E134: Ukraine counteroffensive, China tensions, COVID Patient Zero, RFK Jr reaction & more
01:33:32 Share

So way to second you guys. I saw that you were at a coto conference or a tpg conference.

You're at some .

banking conference. Sex is and in a large investors in a hedge and private equity.

there are a fund und some.

It's a really big word was that a MIT is meeting.

well, I like a two day conference and sent a barba nice.

They've done a .

number of years in a row. Now, last year, brand, I went and we met with S, B, F. directly. That S, P, F story.

No, let's go. Who's got crazy, Harry? Now, you or S, P, F, give us a quick.

Take that hat off for a second. Take that long. Clair off first.

second. Let's get aside by side. Oh my god, sex is using no product. It's not that bad. You starting to look like the apple of, like cena pop team from stars. I mean, people are having a field that was a crazy.

But what was the vibe? If you said there was a vive two years ago? The vibe was crypt.

omani. S, B, F. Was the bell of the ball. I suppose we'll be the bell of the ball when he goes in the whole as well.

And just like he's getting off.

he's getting up I thought getting off.

I fix in is the fix .

god he get I agree.

Can you imagine if he gets off?

He's always this protective hundred. Biden.

here we go. Okay, everybody, three birds, not here this week. Insert jokes and conspiracy theory for the midds. There is going to be about eight thousand messages on a sub redit about freeburg missing this week and sex missing last week. I let you guys, uh, read into IT.

But what would you say? Brad brager back, of course, if best bra, what would you say the vibe was at this one? If IT was S B F. Lunacy two years ago, what was the five this year?

Well, you know, first they put an incredible vents called the east med's west and IT was really about bringing you know C E O S and founders from china to the states and connecting them with, uh, founders and c is in the united states um listen, I think it's suber right. There's a recognition that we've seen about in the public markets, you know, off of this devastation in twenty twenty two.

But I think, listen, they gave a great tough love speech discussion with the fourteen hundred unicorns that are out there and they said, do not expect your unprofitable tech company to bounce like one of the magnificent seven right. Those are highly profitable companies, traded one hundred and twenty times earning. And if you are burning cash today there, you can't come back to the well.

So you need to either figure out how to get profit or figure out how to get fit, or you need to sell your business because, you know, there's not an endless stream of money. So I I thought I was a sober view. Uni summers was there.

And I think a lot of the people called twenty two, right? We're looking for a hard landing in q one of this year probably including you know the Larry was probably more than that care. And I think everybody still use this distribution of probabilities over the course the next four quarters.

And you know whether struck and Miller turn like this morning on C M B, C, or whether it's Larry summer, they're all so well. We could thirty percent chance of hard landing you for you want. So I I would say I was so.

yeah, I can tell you with so. Bx, but you want to something?

Well, I would say last year I was suber in a different way because you can remember in the first half of two huge decline in the markets around gross dogs because interest strates had started going up with the holder gym change. But I don't think founders had internalized the way that I applied to them. And then the thing that has happened over the past year is that sales have been hit.

You know, every software company and I know is the forecasting down. It's so much hard to grow. Customers are consolidating vendors, sharpening their pencils. Seed expansions been replaced with .

c contraction negotiations are hard, right? Yes.

the have much to ofer IT. Let's say a year ago you two aces, now the new three x if you can go two x in this environment, it's spaces is growing through x before. It's funny to me that how much the fed actions impact buying behavior, that's the thing. And psychology is distinctly .

different ah the psychology .

really is different. I mean, we knew that the feds behavior influence valuations and sort of capital markets. But the way that IT influences a business outlook and how willing companies are to spend .

money and cow is no different. I see billing fire festival to do the food. What is this? I mean, coach should be ashamed of themselves.

Look at this for you. Some vegetable soup with the broad street out. super.

So.

I mean, IT looks like a dog.

Way to the bathroom. I open our lunch box and were like, let's go somewhere else. We know.

my god, go on budget. Wow.

look a surprise, something to put a surprise in our .

IT looks like freeze birds dog for a surprise in the culture lunch box. wow. Well, listen, it's good, coach. O, L, P, should be very happy looking at that seven dollar large that they put out there. I mean.

rich, we tell the S B, F story from last year, summer. I mean, last year we talk about the maybe found hand internalize year, but the markets are corrected. But the one founder who was super bullish, an optimistic and talking about how he was spring money all over the place, and he was acquiring companies and who was followed around by million and had everyone like A A beehive surrounding him and trying to talk to, was S, P F.

And so I remember, yeah, so remember thinking, like, who's going to this year's S. P. F? You somebody here.

we started.

somebody with an AI company was set up and there. So basically the coto conference went .

from bullet shit to dogship to me. Right thing about this, you two guys, brad is like looking prd is so comfortable, proud, like I like this invite we know what about go. Or their budget.

They do put on a really good of a credible firm. And I think that the man they gave the founders this year and last year was great is actually really appropriate. Whether founder choose to listen is a different story, but the message they been conveying is similar. The message we've been conveying for the last you're in a half.

hate you off anymore, jokes we can make about coach since you and I get invited to nothing.

No, I mean, i'm not making fun of code. I was just making fun of the fact that we went for literally full ship with S, B, F to what looks like dog.

By the way, I bet they would to invite you if you wanted to go.

I'm pretty sure they would send ten invitations if I if I even think the desire to go. But i'm in milan right now.

The point is very popular there. By the way.

I know you did a focus group tell everybody, and can we play the focus group or was said.

I think we can play well. Just a fan. A fan came up to me. I mean, what I say, fan.

this is like a very high profile person.

This woman works at net lix in. Her husband is the founder of a startup, SHE said. He is a fan of questions about IT focus because, you know, we've been having this debate of the last couple of weeks about what issues wish we be talking about and certain people on the pod never wanted discuss politics.

They sound like, I only want to discuss politics. I just, I want to exclude IT. I think we should be talking about whatever the biggest issues are in the world.

And then he given a weak current events, whether it's business markets or politics, and SHE confirmed that was basically right. Don't change IT. So I don't know why we would want to change the form I left for the pot at this point .

every week as there is a group of people who are like, stop talking about politics. And then there's another group of people and their feedback is, what did you talk about? Hundred five in ukraine, ukraine, putin, china, whatever.

And so the docket is the docket just to let the audience know, not that it's like all that big of deal should be fairly obvious. Everybody has equal input on the docket. So it's not like anybody owns the docket if you want to talk, talk with them.

But some people want to not talk about politics. Some people wanted talk about a lot of politics. The magnificent seven, for those people who didn't catch the reference, is, I think, something crame has been talking about on C, M, C. Seven stocks make up the most, most of the games to share, meta, tesla in video and amazon, alphabet, microsoft and apple.

Can I take guys my welcome back to my long story?

Oh yeah.

absolutely to back in the one .

for the say a chef steff know and if you could stay high to um finally all my friends Butlers.

everybody can you back in italy because the button are gone.

I'm working for my officers, but this morning I went to copa, which is my style, is my hair dresser. Oh, and the thing is just like a higher chen, the hair dresses and bert, he's like, sort of top of the and that has first tips with Roberta. And I have the other guy whose excEllent as image jacket o yes, you guys will see jacket o in a few weeks. Anyways, the best thing about the haircuts at this place, copyright, is you get a hair fluffy, which means that as jacki o berto cut your hair, a guy comes, and he just like, he like, does this.

and then he'd like that he your cutting your hair in a very.

he loves you here.

he was very uncomfortable.

It's laughing that doesn't exist anywhere that never get disrupted by A I and it's incredible.

A hair styling .

the air flower. The flopper is like a fifty year old .

t doesn't ow in sex roles. Then you're gone to need two fluffs with that help. I need one on inside. I mean, the times are getting crazy exacts.

Tell me if you want to know to cut ch your hair because when you come, because he will do IT, he'll do an incredibly job and allow him to bring the hair of but I listen.

I think we just going back to the code to them. I know where in a high interest rate lunch environment, the heart environment is hard right now, everybody. But we did get the feedback. Let's play the feedback.

Hey, guys, method. Could you summit and just met to find here who wants to explain the magic of the pod? Because you guys keep writing to change things and make things up.

So world my hasn't is to your podcast too much legally. And there is this incredible magic that the four of you have of the red party back in four. It's super informative that your olds that are rooting for characters, almost.

So it's almost like a ported show in some way. So I have my favorite character, my husband, this favor character. I want to, who's who I want you all for, stay together and keep doing the show, but it's fantastic. And you we love IT.

