E25: Biden's vaccine mandate, "equity" in distribution, NFT speculation, impact of inflation & more
01:09:59 Share

Does anybody have any thoughts on this?

I mean, I think it's incredible. Without a freeway side.

We can give.

We sort to the fans and they .

just .

got crazy.

Hey, everybody, hey everybody, welcome to another episode of the all in podcast. It's been a week. It's been a minute with us today, of course, the queen of kin watt if freedman and the rain man himself calling in from a nondescript mansion in one of seventeen cities, the rain man himself, David sex, cackling like a dictator who got his two Billy back and he's back in the game chah poli hopeth er for .

those illionois .

he billion zed is gna get a car with doors .

like this, doors like like this.

Let's talk a little bit about the vaccine, biden says. Everybody whose an adult is qualified by may first is instructed the states to do that. We are now hitting, uh, two point x million a day.

We had a three million shot day, I believe, freedoms g and obviously the one point nine billion dollar COVID slash, uh, everybody gets a big slice. A bill. Ga, past, sorry, that's ilan.

A one point nine billion is what the covered, the coveted. F, T, went for the cove. D, N, F, T.

went for one point, xi said in the past, the illian here, trillium air suit enough. It's real money. Yeah, yeah.

Well, biden speech really kind of beg the question of why we still need this two trillion dollar bill. If covet is can be over in may. But putting that aside, I think biden speech was very welcome in that he called four states to drop all these crazy egibi requirements are actually preventing people from getting vaccine at this point.

He says that every adult americans should be to get to dose by my first. And he's right. And there's a sharp contrast with Gavin sum in california who keep playing political games with the ministration of these doses.

So in california yesterday, just yesterday, we added two hundred and fifty thousand more doses of unused um in inventory. So we the amount group to four point five million unused. Those are sitting on a shelf only two hundred and fifteen thousand people got vaccine. So we're actually building inventory faster than were building the population of people getting. And it's because of all these crazy rules requirements, you have to go make an appointment.

Um you know not really actually it's counterproductive because IT discriminates against people or less computer savy do not to navigate the website or you know communities who don't want to enter their name of database uh which is you know there's a lot of people in california you don't want to you know put put their names in a government database. And so IT works against those communities getting vacation ated. At this point, we just drop all the requirements, drop the website that anyone who wants have vaccines, just get in line and get vacation ated. We'll go much faster.

The problem is that we we throw around this word equity and that we need to do something with equity. And in fact, I think that people who use that were stupid. I think what they're trying to say actually is we don't want in equity. And the most in equitable thing is to actually take the most impoverish and fragile of the population and prevent them from actually getting the vaccine because there are the ones that actually need to be working and can afford to actually not work or can afford to be c or can afford to you know um find solutions to childcare. Um it's this weird word that like you know the extreme left users now that to describe policies that are just Frankly poorly thought out and even or poorly executed IT might .

even be more principle of that correct freeburg in that anybody who gets a shot is helping everybody else because they are now a blocker in the system. I know this is incredibly simplicity, but i'm a simply a guy and I just seems .

to me it's it's a different way of thinking about the benefit of vaccination. And i've said IT in the past, but the benefit of is to get enough people vaccinated that the virus generally stopped spreading and then the pandemic ends. And that's the objective.

It's not about creating equitable protection for individuals. And as americans, it's interesting we think about IT in terms of an individual benefit, like how much do I get? What do I get from this vaccine? I want to get protected. The other guys getting protected before me, who gets to go first and becomes this kind of competitive frothing for a vaccination. And the reality is, if we get enough people, people vaccinated fast enough, the pandemic ends.

If we can get two hundred million shots in arms, this goes back to I think the tweet I sent in early january december a two or million shots and arms, we can be done with the pandemic based on you know how many the effect acy of transmission rate um a reduction a combined with the fact certain number of people have already developed community to the thing um we get to the point that there should be kind of, you know think about a network and you start turning nodes of the network. Sudenly becomes really hard to see transmission happen across the network. And um and so the prioritization of you know who gets the vaccine over, you know how fast we are deploying the vaccine has been a critical error from day one, in my opinion. Um no look all that being said, um I feel like we could sit here and criticize and argue about tactics and strategy uh all day long about this and and you make politicians look like gidia T S, and administrators look like tidier tes. But the truth is we are now seeing three million shots a day in biden speech he said which if you remembers what I said we really should be targeting is about one percent of the population every day um and that's roughly where we are White and said in his speech that we are in a war footing which is effectively what we today the federal government is Operating six hundred mass vx sites and we are right now getting shots in arms for all of the issues with prioritization and .

nonsense is going on in in the united states I agree. I agree that biden has the correct posture on this, which is war footing. We are not doing that in california.

I mean, I just talked about how our building elementaries fashion getting vaccines administered. Newsome just announced that forty percent of them have vaccines are not going to be uh basically separated out and reserved for equity zones. And you know it's .

what is even mean IT means .

that certain communities, only people in certain communities can get those vaccines and they're going to be distributed out through this complicated system of local community groups.

All that does is put money through some no bid contract to some shady technical company, uh, a bunch of consultants that then take advantage of the system, get paid hundreds of millions or billions of dollars to do nothing. I mean, right, I tweet out there's a boat that now scrapes and and by the way, before I tweet out the thing about the spot, which is I think.

uh, your eyes sent to this is the california you a vaccines available .

button for exactly all IT does IT IT is scrapes that might turn up C A website. But before that, in our group chat, there is another front of hours who wrote his own scraper, if you guys remember and IT was really shocking because oliva show is page after page after page of completely open and available the vaccine slots.

Ah um you know at the moscow center and places and you think all of this stuff is just a bunch of, i'll be blunt, uh rich White people sitting in a room with their head up the us. And they come up with these stupid fucking in rules and then they try to implement them with words like equity. And all that happens is that you compound in inequality and let .

go let's and let's go back to freeburg's first point, which is that all these unvaccinated of people who can get vaccinates faster become a giant petry dish for the virus, continue spreading and experiment more things and more things. So maybe we actually do get a vaccine resistance strain, the new strings, the various of popping up so far or not, a vaccine resistant.

