Kind: captions
Language: en
Trump attempts to fire Fed board member
Lisa Cook. Trump signs an EO making flag
burning illegal. Trump wants to seize
the means of production apparently. And
Trump is going after the cartels in
North and South America. And they
finally did it. They added the cracker
back to Cracker Barrel. Plus, you are
not going to want to miss the AI Will
Smith fiasco. All right, everybody. Here
it is. Another Tom Billy show. Welcome.
>> All right, let's talk about Trump taking
over the Fed. Let's go.
>> So, Trump has it all. It's like Pokemon.
He's going to get all the agencies, all
the companies,
>> intel, now he's taking over the Fed,
everything. Um, Trump has issued a
letter to Fed Governor Lisa Cook. Um,
calling into question
>> calling into question uh her
trustfulness, her trustworthiness as a
financial regulator because she's
currently being investigated for
mortgage fraud.
>> Yeah, I was going to say he's accused
her of a crime. Lisa Lisa Cooked has put
a
>> Is that a Freudian slip? Lisa Cooked.
>> Lisa, she did cook. No. Um, she uh
bought two uh properties and put both of
them as her primary residence to get
favorable rates. That's what Trump is
calling out for fraud. So, I just want
to kind of put that in there because
fraud is different than mortgage fraud
in my opinion because fraud is like
you're not actually who you are. People
are coming at her credentials. She just
fudged some paperwork said that I wish
she'd get a better rate on a mortgage
for her investment property. Um, some
people are saying that this is Trump's
way to kind of control the Fred, have an
ownership over the interest rates.
>> Correct.
>> Last time this happened, Nixon did it.
It worked for a couple months, then
everything tanked. It
>> It is a terrible idea. So, uh, listen,
I'm in a weird position with my, um,
code of ethics where
you cannot let people run rampant with
crime.
Period. New paragraph. You cannot
weaponize the um, Department of Justice
to get things that you want done
politically. And when I say can't, I
mean, you certainly can. And both
parties have been doing it for quite
some time now. It is a terrible idea and
it will accelerate the division in this
country and this is going to be the
death of us. This is exactly how we
become a banana republic. So I could not
hate this anymore if I tried. So I love
if a president wants to apply uh
narrative pressure on the Fed and call
him too late Powell and all that stuff.
I love it. Like try to convince the
American people that this guy is doing
the wrong thing.
>> Funny name's cool.
>> Yep. But when you start going after
somebody, this again, people should not
be doing mortgage fraud, but that he
isn't overly concerned with mortgage
fraud. This is a which one of these
[ __ ] can I go get? And if he
could have gotten Pal, he would have
gotten Pal directly. Oh, I can't get
Pal. Let me get one of the people on the
board. And so this is a terrible idea.
>> Like this is what happens when people
trust themselves too much. Dude, do you
know why I don't want a Fed? because I
don't trust these guys to set the rate
correctly. So, we got to stop trying to
manipulate the economy. Now,
the only thing that strikes me as worse
than an independent agency setting the
policy
is the executive branch setting the
policy. This is wild. So, anyway, I hate
everything about this. If you uh don't
like Jerome Powell at the end of his
term, replace him with somebody better.
But dude, you just you just can't do
this. This is the odds that things go
wrong. Like even if he gets it right
right now, because I really wish Jerome
Powell had lowered interest rates so
that America could secure better
long-term rates and relieve some of the
uh interest rate burden, but he didn't.
And so
>> if Trump manages to bully them enough
that he's able to influence them,
because by the way, him booting her out
is not the same as him controlling
interest rates. Let's be very clear
about that. Even booting Powell out is
not the same as the Fed no longer has uh
autonomy. So, let's be very clear about
that. But this ever ratcheting up
pressure, he's doing it because he knows
it will work. because even if she
doesn't end up getting convicted, she's
going to be like, "Do I really want to
deal with this?" Like, "This is a lot of
drama." So, he knows that the pressure
will work, which is exactly why he's
applying it. And if you can influence
them, then you end up getting policy
that might be well-intended, might even
be short-term positive, but over time
you're going to make mistakes because
when somebody who has to get reelected
in a very short period of time has
control of the interest rates, you jerk
it around till you get to the midterms
and then ah, look at that. Money's so
cheap. Everybody's happy. The economy is
booming. Oh, I'm up for re-election. Oh
my god, who would have thought interest
rates would come down, Drew? Isn't that
wild? So, and also by the way, uh, watch
the upcoming episode with Lynn Alden. By
the way, we should message next week.
Uh, I'm going to be traveling, so we
will not have a deep dive on Monday, nor
an interview on Tuesday because of the
holiday weekend and my absence. We're
going to wait and drop them the week
after. Uh, but when I get back, Lyn
Alden drops on Tuesday. And, uh, great
episode. And she talks about something
called fiscal dominance. So, we're in
fiscal dominance. Now, I know that
Besson understands that. Do I know that
Trump understands that? I don't know
that Trump understands that. And he
certainly isn't acting like he
understands that. Fiscal dominance, put
very simply, is where the government
takes on so much debt that it outpaces
the private debt. And when the Fed,
which is charged with basically
maintaining the uh private part of the
economy,
when the government is taking out so
much debt that it outstrips the private
government, when the Fed tries to raise
or lower interest rates to influence the
public sector and the um the corporate
sector of the economy, they can't do it
because the government is just taking on
debt so much so fast that uh they're in
control and the Fed is going to have to
print money to match whatever amount of
deficit spending that they're doing. So,
uh, the Fed is in a no-win situation
because if they raise interest rates,
then the debt accelerates on the
government side even faster because of
the interest rate. And so, they have
tools, but they don't really have an
impact. Uh, so that's a pretty bad place
to be. And we are there. And on the
following Tuesday, uh, Lyn Alden will
walk you through it all. Was an awesome
interview. I really I was she changed
some of my thinking on economics and
when that happens I am always excited.