And if you work at a next lix.

I work at networks back today. I could you show, so is selling David tanna get that magic? You can put any number strips together, but once you get the cast on the floor and actually start getting, you know that chemistry going, that when the magic happens and you guys can 没有 给对 呀。

that's a professional right there. So stop screen with the formula. stop.

Proc, I mean.

the camera really does that. Ten pounds.

Doesn't I take two things away in this smoth? Number one, she's much more charismatic on camera than sax. SHE stole the show. She's delighted. And then to that sweater, will lord.

the water is fantastic. No, the sweater is fantastic. The shirts fantastic. I just think they may not have been. I don't think the intention was the mesh, the two together, but a .

cream color .

sweater. You can wear a red check. sure. This is not.

Yeah, yeah. I agree.

Striped.

anyway, it's A, I mean.

that looks like you're wearing an italian table cloth under there from a picture, a combine with like a eight thousand dollars. Swears are great, but the hair in the hair and control.

I think there is fantastic.

I do, do not.

I'll let .

jacki .

o to her. Brit.

这是。

We, man, give.

We open sources to the .

fans and got. Let's like about the sucky on cage match.

Oh yeah, oh my god, this is work for my friend here.

Yeah, I don't like .

on is completely up to date on what kind of shapes zuck is in. Zc is in tremendous shape. He's got like a dojo at his house.

He's been getting training in, you know, mix martial arts from you are competing in events. Zc is in tremendous shape. And no, you now ella's a big, a ella's, a monster.

I have time to work out like this. I hope you get some sort of gracy on your team to train you off for this thing. Also, iran has a neck injury that he got from the suo thing years ago. Yes, and he's that have surgeries on IT. So IT really suck if that would get retried.

Here's the thing though, he did take on a summer restless er, we were there for that at his birthday party and he held his own against the giant suma slr, if you want, does get on top of and do the war on top of. Zuck has no chance he will .

get worse.

You're telling me what he should do is abandoned the mission to mars. Yes, stop electrifying the world totally and stop free internet and so he can beat up, suck.

I. Mean.

if this is the domus fucking idea i've ever heard of.

my oh my god.

I love the painter between the two of them. And let's just say we can all agree out of all of the companies, right? There's only one contender to suck getting fit, right?

Getting a company fit, getting himself fit, is IT on, yeah, seventy five, eighty percent of the people gone. A product velocity is on fire at twitter. So this is this should be a cage match between the two who have defined this error of getting fit.

Let's get to the docket here.

What the fuck are you're .

talking about is using the fit.

the guy burned a quarter trillion dollars and then found a way to stop IT.

That's very .

different than firing on all cylinders in three companies .

and all the, and by the way.

the only one of anybody, I think that no, well, maybe sex kind of like you.

If you've got like a fast set running, you are spilling over the sink and then you turn IT off. That doesn't make your firefighter. Make your plumber.

I feature a bathtub. Stop spending money on there is feature of bathtub. Or when you get into IT in the water gushes so violent over the over the outside of IT.

And then there's a drain at the top as well as the bottom. So eventually just stops. Yes.

you could be in, yes.

but char A S, A good point, which is, look, he wants a big guy. If he got training in M, M. A, i'm sure he'd. You fine, but we don't want elon spending two hours a day for the next six months or whatever because that to me, I guess, for a while, couple many years.

Yeah, there are sense of updates. This a war tween russia and the ukraine were the invasion of ukraine by russia. You wrote a piece of about IT in what was at the federal list, I think, this week, titled the truth about ukraine falling, falling counter offensive and the peace that could have been once he gives another review. What you wrote and what your take is on the state of affairs, right?

Well, that the thing has been going on sense around june, forth of june, faith, this long awaited ukrainian encounter offensive, this has been talked for a long time, as is going to a reverse russian territorial gains.

A ukraine is gna use all of this modern western equipment, these lepper tanks that have come from germany and brad least from the united states, and a lot of other nato or american equipment, and they're going to push russia out of their country. This has been told to us since the fall last year, since that of car key kind of offensive, produce some ukrainian territorial gains. You've had former generals like ben hoges and portrays say that this counteroffensive going to be highly successful.

But where IT stands right now is that around eighteen or nineteen days into IT, IT has produced minimal gains. In fact, it's been somewhat of a disaster. It's hard to get conclusive estimates of personal material losses, but I think as many as a quarter of the tanks and armed vehicles have ready been destroyed and the casualties may be as high as around ten thousand out of an army that was trained up for this purpose.

Around fifty thousand so so far is not gone. Well, the the ukrainian army hasn't even made IT to the first line of defense. So what the russians did is they created three fortified lines or belts of defense.

And then in front of that is what they call a grey zone or security zone or crumble zone, which is an area they can test, but it's not technical, a fortified line. The ukrainians are still in that sort of grey zone. They are not punching through.

They are not even at the first russian and forty five line. To give you some idea of what's involved the russians have these obstacles are basically trenches of in dug. There's ditches that would stop tanks, or sort of forced him to go in a certain direction, steer the traffic.

There is extensive minefields. They've got these things called dragon tea, which are concrete bowlers that stop tanks or move them in a certain direction. Then the russians have massive amounts of artillery. They've got inventory on the ground that hold spot the.

And if all of that doesn't take out these ukrainian tanks, they've got these attack helicopters that come in almost uncontested because at this point, IT doesn't look like the ukrainians have any year defense. And they've also got fixing aircraft that are capable of dropped precision munitions. So IT really seems like the russians have fixed a lot of the problems that they had last fall and their army. And so far that seems like this counteroffensive not go in anywhere .

where sixteen months into this true math and clearly fatigue is setting and its not commanding the new cycle here in amErica and on a percentage basis, even the neocons and republicans are dropping their support for this at a pretty precipitous rate, which, uh, is predictable. Americans don't want to be in forever words, we all know that. So which are take on how this winds up, especially in relation to A R budget, and be this upcoming election, which this seems to be, will be a major issue if this isn't resolved by the time we get into the twenty four election cycle.

As part of answering this, have a question for sex. But is IT true that there was a ceasefire, like putin had a press conference where he showed a document that he said that there was a ceasefire, that then the united states apparently sent boris Johnson over to russia, ukraine, to basic blow up. Blow up? Yes.

this is finally correct.

This was a ceasefire. This was a pcl before the war.

Cct cm, there were rounds of negotiations before the war. Notably, there is a proud diplomacy between blinking and love of in january, the month before the war, where lincoln said that we cannot compromise on native open door policy, that that sort diplomacy fell apart. But then after the war, there was a meeting of the russian delegation, ukrainian delegation, in under the supervision of of artavan in turkey. Now tally Bennett also had a similar process. In both cases, the west rejected a peace deal.

allegedly. We know this is put .

more talking about back to the evidence for the second. But what the deal would have provided is that the russians will move back to prewar lines if the ukrainians would agree not to become a member of nato. However, the ukraine es could still receive specified security guarantees from the west.

That was the deal now. Well, we have now multiple data points. You've got ten off totally, benet saying that he thought a deal was in all these lines, but IT was rejected by the west. You also have not put in showing the very document which was signed by the ukrainian delegation. So this was .

just no police IT has .

been released yet. I hope the russian government releases IT for the purpose of history, so we can expect IT, but nobody can test. This document is real.

Remember, if you just making this up, you would think that era wan, we basically come ford and say, no, this is fake. There are many people who are in that room who be able to say this document is fake. No one has done that.

So I think there's every reason to believe this document is real. Now IT is not a final agreement. IT appears to be a preliminary agreement or an outline, but the outline is that russia is saying, we will move back to prewar lines, if you agree, not become part of nato.

And that deal was rejected when boris Johnson flew into chief and basically told the ukrainians, we do not want to make a deal at putin. We want to pressure putin and the source for that is not the russians. The source for that is a ukrainian publication called, uh, ukrainian proved A U.

P. And they ran an article in may of twenty twenty two that I can put on the screen. And IT is the source for saying that boris Johnson came in and told ziller ski, we do not want to make a peace deal.

We, the west are not ready to make a deal. Putin, we want you to fight putin n or pressure putin. And if you do, we will give you advances, weapons systems. And that is when the deal fell apart. If you look at the time of IT.

is this how of this has been this been lightning ce here.

So but you have to consider the source are, this is a pro ukrainian publication writing in may of twenty twenty two. Now, the tone of the article, and what they basically say in this article, is that linski accepted boris Johnson s offer. In other words, he took the gamble.