But the longer the pandemic goes on, the longer there is a chance that one could arise. And then we're back to square one on this thing. So it's gonna heard everybody um and here's the crazy thing is that you know I think we all know a lot of I know dozens of people who've been vacated in california and they all come to me and tell me they're whispering about IT you know because they don't want to tell anyone there .

are scare of being cancelled.

They are scared of being cancelled because you know newsom and and and the equity people have created this idea that if you get a vaccine, you're taking away from somebody else.

In reality, you're not because anybody whose high risk has really gotten the vaccine by now or is that access sket vaccine and all you're doing right now, you get the vaccine is taking a dose off the shelf where there's four point five million doses sitting there and is increasing by millions every week. And so what we need to do is what we make A P. S.

A actually starting on monday. A you could anyone in california can get the vaccine with a doctor's note, and they're saying that doctors have total direction to give the note. So let me just make a PSA everyone out there. If you're in california, just go into a doctor's note starting on monday and go get the vaccine. P stop worrying about, do some stupid rules.

Let's also just to remember. So two points on that. Not everyone has the ability to go. Just get a doctors note. It's really hard for people that they have to go to public clinics and so on to get a doctors note.

Um what we are seeing as a lot of people just hacking the website, almost like soviet union era bread lines where they go to the website, they type in something that's not true to get themselves to slaughter. That's how a lot of people are kind of filling the void. The reality is, I just want to go back to the point I was making at the beginning. I think we're skating out of this thing and I think that the inventory surplus, which is absolutely being built up at a stagger ing rate in the united states right now, you look at the inventory forecasts from J N J fisa emar na relative to the deployment rate of vaccines right now, you are correct. We are building up a surplus and inventory surplus and the rate of build up per day is increasing right now.

So one million extra shots a day, two million .

EXO shots a day, probably a million to a million. And so what building up an inventory, and so one time of thirty million already happening is there are natural where what we are all pointing out and saying is starting to play out in terms of people kind of hacking the system. There is so much supply, there are many vacates.

Now you can go to any supermarket, any pharmacy, california, to get a shot. And everyone's just clicking the box and saying, yes, I qualify. They're going and getting shot. So the market demand is starting to meet the supply even though there are government and regulatory forces that are trying to inhibit that from taking place. And so I do feel pretty good when you look at kind of the inventory forecasts and you look at how many shots and being given per day that in forty five days or so.

we're gonna .

get to a point that we're a regulators.

And I just have a quick science question because I was trying to find the answer to this. But I I would love for you to tell us what is the real efficacy of the vaccine and what is your trans MIT ability like your your Carrier status once you've gotten, for example, like let's to say you take the the fire vaccine, right? Yeah if you get the fires or vaccine, how many days until this is like pretty good and you know like what is really the risk profile between the first shot.

second or share this link and then we can post IT on the on the note and people take a look at IT. But it's an excEllent paper published in the new england journal of medicine showing basically a population of unvaccinated against pi zer are vaccinated with a half a million and each population and a million people yes uh and they showed basically the accumulated infection rate, severe hospitalization rate and death rate um of each of the two populations over time and that really kind of, I think highlights the efficacy of the vaccines and at what time period they become efficacious on each of those metrics.

And by the way, even after the first dose across the population of half a million people, the margin of error on death um shows that there may even be complete protection against death after the first toast of the fighter vaccine. Uh within seven days of getting that shot. Pretty powerful statistic.

What just to describe the charge for those people listening, you have two populations and ones in blue, ones in red. And it's the time is, you know in days on the bottom access and when you get to eight, one line go sideways and the other one go keeps going straight up. So it's day aid after the visor that you are basically protected according to this short um and that's on the first shot.

And like I think IT adds like one or two cases, yes, there have been zero deaths. So I think day eight is the day and the second day seems like to me, you know, it's just this unbelievable extra. Uh, another amazing chart, which maybe we can dump on the show notes is what's happening in seven from cisco.

We had ten thousand shots a day at the end of february, march verst. We're doing now two thousand shots a day. So we literally have dropped seventy percent or so. We are three thousand shots from the peak. yes.

So this crazy weakness is resulting in, you know, this this virtue signal that you we can give any shots to anybody unless we get this group first for that group first is now leading to everybody hacking the system. The hack that i've heard is, since teachers are getting at child care people and food service people are getting IT, people are now starting to get jobs at door desh or saying they're a teacher. And if you check that box according to, you know, the back channel that i've heard, you go get a shot and you don't get they don't ask you for anything other than your driver's license.

No one's checking.

It's just a drive.

Is the pharmacies, the grocery stores, the mass vx sites, the S, F, D, P, H, california, P, H. Administer sites, the federal sites? No one's checking.

You sign up. You check a box on the website. IT says, I A test that this is true. And then you go and show your idea and get your shot.

And so a lot of people have kind of initially started scoring around the rules by going to be a dot h driver for a day or what have you and then saying, i'm a food networker. And then now generally, people, I think you're just clicking on the box and going in and getting a shot. Now sorry, just to go back on the previous question to up.

I I shared a figure to nick in the uh paper I shared particularly box e shows the deaths due to covert nineteen of a vaccine population and non vacation population and then IT shows documented stars coffee to infection. And you will see that you basically have almost no incremental infections in the vaccinated population starting around twenty eight days after your first dose. And so you know that's really when you could say you've got, you know really good kind of protection from the vaccine and you're already starting to get the benefits early on.

antibody. These studies have also shown that there is a big jump up that happens around that period of time. Um and so call IT three weeks after your first shot and in particularly the fourth week, uh you're really kind of like locked in with the um a protective um you know capacity.

