Kind: captions
Language: en
Right now, we're in the middle of a
government shutdown. And to me, this is
a budget question. So, the government
has shown over and over and over for
whatever the last 30 years that we can't
pass a budget on time. I think the big
beautiful bill was reckless beyond all
measure. And now I see we're in a
shutdown. The Democrats want to add
things that will make it more reckless.
And I want to get your take on whether
you think the shutdown is actually about
the budget. Is it about something else?
Give me your take on how we have ended
up here.
>> Well, first of all, I think your comment
about the American dream is true and
it's sad. I mean, 70% of Americans
themselves have given up on the American
dream. And people say, well, we've got
better life expectancy, better medicine,
we have consumer gadgets. But the
reality is the American dream is about
your kids doing better than you. And
when you have Maxwell House Coffee
naming itself Maxwell Apartments, that's
sort of the commentary on the American
dream. And most people believe their
kids aren't buy a house.
>> They're not going to be able to have a
better job. And it's very sad to me as a
son of immigrants. My parents came here
when John F. Kennedy had called for us
to go to the moon and we were the nation
to be and we were humming and I was born
in Philadelphia, grew up with that
vision. So to me that's the central
issue of our nation uh and our time.
Look, I agree with you also on the big
ugly bill putting aside politics. It
takes the uh it takes the uh it takes
our debt uh def deficit to 8% of GDP in
peace time. We should have a debt
deficit of under 4% of GDP. And I think
there was way too much tax breaks in
there uh for people who uh don't need
them. That's that's my own view. uh in
the OC OECD which is all of the uh
European western democracies we are the
second lowest tax nation in terms of how
much we tax uh wealth and so to me we
can talk about where we need to cut
spending but that is the principal
reason we've got these deficits that are
at unsustainable levels now there's two
things in the shutdown one is why we're
shut down in terms of not paying and the
other is why Congress is shut down uh
and then Congress is shut down because
of the Epstein files. I mean, they don't
want to have a vote on the release of
the Epstein files. They don't want to
swear in uh at Alita Graala. So, they've
literally said for Congress not not to
vote. That's not why the government is
shut down. The government is shut down
uh because the Democrats want to get uh
extended premiums for the healthcare uh
affordable care act, the tax credits,
and that would uh if we don't do that,
premiums would double for 24 million
Americans. and the Republicans are
opposed to that and that's the central
debate in in the shutdown.
>> Okay. So, uh without getting lost in the
uh what they presented a clean
resolution and why don't we just sign
that as has been done a million times. I
think that debate's been had. I don't
expect us to get anywhere with that. But
what I do want to talk about is for me
the core issue is if you already have a
bill that we can agree is ugly precisely
because it increases the deficit, how
can you back something that increases it
even more?
>> Well, because I would say that I I have
a plan to reduce the deficit by debt the
debt by 12 trillion over 10 years. How
would I do it? Now, you may disagree
with some of these things, but I would
have a wealth tax on over hund00
million. I would have a small financial
transaction tax. I would take the
corporate tax rate up to 28%. I would
not let people pass on money uh to their
estate and then uh a Facebook stock of
$1,000 that becomes $100,000 and then
have their kids not pay capital gains uh
tax on that. Uh I would really restrict
these granter trusts where you have
billionaires basically passing on wealth
uh to their heirs without uh paying an
estate tax. Uh, I would have a tax on
stock buybacks. That would raise a lot
of revenue. And then I would cut the
Pentagon budget, which is over a
trillion dollars, 56% of defense. I
would cut Medicare advantage, which is
ripping off the American people by
saying we're sicker than we actually
are. I would cut fossil fuel subsidies.
I would cut duplicative programs. When
you do all of that math, you can save uh
up to 12 trillion over 10 years on on
the debt. uh you can bring our deficits
under 4% and you can still pay for
things like uh universal child care and
expanding the Affordable Care Act. And
so that's that's my view of how you get
the math to work.
>> So there's two things there. One, it'll
be good for us to in a second talk
values in terms of what's the value
system and the beliefs quite frankly
that drive your I think uh even in just
the way you listed it, you're a um tax
first, reduce spending second. We'll get
to that in a minute, but that's that'll
I think be very helpful. The other is
though when I look at this, I see
anything that adds to the deficit is
just a non-starter. So, um, from that
perspective, are you not worried about
adding costs back into the big,
beautiful, ugly, uh, bill that that's
going to make that even worse? What what
is driving the thinking of just get this
stuff back in and we'll deal with
everything else later?
>> Well, first there's the immediate,
right? I mean, people's insurance,
healthcare insurance, and go up double
uh if we don't if we don't do that. And
that is going to mean for people who are
already struggling economically,
enormous hardship, could increase
medical bankruptcies, could mean people
skipping treatment. But then there's the
uh the the the broader uh view which is
that we can reverse the the the the tax
breaks to in my view very wealthy people
that we shouldn't have in this country.
