sort of John McCain style republicanism, which, like, look, man,
Speaker 2: that didn't work in two thousand and eight, it is
Speaker 2: no longer two thousand and eight. And so the idea,
Speaker 2: and we saw this in Virginia right where I live,
Speaker 2: you know, where we can just you know, do something,
Speaker 2: you know, run the old playbook again and act surprised
Speaker 2: when you lose by you know, a historic margin. And look,
Speaker 2: one state isn't the end of the world. It is
Speaker 2: someone who lives here. I'd be really much happier if
Speaker 2: it weren't about to flip blue. But at the same time,
Speaker 2: as you've said, the fundraising, the public sentiment, even just
Speaker 2: the apathy among conservative voters. Look, twenty sex is going
Speaker 2: to be a bloodbath. And it's also important to recognize
Speaker 2: that that coup you were talking about, the way that
Speaker 2: it will be cast is that this is a repudiation
Speaker 2: of all of the populist elements of the republican platform.
Speaker 2: That's what the real problem was the problem is that
Speaker 2: we went to we went too far, and we need
Speaker 2: to tack back to the center. And we all know
Speaker 2: what tacking back to the center means. It doesn't mean
Speaker 2: actually centrist policies in any way, even if that were
Speaker 2: a desirable thing, but it means more big business, more donors,
Speaker 2: and will create a death spiral because who will vote
Speaker 2: for that?
Speaker 3: Yeah, no, one hundred percent. I even tried to redefine
Speaker 3: what I think politics is in order to help the
Speaker 3: right of get better at actually serving the people. And
Speaker 3: you see this dual access of economic freedom and authoritarianism,
Speaker 3: and I think that that doesn't really work anymore in
Speaker 3: my opinion, it doesn't reflect what's actually going on. I
Speaker 3: would replace the two axises with trust and authority and
Speaker 3: grift tolerance. And when you do that, people who are
Speaker 3: very intolerant of like theft from the system. You can
Speaker 3: call that economic theft, you can call it like government grift.
Speaker 3: And people who have zero trust and authority are in
Speaker 3: a quadrant I call burn it down, where they think
Speaker 3: the system they don't trust anybody to fix it, and
Speaker 3: they think the system is screwed. And I think that
Speaker 3: that's like most people, sixty sixty five percent of Americans.
Speaker 3: It's why Donald Trump was able to get and a
Speaker 3: lot of them are low propensity voters who would support
Speaker 3: a movement that could actually do this. And then I
Speaker 3: think Republicans right now are in high authority trust because
Speaker 3: they are the authority and they certainly are tolerating the
Speaker 3: grift right now. So you have Republicans and their base
Speaker 3: in two totally separate parts of the quadrant. Now I
Speaker 3: think in the other two quadrants you kind of have
Speaker 3: the Democrat side. So you have these people who have
Speaker 3: a lot of authority trust, but then they're not tolerating
Speaker 3: the way the system's working, the grift tolerance. And those
Speaker 3: are people who are like, well, elites need to run this,
Speaker 3: but I don't like their elites. Pete HEGXEF makes me cringe.
Speaker 3: I think Pete Booter Judge could do a better job,
Speaker 3: right And then you and so I think that's most
Speaker 3: of your Democrat voters and obviously they're retarded. And then
Speaker 3: in the lower right you have low authority trust, but
Speaker 3: they love the grift and that's like, that's your core
Speaker 3: kami in the Democrat Party. That's like AOC. They don't
Speaker 3: mean that stuff they're talking about. They just want to
Speaker 3: take the system back over so that they can continue
Speaker 3: to plunder. And like, I think that that's where it is,
Speaker 3: and you're like, I don't know if blood bass the
Speaker 3: right term. It's actually kind of surprising how close the
Speaker 3: polling is, and so I think for the major elections
Speaker 3: will be surprised that Republicans actually do better than maybe
Speaker 3: even the polling says. But there's a million miles between
Speaker 3: now and then. There is demoralization, certainly, but we're also
Speaker 3: I think, going to see increasingly insane's stuff out of
Speaker 3: the Democrats, which means that we might be more locked
Speaker 3: into like a really tight race where people are fighting
Speaker 3: over individual seats because it's only Democrat plus three in
Speaker 3: the generic ballot, which means basically a toss up. And
Speaker 3: then the map, you know, who knows whether Jerry Mannering
Speaker 3: situation is going to be, So that could be bad
Speaker 3: unless they arrest Act Blue and put paper ballots in place.