Now your question around transmits sibling is one that still being studied, which is if i've got a vaccine and I going to be able to pick up the virus and transmitted to someone else um right now you know there saying what we don't have evidence one way the other but I mean generally the way that the virus is spread is you develop an infection in your body, your body that makes lots of copies of the virus and then you cough and spit out in the air and that people get IT. So theoretically, ics, you could Carry some virus on your mouths, on your nose where those cells don't have a new protectiveness. And you know the vi, the virus is still alive, but it's not spreading in your body.

You're not creating a lot of superfluous virus to spread in the world. So you know the basic science of IT is you should not be spreading cove IT if you've been vaccinated, right? I mean, you may have someone, your skin or your nose, you're something for a short period of time, but you're not going to develop a systemic infection that you're not gonna of. Start exerting everywhere. Um so I think we should start to transition to this world of feeling really good and safe, enjoying yourselves.

Yeah, we had five hundred thousand shots a day, sacks in california, and now we're down to one hundred fifty thousand. We've literally gone down two thirds under the management of governor .

harder because and what was his in his state of the state speech, which went over like a red balloon, hit, the most notable quote was we're not going back to Normal. Normal was never good enough. Normal except in equity.

So because there might be some in equity in the world around the wrong person line getting these doses, we're never going back to Normal. And he's basically ensuring that result by taking forever with these vaccines. But let me let me me go back to to to this point about efficacy.

So I think freeman gave the stats on, look, the bottom line here is that vaccines work. That is the message we should be getting out to people is that they work. And the thing i've been really surprised by in the reactions i'm seeing to my own tweet on twitter about this is how loud anti vx voices are and how loud and sort of .

when you say anti vx, you you don't mean not take the vaccine. You mean the vaccine doesn't work and we're never getting rid of covered the forever .

is people yeah well there's there's there's actually a lot of people on twitter who got really angry when I just tweet um I tweet something about how it's over. I tweet it's over you um but says we can all get the vaccine um in may if if you decide not to do IT that's on you. The rest are moving on and I got a lot of and all I was really saying he has look once of accent es available.

There's no need for any of these covered restrictions anymore. But a lot of people interpreted that to as me saying something that you should be forced to get the the vaccine or something like that. Now look, I don't think you should be forced to get IT, but I think it's highly effective.

IT works. And but i'm surprised at how loud these sort of anti vx voices are is usually like a conspiracy theory around around the vaccine. And and I think part of the reason why those voices are are so loud as because they're unopposed because all the people who believe in the vaccine, they are getting IT, but they are all afraid of, like, like your saying, J, K, L, of being cancelled. And so there is a conspiracy of silence around this. You know what we all need to be saying is, look, go get vaccine at work.

Take the win. America, take the win. We screwed this thing up for fourteen months.

Can we just take little thing that that always pops into my mind? And all of these things, whenever I hear some politician, or some like naval gazing intellectual, use the word in equity, I think like this is a power grab because the word equity is really about ownership, whether the word equality is about baLance, right and and power hungry politicians love the word equity and in equity because it's their opportunity to grab power and to tell us how things should be done or to do things differently in a way where you know they can enforce their Mandate, which is typically ill formed and not very smart. Um and I would just encourage all of us, when ever you hear the word equity or in equity, this huge, huge red light should be going up and you're at think whatever this person says next is a crock up or shit and it's probably a power grab. Whether if you hear people really talking about solving inequality, there's really no mechanism to solve inequality through power.

Well, I think that's a great point um around the language that gets used. And I have a similar uh concern about the way that the where privilege gets used. We used to have a term in this country called success.

Now people were successful or not and you know success had a connotation of being earned. Where's privilege has a connotation of being unearned? Well, I mean, now sometimes privilege is earned success and sometimes is unearned.

And but but when you start using the word privilege to describe all success, IT implies that there's something you unjust or unearned about IT and least be relocated. So you know that to me is another one of these political words is we shouldn't be confusing success with privilege. Yeah, the two very different things.

I have an example of this Opera win fee is successful. Prince Henry has privilege, privilege, privilege. I sure the meg markle story finally.

I I mean I do wanted talk about the mean markle story actually at some point the O K。 Joe one is actually also had a tweet um pretty pologize set of tweet around you know the miscasting of this this concept of privilege. And I thought I was really on point.

I really agreed with what he was saying and it's effectively what you're saying, David, it's like people right now I find are just so well not not people the people that take the time to wallow in twitter um mostly at least as I interact with them um are just so bitter and I think that there is no magana ous happiness for other people's success more IT IT I think I think like we live in a culture now where everybody feels IT is so zero some when it's not in fact zero sum um and people just begun other people's success especially by the way when it's earned and the reason is because there's an entire generation of people of all different ages and you know but this this last five or ten years who tapped themselves out now some were legitimately prevented from success. But there's a lot of people that bought into this narrative a wow it's a whole conspiracy that set up against me. So not even gna try. And they are often aloud. And the most invita sox and and the reason is because, you know, everybody wakes up in their forties and fifties and start to rationalized their choices in their lives and what they really feel deeper down inside is, oh my god, I just let an entire decade go by of blaming other people.

yes. And I think there's .

a surprisingly a large amount of that.

This ideology of victimization doesn't t people the right things? Because you start to think that you if you're wallowing in your oppression that you don't have agency over your own life, you're blame other people for not being successful. Knock getting ahead. And what you should be doing is focusing on working and improving your own life and getting ahead.

or also just redefining what happiness means. Happiness doesn't mean what the other person has and then saying, because I don't have that, I nothing happiness is really like introspectively figuring out like what really makes you complete and I mean not to get to therapy about IT, but it's like that's what we've also lost the script on. So when you put all of these things together, there's just a bunch of people that sit on the sidelines. They either are too scared to enter the arena or they don't want to enter the arena. They don't want the failure that comes from IT because we've grown up in a culture word know they had the kindergarten socket ball handed to them, the gold star in .

everything theyve participation ropy.