And at this point in time, you've got, remember, this is two months after the war started, look like the ukrainians were doing well. So U. P.

Was essentially praising silly's ki in this article for taking the west up on this deal to pressure putin rather than make peace. Now, a year later, IT looks like this gamble was a disaster. yeah.

And so that is the real conclusion here. A deal was available, but the west chose not to take IT. By the way, if you on a hill who is a russia hawk, and we can almost put her, I say, new on Jason, he is basically said that this type of deal was available. The west did not want to steal.

I think, Jason, maybe to give you a an answer. My thought is that this week was a very bad week for establishment politics and institutions. Because on the one hand, if you take the russia incident in the ukraine war, what you saw was that there were ample numbers of office that we chose, Frankly, do not take, so that we could engage our enemy in some long jonna war on the hope that I just deplete their resources.

That's kind of role in the dice, I think, in a very dangerous way. I think this week, we also saw some publish stuff on coffee in the coffee vaccine, which also debunked a lot of widely held truth. And I turned out that folks that may have been conspiracy for a good and quote, we're right there as well.

So I think it's just an uncomfortable set of facts that again, just reinforced that if you're not really thinking for yourself, you're not going to see the totality of what's actually going on. I think with respect or russia, ukraine, everybody has moved on. And so sadly, the only people that are left over are the people that have to fight.

The war were so separated from their families. There is the people that are dying. There is an article, I think, today they recruit prisoners, right? So obviously, some of the prisoners russia users are still pretty crazy.

That person went on some RAM page inside of a train, killed a couple people, stabs and other people. There was just pictures of blood everywhere. Mean, this is just a horrible situation and it's still not cleared to me why we didn't take the offering if in fact.

it's real. So I just want to keep putting that disclaimer out there, because put and flashing the door and IT doesn't .

make all .

this true .

IT does not feel natural.

What about the, what about I bennet confirmed IT. What incentive just the israeli former israeli leader have to lie about this?

Here's what I would say, Jason. I think that something like that is so profoundly important that if I were not true, I think I would have been very important for the powers that be to directed IT almost immediately so that they didn't have to look like they were more unnecessarily.

Can I also up level and connector at this point about the establishment? Because I think there's been a lot of push back to even chAllenging the state school, even having a conversation about ukraine or having a conversation about covin. And I think if there's one thing this pod represents, the fight going on a twitter represent is the need to have this conversation.

If we look at the war the U. S. Has engaged in since september eleven, it's estimated three to four million people have died in iraq, pakistan, afghanistan.

We spent eight trillion dollars inflation adjust that. We spent four trillion. In world war two, eight trillion represents twenty five percent of our entire national debt.

And I ve yet to meet a single parent who said to me, I care so much about this ukraine situation. I would be willing to put my children in harm's way to fight for the defense of europe. okay. So those data points tell me, at a very minimum, we need more of this discussion, more of this debate, not less the .

idea that that we could be tiptoe closer and closer to some land war in europe unnecessarily. And I think the bigger issue is and you can't trust what you're being told, and I think that that's what's a very problem.

is a bigger picture. And just so we're clear here, i'm not saying on either side of this. I'm just pointing out that this is all still .

very thickly sourced.

You until the west confirms any of this, I think expect the west to do you expect the state department to issue Price saying, yeah, we fucked up on me my theory.

what you going to do my theory in the beginning has been and I ve been very clear on this podcast, my theory has been since the beginning, they want to delete russia and they want to delete their army and and have regime changed in putin? I'm not saying i'm for that.

just for the people are .

no new language, that is, they plan doing defense said .

that our purpose was to weaken russia, so to knock great powers.

I think they that's what paris Johnson went to.

Kevin said, we want to pressure pro, not make a deal with him. So they quoted this war they they .

preferred to find. They .

prefer to fight a problem of choice that .

was not in saying that at was much. So i'm just clearing. He said, he said that was your position and i'm correctly oj, that was not my position. I said that my I actually .

agree with you if if you're saying that that was our government's objective, which was yes to we, can putin N I agree with you. They've close to fight an optional proxy worth choice that was easily avoidable, that just taking nato expansion off the table because I thought what we can put. But here's the rub on this.

IT is not, we can put in and as weaken the united states and our allies any way you wanted. Look at this thing. Look at just the weapons ammunitions.

So we are out of one hundred fifty five millimeter artillery ells. We cannot produce enough. This is a crazy thing.

We spent eight hundred billion a year plus on the pentagon, on our national defense, where had a emo. I mean, we must be getting so royally ripped off by the military industrial complex. okay? We cannot produce amo fast enough.

That's why ukraine is losing the war that baLance our tilly favors russia. Russia is basic, using about twenty thousand shells a day. The ukrainians are using between three and six thousand. We are out of the ma. We cannot .

produce enough. And this actually duff tiles nicely with another story. This week, there is a journalist name, matt.

Ugliness is that is how you .

he places and he said, I mean, he literally said the quite apart out loud and i'll just quote because he was criticizing you and chamakh for hosting R, K, will get to that a second. But he basically said, this is actually a really good idea for us. Basically, nato equipment plus ukrainian lives are being traded for russian equipment and russian lives, which leaves nato coming out ahead.

That's w true, because nato is much richer than russia. So we win a long term game of everyone explode their weapons as fast as they can make them again, though what makes that really true is nato material is killing russian soldiers, while russian materials killing ukraine soldiers. That's a deal in our favor. I an that is a cynical clear of, yeah.

he wrote that last year in defensive of the war, basically, like all the neocons, he served an establishment approved intellectual. They think he's smart. I think he's really foolish.

He basically wants to fight the last training here for the sole purpose of blowing up russia as stockpiles. The reason this is so dumb, as russia can always make more those lives on to coming back, but they can always produce more artillery, more weapons. And in fact, the russian war machine is now ramping up to full production.

okay? They are rampling up the number of people in their army. I think it's estimated that by the end of the year that can have seven thirty thousand men under arms.

They've wrapped up artillery shells production. They're asked me like one and a half million. At the beginning of the war, we were only producing fourteen thousand or tiller shells a month, mostly for training purposes.

The united states, we've since ramped that up to twenty thousand, but that still massively trails what the russians can do. And we try at home, they trying to range up to ninety thousand a months. But that's going to take to twenty twenty eight because you know IT takes time to build that.

You are going to build a new factories, new production lines. You're got to issue contracts to suppliers of vendors. IT takes time to do this, but the russia's breath of up their war machine.

And then the other thing that's happened is that russia and china have entered a defect or alliance and including iran. So you now have the cementing of this giant alliance in asia between china, russia and iran. They're sharing equipment now together.

Iran is producing drones for russia. Russia is now going to be giving advanced ghor jets to iran. So this idea that this war has made the west stronger is depleting the west over objective.

We didn't need to fight. The war is easily avoidable. And we have now created, I think, the most fierce m opponent that amErica has ever faced.

We have never faced a adversary with a combined manufacture capacity and raw materials of china, russia, iran. If we were to get in a war, a new world war, against this sort of new access, we could lose. They actually have more manufacture capacity to produced of war and munich, ans and ammo. Then the united states does .

china has been clear that they are not going to provide weapons. russia. And so I i'm not sure that the alliance is exactly accurate.

They're given us no such assurance all lives said, as they haven't done IT. Yes, it's a theoretical .

thing that you're talking about here that could be very search. I think your point, and this is batch point, we should be having a very thoughts discuss here because if china did pick russia, which they have in and .

they went to war, IT would be war .

with which I might to china. And this was the first trip for an american sea state since twenty eighteen. Obviously, things have been strained with the spy balloon.

And the visits to to blink gave some basic goals for this engagement with china, the fentiman problem, some detained americans and protecting us citizens working in china. Those were kind of the easy checkbox es, but they wanted to create also an open line of communication tween our military, which china wasn't super stoked on. Awan agree to tony .

did to the great year. Yeah okay. I think what's really disappointing is that while tony over, they're doing this hard work, which is must be tough to do, because there must have been a little bit like dancing on eg shows a little bit right.

He had to be a intense. He had to be very thoughtful, very measured. But as far as I could tell, he did a fatal job.

Now full discover he's a friend of mine. So maybe unbiased. But then over here, biden at the middle vel fundraiser in california is calling G A dictor.

How hard must to be for you to try to do your job on your bosses, just like completely undisguised here? And here's the problem with that, is that if the united states actually thought that he was a dictator, do you think that amid level fundraiser that we were all invited to and worth in california, that none of us said yes to, is the place to announce a foreign policy shift like that? Absolutely not.