We can cut spending from other areas uh
to be able to fund healthare. And I
think there are two types of spending
that are deficit spending. One is
deficit spending that is productive and
one is deficit spending that is
nonproductive. If you have an investment
that has a rate of return that is higher
than uh the uh the amount spent then
that's productive investment and that's
that's appropriate. Uh I mean Paul
Krugman and others have written about
sort of productive investment. If you
just have money though that's not
leading to productive investment then uh
then that is uh that's a cause for
concern. My view is that investment in
people's health and education is
productive. I will agree certainly that
an investment that actually yields
improved health and actually yields
improved education results would be
wonderful investments to make. Our our
government has not shown in my
estimation any ability to yield those
results. You you don't have to look very
far to find the stats on us spending
more per person on healthcare to get
some of the worst outcomes in the world.
It's a developed world. It's absolutely
wild. Uh so and then education same
idea. So from that perspective where I
start to say okay the conversation we
have to have I think is around values so
that we can establish okay what is it
that's driving us in this lane. I don't
think you and I are going to um disagree
on the fact that we're not getting the
outcomes that we want now. And yet you
look at that problem and say, "But still
it's better to spend more money even
though we're not getting the outcomes
that we want." And I'm going to say,
"No, no, no. You have to balance the
budget first." And given that we have
not shown an ability to generate those
results, we and I teach entrepreneurs
all the time. And one of the things I'm
always telling them is you cannot assume
exponential growth if all you've ever
shown is linear growth. And that's what
this feels like to me. It's like, well,
we've never shown that we've been able
to get these results, but keep throwing
money at the problem, and somehow it's
just going to resolve itself. And so
then it comes down to, okay, well, we
each have a belief system, a value
system that's driving why we want to act
the way that we want to act. Um, so I'd
be very curious to hear what is like if
you had to break it down into some
really simple ideas that you filter
every bill that you pass or reject, uh,
everything that you're trying to
accomplish with your time in Congress,
like what is that small handful of
values that are your northstar that lead
you to vote the way you vote or endorse
the people that you endorse? Every
person in this country should have the
chance as I did to be able to live out
their dreams, their potential. That
means they should have health care. They
should have good public education. Maybe
they shouldn't have to take out as many
loans as I did, but live in a a safe
community, have people who support them
and believe in them. So, that's the
first principle. The second principle is
I I represent a district of $14
trillion. Five companies within 50 miles
of over a trillion dollars. Apple,
Google, Nvidia, Tesla, and Broadcom. We
are producing enormous wealth in
America. We can afford to make sure that
everyone has healthare, child care,
housing, education, the basics. That
that that's not an unachievable dream
for the wealthiest country in the world
that's going to be producing more wealth
than ever before. uh and I want a nation
where everyone has a chance uh to have
the basics to have the capability to be
uh who they can be and also uh to be
productive to contribute to be able to
start a small business to have a job or
uh to have a career to to to do
something that brings them pride and
satisfaction th those are sort of the
broad principles.
>> We'll get back to the show in just a
second but first let me tell you about
my non-negotiables. I do not compromise
on my standards. Not in business, not in
my relationships, and definitely not
with what I eat. With Paleo Valley beef
sticks, my nutrition standards stay high
no matter how busy life gets, or even if
I'm traveling. They are 100% grass-fed,
grassfinished beef, 6 g of protein, zero
sugar, no artificial preservatives, and
they're naturally fermented with organic
spices. There's no gluten, no soy or
corn, and they're paleo and keto
friendly. Your body does not care if
you're busy. The difference between
successful people and everyone else
often comes down to the standards they
refuse to negotiate on. Make your
nutrition one of those. Right now, you
can get 30 beef sticks for just $36.
That's maintaining your standards for
barely over a dollar per stick. Click
the link below to get your 30 beef
sticks for just $36.
All right, now let's get back to the
show. Uh, a lot of that makes sense to
me, but there's some devil hiding in the
details. One of the things you mentioned
a couple times is wealth. And so I think
it's really important for us to define
terms to see if we're saying the same
thing. So I think a wealth tax is
literal financial suicide for a country.
Anybody that proposes that, I'm going to
go uh campaign against that as hard as I
can. Uh but I think most people confuse
income with wealth. And so I'm just not
sure. I doubt that's you. I think you
know exactly what wealth is, but I want
to make sure that we define it. So I'll
define wealth as potential income. Maybe
one day it will happen, but it has not
been realized. And to realize that the
actual income on that wealth, you have
to destroy the asset, your possession of
it. So you take a share and you have to
sell that. You take a house, you have to
sell that or you'd have to take a loan
against it. And so those are the only
ways to liberate the potential from that
thing to be able to tax it. So if you
take wood, wood has heat energy trapped
inside of it, but to get it out, you
have to light it on fire. So to me, it's
like saying, "Hey, you have a whole lot
of wood, and so I want to tax you on
that heat energy by burning it." And
that's where you begin to um you
actually break down the engine of wealth
by forcing people to essentially light
that asset on fire. And so I'd love to
get your take on why tax wealth if you
understand the mechanism that I just
described.