Um and now what we really need, our people in the arena more than ever, folks trying and fAiling and it's OK and they're just not enough that what instead is there's just a lot of people who just wanted a bit of complaint.

And I think this is the backlash to the magic kal interview is is this miscasting that this is an extremely privileged person or you know harrie back and both are very privileged. And but but I think what you're trying to do by making all these sort of accusations of races and make their own family as you're trying to ground that privilege in victim status and and this is the thing about privilege, is privilege is a social concept, is got nothing to do with with success, which is either earn or run earned. And so the way that people get uh to maintain their privileges is the again, they grounded in some sort of victimization um IT IT crazes very person incentives.

My reaction to the Megan markle prince Harry interview was the following. I had a lot of um sympathy uh for um what he was saying um but on the other side, I also thought you must have known what you were getting into on the way and there was IT was beat and out and look, i'll say this as a canadian industry longer on so the queen and the monarchy is an in like I can't describe you guys because you're not part of the coming world. But IT is just A A definite definition, part of who we are as we grow up and I don't know what the equivalent american constructive ves, I guess there isn't one really um and so you know the monarchy is an incredibly important thing, but we all know that it's this kind of like an acronym thing that just kind I look for us is not bullshit like I mean like if you said to me, despite all my bullshit IT enraging against the machine and society and blob block state of if if I could be invited to meet the queen, I would be there in eight nine o .

seconds I think the equivalent is the presidency. We actually feel that way about the presidency like going to visit the president is I mean.

the dency is not an double kind of circumstance that .

in my point is though we all know a that is important, is a great symbol of of the commonwealth. I'm very proud of all of that, but we also knows an acronym and IT doesn't make much sense.

And so what what do you uh what do you think you were marrying into? And I think, you know my perspective was I felt bad for I can't believe, you know, I got to the place where, like, people wouldn't get help for her when he was sick, you know and then they were questioning haris or the the kids, uh, archie, skin color. I mean, this is insanity, like these people are stuck in the eighteen hundreds.

But then you realize they are actually second the eighteen hundred, because are not allowed to have a Normal life, they are not allowed to actually interact. So you know, are they at fault or they or is the system that creates these sort of like voyage tic in exotic animals in the zoo that we call the king, the queen, these princess is the system at all? I don't know.

I was kind of like fifty fifty on the interview, but my perspective was the monarchy in a really tough spot over the next thirty forty years. Because, again, so now let me tell you where my belief is. I'm kind of a little bugged by the whole thing. The monarchy doesn't mean what is what what is used to be for me.

David, what's what was more enthrone to you this week, tucker versus teller or the queen verses for me? And I didn't spend.

I didn't spend to many a time on either one. I mean, look, I if I were, if I were Harry, I would probably do the same thing, which is to basically leave. Look, the first thing I did my career was lead, was quit the the firm right know who wants to work for a firm um you know it's very tract um so I don't blame him leaving going to california.

That's what that's what we all did right? And who's being is a very that's a very ultor al american thing to do. What I had a problem with was the way that they're attacking their own family because they're being paid seven million dollars to do this interview.

No, no, no. Holds on were nothing. There was the first question, Operas.

And and they were very clear. They were not. Now they did.

Who made seven? seven? No Opera did. Harper did. She's genius. A genius?

No, no. A is an america. It's even worse.

It's even worse if they did the interview for free and then even get a piece of the back end. So all they did was attack and to merge their family for not of that. And I look, I I guess my point is so so why would they do IT if it's something about the money? I mean, it's about this idea of defining their privilege, grounding at a victim status.

And I think there's something very fake and phony about that. And I think that's why people had this uh, reaction to IT where Frankly, they were. I don't think they're on the side of the roll family because it's IT is outdated, but I think there was a lot of skepticism .

towards what here. I had a little bit of a problem with, like live from our fifteen .

million dollar monto to change. I mean, that was paid .

for that house was .

they have .

a fifty million or I know, but they also have a fifty million. Our house next to open.

put IT down. It's probit. They put five down and they took out a mortgage or someone .

listed this. I is another question, does the to the .

taxpayers of the U. K. Fun, the princess sort fy, and now they have a salary and they're making money like everybody. Also, I an not, I have an issue with any.

I don't know. The taxpayers were funded the lifestyle. They do find the lifetime of the other princess, right? sure. yeah. So I mean.

that's .

important.

okay. So a people N F T soul for sixty nine million dollars.

I mean, this was crazy with all the dub happen, this .

table.

yeah, the condemned.

So I M I I miss talk or versus Taylor or but actually the real a the person took on Taylor that did a brilliant job was glenn Green wall. Yes, I know. I don't know if you guys read his post, but I was brilliant.

Basically what he said is that, look, you've got these classic reporters out there who their job is to go out and they're like little hall monitors, you know, trying to ask people for whatever they might say in a clubhouse room, not just public figures, but private people too. They're in the business of destroying lives and reputations, you know, that's basic, their business model. But then the second anyone has any criticism for them, they clam its harassment, which is this absolutely nonce. What funny, unlike the person .

that was inoculated against social justice, spoke ness to write that article, is glen Green because he is, you know he's gay. He's got Brown kids. He lives in brazil you know with uh, I mean it's it's fat. It's like you get remove object.

He's not completely immune because he was he was attacked you know and and people's said pretty nasty things about him but yeah he definitely .

has some I think Green wall is an unbelievable writer who calls IT like he is that um I don't agree with everything he says all the time um but you know he's right to call this stuff out. There is another bunch of social justice nonsense this week as well, this poor guy had to like, give out this crazy apology tweet because you said you like this. What happened is that story okay? This is a great been telling. You, by the way.

public service announcement, covet vaccine C A is the bott. So at cove vit tweet every five minutes, a hundred different places, you can go pretend to be a door as drivers, a shot.

an to go check a box.

Don't let some .

take away your health.

You don't let .

new son focus on equity.