There's been some speculation about what
the actual wording of the executive
order is, but Trump has put a renewed
focus on flag burning.
>> And if you really open up the EO and
kind of bury something at the very
bottom in the last paragraph, it says,
"My administration will act to restore
to restore respect and sanctity to the
American flag and prosecute those who
incite violence or otherwise violate our
our laws while desecrating the symbol of
our country." And I think that that
incite violence line is literally the
thing that separates it from free
speech.
>> Yeah. I mean, that's certainly what
they're going to use to try to separate
this from free speech. And so, we'll see
when they actually go after this. Um,
this was something though that's already
been litigated. The Supreme Court has
already said that this is protected
speech. So, h I don't know, man. This
one is if it they give a ton of latitude
and people can go and they can burn a
flag and they can make their statement
and they can protest and they're not
gone after,
>> great. But if they're like, "Well, this
could have led to an incitement because
they were doing this out in public and
we are going to throw the book at them."
>> Then this is just about trying to rally
literally around the flag to draw a line
to say that this thing is sacred as a
symbol of America and you're going to be
patriotic whether you like it or not.
And this is where I and I remember this
coming up. I think it was back in the
'9s.
>> Um,
>> it just it felt weird back then. It
feels weird now that I love that we all
make certain things sacred in our lives,
but we will get to the um the person who
burned the Quran. Did you see that?
Yeah.
>> With a flamethrower. It was like the
most hysterically American thing I've
ever seen in my life.
>> And
like when you make something sacred in
your own heart, that's one thing. when
you are trying to make it sacred to
everybody else, that's a totally
different thing. And so people are
saying she's doing this to incite
violence against that community, uh it's
also possible that there is violence
towards her from that community because
it's such a sacred symbol.
>> And so again, making something sacred in
your heart is fine, but expecting
everybody else to hold it in that same
esteem, I think, is a mistake. If we're
going to protect America, we've got to
tell a good story about what America is.
We've got to make people literally rally
around the flag because they believe in
what it stands for. You are not going to
get people there because you make it
illegal to burn. And so that's where
this just starts becoming idiotic is
like you're you are clamping down too
hard. So when you go, hey DC's way out
of control. We're going to go like
restore law and order. Okay, like
there's an argument to be made. But when
you start trying to
take something that's already been
adjudicated by the Supreme Court and
like inch a little bit closer, a little
bit closer, it it really is just I mean
I don't want to bandandy around
authoritarian. It's just overreach. It's
not going to have the effect that you
want. It's going to continue to be
divisive. It is not going to draw
America together. And if your goal is to
get people to reall in love with America
as a country, that's not the way.
>> Yeah. G, if you could put up the uh
laptop screen of the lady burning the
Quran. Um, how do we um how do we tease
these two things apart, though? Because
on one side, um, right-wing a lot of
politicians, Matt Walsh, went crazy
about flag burning and things like that.
They're all saying, "If you burn the
flag, you should go straight to jail.
Don't pass. Don't collect $200." But
then on the other side, we have a GOP
candidate literally burning something as
sacred to that community. And should it
just be, oh, they're not American. It's
cool cuz I feel like if this was a
Bible, those same people would be up in
arms. Um, and me being religious, I
definitely don't want to uh be a
hypocrite in this situation where her
burning the I don't know what she's
trying to incite. I don't know if she's
trying to say I'm going to take down
this relig like she's trying to almost
be like a villain. I don't really get
it.
>> So, play the clip because she's pretty
clear about what she's trying to say.
Like, this is a wild. your daughters
will be raped and your sons beheaded
unless we stop Islam once and for all.
>> Okay, so this this is a collision of
values. This is exactly what I'm talking
about. And so uh I'm a little bit jokey
because this is so over the top, but the
reality is a collision of values is the
thing everybody should be afraid of. It
is the thing that people will start
killing each other for. Anybody that's
confused about that, go ahead and draw a
picture of Muhammad and see how that
goes.
uh people take their value system
extremely seriously. So that's really
what you're seeing here is somebody who
in a Tik Tok fashion is realizing this
is how I'm going to get my message
across by being like bombastic dialed to
11 to say my message in the most
aggressive crystallized fashion so that
it will be emotionally triggering so
that it's going to get attention. uh
playing the hallelujah music as you
>> that was a Kanye song
>> as you as you fry the Quran is th this
is wild. So
>> okay, how do you tease the two things
apart honestly
getting into the um the collision of
values thing is the thing that that
draws these inextricably together for
me. So I don't know while they're two
examples temperamentally
arguably very different but uh it's the
same idea. You take a sacred symbol and
you say that this thing is off limits
that because I believe it to be sacred I
insist you believe it to be sacred and
this is where we're going to find a
collision because she's right that this
is a Christian nation.