Well, I view wealth as a person's total
net net worth. Now, I'm not for taxing
unrealized capital gain. So, I'm not for
okay, you get a stock option, that
option appreciates uh that we tax that
uh as a realization event. But if
someone is worth over $und00 million,
let's say someone is worth a billion
dollars, uh Elon Musk may be worth a
trillion dollars. So, I say let's have a
5% tax on on on on his trillion dollars.
That would be true.
>> But when you say worth, he's only worth
that because the potential revenue that
he could generate by selling his shares.
He doesn't actually have that money.
>> Sure. He may have some Well, some people
borrow against it and so they're uh
borrowing from the bank and then
financing their lifestyle and not and
avoiding tax. But let's just say he has
a billion dollars and let's just
stipulate it's all in stock or the vast
majority is. I don't think paying a 2%
tax on that, forcing the sale of 2% is
going to disincentivize
uh people from building more wealth, nor
do I think it will lead to capital
flight because uh 93% of American wealth
is invested in America. It could lead to
flight from, let's say, California to
New York, but people aren't going to put
their money in China. It's 20%
unemployment. It's got huge debt of uh
cities. They're not going to put their
money in India. And they're what are
they going to go to Europe? think your
president hasn't had a successful tech
company other than SAP for or or ASML
for for decades. So I think that America
is unique. We're not France. There's
extraordinary wealth generation and
having a tax of a few percent on them to
be able to finance uh the uh the the the
health care and the uh and and child
care that we need is is is worth it. I
mean that's that's my view. There are
other taxes we can look at as well, but
but you're right. I mean, I certainly
understand the distinction between
wealth and income, and a lot of people
aren't paying the income tax at that
level because they don't they don't have
a W2.
>> Now, help me understand. You said, "I'm
not for taxing unrealized gains, but
then you said I'm going to tax 2% of
their unrealized gains." How do I
reconcile those two statements?
>> Well, I'm I'm for taxing their total net
worth, uh, but not taxing. Some people
say, "Let's just tax unrealized capital
gains of everyone, right? of someone
over 100,000. We're talking about people
over a hundred million and we're not
talking about their total unrealized
capital gains. We're talking about uh
their total net worth at a given uh at a
given moment and just 2% of that. So if
if
>> but just uh this will be the last time I
say it and then I'll I'll let it go. But
I want to be very clear for anybody
listening that is taxing unrealized
gains. You may only be taxing a
percentage of their unrealized gains,
but net worth is not income. It's not
money in the bank. It'll be partly that,
but the VA like someone like Elon Musk,
what do they have? Half of a percent of
their net worth at most in a form that
would be um liquid and it would have
already been taxed unless they did it
through a loan, but it would have
already been taxed when they took it
out. Which is why in the year that Elon
liquidated a bunch of his shares, he
paid more tax than any human has ever
paid ever in all of human history. So,
here's what I'm mapping. Roana believes
that, hey, we've got Americans that have
health care needs. We've got Americans
that aren't getting the shot that you
got, largely from an education
standpoint. And the way that we're going
to get there is the wealthiest
individuals over a certain amount, we're
going to force them to liquidate assets
in order to pay roughly 2% against their
net worth. Is that a fair assessment?
Cool. The only thing I
>> I don't think that'll be enough. I think
we need other taxes too to get the the
the math to work just in fairness. But
>> you're losing me here. All right, we'll
get to that in a second. So the only
flag
>> one thing I think is important is for
politicians to be honest about their
math. You have all these people come in,
they they say, "I want healthare. I want
childare. Then how are you going to pay
for it?" And they don't have any
answers. My in my case, people may
disagree with where I stand, but the
math actually works. and I'm honest
about where I want to increase taxes on
the wealthy and what I want to spend it
on and how to get there.
>> Yeah. I mean, this is why you have the
reputation that you have and why I have
a feeling it's going to get better by
the day. Uh so, yeah. I mean, full
acknowledgement of um you got on my
radar for being the guy that you could
actually have a real conversation with,
somebody who has, I think, sincere aims
and is really trying to get there. Uh
so, full respect. um very grateful to
have people like you doing this. What I
want to get to is just mapping the cause
and effect of okay when we do this what
does history tell us is going to happen.
>> Um so where I come down just to so I'll
plant my the final flag then we'll move
on just to my side of the values
equation. So last thing is um you very
clear on what you want to do. We're even
going to need more but that is a tax
that will require people to sell things
getting into the value perspective. So
for me, I'm looking at everything from a
cause and effect perspective. And I'm
trying to figure out if we do one thing,
what is the thing that this is going to
yield? So if we take health care and
education as examples, I look at that
and go, oh, we've run the experiment of
does throwing money at those two things,
does it solve the problem? And the
answer is unequivocably no.
>> I agree with that.
>> We Yeah. So we know that just throwing
more money at this isn't going to do
anything. So then the question becomes
what is? So my guiding value is one
freedom. I really believe that freedom
is the backbone of prosperity. And so
for America which is declining in
prosperity literally by the minute. I
can't remember which one. You'll
probably know but there's a uh somebody
either in Congress or Senate that wears
like a button that shows the deficit
growing. Yeah, that's that's my friend
Thomas Massie is an MIT.
>> That was my guess.