Meanwhile.

he's like tell us about there's .

a kdd named dom. He's an entrepreneur, is building a company.

it's a good company, is funded by strike three hundreds of millions of dollars like good .

for this guy yeah but he likes to like you is kind of like trying to engage on twitter. And he basically said, I feel so much Better and i'm performing at such a higher levels. S since I got my diet and my exercise right. I mean, people who are not getting their physical right are really under performing at work is such an opportunity, whatever. And then you know the the large and in charge, you know, fat is beautiful, you know, contingent basically try to cancel him.

But did he say that you have to be skinning?

No, he just said you will pay for if you're fat, you under performing. Basically, he didn't use our fat, but he said, if you're not in shape, you're under performing at work, which I said, is the science behind this and yeah sure, people show me a hundred studies that show if you lose way, way, you have Better concentration and focus. I mean, it's pretty obvious, but he he did the cardinal sin as, uh, here here average to the tweet.

An important lesson I learned well into my career. If you are not physically fit and healthy, then you are underperforming at work. Pretty basic.

I probably not a very controversial, but he did what David acx always advises uh and the the the the advice gift trap which is never apologize um and he apologized dm apologized and took the tweet down, which then the mob really went after him um and he said I screwed up and i'm extremely sorry. I have recently spent a lot of energy focus on my fitness, eating and sleep. In my enthusiasm for my new fitness regime, I posted a tweet that was meant to celebrate my new healthy lifestyle but that's not .

how I came across. And I see now the with all the problems that we have that need fixing. I mean, this is what people are focused on. This is, here's the kicker of apology.

This is something I really need to improve on.

and I will won. I'm not making fun of him. I do you think it's sad? Is that what the is going on?

I don't apologize. If you believe being healthier is you know, good, then you should say IT. And you know we will let the chips while people can debate IT.

But I mean, can we have a debate about that? Because this is in the middle of a coffee crisis when the top two vectors are age and obesity period. If you're fat, you die from covet.

That's that's how IT works. And you got both those problems.

You're old fact. Guys to say stupid, good, alright today in all in nonsense. Apparently there is so much money in the system that an nf t just thought for sixty nine million dollars.

After we talked about the previous one build bought for six million dollars. I don't know that he bought IT for six million dollars, but somebody bought when last week. Nf t seem like a real thing. It's reasonable to trade stuff, but sixty nine million dollars.

I think it's incredible. I mean, I saw the breakdown of like the number of bitters here. Let me actually just get this, uh, data up because I think you guys will find that really incredible.

My this is on this, or my theory rather, is that there are a bunch of people who have stakes in the crypto assets and then they all premeditate decide to buy up these N F ts. To get the market started. And then once I started, like that's, but i've been .

buying art for a decade plus. And this is exactly how IT works in the art market. You know, we go in there, certain people will go in by.

And then what the gallery says is, oh, did you know that chaotic just bought this piece or such a such person about the other peace? And then all of a sudden the Price spins up, and then they feed into IT. I mean, this is where, you know, an enormous amount of money has been made by galeries ists over the last twenty or thirty years.

Now IT just happens in a different medium. So the the bidding break down, by the way, of the of incredible thirty three active bitters, ninety one percent of the bitters were renewed. Christies, fifty five percent came from the america, twenty seven percent of bitters were from europe, and eighteen percent were in asia.

The age breakdown is the most interesting. Six percent were genji. So ninety seven to two thousand and twelve, fifty eight percent of bitters were millennial s ninety point between eighty one and ninety six, thirty three percent and actions and three percent baby. So this is really like a transitional change in you know, basically deciding what's valuable. And I don't think this I don't think this was any different than you know, when you have this transition from you know sort of impressionist in the art world, like if you moved from the body of work where you know these impressions paintings were just going for high tens, low hundreds of millions of dollars and I think I peaked around then go um and then you know basically went from there off of a Cliff where you can basically give away in personal paintings, uh and everything went to contemporary and you know sort of like this post modern stuff and that was a decision to change by boomers.

What what does give away mean .

to user math? Every ten million.

So O, K, I, so I think on the nf t stuff, people as the artist, there's there's two things going on, right? So one is on a technology level, nf is non fungible tokens. They are it's illegal technology for creating provenance on a blockchain.

You know if a piece of art um basic gets put on a blockchain, you have perfect province. But that doesn't mean that all nfs are valuable. In fact, most of them won't be.

This is a technology, then you have the other things happening is an art level. What these sort of these sort of prestige galleries and so on there are saying that people is now a major artist. And there and the reason someone becomes a major artist is because they usher in like or become representative of certain new wave of art, like to moths thing.

You've got impressionism. You've got modernity. I mean, the reason why Jackson pollock cells for what? Have one hundred million dollars?

No, three.

three hundred to six, okay, because he represents an important wave in art. And some of those waves fizzle out, and they turned in to psy schemes and some of them become real. And people are speculating that this digital art will be a major wave.

And they're saying that people is the most important artist. They are kind of betting on that. Now do I think it's gonna last? Um I don't know. I really hard to .

say you you said the key thing though, the key feature of nfs, which I think is amazing, is that you can actually have ownership and provence written into a blockchain. Now you've take that abstraction. You can apply to all kinds of surface areas.

And IT makes a ton of sense. Any kind of other assets would make sense if you own a car, if you own cloth, if you own watches, if you own wine. Um what happens if you own a house? Now all of a sudden, if you can prove ownership over the stuff, not only can you trade IT, but you can also borrow against IT.

And I think that that is a really interesting idea, where once you financially ze all of these physical lasses that we own, you do eliminate an enormous amount of in inequality in the system, because you can actually get real transparent pricing. Like now could you? Yep.

block chains. Block chains are a leger, right? There are perfect leggy system. And so like everything, every type of possession that relies on title should eventually be blockchain. So are aren't a good example. I um help found A A company back in two thousand seventeen called harbor, which was a block chaining, uh, real state and getting a acquired. So now .

red or acquired?