So IT just means that, again, there's just more evidence about biden being very undisciplined. Now again, that could be an age issue. That could be a mental acuity issue.

We don't know because you're not given a chance to really prosecute that problem. Meanwhile, tones, they are trying to do the best job I can. And the sand shift underneath them, thank god he was able to get the trip done before this thing happened is what I think. But that gaff was a very big gaff and a very big problem, I think, because whatever goodwill he built up was practically flushed down the toilet if you saw the reaction from the chinese, which was to be deeply offended, and IT makes no sense .

to poke when he went to see M.

P, S. And dead and negotiate a face pump verses a handshake. What is all of this either unplanned or undisciplined theater? Why are we engaging in any of this stuff?

IT doesn't make any sense to mah. Jobs always been known for being a liability in terms of these statements. When he worked for obama, he was the V.

P. He also said things shot from the hip a lot. You should not be calling medication or when you're trying to do this critical work, it's a stupid move. Think everybody can agree you were to say something bad.

Yeah, I just can say, you know kind of market reaction going in to the k web. The chinese index was up about twenty percent heading into these series of meetings. Now notably, blinking was not scheduled to have a meeting with SHE.

And so what happened is on day one, there is a meeting with the foreign ister, right? And IT seems that there were some positive trend lines coming out of these first two meeting with the top diplomats with foreign minister, which LED to the meeting. And notably in the meeting, he did say the united states has not changed policy on taiwan.

We don't support taiwan 的 y's independence。 Now the market reaction post visit was down ten percent. I think this is owing to what chao said that people felt like maybe we took a step forward here, that we at least out of meeting then IT was a another step back.

And so I think where we sit at the moment is there's probably gonna some follow on means coming out of this. This was not, you know, A A A H H A pat back where we were, but I think IT was a stabilizing. And you know, again, we were just at the east meets west conference, whether a lot of chinese CEO and founder who were there.

And I think the idea there was like things are stable, like not getting worse. And by the way, six months ago, there was a real concern that things were deteriorating quickly. So I think it's you know, you can see something constructive coming out of this.

not getting worse with how I felt. Coming out of IT and then bin then makes IT worse. Is that really IT is I I agree is just a stupid gaff.

Let me tell you about something the reporting from the the chinese side. So after these diomedes events and and you're right, blinking met with when you for seven, then he got audience with cheering pink. They do these read outs where each side basically produces a public summary of the meeting in the chinese.

Read out, they said that U. S. Chinese relations PS are at the lowest point they've ever been.

I mean, since, I guess, diplomatic relations were kind of reestablish under nexon so that from the chinese standpoint, they believe that relationship worth the worst they've ever been. Moreover, the U. S.

Sought to put ukraine on the agenda. The chinese response to that was, we are not interested discussing our relationship with russia. That is none of your business. So this idea, there's been this neuron fantasy that somehow china would help us in this war between russia and ukraine.

And i've said all along that the last thing china wants is for neo concept, achieve their objectives with respect to russia, because then china alone will be in the gun sites of U. S. hawks.

So china will do what he has to do to support and even prop up russia. If they have to remember china and and russia, and specifically he and putin, they are the two leaders we've met with each other more often than any other leaders, and they're called each other. They are best friends. Or most think that the language they use was most, most, most boisson friends, was what they call IT OK.

A little .

of somebody.

a great T V show. Just give people exactly what happened by him when he was at this campaign funders er in norka that um again yeah we were probably invited two people on the show. He was talking about the military chinese by balloon and he said he got very upset, quote, that this was a great embarrassment for dictor when they don't know what happened.

And he continue to say that he didn't know the balloon had been over the country to U. S. And was off commercial asa.

And this is the kind of thing where is basically saying SHE is stupid or know whatever or there's some level of incompetence over there. It's exactly the wrong message you send, calling a dictor and calling him stupid and saying he was embarrassed. Why would you provoke that to raise money or to be a tough guy? That makes no sense. I mean, that sounds like trumps version of the chinese standpoint.

They thought the whole balloon thing was a travesty. I mean, I don't know what the truth of IT is, but they feel like I was just this continuous uh, drumming up of outrage on the american side against china, and they wanted to put that behind us. Terms of relationship, I heard blinking interviewed about this tomorrow.

I agree with you. I have no complaint with blinking in terms of how he handled this meeting. I have a complaint about how I havena complaint about hand moscow, but, but not beijing, but they wanted to put this balloon business behind them. My guess, i've always said that IT never made sense to me that the chinese would use such a ham fisted way of conducting ebonie to fly, deliberately fly a balloon over the U.

S.

Never and never made sense to me. And and and and IT became this costs left in the U. S. And I think the chinese, at a minimum, wanted to put IT behind us. And then by and reopen the .

issue like the submarine tragedy, the balloon is like made for network television because it's a live event where you can put live cameras up and you can cover IT.

Twenty for seven is just like just for the media.

It's for the media. It's catnip for them.

We have very careful now. I think in our realised was china because again, you now have this asiatic alliance between china, russia and and iran. IT is the most capable.

But say abott I ever face. Remember that when we face the soviet union, the economy was never bigger than one third. The us economy, the soviet block verses the western block.

The chinese economy, on a purchasing power parity basis is roughly the same size as the U. S. And they've got more manufacture capacity. If you think about the type of manufacturing capacity united states had during war, war two, that now belongs to china, not the us. We have .

hollowed why are foreign policy bra of government to discussion? Why are foreign policy isn't being driven by some of the things that we could do together to collaborate on, like we have global warming, we have, you know, issues on this planet that we could collaborate on. And IT seems like we're spending no time on those issues.

And sabring cuba, another example, why can't we set a go for the united states to Normal ized relations with cuba and get them on our site, since they are the equivalent of, let's say, ukraine, David, to america, you you brought back comparison. Why don't we make peace with cuba? Why can't we have a peace based foreign policy where we're trying to build bridges? God, cuban unites, could do amazing things together. And we should be trying to win that relationship instead of living fifty years in the past over IT a mature.

There was legitimate outrage over the past week because we discovered that china was planning on, they already have an intelligence outpost, cuba, listing out post, but also they are thinking about doing training of troops in cuba. And that would be a violation of manero doctor in, and we should basically get our backs up over that.

The monorail doctor states that no distance gray power can bring troops, weapons or bases into the western hemisphere. United states spent over one hundred years basically enforcing mono doctrine. IT would greatly diminish U.

S. Security if we allowed any foreign grade power to have troops to the western hemisphere. So we deserve to have our horns out over that.

The problem is that we have our horns out over everything. And so we're not really taken seriously. We quite well so many times, I don't think we really taken serious ly by the chinese on this.

And this should be a teaching moment to the foreign policy establishment, because this is russia objection. Russia's objection is to having american troops, weapons in basis directly on their border. This is our objection to what china is seeking to do in cuba.

Okay, you wanted .

to quit. There's a real appetite community to be engaged. This idea that we're going to a couple of the world never have to deal with these folks, right, is just a farce. Bike dance bought a billion dollars worth of in video chips announced this week, right? Like like the world is entangled. And I think we would be Better off having our political and business leaders in more sink over how to achieve this long term safety and prosperity as opposed to what feels like a disjointed foreign policy relative to the global reality around A I and and and what's happening in the business from agree.

well said you and that I mean, it's just so obvious, why can we be collaborating? And so and we see uh, when you and I made our trip to the U A, and then we see the saw you bringing movies back. We have certain regions. We're doing a pretty good job of engaging with engagement. You know, reasonable engagement is a good idea.

It's because, and I think R, F, K has said this, we have created a very dangerous revolving door between our most critical institutions and the largest industrial companies in the united states. And that revolving door creates all kinds of conflicts of interest. And those things get sorted out via revenue and dollars .

in profits incentives.

And so those incentives will drive us, if it's the military industrial complex to go to war and you're seeing that it'll complicate form policy. So this is why I always said the most important thing that we're doing is something that the military industrial complex cannot stop, which is our energy independence. And when you have energy independence and abundant causes energy, I do think that the biggest thing you get peace of and you stop fighting these words, you become much more rational abroad. And you're like, okay, ay, I don't need to fight with all these people because, you know, things are so great .

within our borders you're so right about because we actually have stopped those words. And now we've created two other ones, russia or ugine. We can in china. What's that? We can help .

ourselves and will use the scarcity of commodities as a booky man to basically incentivize us to go in these foreign visit ventures. And IT really has .

to start two quick points on that. On taiwan, there's an election next year. And IT looks like right now that the pro china party might actually take power. Right now the party that some power is more of a for western party.