Speaker 3: And it's like a lot of like possible exogenous changes
Speaker 3: that could fix things. But like again, I think the
Speaker 3: bar is real low, and they brought me to the
Speaker 3: White House and I laid out a very clear plan,
Speaker 3: like I don't think this is hopeless at all. It's
Speaker 3: very very very easy, in my opinion, how you would
Speaker 3: fix this. But the problem is, I think that the
Speaker 3: Trump administration is just not capable of it. And the
Speaker 3: advice was very simple. It's like, sir, your approval rating
Speaker 3: is kind of okay, but the Republican Party is just
Speaker 3: seen as completely feckless and incompetent. And so you, in
Speaker 3: my opinion, instead of saying, well, we're already here, there's
Speaker 3: golden age because I brought down egg prices, that he
Speaker 3: should acknowledge act the actual scope of the true failures
Speaker 3: of the system, call out the corporatism, call out the oligarchy.
Speaker 3: Tell Americans that you're going to restore economic capability to
Speaker 3: younger voters and work with the Republican Party to lay
Speaker 3: out a long term strategy. What that looks like, a
Speaker 3: contract for America, economic populism, restore American dream for the
Speaker 3: young voters. That's prong one, and Prong two is brutal
Speaker 3: and visible government reform. You have to walk people through
Speaker 3: cleansing each government agency. Because the polling shows that like
Speaker 3: over eighty percent of Trump voters think the FBI and
Speaker 3: the CIA and other agencies still in need major reform.
Speaker 3: So like Cash Bongin or Dan bongino in Cash tweeting
Speaker 3: about the stuff they did in the FBI, it's inadequate.
Speaker 3: The system got so bad that people need to see tears.
Speaker 3: And so this is such a big fix that it's
Speaker 3: going to take more than a year. He won't be
Speaker 3: able to accomplish that mission. He won't be able to
Speaker 3: deliver the Golden Age to America. I said that he
Speaker 3: should show them a golden path. You could call it
Speaker 3: the fight Fight Fight plan for America and just get
Speaker 3: just say what you're gonna get done between now and
Speaker 3: November and give people a reason to vote for Republicans
Speaker 3: and like nothing, and it's it's I'm starting to get
Speaker 3: really black pilled because I was I was looking and
Speaker 3: Trump's talked more publicly about Miriam Maidelson than he's talked
Speaker 3: about under forty voters being able to buy houses.
Speaker 2: Well, and look like Miriam Madelson has a lot of money,
Speaker 2: but she only has one vote, whereas under forty potential
Speaker 2: home buyers is and I'm by no means a poster
Speaker 2: a larger percentage of the population than Miriam Adelson.
Speaker 3: That's the problem. Nobody represents the American people. And Trump's
Speaker 3: trying to he wants to, but at the end of
Speaker 3: the day, like the feeling I got is that there
Speaker 3: wasn't some kind of like four dimensional strategy behind the scenes,
Speaker 3: Like I definitely think they came into the White House
Speaker 3: with a list of one hundred and fifty executive orders
Speaker 3: that they wanted to sign and the people that they
Speaker 3: wanted to get into office. But there wasn't this like
Speaker 3: they were not following Project twenty twenty five. Let's just
Speaker 3: put it that way, right. And one of the reasons
Speaker 3: I think the beginning of the year felt so successful
Speaker 3: is because the executive orders were good and they were bold,
Speaker 3: but also because Elon was laying out a lot of
Speaker 3: air cover. And what happens is, in my opinion, if
Speaker 3: you throw out enough positive stuff. I had to say
Speaker 3: the word vibe. But the vibe is such that people
Speaker 3: will overlook any of the small failings. So take that
Speaker 3: Rob Reiner tweet. If he had done that in February,
Speaker 3: everybody would have been like, I don't care. Look at
Speaker 3: all the people in Washington, DC trying to get criminal
Speaker 3: defense attorneys, you know, like that's what would have happened.