No, I got acquired .

today.

Today we're going to .

make money.

We're going money. But yeah no, we're gonna make like back tight money, but we will make a little bit of money. But but yeah, look, I think I think we're in the early, early stages of this type of technology. You're going to see eventually blocked chaining of every of every type of asset where title is important.

David, I think that this is such an amazing idea because like if you think all of the OPEC lending markets where people can get access to reasonable cost of capital and they own assets, you know you end up in these crazy worlds were like if you look at the the housing crisis, uh, or the great financial crisis, you know there was like so much crazy lending, but behind that lending was like double, triple mortgage is happening right now in the car market. All of that stuff doesn't necessarily need to exist because if you have clear provenance and the ability to Price risk you just get, you know people can borrow a reasonable amount money at a reasonable rate and pay back and you can trade assets, you can sell assets is a really big deal. I think I think .

um if you take a zoom out on the you know the notion of what an N F T represents, it's IT doesn't feel to the similar from other um what I would argue like non productive assets. Like if you think about where one's capital goes, where individual put their capital, the first thing is kind of essential right? Things you need, like food and medicine and housing and clothing and went, and then you kind of enter into these kind of, you know not extend h you know uh kind of discretionary spending for consumer, you know, nice stuff, nice cloth, luxurious goods, things that are basically to dish. Then as you think about allocating the leftover capital, you're either and allocate you are leftover capital into investable assets that are either productive or non productive.

A productive asset is something you buy that you expect to return IT IT producers some value for you as you own IT, such as a owning a home or you get the value of living in IT or owning A A car where you get the utility of driving around in IT or owning a bond which issues you know a you know a coupon or or a stock that's gonna you know generate cash flows at some point in the future theoretically um the not productive assets of these assets that are just not designed to do that. But there a store of value that you expect at some point to realize some return um you know because someone else will pay a higher Price to you for that uh, nonproductive asset. This is like a piece of art or you know some piece of gold or something or something that you kind of hold or more increasingly, you know digital assets.

And this seems like the explosion in digital assets is, you know, Jason, point out at the begin, like as we've have moved to a highly kind of overvalued segment of productive assets sinks, that market is very frouzy. It's very difficult to kind of find productive assets that are worth putting capital into. There's continually more interest in non productive assets across the board because there's access capital in the system.

And uh, IT turns out that when that happens, there's enough of a market dynamic that emerges as an unproductive assets that gives people a reason to put their capital in and expect to have a return on them in the future. As soon as the market start drinking, as soon as um you know you've start having effects at a deflationary, your money will pour out of that market in general. That's always what happens with the art market and has for hundreds of years. Um and it's the digital means of of kind of realizing the same market transition.

Talk my size, do you get the rights? I guess this is a dependent on the terms that are set in the smart contract. But in the case of the people of I were to buy for sixty nine million, do I have the rights to IT so that I can print t shirts and sell hundred dollar t shirts? What can I create ten thousand more of this?

A great, great question. I don't know.

But that's a fabulous, by the way, can be altered as you point IT out the artist and and other folks have rights to art um even though the original painting is what sold you know the original um master of a Bruce spring inking song could be sold to a collector but the rights the rights on that track for reproducing IT making money off IT or owned by .

a publishing house that the magnetic tape, but not on the .

rides to explain over time the way if you think about what F T represents, IT represents that particular chain of electrons. And you know this is this is these these bets that represent this image um .

and it's not people make a hundred .

more and but he could change he could change one pixel theoretically or two pixel .

and he could go not not really because those images were once that he had he had this rythm .

of creating like one a day I think .

for very exactly this is it's a one of one another interesting uh, one of one that just happened was this, uh, performance artist. So I guess like underground digital artists, uh, bought bank sea for one hundred and twenty five million, hundred and twenty five thousand dollars. I get thousands and millions confused that. Everybody you want .

to use for this episode hash .

cancelled your um anyways, these four guys bought bought this banks I um for one hundred and twenty five thousand dollars. They brought to a warehouse and broke lin. They took a high rest image of IT.

Okay, so they took a picture of IT, and they created a one of one N F T. right? Okay, then they created youtube video of them burning the original bank sea.

Oh, so now all you had was the digital manifestation of this physical thing. Wait for IT. And then they sold IT for three hundred and like fifty thousand years, three x their money is the most incredible story.

Um I I can find the link and put I put IT in the show notes as well, but IT just shows you what's happening. And then I also think lasting on of ties. I thought that I think I was like kings of leon just put out an album and I was like, it's like fifty box for a song or something like that.

And IT comes with like a bunch of a interesting content. So it's the beginning of something, guys. I just think that you need sort of like popular content to get this movement going. But he seems to me like this is what people want to do. They want to own digital assets, they want to have provenance, they want to have custodial relationships, but that they want to basically.

But I just like it's art, art posters, right? Anyone can put the poster up in their room. Anyone can buy a copy for five box, but who wants to be original? And only the original may be visually identical, maybe graphically identical. But uh IT is truly about that notion of that that theoretical human mind constructive um that that that creates that distinction, and you just effectively have to count on other human minds believing the same thing in the future for you to be able to reclaim that value that that monetary value um or you're going to take a loss on IT. I mean too much.

Have you ever sold art that you've bought? You know I uh i've sold very little. Um I tend to buy and accumulate with this idea of eventually endowing something with just because I like, no, I think they're two waste buyers. One is speculatively and the other one is to tell a story um I took the second path um and so you know it's stuff that means a lot to me so hard for me to part with that even though IT sits in a report and delaware it's not exactly you know out about um with this idea that at some points people will get to really by I an one of the .

things that happens in the buy this art and you don't ever a lot of art doesn't get result to everyone kind of buys that under the notion that it's gonna worth more in the future and they can sell IT for more but very few people actually do end up selling IT.

No, no, no, this is so I get .

in the trading market right. But like I mean generally like a lot of collector's at a downing art or or a gifted. And when you gift IT, you get a an, a praise al done and you get a deduction on the APP raise value, right?