And the reason, I think, is that the taiwanese are looking at what's going on in ukraine, and they're looking at the corpses of the ukrainian youth pile up, and they're thinking, maybe it's such a great idea to be an american proxy state. Or in the words of Henry kissinger, he wants quipped, that is dangerous to be an american enemy, but it's absolutely fatal to be an american friend. I think that this war may be backfiring in terms of the incentives is creating around taiwan. Remember by said that this war, we basically help protect taiwan by deterrence, china, and might actually deter taiwan from opposing china. So I have to see how that plays out.

All an able body person I want a voting age, needs to do. Please read the newspaper and understand that the last two and half years, we've essentially started a multitrillion dollar programme to deliver ourselves to all the critical resources that china and taiwan gives us. And so if you're taiwan's citizens, the writing is unfortunately on the wall, which is that we are giving ourselves the optionality to not have to do anything.

So to your point, David, if you're a rational thinking to ane's person, unfortunately you're forced to be in a position where you may have to head your bets. And if the united states can basically have, uh, chip supply that comes from europe and mexico, now of a sudden the criticality of T, S, M, C goes away to wait. I publish his tweet yesterday about buffet and his trades in japan, right? He bought these five trading companies and it's just a really novel Carry trade that i've really fAllen in level of just understanding IT.

But the code a to that is when he did this and going long japan, what he actually also did was he delivered t. Himselve from china. He had a long position in T, S, M, C.

And he said, i'm out. And when they asked him why he saw T, S, M C, he said, this is a very complicated thing and he basically said that it's not a bit that's worth making. And I think underneath that, if I had to guess what he's trying to say about taiwan indirectly through his sale of T S M C is.

The odds are that we are not going to get into a land war over there, which means that, that asset and its equity value is in danger. And I don't want to owner. And I think that, that's a very clinical the making of his rational action. So to your point, but here's a blink, people to speak with their .

dog is very important. The one china policy says taiwan is part of china's, not an independent country, but we've had a very ambiguous and tolerance for this ambiguity of taiwan acting as its nation, while saying we support the one china policy, and that ambiguity has served us very well in the china relationship. Here's a blink and set at the press conference quote, we do not support taiwan independence.

We remain opposed to any lateral changes to the statistical by either side. The SaaS quotes referring to hear brad is that they get to be independent in taiwan. But we don't say they are independent.

They are obviously acting in an independent manner. But IT is not our business to toa tian is people that they're independent or not. It's their decision to determine if they are independent or not. And and he thoughts on the the trade by buffer t and blinking at the press conference in the ambiguity.

I think we want to maintain the amputee. I think we're basically saying to china, don't change this statius, at least for now, right while we rebuild these chip fbs in arizon and other parts of the world. I think most of the wealthy families i've talked to from taiwan believe that five or six years from now, the U.

S. Will no longer be in the position where they will need taiwan in taipei. I as much as they do today and there years .

you think it'll take to be independent to say one more .

time and explain IT. Well, it's not about being independent. It's how much longer will taiwan have what they believe to be defected protection from the united states. And I was told by one very influential time and he's family that they believe when the fifth chip fab comes online in arizona, which I think is scheduled for twenty five or twenty six, they intended to have most of their family members out of taiwan at that period in time.

Now I think most time when you don't envision this being, you know, a violent invasion of taiwan is more of a take under in the same way that hat kong was. And so I don't see an american president, Frankly, going to war, nor what I want them to go to war over taiwan. But I think it's in all of our interest to maintain that status school, which is why tainting the chinese over the course of the past few years over taiwan has seemed like A A policy that's not fit with our goals.

right? Well, if you look at skin in the game, the fact that the chips act went through so quickly, the fact that warn buffer t, as you pointed out, chmagh made his bed and his family that has obviously, you know, skin in the game quite literally, are making these decisions. I think we know where this is added.

You can just follow the bets. And if you look at the beats and five dollars, follow the dollars and and also where people put himself, uh, geographically body left hong kong when they turn over happened or before IT, they went to singapore, they went to U A E. They voted with their feet and their dollars.

And that's obviously what's gonna happen here is a good tiv. Because this criticism of the ukraine policy by math, uh, that sacks pointed out, came because there is a belief on his part and others that they paid here all in is putting its uniters al support behind ark. That is not true.

There are two people on the pod who hosted fun raiser last week. And here is what matt incorrectly said because I have not put my support behind R F, K, I think is very interesting and i'm glad is in the race. And neither has freeburg, but cheap and sexed host one and all handed over to them. But here is what matt said in is sub stack.

And even though it's not the subject of this post, I do want to say that I think it's really sleezy and gross for the host of the all in pockets to be engaging in the Kennedy boost arising as a bang shot way of harming joe biden's real election prospects, not would say, in the recent conversions around russia policy. Kenney represents precisely the shand, a progressive that that writer center business people have highly, have rightly spent the Better part of the century by morning. His is an anti progress, anti technology, ultimate anti human tour view that stands against a milo, progress every process and blow .

up as many ukrainians as possible, as order. Yes, exactly anti human. I giving him this much time.

Well, no. But I think that is important, that people now have this pot with the rise of rk.

This was the first eglin accusing us, somehow, of, of, of supporting R, F, K, not because of issues, but somehow because it's a bank shot for Donald trump, which is ridiculous. None of us support Donald trump because I might prefer candidate .

in the republican lane, but what he said was a bank .

shot against biden. To clear a shot against. I prefer R, F, K, A, biden that simple. What's what's wrong with that? He's, I want making any arguments here.

Look, we have explained in a lot of detail, and I explained in my response all the issues. But where I support R, K, he supports free speech over censorship. He supports civil liberties over the surveilLance state.

He supports peace inside of war. He supports ceiling the southern border, virtually alone among democrats. And talking his sense on that issue. And I believe that he's completely correctly diagnosed what we're doing in ukraine. So on the you disagree .

disagree with them on some issues, right? You disagree with them on nuclear and you may disagree with them .

and is a diva if he in the dive and cover the so called covet shot. That was not even a vaccine that that should not have been required.

But what about those two issues? You obvious he disagree with him on something. Do you disagree with him on his antivari stuff and his nuclear stuff?

I don't know enough about those issues to have like a firm stance, but I would say that every candidate represents a bundle of issues, and you support the ones who are aligned with you on the issues that are most important to you, on the issues that are most important to me, which are these questions, the great questions of warrant peace and the questions of free speech and censorship.

And even, I would say the question of the economy and who do we prioritize because he want prioritize the middle class on those big questions. I feel like i'm a mind with R, F, K, but that's why I support him. Let me go to you.

Jack dorsey is is supporting R, F, K. Is a bank shot something rather no? He's supporting IT because he agrees to ark on these questions of warm peace, okay, and free speech, great.

I'm just letting everybody be very clear about their positions since this is becoming the support of R, F, K by this pocket or two of the four people, the pocket is now becoming kind of national news.

A glasses is even making any arguments here. He's just applying droga, ory labels to us. And and what this is, this is a disciplinary tactic or a shaming tactic, yes, by the sort of enforces for the establishment and to prevent independent thinkers from stepping out a lot, I agree.

That's what this is about. IT looks like this outside. Went to the thousand school and universe. Yeah.

you got a two million dollar education. Doesn't know what a basis point.

He's the guy with the maxes point, right? He filed me.

He graduated to in order.

Good luck with your substance.

You oh my goto about you are pro nuclear.

You've been very clear about that, although you are pro renewables mostly you've been clear about that on this podcast and many conversations i've ever. You you are also pro vaccine, but your anti what happened with the lockdown. So maybe you could expand upon your support of R, F, K, why you held a fundraiser firm and what things you agree with money and maybe what things you don't necessarily agree with them on.

Well, first, I actually did what I think a lot of people haven't done, which is just listen to him, just stop talking zip the old g APP er and there is an enormous amount of long form content where you can really understand where he stands on some of these topics. He's right about the war on ukraine. We shouldn't be ended.

He's right about free speech, which is, we should have IT. He's right that the coffee vaccine was not a vaccine. And really, what is done is actually discrete.

The word vaccine, unfortunately, in a lot of people's minds, he actually is a person that is pro vaccines for all these other vaccines. He himself is vaccinated. His children are accent ated.

You will all know this stuff if you just took two minutes to just listen to a, he is against the covet vaccine. And what I would say is i'm very sympathetic to that. I'm very sympathetic to the job the F.