Speaker 3: But now it's like, why did he tweet that this
Speaker 3: is terrible? Why are the wheels falling off? And so
Speaker 3: the problem is is that they got rid of Doge
Speaker 3: like on purpose. And I don't know if it was
Speaker 3: a Trump decision or that Elon freaked out about the
Speaker 3: way that Congress was treating him, but I very much
Speaker 3: think that they the one big beautiful bill I think
Speaker 3: was a Republican like Trump knows they can't get anything through.
Speaker 3: He needs legislation. He can't write the bill himself. It's
Speaker 3: probably have been it was probably being written four years ago,
Speaker 3: just waiting for Republicans to get back into office, right,
Speaker 3: and it's all these favors and gimme dats and backscratching,
Speaker 3: and so they that was a Republican DC piece of garbage.
Speaker 3: And I think that they did as much as they
Speaker 3: could to make it look like Trump's stuff, but it
Speaker 3: certainly was never going to have any of the Doge
Speaker 3: thing in it. And I think Elon freaked out and
Speaker 3: they're like, Okay, can fine screw you, get away from me.
Speaker 3: We don't need you. And I also think probably right
Speaker 3: out of the gate, the Israel backers for Trump were
Speaker 3: very very same thing. They've been waiting for four years.
Speaker 3: We need action. We now all of a sudden, the
Speaker 3: Enrichmond is so is too high. The irishment's too high.
Speaker 3: And I think that Trump told Bbe probably behind the scenes.
Speaker 3: I'm just guessing to like, you know, back off, like dude,
Speaker 3: pump the brakes a little bit. I need the Republican
Speaker 3: bill through. And then what happened is the second the
Speaker 3: writing was on the wall, the r got kicked and
Speaker 3: it looked like the one big beautiful bill was going
Speaker 3: to pass. Then it's time to bomb. I ran. So
Speaker 3: you have all of these special interests in all their
Speaker 3: monetary things and all their punch lists, and there was
Speaker 3: never a punch list for the American people. There just wasn't.
Speaker 3: I mean, like the executive orders were it, and there
Speaker 3: aren't any anymore. And so what's the plan. And so
Speaker 3: the Republican inability to acknowledge the root cause of what's
Speaker 3: afflicting America is, in my opinion, the biggest dereliction of duty.
Speaker 3: Because we know the left is insane. So if they're
Speaker 3: not going to do it, who's going to do it?
Speaker 3: Who's supposed to be the responsible, objective, pragmatic task the
Speaker 3: task masters that say no instead of democratic socialism, which
Speaker 3: will probably suck, here's your viable alternative. And we see
Speaker 3: over and over again. They literally can't. So the healthcare
Speaker 3: situation is a perfect example. Obamacare happened. We knew it
Speaker 3: was going to suck. They ran on repealing Obamacare, they
Speaker 3: never did it. They fund raised off the repealing Obamacare,
Speaker 3: they never did it. And so we know we have
Speaker 3: these subsidies coming, we know it's going to be a fight.
Speaker 3: They have months to deal with it. They spend hundreds
Speaker 3: of millions a year on conservative think tanks on health policy.
Speaker 3: We have a lot of big brains working on that.