And so you can definitely do that that way. So a one one interesting story is that um one of the law auction houses has a financial and the the most incredible thing is like over like the last fifty years um their cumuli tive default rate was thirty basis points on their book like cumulatively, not like a year or a month but ever no be default .

but because .

they borrow money for the purposes of maybe buying other things or whatever. And then they will very you trade out of things and trade up to things and trade across things um but it's a very viBrant market of buying and selling. IT just happens to be very informal and a little bit closed and very much for insiders.

And you know another reason that I think that nfs will will change because IT IT will change this is that IT just makes IT available to everybody because you put all art on a very level playing field. And really, at the end of the day, what is art? It's a commentary on society.

And I think that having that level of transparency on that kind of stuff is, I think, is going to be really viable because you don't want water to people who you fundamentally disagree with as being a taste maker for a kind of art that you think is fundamentally flag, right? You're rather it's just it's no different than being able to go to ninety five different media sites to read the content you want, or you know, being able to listen to a thousand different kinds of music. All of IT in its totality is a commentary or on society. And I think what society says is we want transparency, we want choice. And this is where I think like that's like.

So I think this is a good a good duck tale into what's happening with the stimulus bill and where we started, which was is this even necessary um we have uh stimulus checks going out in the amount of two thousand dollars per individual in households with under one hundred fifty K I believe is um the income level, which means people who were not impacted by financially in any way by what's happened undercover IT. We're gonna get in a family of five ten thousand dollar checks even if nobody was laid .

off like nine percent of the bill. Jason.

yeah, mean. So .

four.

And so what do we think the end I have .

working theory, what are your .

general thoughts on this is necessary? And then to what's the what are the second or effects that we each predict will happen over the next eighteen months when all of this capital gets injected?

So the latter is what i've been focused on trying to figure out. And I saw some really interesting data, which basically I ask you guys the question because maybe you guys know the answer, but if you measure wealth and inequality, when do you guys think was the most recent period where there was the least wealth inequality the least what sorry.

how do you define that?

Ah you can measure IT like the genie index or you can measure is like you know the gap between the top desi and the bottom del in terms of uh, wealth and accumulated assets.

Well, would you be before the robby barren? No IT was between the robber ran now.

But the period of the least in equality in recent history was in the late seventies, which is an incredible start to say where the the gap between the top test l and the bottle as I was like you kind of like on on an index like sixty sixty five where as today sort of like at one hundred um now what happened then and is this is really interesting. What is that an inflationary period? There you go.

So what happened? And as IT turns out, inflation is a phenomenal way to decrease levels. The playing field, absolute decreases people's richness.

So IT makes rich people poor. That's really the most effective tool that you have to accelerate. It's very, very hard to redistribute money.

And I think every attempt doing that has largely failed. But the one consistent way. And if you go back period before that, you know, into the beginning of them.

but in an inflationary environment, borrowing costs go up. So businesses and people that rely on borrowing to grow their network, investing to grow their network k kind of suffer more than people that have a home, have a, you know, wait, wages go up in an inflation and .

environment right up, which would actually, if you think about like what you said before, like you, as people get wealthy, they move their money into you know, essentially financial assets and away from sort of like working assets. And when you know, interest strates go up and the risk free rate goes up, then the attractiveness of those assets go down. yeah.

And so what happens if shares and technology companies go down? But what what also happens is that you your cost of capital for a traditional business because it's tired, they have to then charge more, which means that they are paying their employees more. And those folks um on a marginal basis tend to then you take those dollars and spend those dollars. So inflation is this very productive mechanism of actually redistributing wealth and how home motors benefit homeowner benefits. Well, but like IT inks, IT drinks, the the .

wealth mild mild inflation, mild inflation is probably good, is is Better than probably deflation. But if IT tips over to hyper inflation, then IT destroys everyone in savings, right? And rich people have the ability to protect their asses against inflation.

A lot Better. The middle class people do. So you look at, like venezuela are germany, hyperinflation people. Hyperinflation destroy the value of of where are we seeing inflation .

or where do we anticipate we will see inflation? I saw today teslas tesler raised the Price on all their cars .

except they have to because the inputs of you, if you think about like if you break down a test line, you look at where the money goes. The money really is in the batteries. And if you break down the batteries, that goes into three critical input slip, ya nickle and cobol t and the Prices are highly suspect and um they're they're very poorly predicted. And so the cost of tests are going to go by twenty and there's nothing that there's nothing that tests could do.

And by the way, you'll see this across all commodity products if inflation takes hold in a in a meaningful way um including uh you know food products, egg products, you know uh all all commodities, no medals, but um the businesses it'll benefit the most. And this is really interesting from a technology perspective.

And I think he played in part miner standing is speaking to a number of pm about this portfolio managers at funds um is that you know technology companies don't have a lot of hard assets um and so they have less kind of um value a creation and amid plan in a commodity supply chain. So it's much more difficult for technology company to say raise rates by thirty percent or is a food company can raise rates by thirty percent. One of the ways to look at this is to look at the um you know the book value of the capex, you know pot property, plant and equipment of a business.

And businesses that have a lot of PPT are generally gonna do Better in inflationary environment. They're gonna a more through put on that P P I are going to have higher dollars per unit of p na. Um and so you'll see, you know this is why there is a shift of dollars toward or traditionally called kind of value stocks or you know kind of bigger industrial companies away from you know softer kind of tech companies, which don't really, really benefit from this inflationary trend. Um and so there's gonna you know some sort of play out in in in those sorts of products.

probably more. Jake, alvin, I think, David, do we sit in SaaS because i've noticed that SaaS Prices are going up and that people are just keep adding to the Price of the set Price. I was pricing out all the virtual conference, you know, stuff like hop in and all that army and whatever. And I was just shocked at how much they wanted to charge, you know, fifteen, fifty, one hundred thousand dolla year. And I like, but can I use like zoom in this for that in a chat room, slack room? But we going to see IT happen in sas, where people going to start raising the Prices and just increased their profit merger because their employees are going to demand more money because there are part of the cycle.