D. A. Had to do. And I think they generally did do a great job. But we RAM something true, and we allowed to be labelled a word that is appropriates. What IT is, it's not a vaccine.

And the problem with that is that IT now makes people mistrust the missile moms and rebel vaccine. That's crazy. You shouldn't mistrust the M M R vaccine or d tab, but because those things are lumped with the same thing as a coffee vaccine, that is at best thirty or forty percent fictions.

We have these problems. He calls that up pretty honestly. So I like the fact that he actually speaks in nuances. I like the fact that when I listen to him, I find that the talking had, think police are generally lying. IT confirms what I believe about them because he just says things in a very plain spoken, intelligent way.

And I think that there are a lot of folks who don't want to think who, who want to be given the simple answer, who want to just reject what he stands for, just take the establish review in the hopes that they will get, I don't know, maybe accepted by the establishment. The establishment just wants to curate power. And I just think that people should be thinking for themselves.

If you listen to the rock in podcast, if you listen to the George Peters in podcast, there are millions and millions and millions of links and page views and discussions and thoughts. And there's public thousands of minutes of R, F, K, explaining what he thinks on basically any topic you can imagine, you can get your own conclusion. And now I think what I think you'll find, and this is true for me, is there's ten percent of stuff you are just a vehemently supportive of seventy percent of stuff that's like quite reasonable and fair. And then there's the rest, which is a spectrum of things I disagree with. But then you're left with a blended expected value where you're like, man, this guy is really Better than all the other alternatives.

Bright and let you go. And i'll give my question.

what I find most in cities about the opposition to this discussion is people are .

upset .

that you're not swearing an allegiance to a dogmatism, right? The truth of the matter is this group has hosted dinners for roka, for senator mansion. We've hosted dinners for the scientist, right? Had i've been here, I would put my name on the dinner for Kennedy because I want to gather information.

I'm an analyst. I want to think for myself, how can we spend trillions and put ourselves into potentially harm's way without having a real conversation in congress and on these pods about the risk of war? Why can't we have an authentic post morning about the efficacy of the covet vaccine without being shame? The revolution going on in this country, which is fantastic for my perspective, is that there is no longer a monopolist control over the discussion.

And that's why this podcast, in this friendship, in the conversation we all had here, is resonating with people, because they also want to hear all the different sides, because most people are capable, are way smarter than the elites on the coast, thing you from inDiana, lots of smart power to think for themselves in inDiana. But they'ld told by coastal, allege what to think, and they reject this. And that's what you're seen in this discussion, is so many of these others, it's not about it's not about vaccines.

It's not about a war. It's about their control over how you think. And then one, to force you to swear to an orthodoxy.

I, dick, that's really, well, sad.

Yeah, that is, well, sad. But the the way they try to control what you think is by labelling candidates so as to exclude them or make them sound crazy. J, K, L, I mean, you kind introduced R, F, K as an N, T, vx arg. I don't think that is the crack way to describe this position, or the singular way that he should be labelled.

No, I don't. I don't do that. I said here are the things he believes that we agree with.

And then I gave the things that the media is saying here. I was trying to present the totality of IT. And I said, he is obviously in favor of the middle class and all the stuff super.

I just want.

I want to be clear on my position here. So I am in support of vibrate long form debate like we have here. And i'm in support of anybody who takes on the establishment because there are crazy incentives as we talk about our incentives matter, and we are long overdue for a discussion on the vaccines. But it's very important that everybody understand here that everybody on this pocket took the COVID vaccine. And everybody here, our kids, have been exactly so.

They took the mental M R N A. Truman because we got hold wink by media to thinking IT would prevent us from ever getting cover IT.

which I did not do two months later, I got zines are good, and the COVID thing was not very good.

And IT reduced death in older people and probably was the only proper people, and will know when we do a postmortem, but do not get this .

M R N A like flowing through our bodies as who knows that might be a time bomb.

Well and then for people who are wondering, like if we should even be having these discussions, the the hypocrisy of the media, I think it's very important to look at here because the media could be attacking this pocket over over again. Not that that matters. But when we moved into the to p 5， to p 10， top ten, that's when the knives came out.

And I I would like to remind the media of the long history of investigative journalism and debates. What was once a conspiracy theory often goes on to win a bullet surprise and know the the apocrypha is crazy. Because if you look at some of the greatest stories and investigative journalist pieces, they started with these debates, rumor, success or above grab. I was the new yorker, rough .

supporting, supporting. And he can get the time, he can get the time of day for his report on who really destroyed north stream.

the catholic church sex scandal, the bosting globe.

The means you need does not perform the function that you're describing anymore. They act as the body guard for the elite, for the establishment.

They actually have even .

of law for the people in power.

Not exactly true. They have actually done incredible reporting. But there is a group of them, which is to in the party, one because you have the new york times in their explicit on the taxi commission that one of poor in twenty twenty and then look S I know you don't find people or investigative journalism in twenty twenty brian rose and fall at the new york times that a massive explicit on the predator's new ork city taxi into and at the same time.

that might be important that there's a few other issues that might be more .

important to the nation. IT was an example of protectionism and rent seeking a the enron scandal, big tobacco, sixty minutes.

what monopoly in the south part of the bronx.

What about that hot dog vender .

on guys informed .

didn't have all of these licenses up to date.

I thought, oh my. The fact is, at the same time that the new york time CNN were attacking what uber was doing, the new york times won a fucking polzer for their coverage of predatory loans by rich, powerful people in york.

A story on the guy selling trinket outside the station without license.

A man of the people like yourself, like you.

should actually be more informed. OK should be reporting on, for example. But if they really, if the pooches worked, the way they should is where patient zero came from uncovered because Michael sheering just reported this over the last week. I got picked up by the wall sty journal, al, that patients zero IT, turns out was a researcher at the wu lab who was performing gain functions research.

Yeah, shocker.

Another complexity theory proven true and .

will want up being a polluter.

He deserves as a polar.

He does. And the crazy thing about this court on the conspiring theory turned out be true, is like IT brought together the most odd bedfellows, and paul and john Stuart, when rank paul and john's steward can be a room and agree on basically the totality of the topic. We should all just pay attention because it's not it's not a Normal world in which these two guys, we are always get on right. And both of them nailed IT from day one.

They have the same name, but they now connected dots further. Okay, why was the truth suppress? Why did did not come out? Because fault C. I had funded, gained a function research at the woh ang lab via eco health alliance. So he knew that if at the beginning of this pandemic IT turned out that he had been partially responsible for the creation of this virus that had now turned into pandemic around the world, his crew would have been over.

And it's worse sex. It's even worse than that. Forty six percent of the advertising on TV news comes from farm and we did not always allow farmer spending.

And this is may not be one to one IT may not be that a specific person doing a report at CNN or fox or any other networks saying, oh, i'm going to lose my job if I write something critical of farmer, but they're not doing the investigative pieces oh, I can tell you this on the people who have forty six percent of their advertising revenue, unless IT really, you know, gets to the final inning on something. And and that is something that we need to question, right? The media is funded forty six percent by farmer companies, and farmer companies were given a pass. And if you criticize any of the farma companies, the media is gonna come for you. And so listen, i'm not a tin foil, but you do .

have to look at foil. Listen, the media is funded by big pharma, and its primary sources are these high level government employees. We've been there forever.

Leak them information. That is why the new york times was Carrying water for fouche and big farmer. This is the marriage of state power and corporate greed that rf. k. Junior denounces.

Yes, well, there you have the folks. So and he believes he could be assassinated by the sea.

No, he didn't say like that.

He didn't say like that. He was asked what what is his strategy on campaigning and all of that stuff and he said, look, I am going to do as much as possible. But one thing that i'm going to avoid or like these OpenAIr p arades b ecause t here's j ust a l ot o f f olks t hat w e c an c ontrol, crack control. yeah. OK reasonable.

yeah. I mean, the conversation on a rogan went something like this. Rogan was asking me questions about the Kennedy assassinations.

And R, F, K. Believes, like something like sixty percent of the american public believes that lee Harry oswald did not act alone. Then organic, will you ever feel afraid running for office? And his answer was basically no, not really.

It's not something that i'm preoccupied with. But yeah, i'll take precautions. Does that mean he thinks the C. I is gonna stand? No, that's not what he said, but that is how the media reported IT, including fox news, that became the sound .

by when the sound bite from this podcast was that he believes his uncle was and and his father were. C, I was about .

the formations, a lot people. I am not giving my opinion.

giving his opinion on IT, he said IT on this pocket and the C, I, A won't released all the information to this day, even though they've been commanded to do so. So you make your own decision. According to bloomberg, there is a ton of action for start of shares in secondary markets.