>> And we did the Epstein file release
together. And I uh we were both actually
on Twitter saying that the that they
shouldn't interfere with MIT, the the
administration that let MIT figure out
how to select their own students and
faculty. And one of the points I said is
that yeah, the guy Thomas Massie who
went to MIT happens to have programmed
his own gadget at the deficit. He's a
brilliant guy and you should have him on
actually. He's he is a a thinker. We
come from He comes from the the right. I
come from the left. But we're actually
interested in ideas.
>> Yeah. I I am not at all surprised to see
you guys link up. This is what I hope is
the future of America. I have no
indications that it is, but uh getting
people to really map out. Uh again, I'll
just say cause and effect. Cause and
effect. Cause and effect. So Thomas
Massie, wears the button. uh at least my
interpretation of why he does that is to
make it clear to people that literally
America is growing less prosperous by
the minute uh because as we accumulate
debt and so this is part of my belief um
debt is the problem. Why is the American
dream gone? It's very simple. Debt debt
forces you to print money. Printing
money forces you to own assets. The only
assets people understand are a house and
we've made houses completely
unaffordable. that that is the crisis.
If you want to know why the middle class
is evaporating, it is precisely
inflation caused by debt forcing you to
own assets. And right now 10% of
Americans own 93% of the assets. So it's
like you you literally need no nothing
else. That's your problem. And so now
for me it's like okay what are if I
believe the freedom is the backbone of
the prosperity that will reverse that so
that America is getting more prosperous
by the minute then it becomes a question
of okay what are the things that we need
to do to actually increase freedom now I
actually don't consider myself a
libertarian but I am admittedly very
interested in seeing government be
smaller. I am very interested in seeing
us spend less money and be way more
disciplined uh and forcing every one of
us to accept Thomas Soul's brilliant
insight that there are no solutions only
trade-offs and so it becomes a question
of what are the trade-offs that we are
going to make and I think going back to
my values those trade-offs should be
driven based on the cause and effect of
what will actually generate more freedom
and thusly more prosperity.
So for me, balancing the budget by
reducing the cost of the government is a
must. And the reason I think that's a
must is any gains. So like Trump has a
don't worry, we'll grow our way out of
this strategy. Uh but that's all
hypothetical.
And the same is true for anybody that
wants to increase the budget because the
only thing we know is the budget's
definitely going to go up. The deficits
are definitely going to go up.
Everything else is a maybe. I'm trying
to get people to be honest about what
they're prepared to cut in order to
balance the budget based on where we are
today, which is already ridiculously up
from where we were in just 2017. What
are the things that you think government
should get out of so that we can start
reducing that deficit?
Well, first I agree with you that uh
inflation has led to the uh devaluation
of assets. uh uh devaluation assets go
up
>> but devaluation the devaluation of money
and making life more more expensive that
people are then taking it because
they're afraid of inflation that the val
they're putting but when you have
printed more money that money is going
in the hands of people who already have
capital uh capital and so they're uh
they're benefiting uh from uh uh more
money in the system and it's contributed
to income inequality but I don't think
it's the only thing that has I think it
is also the de-industrialization that
led to people not having jobs. It's also
people not having healthcare and
education. It's also the concentration
of industry. So I think that the com the
the the fact that 10% own 93% of the
assets the story of printing more money
is in my view one factor but there are
whole other set of factors that have led
to that income inequality that that have
to be addressed. And I don't think just
uh just the deficit reduction will will
do that though important to to do. I
mean that's
>> all right. Can I tease those out because
I think you're correct on everything
that you said. I'm going to give you a
speedrun of all the beats literally that
I think are all of the beats. And if you
think that I've missed one, let me know
and we can go into it. So debts force
the government to print money. Printing
money is inflation. It's it's not a
proxy for inflation. It is inflation.
>> Inflation causes prices to go up, but
they are two separate phenomenon. So
debts cause inflation. Inflation causes
prices to go up. You've pointed out very
smartly that offshoring everything,
globalization, letting China into the
WTO,
uh, NAFTA, all that stuff hollowed out a
lot of our manufacturing base. We lost
roughly 3 million jobs. That was one of
the biggest, actually far bigger than
what happened to um the unions that made
it impossible for Americans, American
workers to negotiate their wages. I even
in white collar jobs, you just go, uh,
I'll just outsource to somewhere else or
I'll import somebody that will do it
cheaper. Uh, and so that robbed the
average American of being able to
negotiate higher prices or higher wages
and therefore the real wages have not
gone up. So you've got inflation causing
asset prices to go up because that's
what happens. Every the people that
understand get out of cash, they get
into assets and then the only asset that
anybody understands intuitively is a
house. So, the average person could get
into the stock market, asset ownership,
but they won't because it's confusing
and risky. And those two things
together, the confused mind says no. And
so, they're not going to go after it.