Speaker 3: And the Republican solution to healthcare is Trump negotiating an
Speaker 3: MFN which will probably reduce healthcare prices three percent healthcare expenditures,
Speaker 3: but healthcare expenditures the government subsidized portion of healthcare expenditures
Speaker 3: like ten percent of our GDP or something ridiculous like that.
Speaker 3: So we're talking about a very very very small amount.
Speaker 3: And then the Republican legislative advent like response, because these
Speaker 3: subsidies are a wealth transfer, right, they tax people and
Speaker 3: then they give those taxes to other people. Well, the
Speaker 3: Republican answer was also a wealth transfer. It's like, okay,
Speaker 3: we're still going to tax people and give it to
Speaker 3: other people, but instead of putting that money directly attached
Speaker 3: to your plan in the marketplace, We're just going to
Speaker 3: dump it in a bank account that's held at JP Morgan.
Speaker 3: Like that was the responsible sides answer healthcare costs, And
Speaker 3: it's like what about, No, we got to fire the
Speaker 3: entire managerial class that's strangling healthcare. We got to break
Speaker 3: up the regulatory capture. We have to hold these companies
Speaker 3: accountable for killing people so that they actually have studies
Speaker 3: that show efficacy and safety, like correctly, right, Like all
Speaker 3: of these things that we know that you were if
Speaker 3: you or I were Franco in charge of the entire
Speaker 3: healthcare industry, Like I could fix that problem. It's not
Speaker 3: that hard. You don't need to be I don't think
Speaker 3: you really need to be a policy wonk to know that.
Speaker 3: Like we probably shouldn't throttle the supply of doctors, Like
Speaker 3: that's probably a bad idea. And maybe everything doesn't need
Speaker 3: to be a super expensive pharmaceutical drug that is barely
Speaker 3: effective at all. Like the number on REMS desi vieer
Speaker 3: is like, wow, the polling we poll on REMS desiviere,
Speaker 3: which costs I don't know, twenty thirty forty thousand it
Speaker 3: was rushed through, it never had really safety trials, so
Speaker 3: to speak, and the efficacy was never that high. I think,
Speaker 3: I don't want to put words in his mouth, but
Speaker 3: of the people who said they had a person die
Speaker 3: in the hospital of COVID, people thought that hospital protocols
Speaker 3: were complicit forty seven percent to thirty six percent. So
Speaker 3: America knows it. It's like these pharmaceutical companies kill people,
Speaker 3: and uh, we're like nothing, not even an acknowledgment. Like
Speaker 3: I guess it's good we're not gonna have red dye
Speaker 3: number forty or whatever, but but we're all gonna feel
Speaker 3: we're all going to die because we're fighting a civil
Speaker 3: war because healthcare took about twenty trillion of our thirty
Speaker 3: eight trillion, Like you know what I mean.
Speaker 2: Well, the same thing you see like poignantly in like
Speaker 2: the UK or you know, Europe, where they have a
Speaker 2: you know, a more formalized system, but it's like the
Speaker 2: entire state is being absorbed into a pension program and
Speaker 2: that becomes the point of England is the NHS or
Speaker 2: you know, whatever alternative systems are, and it's like, look, man,
Speaker 2: like that is a real possibility, and it seems as
Speaker 2: if the way we're going to do that is not
Speaker 2: through nationalized system, but it basically comes out to the
Speaker 2: same thing. Like, one of the few areas of growth,
Speaker 2: particularly in like flyover America is medical systems, right, is
Speaker 2: you know, whether you go to you know, hospice, which
Speaker 2: is one of the few areas that a lot of
Speaker 2: hospital changes make money. And like, if you know a
Speaker 2: little bit about this, I you know, worked in this industry.
Speaker 2: But effectively, the combination of retirement homes and hospice are
Speaker 2: explicitly designed to reduce your income, your net worth to
Speaker 2: zero by the end of your life, to completely take
Speaker 2: that from your family redistribute it to that system. At
Speaker 2: which point it's like, well, even if people don't know
Speaker 2: that particularly, they see it. They see that, you know,
Speaker 2: Grandma died penniless. They see that, you know, an entire
Speaker 2: generation of wealth just got absorbed into.