Uh, but when you start talking about
David didn't pray for Goliath or
whatever she says he killed him,
>> it does sound pretty bad in terms of
what she's trying to get across. So this
is exactly like worry about the
incitement, don't worry about the symbol
that they're burning.
>> And so trying to make the American flag
like the special exception. And so
burning the Quran is fine and calling
for I mean she she gets about as close
as you're going to get to saying go kill
yourself a handful of Islamists. Uh so
this one feels pretty incitementy to me.
And so if we're going to be okay with
this but we're not going to be okay with
that had she burned the flag. That's
idiotic to me.
>> So um getting people to focus on the
core issue when values collide people
become very dangerous. You need to
protect yourself from that. Uh and then
if somebody wants to burn a Quran, let
them burn a Quran. If they want to burn
the flag, let them burn the flag. But if
they want to incite people to violence,
we already have laws against that.
>> Is there? But to the whole story, we
need to have a unified America. We need
to bring people together.
>> You can't force it, though.
>> This is the problem. So yes, we need it,
but you've got to sell it. You've got to
make America um
from a narrative perspective, easy to
track, why it's awesome, why I should
love it. You should be very careful what
you're teaching kids. If you only focus
on the negative things that have
happened in America, then of course
people are going to have a negative view
of America. So, um, you have to
propagandize yourself because you don't
want to be lying to yourself, but you do
want to you want to focus in on the
things that set you up to build in the
right way in a way that is um, going to
be prosperity for as many people as
humanly possible would be the thing that
I rounded to. And so when you create a
an internal narrative, and by the way,
for anybody that's internally freaking
out that I'm saying you're going to
intentionally like look at only certain
parts, that's all humans do all the
time. So part of having eyeballs is that
your um evolutionary the evolutionary
processes that gave you the human
animals said the vast majority the vast
vast vast vast vast vast vast majority
of things you interact with, they don't
matter. So, I'm going to limit your
world to a very small subset. So, a stat
that I've said a gazillion times, uh, we
only see 0.0035%
of the available electromagnetic
spectrum. So, evolution has said, the
vast majority of what's there just
doesn't matter. So, focus in on this.
And I would say the same is true for
people that like push the 1619 project.
They're saying, hey, all those wonderful
positive things about America, they
don't matter. Just focus on the negative
things. That has second and third order
consequences. I would say they are
terrible. But nonetheless, it's a
simplification of the American
narrative.
>> I would say, hey, do a similar thing
that they're doing, but focus on the
positive things that lead us in a good
direction that make people feel more
connected to each other, that make
people feel unified, that give them this
expansive sense of what America is.
>> Uh, and focus on that.
Even word choice already artificially
focuses people's minds in a certain way.
So, trying to get outside of a frame of
reference doesn't make any sense. you're
going to be in a frame of reference.
Build a frame of reference that is
useful. Build a frame of reference that
makes people come together because if
you don't, especially in populist
moments driven by wealth inequality,
you're just going to exacerbate the
separation of your country and it will
ultimately begin to fight against
itself. Uh, and I mean that in a
bloodshed way.
>> Yeah. Um, I want to kind of keep this uh
what America is doing and how they're
stepping on our rights conversation
going because a lot of people were
worried about the Biden regime, the
authoritarian tactics. But now with
Trump investing in private companies and
more private companies now becoming
nationalized, there is some speculation.
So this is a report from after the
cabinet meeting that he took from
reporters talking about his 10% stake in
Intel.
You called Camala Harris a communist,
but the Biden Harris administration,
they never called for nationalizing a
private company with the federal
government like you're proposing with
Intel. What do you say to some who say
this is a bit hypocritical and is this
the new way of doing industrial policy?
>> Yeah, I sure it is. I want to try and
get as much as I can and people come in
and they need something. As an example,
>> he's honest.
You can't you can't say that he doesn't
just say the thing. He says the thing. I
wonder how often Trump is outright lying
because he is so willing to say things
that I'm just like, bro, this is like
horrible thing per minute. Like he he
will hit a density of horrible thing
that is so high that I'm like that just
I'm I was about to go after you for that
one, but then you said this one and now
that and
>> and you're still talking.
>> Yeah. It's like it it so I don't know,
man. I'm sure he does lie. Every [ __ ]
politician lies, but he also just says
the things, man. It is wild. Is this the
new industrial policy? Yeah, sure. Yep.
I want to get as much I want to get as
much as I can. He actually said it.
That's wild. That is wild, dude. Does he
This is like historically illiterate.
So, I've really tried to map like what
he's doing here. And the only thing I
can think is that he is so his frame of
reference is so entrepreneurial that
he's like, "Bro, I've done deals like
this." No, no, no. Drew, Drew, Drew,
Drew, Drew, I'm going to get you a piece
of this. I got you, bro. As the American
people, we're going to get you stuff.
This is going to be dope. I'm going to
get you some of TikTok. I'm going to get
you some of Intel. I'm going to start
like hardball negotiating these guys.
And he's not realizing, yeah, but as the
government, this hits different. And now
all of a sudden you become they are the
US government. If they get 10% they are
now the single largest shareholder of
Intel. Now they don't have voting power.