We don't know what secondary market is that when one investor by shares in a company that's not yet public directly from another investors on the capable. So if stripe, which is not yet public, or reddit, there are shares floating around in those companies, either previous employees or previous investors, one firm might see an opportunity there and buy them as this process of bottoming out has occurred, pitch book reported. Tiger global told secondary investors, and that's a class of people who like to buy these, that they could bid on any individual private company in its portfolio.

They tried to sell a bundle of these shares, about thirty started ups at a time, but they could not find buyers, according to the reports. Another allowing people to bid on poor company. On a poor company basis, some of these are being marked down a third fifty percent h eta.

Here's the quote from bloomberg has have made thirty four shares of startups were trading at a medium discount of sixty one percent pair evaluations at. Latest funding rounds, according to report by forge global holdings, eight sixteen, according to the report, is actually buying shares in secondary excell bee best. mr.

Kiner are also using secretary to grow stakes in their existing investments, stumbling down as they were cross the reforms like kota tiger go global. And even brads altimeter are actively searching for deal. So brad, your thoughts on this is this sign of a bottom and what are doing this? Yeah, IT is is true. I mean.

our job is to look at all these companies, understand the way you know, i'm sitting here looking at a list that I was given the small day one hundred and twenty five companies. Second, you know the gold sacks unprofitable tech index in the public market uh is down sixty four percent as of this one unprofitable public. They they put together basket.

They track unprofitable public companies down sixty four percent off of its peak as as of this morning. So you disclosed the gloomier article, say, yeah, these unprofitable tech companies in the private market are down about sixty, sixty one percent. That smells right to me.

The repricing have to occur. These have to occur, right? There are fourteen hundred unicorns at the end of twenty twenty two, and one hundred percent of them will likely do a downturn.

And if you said what is the average that they're gonna down, it's over fifty percent. You saw the repricing out of some of the best ones like a can vote or a strike work was down less about thirty, forty, fifty percent. But you know they're going to be companies like in the public markets that are down eighty or ninety percent and disappear altogether.

So we didn't see the repricing. okay. And by the way, when we say, you know that article quotes orge, that is what the sellers are offering to sell shares for.

That is not where transactions are clearing, right? So why has an ultimate purchase to do this? Because the Prices are low enough to induce me to get off the sidelines to purchase the shares. But within kind of you know, we're starting to get in the zone where we can only right to a margin of safety, competitive or Better than the public markets for companies that we think are great companies.

Now out of those four fourteen hundred uniforms at the other twenty two, they're probably less than five percent of those companies I would even want to own at the right Price, right? So it's a small subset of companies the Price has to get to this clearing point. But you know, I think over the course of the next uh, eighteen months, we're going to see an acceleration of market clearing events as these companies need to raise capital, as their employees want to get liquid on shares.

And it's probably see some great opportunities. But most of these things they get put on sale should not be purchased, right? Most of them even, you know, the first sale Price is never the last sale Price. The mark down on the black t shirt continue to author sex.

Any thoughts are you buying in secondary? Are you're looking at this year.

look at secondary ideals is not primarily what we do, but we're open to IT, but bad. If you are the categories ze to fourteen hundred unornamental, one of three categories, what do you think the percentages would be? Those three categories being zombie corns like unicorn companies that just don't deserve to exist that our product market fit, they're going to go away. Category two would be viable companies that are just over pricing or head of her downward. And the number three would be the ones that are actually heading up .

around yeah I say thirty to forty percent are these companies that were valued over a billion dollars that don't have product market.

If it'll disappear.

some companies that will disappear. Like to be fair, let's explain. Most of these companies right, have less than two hundred million of preference preferred shares. The venture capitalist of vest into the company and many of those companies in that thirty forty percent, there's a team, there's some asset of value.

They may be able to, you know sell the talent of the team and recoup David, let's call IT thirty forty percent of the press start right in that transaction. We're starting to see some of those occur then. I think the lion and share of the companies that are left, let's call IT, you know, another forty percent.

These are companies that should never have been marked these Prices, right? But they do have a business and they're gonna be marked down, you know fifty to eighty percent by all of those, like none of those have been able to grow through IT. Then there's less than ten percent of the companies, right, whose growth has been so robust through this period that they've actually grown into or within ten fifty percent of those prior Prices.

And if you do all of that work, IT puts us back on trend line, right? The only thing unusual here is how far off line we had fourteen hundred hundred ords, right? In twenty twenty, we had, I think, one hundred and forty five I P S.

In the last two years, we've had four. okay. So there is a huge backlog. These companies aren't getting public lie because public market buyers like ourselves, we're not willing to pay the Prices that were in the private market. So the first step is to just have these clearing events.

And is David, you and I heard sober talk over the course at the last couple days. I think they, you know said to founders very clearly, you need to sell your businesses or you need to get profitable. There is no bildner .

in other news for has been issued a conditional nine point two billion dollar alone from the use department energy to build out three, one, two three E V battery factory is specific alone is coming through the department of energies L P O. That's the loan programs office. You've got about four hundred billion to land out.

You might remember this from twenty ten when they gave ceLinda a one, two, three batteries, which eventually went bank, rubbed up up by a chinese company, I believe. And tesla, a four to sixty five million alone. Text pated back, the other two didn't text late back with the interest sugar shot.

The director of the loan program office described the lending moves as a way to onshore and restore manufacturing. The goal program is not innovation, but to get more of the supply chain to be manufactured in the us. Guess some people are criticising this just at a the gate with, why should we be giving these loans to combination to be the private sector doing IT math? What your thoughts here is this A A good idea, a great idea, neutral idea.

a great idea.

explain.

It's us using our baLance sheet to make sure that we get to energy independence. So this is actually a perfect role for government. It's shaping incentive so that capitalism can do is jump.

What this does for four is four is a partnership with sk. And so s has a lot of capability in korea, but they can bring that know how. Now domestically, on short of the united states, you will be hiring thousands of people.

You'll be building battery factories, organ's batteries, their forecast, they'll be selling two and a half million electric vehicles by twenty twenty six, twenty twenty seven. So whatever for does you can expect. G, M, i'll also do.

You can expect all of the other big companies to do so. This is all just great. And at the end of the day, for people to not over, this is nine point eight billion.

I guess that sounds like a lot, but we're probably spending nine point eight billion dollars a day fighting wars. So this is the day of just taking a pause on all these dumb wars and actually becoming energy reliant, carbon neutral. Fixing the climate is great.

jobs, energy independence and less dependency on autocratic nations seems like good idea.

Everything should be. How about instead of thinking about IT in terms of words, I think about IT in terms of, so if if the the D O D budget is eight hundred billion dollars, okay, per year, what is at two point six billion a day? Two point seven billion in a day, okay, we were talking about three days, four days, monday, tuesday, once at thursday, we want to say .

monday, tuesday.

once I dree with. But this is all money we don't have. I mean, we shouldn't spending the money on wars, and we shouldn't be spending IT, I think, on industrial policy. So first, all one of our friends use an energy investor and we be his name was telling me that the energy subsidies that were in the misnamed inflation reduction act IT, is like the biggest bonanza of all time. He said that the energy sector is going crazy now trying to figure out how to exploit these incentives.

And his view is that although I think he was used to cost about three hundred and fifty billion dollars, he thought that I would ultimately cost the government somewhere around a trillion. Because the way these subsides work is that you just qualify for them and then you get the subsidy is not like the credits run out. So if you qualify, you get IT.

So this could end up costing the government way more than what was originally projected. And so the question is, what are you going to get for of this money? And in this article on four, they were talking about these seven thousand jobs are being created at a cost of foreign and forty thousand dollars per job. So it's great that the jobs are being created. But if you look at the efficiency of that spend per job doesn't really make sense.

I don't understand .

you that the article said IT, the article said four hundred .

and forty thousand do take nine forty billion and divided by thousand two. I'm just quoting .

that paragraph for the article. So so the job creation is good, but you got to look at the efficiency, the job creation. The other thing is, the question I would ask you guys actually is who wants one of these ford evs? Do you want an E V by ford?

Um I think there are a lot of people that drive a ford pickup truck. We talked about this before. So one thirty is coming. Yeah, very popular. There is an an article in the wall street journal a few months ago which talked about the brand consideration cycle that has been going on.