Speaker 3: How are you involved in the industry? That interests me
Speaker 3: because that's perverse because this generational wealth that the boomers received,
Speaker 3: that theoretically they should be passing on to the children
Speaker 3: is going to be harvested by corporations.
Speaker 2: I won't say I worked for a medical company that
Speaker 2: provided being very vague here for obvious reasons, sure, but
Speaker 2: specific medical equipment oftentimes, I mean, you were you could
Speaker 2: very easily end up with it, but a lot of
Speaker 2: it was at nursing homes or you'd see people who
Speaker 2: were at nursing homes or hospice and you're like, I
Speaker 2: mean not to be grim, but it's like, hey, look like,
Speaker 2: if you've really got three weeks to live, why are
Speaker 2: we running a hard test on you? Like, I don't
Speaker 2: want to be rude here, but like we know the prognosis,
Speaker 2: and then between that and knowing other people who worked
Speaker 2: in that industry, you see that Like I can't say that,
Speaker 2: but there are there have been instances where a medical
Speaker 2: group connected to a hospital will get in trouble for fraud.
Speaker 2: And admittedly this is caught within the system, but it's
Speaker 2: oftentimes not particularly in areas like oncology and hospice, where
Speaker 2: they are deliberately Okay, what do you.
Speaker 4: Want for lunch?
Speaker 3: Let's cut to the chase.
Speaker 4: I want cookies that's off the table, Broccoli and pasta,
Speaker 4: pasta and a bag of crisps. No deal. Ah'm on
Speaker 4: tomato sandwhich my final offer, white bread, brown bread. Gunness
Speaker 4: of both deal fel Johnston, Mooney and O'Brien goodness of both.
Speaker 4: It has the smoothness of white bread with all the
Speaker 4: goodness of home meal. It's the bread where both sides win.
Speaker 4: So he was like messaging me all night and then
Speaker 4: he just ghosted me your way.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: He was like, you're so hot, I want to come over, okay,
Speaker 4: And I was like cool, and he was like, I'm
Speaker 4: on my way, driving over right now. And then nothing.
Speaker 1: Phone use while driving can be deadly. Your phone. It
Speaker 1: won't kill you to put it.
Speaker 4: Away from the road Safety Authority visit orsa do.
Speaker 2: IE funneling people into those programs because they're incredibly expensive
Speaker 2: and they can collect a lot of money, and so
Speaker 2: they will funnel someone who could have lived another three
Speaker 2: or four years on the hospice so they can take
Speaker 2: that and siphon it up. That is all alleged.
Speaker 3: It's not going to kill them.
Speaker 2: Yeah, literally, And so you look at that and you're like, okay, well,
Speaker 2: like that is creating an immense amount of anger. And
Speaker 2: when you know, like look like even Curtis Jarvin of
Speaker 2: all people, was talking about this, but I thought was interesting.
Speaker 2: But he was talking about the fact that you know,
Speaker 2: healthcare has sort of reached this point where even in
Speaker 2: his wealthy San Francisco bubble, large portions of people are
Speaker 2: simply making a bet, simply saying, well, I can't afford this,
Speaker 2: so I'll just roll the dice and hope that nothing happens.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and again, those are the people that have to
Speaker 3: pay for the end of life care for boomers. They're
Speaker 3: subsidizing boomers. Everything's about that freaking generation. And we haven't
Speaker 3: even seen the full wave in my opinion, of chronic chemotherapy,
Speaker 3: of the diabetes like end of life care, of all
Speaker 3: of the hospice, of all the insurance money that's going
Speaker 3: to go to the boomer generation. So they literally stripped
Speaker 3: mind the economy and they're gonna give us a big
Speaker 3: middle finger on the way out. And already healthcare is
Speaker 3: like the biggest employer in almost every state now. But
Speaker 3: what blows my mind is, like, look back at the
Speaker 3: absolute state of Americans, like building the freaking you know
Speaker 3: kind of railroad, right, like freaking terraforming the West, the wilderness,
Speaker 3: and like I look at pictures of the Chicago Columbian
Speaker 3: Exposition of eighteen ninety three and just look at it
Speaker 3: and say that that was America, like that Ferris wheel
Speaker 3: they built, like those vast Greco Roman columns, this amazing
Speaker 3: thing they put together in like six months, and whatever
Speaker 3: it is. And now we're saying, as Americans, we can't
Speaker 3: step into the healthcare industry and immediately spot the misalignment
Speaker 3: of pricing incentives that are causing this. Why do we not?