When you couple that with they're unable
to get their wages to go up for the
reasons that we just covered, you're now
in a position where every time somebody
says add another thing to the budget
without removing something of equal or
greater value, you're pushing that
person's head farther underwater because
you've already made it impossible for
them to negotiate their wages in any
meaningful way. But inflation, as Thomas
Massiey's pin shows us, is growing by a
trillion dollar every 100 days. It is
wild. So,
>> a couple points to that. Uh I agree with
90% of that. What I would say is that if
inflation was matched by wage growth, uh
then of course you wouldn't have the
issue, right? It's that the that that
the prices are increasing over wages.
And so one of the things that I believe
is we've got to figure out how do we get
wages up? How do we get people into good
paying jobs, productive jobs, uh to
match the the cost of living. The second
thing is I think that there's technology
has had some deflationary effect, not on
uh not on everything. Uh and the United
States being the reserve currency uh has
had a a deflationary effect. But so what
we see is that consumer goods have gone
down, products have gone down, but the
costs of health care, uh, of housing,
uh, of child care are up. Uh, and so,
uh, I think this is one of the reasons
we've not really had to confront
inflation because the we've been
buffeted being the, uh, the reserve
currency that's allowed us to keep
interest rates uh, relatively low. uh
and we've uh had technological proess
that hasn't shown up in ordinary
consumer goods. Though the story of of
the price inflation of healthcare, child
care, education combined with people not
making it as much is is really the the
crux of why the American dream is is
harder.
>> We'll get back to the show in just a
second, but first, let's talk about one
of the hidden distractions that is
killing your focus. Most people do not
realize how much mental bandwidth gets
stolen by small frustrations. That shirt
that rides up, the fabric that bunches,
the constant need to adjust. Every time
you're thinking about your clothing,
you're not thinking about your work,
your goals, or what actually matters.
That's why right now I am wearing a true
classic tea. True classic fits right
where it should. Tailored through the
chest and shoulders, relaxed where you
need it. You put it on right in the
morning and then you just forget about
it. That's the point. Zero mental
bandwidth wasted. The fabric feels
premium. The fit is tailored without
being restrictive and it holds up. Stop
letting bad clothing steal your focus.
Upgrade your wardrobe at
trueclassic.com/impact.
Again, that's trueclassic.com/impact.
And now, let's get back to the show. I
love that. And so another thing to look
at there is um when you start thinking
about okay technology is actually making
things cheaper every year but the
average American doesn't feel that the
question becomes why doesn't it now I
already think we've said so many things
that the average person is like I
already can't follow you but for
completeness let's put this final piece
uh on the table when the Fed says that
we want to maintain inflation at 2%.
What they really mean is we're going to
print so much money that we gobble
through all of that technological
innovation cuz your prices should be
going down, down, down, down every year.
And people will lie to you and they will
tell you that deflation is bad. It is
absolutely not bad. You want prices to
go down. We've eaten through all of that
by printing money plus 2%. And so people
are already rightfully up in arms when
they hear in the last 5 years alone
inflation has been 25%.
Uh but if they only understood that it's
dramatically more than that because
first we printed our way through all of
that uh innovation that you were talking
about plus 25% on top of it. But don't
you think that there's c that it's the
the price uh hikes and and declines have
been dependent on on on what we're
talking about? So, you know, a price of
TVs have come down, the price of
computers have come down, the price of
an iPhone uh or an Android have come
down, uh the price of knowledge has come
down. Today, every person has on their
fingertips the amount of knowledge
probably President Reagan had in the
1980s with all his staff. And so certain
things, the price of communication has
come down. But the price of health care,
the price of child care, the price of
education, those have skyrocketed. And
that uh that I think is the the biggest
challenge. And on healthcare, I agree
with you. We haven't achieved the right
option. I I would be curious what you
would think of having a singlepayer
health health system because I think it
would uh make it much easier for
businesses who don't have to deal with
it. You'd eliminate a lot of the dead
weight costs with middleman insurance
and you could still have have doctors
and nurses. But I I think the problem is
these these sectors where the costs have
skyrock skyrocketed.
>> There's no doubt that there are some
things where the cost is easier to get
down at a more rapid rate that people do
feel it. Uh my favorite quote though is
you can't eat a flat screen. So uh yes,
there there have been things that have
come down and those are wonderful and
we've gotten to take advantage of some
of them, but it creates this weird sort
of dystopian thing where it's like I can
get this the most advanced TV of all
time. However, my groceries have doubled
in cost, right? So um or even looking at
healthcare. So my take on that is the
areas where we just cannot get the price
down are the areas where the government
is most involved, not where the
government is least involved. And so
this is why I'm careful to plant the
seed for the very thing that I think is
the engine of prosperity is freedom. The
very thing the government takes away is
freedom. Now I think we actually want
some rails. I think that humans have a
tendency towards tyranny at the
individual and at the collective level.
I think if companies don't have any
checks and balances. We've already seen
what they do. They've got like
9year-olds cleaning chimneys. So, uh,
let us not pretend that humans will not
do dastardly things if they're not given
boundaries. I think boundaries are a
good thing. I think we want them. I just
think that it's one of these dances
where as you start putting more and
more, it's like, hey, this is a good
thing, right? We're trying to protect
people, right? And then you start
getting into the nanny state which ends
up breaking the mechanism that gives you
the freedom to actually get the
innovation.