And there is a large look we're friends with you on, but we should acknowledge there is a large number of people that are Frankly, a little good turned off by him. And they've been very clear that they want an alternative to test us because they don't want to buy test a because they don't necessarily prefer him as a brand ambassador for their car. And the reality of life is that you even if you're like maximum incredible, unless you find some clever way of creating a monopoly, in which case you can be a do so evil, you're only ever going to capture thirty plus forty percent maybe of a market.

Coke pepi is a good example. And so there is only. Is gonna long tail alternatives. And I had a chance, for example, in vegas, to drive a review. I was surprised at the quality, or drive in a room.

I was surprised at the quality of review, only because i've been so focus on tests on my whole life. So yeah, I think there a lot of people that buy fords doesn't well take anything away somebody wants doing. But I do think there are a .

lot of people industry, Polly, is you think about that E V. Summit and even vite on that was for political reasons.

union reasons yeah .

partly because of his views on speech but I think mostly because he's not a union shop, right? And so that's the real reason my ford is being doled out this sort of nine point something billion dollar loan is because they are politically connected with the right people in this current administration. And that's the problem with industrial policy, is that the money gets handed out by government to the politically connected.

in this case, test.

to the companies that may be producing the best products.

The fact is tesla to get one of these long in twenty and IT was a very nice company. So you've gotto give them some credit. They took a big rest there.

Listen about that for a second. Okay, because I know that example comes up a lot and a one.

two, three insulin.

Er, yeah. So elan was basically a fluke. I mean, you get like a once in a generation entrepreneur who happened, be working on this EV problem and he got that loan. If you're to take elon out of that government portfolio, IT all looks like ceLinda. yeah.

So the question is, like, what is this portfolio are going to look like? Is a really going to be another elon in there? Because if not, this give me a lot of cylinder.

But even if they break even, this give me a lot of substance to companies like ford, which are publicly connected. And I think a point feber would make if you were here is that at some point you're going to change off the subsidy because we can afford IT. And then at that point, is that factor. Give me self sufficient bad.

You have heard the two sides of the story here when you and listen.

while generally against industrial policy, I, I, I come down on to my side. I think this is a once in a generation opportunity to reduce our national security risk profile and to achieve what is really a national security imperative, which is energy independence. It's not going to happen just according to the invisible end of the market.

We see our you know great power competitors who are using this against us, Frankly, and have robust industrial policies. So i'm willing to stipulate that there will be those inefficiencies in the system. But I was lucky, lucky enough.

Last night I was having dinner with the W. T. Sector, the treasury, while the audio was out here meeting with founder, including battery founders in silicon valley, on this very subject.

And I know some of the companies who are getting checks from the U. S. Government to scale up right innovative battery technologies in innovative chip manufacturing.

And I have to say this is the best of america. I see some really great public private partnerships that are on shing vital national interest in ships in batteries. And so i'm happy to see a happening.

But I also know there will be griffin, there will be waste along the way. But compare that, David, to the trillion we've spent over the last twenty years of war policy and what we've gotten from that. So you know you I never see us take change here on innovated battery .

technologies that will waste.

but not as well. Of course. I mean, the first thing to do turn off all these crazy wars, but that can be the bar because that's a very low bar. Anything is more productive than wasting the money blowing up other countries that we don't need to be involved in. I mean, member, we do have a thirty two trillion doll.

I think a great thing to do here is what they should have done with tesla, which is when they give that five hundred million dollar alone to tesla, they should have gotten percent at that in warrants to buy tesla shares at the IPO. Fifty million at that IPO would run one two hundred x and that would have been an incredible payday. So if they give this nine point two billion to ford, when I get nine hundred .

million in ones to buy shares to come a VC.

no, I want them to get a little participation in the a upside of the company. I don't want them to own IT. I want them to participation. Well, I I am giving a modest number here.

So right now, there are V, C, without participation ent.

but right now there are alone that gets payback with interest. And i'm saying give them some upside in the equity even if it's a small piece. Would you object to that sex?

U V, I wanted to make them a venture debt provider like s.

basically venture that, yes, give up and .

you not remember you have .

work well with their Price.

Doesn't lk my problem? You might drive a Better deal for the U. S. Government in that case, which is fine with me. IT doesn't solve my objection, which at the end of the day, these decisions are going we made based .

on political cricket.

and we're going to end up with tony capitalism and state capitalism as opposed entrepreneur capable ism.

This is in support of that because this is a deal where that nine point eight billion does come over. But these are basically like loans and loan guarantees you to put up the equity yourself. That doesn't solve anybody's problem, meaning you need to still be entrepreneurs and there needs to be risk capital, in this case of risk capital coming from ford, N.

S. K. And I think that that's my understanding .

of this is really like ninety .

percent the cost or ninety five percent the cost. So there's not much less capital here from ford or S K. I mean, there might be opportunity cost.

but it's not the full cost of these three factors. Almost thirteen billion dollars. So there's still a non trivial amount of risk, risk capital that has to get put to work here.

man. I would love to only have to put up twenty percent of the dollar, but no sense of the dollar of my investment.

I think brad does make a good point about the security of our supply chain. I'm more willing to use this serve industrial policy when we're talking about something that is vital, the security united states. I think you can make you can make that with chips. I don't think electric hicks rise to that quite that level.

Batteries might I don't know. I wouldn't .

say batteries do. But I think obtaining a secure supply of the rare earth that are needed to make batteries, there's maybe a role for government.

may be the reason battery is must is because the only way to win yourself off the dependence we have on fossil fuels around the world. And even though we produce and we're now a exporter of of oil, the reality is we're still in in tanglement around the world because the world is dependent upon those fossil fuels. And so I I, I do think that that is a national security interest having, you know, energy independent for selves.

If many was energy independent and kept nuclear running and didn't have, we have a different situation here.

Have we got plenty oil? Get over here.

everybody. The architect. 然后 trigger warning。 I like to regret a that burn tweet from off. I was a really good tweet shot out to my good number.

number of people. I, I mean, did the mits like you are the most hated IT. What happened? Can I just address what this means? So when I think of somebody has a ID, it's somebody that is just a helpless, impotent cuck that can think for themselves.

Matic, lacie.

And so what I what I don't need is that, you know, you become .

every week know this. I see all in podcast for clicks.

If you ten people have started, finish, yes is nothing to do with your financial status. It's just everything to do with your open mindedness. And there are these people that are just so reactive on twitter.

I feel little aside because I can a few years, they'll still be very unaccomplished and yet still be wondering who they can blame now and it'll just be them lame. So so I would just encourage these people that just fucking do some work, but you head down, do the work, my god, build something, make something. So anyways, most, most of the comments were really great and interesting. And then there's a couple of people who like all my god, how dare you you and it's like, how dare I want how there are what .

exactly you can tell that h this progress has truly become successful when the mainstream media fights up and punches up to try to get us to respond to them, to get more people to sub stack will play math.

I'll played the funniest thing. The funniest thing was I did this tweet about buffs and then people are like, oh, but I thought you compared yourself the buffet now like, no, no comparison, just benchMarks. And they think I tweet about the world compares in versus and then carston block jumps.

And I texted carson on the side. I was like, bro, i'm just trolling the meeting. Don't worry, I poo jet light one of .

the it's on the ambient or while taking a dump or both. No ambient for the dictator, the fact and busty bread, the fifth busy and our mass are new mascot, met the mascot who be writing three more subjects about us. I am the world's greatest moderator.

Can we make that bread logo or logo? Yes, make to go choose stern measure lunch. We lute you. The all in lunch will not be a way you, you touch IT. You know what IT was?

Was a bread. Did you touch? I didn't touch IT, no.

What was IT? I did immediately is .

a big petal I don't know I .

was being is I would take off tog prove now, a vegan pretzel free.

Berg was to .

be a vegan.

Well, the mean, the W E F, the W E F wants us eating insects. So this is, I think .

that's probably did IT looks like a vegan donut slash. I do do IT looks like a .

first to his face, face. He opened up.

He just, just like a little time. I thought .

my seven .

year old had played trick on me because .

those .

types of.

once I done fake.

you is great. I'm going to buy some fake. You actually know they should do. They should put that code, should make fake, do, do and put IT in the gift bag for all in summit, there would be a great little merch item.

I see time.

your winter.

Light man.

And we open sources to the fans.

And they have just got crazy with.

Should just get a room just one big huge, because like sexual attention that .

just .

need .

to leave something. Bear b 我 一定 只 给我。