But guess what Drew? When the president
of the United States calls you into the
Oval Office and is like, "Bitch, I own
10% of this company. You better [ __ ]
hop to this cuz it'd be re It'd just be
a real tragedy if some tariffs showed up
on your door tomorrow, wouldn't it,
Drew?" Like to your point like the
government can start acting like a
gangster
>> and I it's like
>> I think he's so just he realizes the
utility of authority
>> from an entrepreneurial standpoint that
he doesn't realize that you cross like a
really weird chasm when you go into the
government and when you try to carry
over some entrepreneurial principles
it's incredible. when you try to carry
all entrepreneurial principles, it
becomes maddening. And so this is like
this is if this is because it's purely
national security.
>> Okay. Like if I were convinced, okay,
>> got it. Like there are going to be times
where you have to do stuff like that.
We've already done it historically,
including bailing out the banks and all
of that.
>> Uh but historically, this has always
been there's been some big crisis. We
had to address the big crisis and then
we move forward. this is not that
uh on its face. It could become that as
we go down the road. Um, if in the
battle for AI with China, like this
really ends up being a chip war and if
China really is on the precipice of
either sweating Taiwan to the point
politically where they just start
listening to China more than they listen
to the US or if China just outright goes
and takes over Taiwan, yes, we would
need a backup plan. And that is the what
the administration has said is this is
about making sure from a national
security perspective that we have access
to chips. then people will push them.
But hold on. Like you're negotiating
increased access to chips from Nvidia.
Like what are you talking about? And
their punchline is only chips that are
down the tech stack. They're no longer
the cutting edge. We're not worried
about that. We're using that in leverage
as leveraged with China partly to slow
down their own development which will be
good for everybody uh just because they
won't need them as much and partly to
get other concessions. So, it's like I
don't want to pretend that this isn't
inside of a context that there's some
logic to that and you can get why they
would be doing what they're doing. But
at the same time, like watch the
pattern. And the pattern with Trump is
it's a business guy who loves deals.
He's legitimately excited. Part of it is
he just he wants to throw his weight
around. He wants to get things done his
way. And part of it is I legitimately
think this is a guy who loves America,
loves the American people, wants to do
something good for them and doesn't
realize that this puts them in an
increasingly dangerous position. You
centralize more power, you start
becoming more socialist. It's like you
don't out China China, you out America
China. And so with us going in the wrong
direction with so many of his instincts,
it's not ideal. We'll get back to the
show in just a second, but first, let's
talk about the algorithm gap. The most
successful people operate on
decision-making algorithms you don't
have access to. While you're making
choices by gut feel, they're running
systematic frameworks that eliminate
guesswork. Take Ray Alio's book,
Principles. It reveals the exact
decision-making algorithms he used to
build the world's largest hedge fund.
But it's 600 pages of dense frameworks
mixed with personal stories. That's
where Short Form comes in. Their guide
to principles doesn't just summarize it.
It extracts Dallio's core algorithms and
shows you how to actually apply them in
your life. New guides drop every week.
Business, psychology, productivity, all
the systematic thinking tools that
separate high performers from everyone
else. Stop making decisions by
guesswork. Click the link below and get
a free trial and three months off the
annual plan to access the
decision-making systems behind every
major breakthrough.
>> And now, let's get back to the show.
>> Yeah, I want to keep it this going cuz
he does say why he did it in comparison
to the Biden administration and the
chips act.
>> And I have a uh I have any form of a a
stop gap where I can stop somebody from
doing something, right? I have a
covenant and an agreement and they come
to me and they say would like you to uh
would like to do something but you have
us restricted. Uh if I do that they
usually have to pay. Now in the case of
Intel was interesting but I hope I'm
going to have many more cases like it.
Uh Intel came in. I met with a
gentleman. I had a lot of respect for
him. He came in under a little bit of a
cloud. Uh I liked his story.
>> I love that. A little bit of the cloud.
they they were in trouble. Do I like
pressure him to step down for national
security reasons or do I just take a
piece of his company? And the fact that
he's saying like, I hope that there are
many more like this. What does that
mean? You hope that there are many more
industries that are a national security
risk. I don't. Uh you hope that there
are more companies that are in trouble
and so you have leverage over them? I
don't. Like what what exactly do you
mean by hope there are more things like
this? What I think it is is I hope there
are many more companies that I have
leverage over that I can get a piece of.
And so it's like uh what constitutes
leverage? If somebody is advantaged by
your tariffs, do you now have leverage
over them and they should be grateful? I
think he would even if he won't say yes
out loud. I think he believes yes. I
think this is a guy who in a business
context, Drew, one of the most important
things as an entrepreneur you have to be
able to do is recognize where you have
leverage. And by the way, not just
recognize where you have it. You have to
position yourself to get it. So if he's
now got the controls of the US
government, he's like, "Okay, just he
has a process that he's trained himself
to run in his brain non-stop.
>> I need to build leverage. Some leverage
that I know how I'm going to use right
now today. And some leverage I don't
know how I'm going to use, but I know
it'll be advantageous to me down the
road somewhere."