>> But this is
>> Oh, go ahead. I don't want to interrupt.
>> Please. No, you
>> but but I just wanted to push on this
idea of freedom because uh this gets
back to sort of basic political
philosophy, right? There's negative
freedom and positive freedom. And I be
curious how you think about the negative
freedom uh which we can all agree on is
you don't want the state to say hey you
know you said the wrong thing on this
podcast or bro you I said the wrong
thing we're going to put put you in jail
or uh we're going to come and just
confiscate all your assets without due
process. That is the freedom to be
protected against the arbitrary use of
violence by the state. But that's not
sufficient, right? But to be tr truly
free and this gets the work of someone
like Amarthia Sen who wrote capabilities
theory or FDR on the economic bill of
rights. They say like that that a human
being to be free and achieve your
potential you needed an education, you
needed health, you needed uh the basics
uh to to to be who you are and that uh
the the that a society has an obligation
uh to help people achieve their
potential and that that is the positive
achievement of freedom. So it's not just
a state that is uh is is is uh allowing
you not to to face uh violence. It's a
state that's helping you uh flourish.
And then in a modern complex society,
family and civic society isn't enough.
The state has to play some role.
>> So what I would say to that is um all of
that stuff is wonderful, but there has
to be a point at which you say I'm
trying to do the minimal amount of this.
So Jordan Peterson has a really
interesting take uh on parenting and he
said you should use the minimal force
required to get your child to act in a
manner that is appropriate. Now of
course we could all debate appropriate
and of course we could all debate uh
what is the minimal force required but
that feels like pretty good guidance.
You cannot and from where I'm sitting
kids will not develop in a manner that
will make them productive adults unless
they have some boundaries. So hey
government needs to come in. The
government is the parent in this
situation. The government needs to make
sure that we become a productive
society. I love that. However, if a
parent is slapping their child around
and beating them, I think we all know
that there's going to be real damage
that's done. Even if it's not physical
damage, there's the potential for
massive psychological damage. And I
think the same is true to extend the
metaphor about as far as it will carry
that if the government is coming in and
it's doing too much that now you're
going to run into problems. So I I think
I mean I'll not have a hard time getting
you to agree with yes there is such a
thing as the government does too little
and yes there's such a thing as the
government does too much. So then the
question becomes okay what are we going
to use as the barometer to say the
government is now doing too little or
the government is doing too much and I
would say the answer is results nice and
easy just like in a business am I doing
the right things in my business I don't
know are you profitable yes I'm
profitable then you're doing the right
things now there's an element of could
you be even more profitable and then we
can start to optimize for that but if
your company isn't profitable you're
going to go out of business so I know
you're not doing the right things by its
very nature. You can get in to the like
nitty-gritty of well maybe if I'm not
profitable for two or three years like
I'm going to find the path. Let let's
not get lost in the complexities. If
your business is losing money, that is a
bad sign. All of your energy and effort
should be put to get out of that
situation as fast as you can. And so I'm
saying based on your metric, I'd be
curious, genuinely curious. So let's
look at Obama's Affordable Care Act,
right? So we know when he passes it in
2009 or 2010 that millions of Americans
30 20 30 million Americans who did not
have health insurance now have health
insurance. We know that people who had
pre-existing conditions uh diabetes or
heart disease now they're covered. We
know that young kids up till 26 uh who
didn't have health insurance now they
can get on their parents health
insurance. Now, we also know that
premiums have skyrocketed since then uh
and that that's a structural issue and
this is why I believe we need you know
Medicare for all. Would you acknowledge
though that yes on a results metric uh
the the Obamacare the Affordable Care
Act ended up improving health for many
Americans uh giving them the the health
care that they they they needed but it
came at a steep cost and this is a
values question then of whether we think
the cost is worth the improvement of of
health that happened for uh particularly
lower wage Americans.
Uh what I think the Obamacare act did
was give a ton of peace of mind to
people that we're going to reduce the
number of people that are um dying of
something acute. We're going to reduce
the number of people that are going to
go bankrupt due to medical costs. And I
think those are huge wins. And the other
problem is because we have and uh
probably just for the scope of this
conversation we'll leave vague but
because we have structural problems as
you said with the way that that is set
up um we're pouring money into a system
that actually isn't delivering the
result of making Americans healthier. So
I I will just say right now and I am
happy to take a debate with anybody on
this one. your health. Barring of course
there are going to be people that
tragically end up getting cancer either
because of genetics or they live near a
pollutant or they were you know just
something in their environment caused
it. I I I just I can't stress enough the
tragedy of uh cancer as somebody I had
skin cancer and I was a ghast because
I've been so careful my entire life. Uh
but I'm married to a Greek girl and so
I'm always in the shade in a very sunny
space. Uh so anyway, it played out the
way that it played out, right? And so I
will grant that same um grace to anybody
struggling. I get it. Anybody can end up
there. But if you want good health, it
comes down to what what you eat.
>> And so if you
>> Yeah.
>> What by by a factor of 10. So if if you
only let me control one variable, I will
just control what the person puts in
their mouth. And the the number of
ailments that I will be able to reduce
just by controlling what they eat, it
will be far greater than what I can
control by getting them to work out.