Speaker 3: Why why can we send a man on the moon
Speaker 3: but we can't immediately say, well, wait a minute, they
Speaker 3: can order all these expensive tests whenever they want, and
Speaker 3: we have we have have Medicare codes for things that
Speaker 3: aren't going to change anybody's life, but it's the gold
Speaker 3: standard because somebody took like a bribe. Is this really
Speaker 3: what's gonna kill us? And it is. If we had
Speaker 3: capped I had rock run this. If we had capped
Speaker 3: Medicare and Medicaid at a percent of GDP in nineteen
Speaker 3: seventy and just kept it there, then we would have
Speaker 3: I think it was twenty one trillion less in debt,
Speaker 3: might have been nineteen Sorry, correct me if I'm wrong.
Speaker 3: So I like, that's it. The dollar is gonna die.
Speaker 3: The American you know, reserve currency status is eventually going
Speaker 3: to go away, and it was because we promised too
Speaker 3: much healthcare to people that didn't even work, so that
Speaker 3: doctors could drive Mercedes.
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I mean it's it's killing doctors as well, right,
Speaker 2: Like the the bizarre push and pull has created the
Speaker 2: system where doctors are also punished for hyper productivity. There's
Speaker 2: a person I know quite well who's literally been fired
Speaker 2: for doing too much because it's not billable. Right. We
Speaker 2: don't care about what you do functionally. What we care
Speaker 2: about is RVUS. What we care about is billable codes.
Speaker 2: Discussion for another time, Mark. Unfortunately, I'm getting a text
Speaker 2: from my wife that I need to go. But this
Speaker 2: was a fascinating discussion. And dude, where can people find
Speaker 2: you and find your work?
Speaker 3: Yeah? Well you could get tweets like that very sentiment
Speaker 3: that you just talked about. I would just like to
Speaker 3: see a healthcare system where fat people have to run,
Speaker 3: you know, like you could go to honest Polster on
Speaker 3: Twitter and see wonderful takes like that. Our main account
Speaker 3: is ras must and Underscore Pole and we have a
Speaker 3: YouTube video as well where we go into the numbers
Speaker 3: and talk about polling and what it means and where
Speaker 3: we're going, which is pretty wild right now, so I
Speaker 3: hope to see people there, ras Must and Underscore Pole
Speaker 3: on YouTube as well.
Speaker 1: Well.
Speaker 2: Thanks man, This was not at all an encouraging conversation,
Speaker 2: but I hope it was informant.
Speaker 3: Go get a drink. Yeah.
Speaker 2: As far as my stuff, this is what I do.
Speaker 2: If you want to support me, you can throw me
Speaker 2: a few bucks a month on Patreon, Substack or gum Road.
Speaker 2: You get the episodes early in ad free. Can also
Speaker 2: check out our sponsor, Axius Remote Fitness Coaching. Again, Mark,
Speaker 2: I really appreciate you coming on man.
Speaker 3: Yeah, this was great. Thanks so much.
Speaker 2: Good conversation to everyone at home, keep your head up.
Speaker 2: Why can't last forever? Good night,