>> And if he starts doing that, he's going
to realize, "Oh man, I can pull a lot of
levers. Like these do a lot of things."
like when you're the president, like you
can really do some [ __ ]
>> And so he can start putting himself in a
position where he has tremendous power
over our uh all of our capitalist
entities. And if he's looking at Xi and
he's like, "Yo, I really do like that he
just puts a an official in the company
and it's like, uh, okay, listen, car
manufacturers, I'm going to need you
guys all to vote as one block because
I'm going to use you uh as negotiating
power against India, US, whatever. Um,
so here's the party line. Do as you're
[ __ ] told or suddenly you're going to
find yourself being re-educated." And
then they just do it. And that's the
kind of thing that I could see Trump
being like, "That's pretty dope." Like,
I just listen, I'm not trying to take
over these industries. Xi doesn't take
over the industry. He lets them compete.
But boy oh boy,
>> I just have some notes. I have some
notes.
>> I I have some notes. And you know, look,
don't be intimidated by all the guys
with the guns. You know what I mean?
Like just they're just notes, Drew. Just
take the good ones, everybody. Uh, so
yeah, I unfortunately can see him really
enjoying like, oh, America, we got you
10% of this and we got you 5% of that
and we got you 50% of TikTok and and
right now I almost feel worse that they
realize that it's not going to be
popular to start a sovereign wealth fund
where they take your tax dollars and
they buy something. But he is expecting
it to be very popular that he can get
you stuff for free. And so he's going to
be looking for those leverage points
which all look like him hitting a big
stick going, "Hey."
>> Uh, so yeah, I hate that.
>> Uh, okay. So I'm I'm conflicted again.
I've been reading Atlas Shrugged later
and the entire inciting incident is one
of the minds got nationalized. So I'm
automatically like government control
bad.
>> Yep.
>> On one side we have the sovereign wealth
fund. Hypothetically speaking, it
includes 500 billion in tariff revenue,
10% of Intel, 20% of Tik Tok, 5% of
these other organizations, and that's
growing in a stock market, in a
portfolio, etc.
>> On the other side, to your point, should
the government be in bed with these
people? The CHIPS, we put up hundred
billion dollars on initial estimates
that's been paid so far, and with that,
we didn't quote unquote get anything
back. That's Trump's words. So instead
of me just giving you money or investing
in a resource or investing in an
industry, at least now I have a
percentage of it and I'm bu I'm on the
upswing. I have the upside uh leverage.
>> Yeah. But so this is where people really
rightfully start going crazy about the
idea of corruption. And so part of what
makes the government work is that the
government isn't getting anything back
from the things that they they try to
create the soil in which their um people
can thrive. Got
>> once you understand the government's job
is not to feed the government. is not to
grow the government. It's to support the
people. Then all of a sudden, you're
like, "Okay, I get what this is." So,
you want to create the soil. So, the
government should think of itself as my
job is to make sure that the soil has a
ton of nutrients so that the farmers can
go out and do their thing. And so, where
do we need to put a little bit of
nutrients to make sure that those things
can grow and then you want to see them
grow? And if you start getting a
monopoly or something like that,
consider those weeds or consider that a
locust swarm and I've got to go deal
with that. Cool. that yeah 100% the
government should be doing that. What
the government shouldn't be doing is
betting on farms and saying I want this
farm to win because this farm is a
little bit better for me and then me
suddenly becomes well it starts by
saying me as the American people then me
becomes me the politician and that's
where all of this stuff gets dangerous
and so again China is showing you what
that model looks like and my fear is
because it is successful there's no
denying that that people will look at
that and go oh I want to do
And I would say that China is better,
way better for politicians than it is
for the average person. Now, we are
about to find out how true that is
because remember this system for a long
time was starving tens of millions of
people to death. America has never done
that.
>> Uh so black mark on China. But then
China pulled people out of poverty
faster than we did. So that's a win in
China's column. Uh but now that
Xihinping is in power and nobody can
stop him. This is the thing that
democracies are meant to protect against
cuz democracies are worse when you have
uh a string of like so-s so leaders,
right? Like, oh god, we're just pulling
back and forth from one side to another.
And when you've got somebody like
Deniaing who's like yanking China out of
poverty, you're like, yo, like we're
falling behind. Like these guys are
like, they're really [ __ ] killing it.
We're over here. Like this sucks. Like
we have constant gridlock. We're not
able to get any momentum. Everybody's
thinking short term. I don't want to be
a part of this. This is super lame. I
want to be or even like people looking
at the UAE like bro like we got to be
like the UAE. We got to be like China.
Like these guys are moving a lot faster.
And it's like when one of those
[ __ ] breaks bad, they start
killing people left, right, and center.
And they will take you down the darkest
of dark roads for like a hundred years.
This is this is the thing that we're
protecting against. So people need to
understand it's entirely possible that
Xi is about to move them backwards like
70 years
>> because he has like real Leninist
Marxist theories and those have proven
throughout history to just be an
absolute bloodbath. Uh Xi is about
reconsolidating power thinking that your
entrepreneurs are getting too uppidity
and literally re-educating them. So
that's where it's like, hey, be careful
because the if you could have a
benevolent dictator, like if Jesus came
down from heaven and he was willing to
run America, oh cool. But alas, it tends
not to be that way. And this is why
people say absolute power corrupts.