Now, if I can get them to work out like
an Olympic athlete, okay, maybe then
it's so hardcore that you can sort of
start to get where food matters a lot
less. Uh but oh buddy that that is
>> what would be your top three things I we
discussed I think before we were online
you said no car or low carbs if you were
to to be talking I mean we've had this
complex economic discussion but if you
said here are your three laws uh someone
changing their lifestyle tomorrow uh
what would be the top three things
>> don't eat sugar
don't eat sugar don't eat sugar
>> like it's it's and the problem is most
people don't understand
>> well car uh I I don't advise it, but
it's not nearly as problematic as sugar.
It just depends on how much they have.
My I don't have the studies to back this
up, but my instinct is if you overeat
artificial sweeteners, you're going to
have microbiome problems that will be
severe. Uh probably not as detrimental
to your health, but you're going to get
things like itchy skin, irritable bowel.
So, look, they have their own problems.
So, I would advise people to eat whole
food whenever humanly possible. But
going back to the sugar thing, most
people just don't understand how many
things have sugar. So carbohydrates will
turn to sugar in your bloodstream unless
it's fiber. So um yeah, just that that's
the number one variable. People intake
so much glucose. It's wild.
>> Yeah. Well, and you have an expertise. I
was your whole whole company. And uh and
I I agree with with you on this point
that that that there has not been enough
focus in our society on on health on
wellness. You know, I I I had one of the
best educations uh you could have in
this country. And I was very studious.
And what amazed me is even though I went
to a great public school, even when I
got fancy degrees from the best private
university, Chicago, Yale, I did not
really know these simple things about
sugar and carbohydrates and diet until I
was in my 30s and read about this. So
the amount of one lack of health
wellness education that we have at least
in my generation I don't know if I don't
think it's become much better now uh in
our society is a huge problem and then
the amount of access that people have
just to regular uh health and wellness
in their communities is a huge problem.
>> It's interesting. So this is where we
get into like the the how do you
actually solve these problems? I don't
think that health is confusing anymore.
I think everybody knows exactly what to
do and it's just hard. So there are some
things in life I don't know your age.
I'm 49. You agree in the 1980s it was
not obvious like we would have you know
orange juice and uh Rice Krispies and
cereals and sodas. I I don't think at
least where I grew up in Bucks,
Pennsylvania, it was not as obvious uh
about the health knowledge we have now.
In the 1980s, the US government was
actively trying to kill its citizens.
My producer just laid his head on the
floor. He's not happy with that
statement. But that really is either out
of ignorance or malice. The food pyramid
is unforgivable. And every time that uh
the government wants to put a regulation
in place, I want to scream because
they're convinced they know best and
they do not. And so this is why I'm a
huge proponent of pointing out that
freedom is what leads to prosperity
because freedom is a bunch of really
selfish people competing to win the game
of capitalism by making something that's
better for you.
>> Meaning you want it more. the maha
movement and put aside where I disagree
with Robert Kennedy on the vaccines, but
this idea that, you know, Europe has
regulations on food and that we
shouldn't be having uh antibiotics in in
the uh the food we have. We shouldn't be
having food dyes, we shouldn't be having
as many preservatives that we uh that we
can do a lot to clean up uh our our food
system.
when you don't know the truth of
nutrition, the sort of first put no
weird thing in your food is a really
good strategy. So from that perspective,
while I have no idea if he's going to be
right about all the specifics, what I
hear him saying is my belief system, my
values, however you want to look at it,
tells me that putting exogenous weird uh
things in our food is unwise. And when I
just look around and I see how much
faster America got fat compared to
Europe and then I look at Europe and the
more they adopt Americanstyle food, the
more of a problem they have. We should
probably reduce the number of things
that we allow to be put in our food.
Yeah, as a knee-jerk reaction, that
seems very reasonable. Um, you can
probably simplify it even farther and
just go, you really want to be eating
things that look like it looked when it
was growing or roaming. And the farther
away from that it gets, the more likely
it should only be a snack, something you
eat on rare occasions, it should not be
like the core of your diet. This is why,
like, this goes back to my cause and
effect thing. Um, I can't explain human
biology to you, but I have I've lost 60
pounds like 15 years ago and have kept
it off. It is the easiest thing in the
universe because I simply know what to
eat and what not to eat based on what it
does to my own body. So, I'm like, "Oh,
if I eat that, I overeat it. I
overconume calories. I put on fat very
easily. Cool. This thing makes my joints
hurt. Cool. I'm not going to eat it."
Right? So, it's like, you don't have to
be a genius. You just have to pay
attention to am I in shape. Uh if your
body fat percentage is way out of whack,
your your diet is not the way that you
want it to be. So, but this this all
started you were talking about
education. I actually want to get back
to that. So, same idea.