Absolutely. And so once you have
somebody in that role who is not
responsible to anything other than their
ability to maintain like cohesion, they
will maintain cohesion through violence
and it just it it just is man over and
over and over and over and over. So
that's what the American system is meant
to protect against.
>> So diving into that um US warships did
sail off of Venezuela as tension soar
between Trump and Maduro regime u over
his alleged cartel accusations. We tie
that with the most recent Joe Rogan
interview where I forgot the guest's
name. Uh, Ed Cderon was just talking
about how they're sending uh, US drone
intelligence agencies are sending drones
over Mexico to kind of map out the
region. So, Trump is trying to take on
cartels, but it seems more research
investigate versus we're actively
putting boots on the ground.
>> Bro, we're seven months in.
>> Yeah.
>> Like we we got almost three and a half
more years. That investigation going to
lead somewhere. So, ooh, now if he if I
love the like, hey, we want to partner
with Mexico. We want to help them solve
this problem. And if Mexico is
receptive, that would be wonderful.
>> If they are not receptive, at some point
you do have to have like a check in
yourself of like uh border would be a
nice easy one. Dear cartels,
I highly encourage you to stay in Mexico
because oh dear God, if you cross that
[ __ ] border, we will bring unholy
hell down upon your head and then make
good on the threat. I love that. But the
Mexico doesn't want you here. The
Mexican president has said as much. And
you've still got drones like flying over
their airspace.
That does not seem like the play. That's
somebody again who's just trusting
himself a little too much. who thinks,
"Look, I got this. I'm the daddy of
Europe. I want to be the daddy of North
America." As a PSA, remember, Mexico is
North America. Uh, I want to be the
daddy of North America. Maybe I want to
be the daddy of Central and South
America. So, um, just as I don't want
China throwing undue weight around the
world, I want America to be seen as,
hey, everybody, we're your ally. We're
going to police the seas. We are going
to expect a bit of a tithe for that to
make sure that commerce can flow easily.
Uh we want to be a good partner to
everybody. We understand that you have
autonomy, but we want to be the um
>> the big brother that people feel like is
looking out for them, not the big
brother that's like, "Oh, you've got
oil. You need some freedom." It's like
that whole vibe that we spread for
decades is definitely not the vibe. And
now the like um we're tired of being
taken uh advantage of and we're going to
start slapping people around is also not
the vibe. So draw boundaries, not just
borders, but draw boundaries. So, hey,
not going to be taken advantage of. Got
that. Um, but it's not, this is one of
the things you guys will see in the Lynn
Alden interview. It's not that easy. We
wanted trade deficits with people
because it actually allowed us to get
more people to use the dollar as a
reserve currency, which allowed us to
export more of our uh inflation. So,
there it's not like we weren't getting
anything out of it. Anyway, I want to
see us position ourselves as the big
brother who's tough as hell. uh nobody
[ __ ] with, but at the same time like
wants you, dear little brother, to
thrive and do well and um we're not just
gonna smash and grab [ __ ]
>> Yeah, it it seems like we have the right
intention in mind going against the war
in the cartels, like claiming war on the
cartels. But it it is giving me war
against terrorism where it could just be
perpetual debt, money like grab, not
money grab, but just like a hole that we
throw money. We spent so much money in
Iraq just to leave and nothing be
changed effectively from 10 years ago,
20 years ago. I don't want that to then
happen on the Venezuelan coast, the
Mexico border, things like that.
>> And we unfortunately have a long history
of thinking if we just get rid of this
one regime. Now, he was measured in
Iran.
>> So, that gives me a lot of hope.
>> Like the way he handled Iran, I had no
>> strike got out. That's it.
>> And that's it. We're done. Uh, and so if
there are things going on with Venezuela
that I'm unaware of and he's got to do a
show of force or something, fine. But,
um, invading Venezuela, no thanks. Uh,
rocketing them into oblivion, I'd have
to know a lot more information before
I'd be comfortable with that. Right now,
that would just seem like really
unhinged [ __ ] Uh, but sure, there are
things that could be true where I would
go, "Okay, yeah, fine." But, uh, I don't
have any of that information right now.
We'll be back with the show in just a
second. But first, let's talk about the
enemy that is absolutely destroying your
portfolio. It's not the market. It's not
inflation even. It's you. Your emotions
are sabotaging your wealth. Fear makes
you sell when markets crash. Greed makes
you buy when everything's overpriced.
Alio Capital's AI, though, doesn't
panic. When markets tank, Alio's
Altitude AI analyzes inflation data,
interest rates, and global risk. While
you're stressed about headlines, the AI
is adapting your portfolio based on
actual economic forces. Whether markets
go up or down, Alio's AI stays
disciplined. It's like having a
professional trader who never sleeps,
never panics, and never gets greedy.
Download the Alio app in the App Store
or Google Play, or text Tom 511511.
Investing involves risks, including
potential loss of principle. Past
performance does not guarantee results.
C terms and conditions. Fax fees may
apply. This is a paid advertisement. And
now, let's get back to the show.
>> You brought this up in the intro. Um,
and it is true. The Cracker Barrel has
rescended their uh new rebrand. They put
the Cracker back next to the barrel.
There it is.
>> He's back. And I I wanted to talk about
this, but instead of getting into the
minutia of like this specific business,
woes, there was a Tik Tocker that kind
of broke down all of the remodifications
of a lot of our fast foods
>> tend crashing out over capitalism. Let's
hear it.
>> So this, by the way, is all because of
Wall Street. This is all because of the
stock market, because of investors,
private equity, and the demand to get
more value to shareholders. This has
nothing to do with wokeness. And by the
way, the thing that he's talking this
the this is everything went from like
these super custom things to like these
gray boxes. So everything getting
simplified. He's not wrong about this.
>> You stupid sleeping babies. Okay, let me
explain this to you. McDonald's the way
McDonald's is structured is McDonald's
owns the land underneath this building.
They own the land. They're the biggest
land holders in the United States when
it comes to commercial properties. The
franchises then rent the building on top
of them. And you know what happens?
Sometimes McDonald's go out of business.
And when McDonald's goes out of
business, they want to put a different
business in there and they want to sell
the land underneath it. Well, guess
what? When you have a building that is
can only be a McDonald's or can only be
a Pizza Hut or can only be a Cracker
Barrel or only be a Taco Bell. Guess
what? It's harder to sell those
businesses. So, every business has
slowly been turning into a gray or beige
box because you know what happens when
you put a vape store inside of an old
Pizza Hut? We all call it, "Oh, the vape
store inside of the old Pizza Hut."
>> Now, in the future, they'll just
>> uh
Who do you think he's mad at, Drew? He
doesn't know who he's mad at. Like, he
thinks he knows. He thinks he's mad at
Wall Street, but who's he really mad at?
>> Inflation. I don't know.
>> The person that wants three burgers for
99 cents. Like it's a good default. It
it is a good default. It's like my wife
says a quote and she's like, "You know
where that quote's from?" I'm like,
"Friends."
>> It's like you just might as well default
to friends. Like whatever quote my wife
is doing, it's guaranteed to be from
friends. Uh so
>> he's mad at the person that wants three
cheeseburgers for 99 cents.
>> Correct. So everybody wants things
cheap. So the business is like, "Oh,
cool. I know like so when I'm teaching
entrepreneurship and impact theory
university, sign up immediately." Um, I
am always trying to get them to identify
the hard. Like find the hard. When you
find the hard, go solve that thing.
That's how you start a business. If
there's nothing hard for you to solve,
there's probably not a big business
opportunity there. You're probably
somewhere with high sex appeal. So like
game development,
>> if you're not doing something new and
original, you're going to have a very
hard time. So the hard thing is finding
something new and original to do.
>> Uh, so in anything in Quest, finding the
hard was manufacturing the equipment.
So, you've got to find all of that
stuff. Um, otherwise, people are just
going to move on to the next thing
because you haven't done anything for
them that like businesses solve
problems, period. So, the problem that a
McDonald's solves is I'm going to
provide you food that you like to eat at
a price that you're willing to pay in a
way that's super convenient. So when
they did it in the beginning, it was
like, I'm going to get you food that you
want to eat at a price that you're
willing to pay in a way that's
convenient, and I'm going to entertain
your kids. Now, once and I'm going to
entertain your kids stop being
profitable, then it doesn't make sense.
The consumer is telling you, I don't
care about that. I care about the first
three things. So,
>> hold on, let me let me jump in there
because I know we we talk about like
consumers vote with their feet, things
like that. So if McDonald's after they
removed place, everybody stopped going
to McDonald's. They would have brought
it right back
>> and what people and what they would do
is they would go, "Oh, uh, in a given
area, like when I was a kid, not all
McDonald's had a play place." And so
McDonald's corporate is looking at that
and going, "Do we make more money in the
places with play places or not?" And for
a while, I'm sure they did. And then
over time it stopped. And so they were
like, "Okay, cool. People don't care
about that. So now we're going to swap
that out and all the ones in the future
are going to be without. Then they start
doing okay. Uh when one of these goes
out of business, like every time we
think about opening a new location,
we're going to think about the full life
cycle. How many years do we expect it to
be there? Uh at what point do we expect
that this might go away? When it goes
away, how are we going to be able to
flip it? They will know all of these
details. And all of those details will
be priced in to the cost of a burger. M.
>> And so what they realize is, "Oh, cool.
To to give you the thing that you were
telling me, dear customer, that you
want, you want the cheap burger. Got it.
Heard." So that means that I have to
make the businesses look like this. So
they make a couple businesses look like
that. And they go, "Did revenue
decline?" No, it did not. Great. Nobody
cared about the unique roof. Cool. Easy
peasy. And so now that's going to be
more profitable. Now I can charge less
for the burger or keep the burger at low
price. And so I get it. it like
especially he's a guy of a certain age.
If you grew up with the cool roofs like
you get kind of bummed that like it's
all looking gray boxy but dude even in a
video game when you're developing the
video game you constantly have to think
about CPU resources GPU resources like
am I going to melt this computer? So all
of a sudden you start going hey that
texture on the grass I'm going to use
that texture on like this creature's
fur. I'm going to use that texture on
like this distant mountain. and you just
try to have very few master textures
that are everywhere even though they
look slightly differently in different
places. Long story how you do it, but
like that becomes a game of optimization
and so and that you're trying to keep
the cost of the game development down.