>> Uh the way that you're educating the
kids, what what result is it yielding? I
would say it's yielding a terrible
result. I say that compared to
international results on standardized
tests. I say that what we spend per
person versus the
>> right and our reading and test scores
just they just came out. They've
stalled. They haven't done well and
there's just a national study on reading
scores, math scores. I mean what you're
saying is factually accurate that we
have not done uh enough uh well enough
for for education. And we've failed a
lot of people who don't get a four-year
college degree.
>> I'm very eager to see people not
accumulate debt. So, the four-year
college degree thing to me is just a
question of, well, can you do it without
accumulating debt? If you can, great. If
you can't, probably a terrible idea. Uh,
but let me put forward a radical idea
that I've never said out loud. I want to
see what you think about this.
uh if you want to fix education,
acknowledge that you live in the age of
AI and hire basically hall monitors
effectively babysitters to sit at the
front of the class, a very limited
number of them, but let's say one for
every 10ish students. Uh and then they
just interface with AI all day. and you
you give each school a budget to buy
their AI system and then you just let
the AI systems compete for who outputs
the best students. Uh and that alone
would be so much cheaper and so much
better than what we do now that we
should do it would it is immoral to not
do that. I'll go that far.
>> Here here's why I disagree with it. Not
not now I'm not saying that we shouldn't
use AI as tools to supplement teaching
but when I think of the teachers and I'm
curious when you think of your teachers
who had the biggest impact on you I
don't remember the details of what uh
books I read in nth grade English and I
probably don't remember the details of
the history I learned in 10th grade
social studies but I remember Mrs. Rob
uh believing in me encouraging me to
write challenging me to write I remember
Mr. long ago pushing me uh to care about
public service, to love public service,
uh to develop my ideas. And I think that
so much, yes, they're the hard skills.
I'm not going to uh to to to to say that
they don't matter, but to get someone to
be good at those hard skills, you've got
to give them purpose. You've got to give
them a sense of why it matters. You got
to get them to love things. And I think
that is not AI. That's emotional. It's I
had this conversation with Jensen Wong
at Nvidia and I said do you think AI is
going to really displace jobs and he
said yes it's going to displace jobs but
you know I spend most of my time as CEO
of Nvidia setting goals and uh talking
about resilience and uh inspiring people
uh and I I just think that that human
quality uh is ultimately the most
important in success. I imagine it was
the most important for you.
So, I love that and that's why I'm
saying you want more people in the
classroom, not less. Um, but you just
want to make sure that we accept that
the question has been asked and
answered.
Is it a good system to expect each
individual, each new generation to go
and train themselves to death and then
go in and teach? Or are we better off
with AI, which has been trained on the
entire corpus of human knowledge and
gets better every day and will most
likely on acute tasks like history or
whatever, always outperform an
individual human. You put them in place
to give the instruction. Right? This
experiment is being run right now in
schools in Texas where they're having
the kids spend two hours a day uh with
tailored because that's the thing the
even if it's one AI it can still tailor
its rate of progress to that exact
student and with two hours of AI
instruction those kids are like
outpacing their um classmates that
aren't using AI by like tremendous
degree. It's it's really incredible and
this is going to be the birth of
something beautiful,
>> you know, because I I certainly am
always a data person and want to look at
what we can do and my my I'm I'm not a I
represent Silicon Valley. I'm not a lite
or someone who says that let's not use
AI. Certainly, it's powerful tools and I
think the question is how do we how do
we blend the uh the uniqueness of
teachers going all the way back from
Socrates on to the teachers you and I
had uh with the tools of technology.
Yeah, I I agree. So, I want to see
humans in the class and I want to see
them um be people that can inspire a
child to dream bigger, to want more, um
to not be an indoctrination engine, or
if we're going to indoctrinate kids,
which we are inevitably, uh that we have
a nationwide curriculum from an
indoctrination perspective that
everybody agrees on. And it's just real
basic. For me, it's a growth mindset.
Just take everything Carol Dwek has ever
taught and just be like, "Here it is.
This is the uh
>> yeah you know you know one of the things
I was just in China that I thought think
we do so well in America to your freedom
point is we love to challenge right even
you know you you could be an
administrative assistant or a CEO in
this country and you perfectly uh can
say that the president is someone you
think is utterly wrong and believe that
your opinion matters just as much with
fervor and certainty. uh and it it's not
just that you have the freedom of speech
to do it that you have the
self-confidence to it. One of the things
I used to do as a student is I used to
love arguing that my teacher was wrong
about something and that now I argue
that people uh may be wrong and it it's
given me a ability to challenge the
system and so I I feel like that you
don't want too sanitized right like are
you going to say the AI is wrong or you
want to make sure people are developing
a a spirit of challenging the system
questioning authority uh taking risk uh
and I I think I know these things seem
soft and I we definitely need to get our
math reading and technology skills up.
Uh but I think it's actually what makes
America exceptional. I think it's why we
I am very bullish on the American
experiment long term.
>> Yeah, I could not agree more. It's one
of the things that makes me very nervous
about what I see happening in America
culturally, which is a move to uh a very
socialist stance of like we want to make
sure that everybody's outcomes are the
same. um you said what you believe which
is you want to make sure that people
have the same opportunity that you had
and I think that is absolutely critical.
I think it's immoral to do anything
o