So you're going to recycle assets, tweak
it a little bit, change the color,
whatever, whatever. Uh and this is how
you keep the cost down. So it's like,
dude, you're money has physics,
businesses have physics, and he's like
arguing against the thing where the
consumer is the problem. Because there
is a greedy capitalist right now being
like, "Yo, uh, dope roofs. Like, let
that come back in style. So that'll be
my differentiator against McDonald's.
I'm going to [ __ ] hit them. I'm going
to have a play place. This is going to
be the dopest [ __ ] ever. All I have to
do is solve the insurance problem."
Word. And the problem is solving the
insurance problem isn't going to help
you because people don't trust a
restaurant with their kids like that
anymore. So parents aren't like, I'm
gonna take my kid to [ __ ] McDonald's.
But if somebody's smart, they're looking
at, okay, wealth inequality, yep, it's
doing its thing. Okay, okay, people are
getting poorer and poor. So now how do I
go serve the poor? This was like Magic
Johnson, [ __ ] brilliant. He would go
into underserved areas and he would
build like amazing [ __ ] and he made
himself ridiculously wealthy doing that.
So trust me, at all times there are
capitalists looking for that
opportunity. And if a red roof with
weird [ __ ] shingles was it, people
would do it. So he's mad at Wall Street,
but the reality is this is just people
trying to pass on the savings.
>> Okay, so this is my thing and I need to
put these feelings somewhere. So I'm
going to ask the most capitalist
capitalist that I know. Um
>> I think I was just insulted, chat. I'm
pretty sure that was a slur.
uh
right now turning your building into a
gray box. It's almost like you're
hedging your bets. If this does go bad,
I am going to have to sell this
building. This is going to make it
easier to sell. It's going to make it
easier for my exit. This is the second
found the second CEO problem. Like Ray
Croc loved the golden arches. It was his
idea to do the land thing. So he was the
one like everybody's going to see a
golden arches from a mile away. You're
going to see it. You're going to smell
it. It's iconic. the So then this other
guy comes in who's a Wall Street uh
investment banker or he's a consultant
for the last two years. He's like, "Nah,
forget that. We're going to make it a
gray box so we can sell it and increase
our stock price." So to me, he is the
bad guy because the founder wanted the
red and the yellow and the arches and
all these things. What happened to I
feel like Silicon Valley gets away with
this cuz Mark Zuckerberg cannot turn a
profit for three 30 years and then come
back like, "Okay, now we can put on ads
and now it's going to pop." Whereas
they're allowed to maintain their
culture in order for the betterment of
the product long term where a lot of
these box stores are like, "Nah, [ __ ]
it. Let's just go straight gray box and
just increase stock price now as opposed
to making it fun." Like in the '9s, the
purple and blue Taco Bell was hot. Like
that was cool. Like the the Playplace
was somewhere to, you know, I mean, I
think if a Play showed up tomorrow,
there'll be so many people that like,
"Oh yeah, I like that. I'll go to a play
place." But it's it's not there anymore.
So people don't go to it and they say,
"You see, we don't care about it." But
like, y'all took it away from us. We
didn't have an option. So it rant, but
you get what I'm saying? Like
>> yes. And I love this. This is so
interesting. Okay, we'll see if chat
cares about this, but uh my speedrun on
that is uh you've put your finger on the
exact right thing, which is when a
founder starts a company, they are
almost always missiondriven. And that
mission will make them do really
counterintuitive things. Those
counterintuitive things are exactly what
makes a company valuable. So uh at
Quest, we started that with the idea of
ending metabolic disease. And so instead
of doing what everybody else did, which
was put high fructose corn syrup in
their bar when they realized you can't
run it on the equipment, we said, "Well,
hold on. That's not our mission. So
we're going to do this thing that nobody
would ever fund because it seemed
completely moronic. And we're going to
engineer our own equipment." Of course,
that's exactly one of the things that
led to the company being very
successful. Cool.
Brilliant. Uh, impact theory. I start
mindset. It's what I'm known for. Cool.
Do my thing. And channel explodes. COVID
hits and I'm like, "Hold on. These
people that I love and care about are
about to get like run over by something
and I want to make financial content to
help them out." And then my own team was
like, "What are you doing? Uh, this is
crazy. You're going to wildly damage the
channel." And I did. And I took our
revenue down. And it was brutal from a
revenue perspective, but from a
self-respect perspective, it felt
awesome because I was like, "This really
matters to me. I really now feel like
I'm helping people." The only reason I
did mindset was I believed it was a
thing with my talent, intelligence,
skill set. This is the best thing I can
do to help people.
>> Uh now that this is happening, this is
the best thing that I can do to help
people. And so from a business
perspective, if I were a public company,
that would have been like the board
would have ousted me. They would have
found somebody else. Like that would
have been insane. They never would have
gone through that. Uh so 100% founders
are able to do things because they're
driven by something other than just
profit. Mhm.
>> Um but ultimately a company has to stay
in business and so over time like even
look at Apple over time they go into a
revenue optimization phase of their
development. That's where Apple is now.
And I mean in to give Tim Cook his
flowers he has made Apple way more money
than Steve Jobs ever did. But Steve Jobs
put them in a place that they could
revenue maximize. And if you had if Tim
Cook had founded the company, it never
would ha