I think that's a function of pricing power are going up for as companies and but they become more established and trenched. Um those companies are very profile, I don't think there experiencing wage pressure and anyway um I think that there is becoming more successful, their pricing powers going up as they become not a monopoly. But as they have more marketer and they dominate their categories, they can increase Prices.

But I want to go back to this idea of the one thousand nine hundred and seventy. So I want to I want to chAllenge the idea that the U. S.

Economy was doing well in the one thousand nine hundred and seventy. So chmagh mentioned the june index. There was a different kind of metric called the misery index um that was a much for popular index that was used around that time.

And the misery index um IT was defined by a brookings economist and IT was basically the sum of the unemployment rate and the inflation rate. And in one thousand and eighty the misery index was nineteen point seven percent. This is why around reagan got elected is because you had a CPI, which the inflation rate of twelve point five percent and then you had unemployment of another seven point two percent on top of that.

And you know the one thousand nine hundred and seventies were ah especially the late seventies were an economic disaster for the country. So maybe things were more nominally equal, but everyone is equally more equally poor. Um and what you saw in the one thousand nine hundred and eighty is that they got no inflation under control.

Uh paul voler at the fed broke inflation that lowered interest strates enormously, that allowed people to buy homes. The stock market went up and you know if there was an economic boom. So I don't know that this idea that we want to introduce a lot of inflation, the system is a good idea. Like I said, I think mild inflation of, say, two percent is Better than two percent deflation the other way. But but I I think wish be very careful here about about inflation and and making sure he doesn't get out of control.

And the other index to look at as the quality of life index, which is typically you know health care um and then the property Price to your income ratio, commuting, pollution, uh safety and those kind of things. And you know the united states is fifteen th on that list with obviously the nordics in australia a germany new zeal just being at the top of those rankings in america.

I never really thought about that, right? We don't really even discuss happiness. You and that question, we don't index for that happiness.

And low stress, I think, were talking a lot about the life from same to go now because that's a community that's very rich and yet it's a miserable city to live in because crime is out of control you know, Jason, I have been to focusing on this, uh, da chase, a boott who's had an enormous impact on people's quality of life because he simply not prosecuting theft in the city.

There is actually is a crazy tweet where a city council member was inside city hall calling for a hearing on the rampant rise and theft in the city and meanwhile his car was broken into right outside city hall. I mean, you can make this stuff up. And then the other thing that came out where a whole series of statistics about crime and servers scores showing, or sorry, trials and convictions, basically chaser has not been has not been conducting any trials.

He hadn't been convicting anyone. IT turns out that the number of trials and convictions that he's gone in the fall months he's spent D, A, is one tenth of what gas scow got when he was da. And by the way, gasko is not the model D, A or anything. I mean, gas go and is facing a recall L, A, for the reelection of duty and he still ten times more productive than .

chase a boodle um just a quick update a many of you uh when I mentioned in the go fund for uh to put a journalist on chester, if you just type and go fund me chess A C H E S A into the google are we had eight thousand dollars since last week or fifty eight thousand dollars that's going to a journalist and a data journalist to cover this exact issue so thanks to the folks. I don't i'm not taking any money from what i'm donating.

obviously um other other than a small funders. Phy.

no, zero dollars. I don't having to IT. I basically said i'll be one percent of IT wherever the final number is.

I think the marine of time has done a great job with this. yes. And there have been a couple other sources as well. But but how dishonest was IT? I mean, this been a occuring theme on the part I want to touch on.

IT chases sent his little mouth piece as little minion, the high school friend, to go out and chAllenge us writing that blog post, saying that that was a lie, that chasa wasn't prosecuting anybody and loan behind the numbers that come out. He tried to claim that a chasa had the same rate of charging that goes gas going did, and that was true. But the problem is he's been pleading down all these charges.

He's not taking anyone to trial. He's not convicting anyone. He's certainly not locking about IT up. So I mean, what what a lie that was.

Well, criminals are just so savy that they actually understand what the chances are of them actually getting convicted and they shape their grip and their crime to whatever the environment they're in is just like people who deal drugs, just like people who take these hard core federal drugs. They just pick the market where they are gone to be most welcome. So they're not going to do IT down in palo to sam or a mill valley.

They're going to do IT on street. Yeah so I think that's how IT starts. But I got to tell you, you know i'm in lay right now and um there was an episode like last week at an opposite oh yeah and it's it's on canal street in downtown beverly hills. And the number .

one to tell you .

in place it's a great italian place is what outdoor seating there was basically a mugging of someone is sitting at a table. Apparently they were wearing a really nice watch and and they were, they were robed at gunpoint in the middle, you know, in the middle of the rest lunch time. And then there was a struggle over the gun.

I don't know why the guy didn't in hand over the watch, but anyway, he struggled over the gun. Four shots went off. What are they bounced off the concrete to hit a woman in the leg? Oh my god. So this is like create. It's getting.

I mean, it's getting out of sounds like sample o with a chat, people's arms off watch, I mean, literally will dry by apparently and just cut your ARM off if they can if you don't give me the watch.

Well, I just know the criminals are starting to feel in bolden because gas gone and boodle or not, they're not having trials, are not prosecuting, they're not locking people up. And so they're graduating to more and more serious offences. I'm sure if they tried in one to shoot anybody, or that wasn't their intention, they just want to steal the watch.

But a resulted in a shooting just like the death of hanoi. A and a list with plot when you had torc coster, you know hit them with the car. So I mean the fact that I we're not locking people up as resulting in in people dying and a lot of risky, very risky behavior.

Or as we rap here, lot of backs going out. We obviously saw um another I guess road blocks was a directly sting here only .

only under prised by fifty percent. Same problem as the IP just saying.

is bill girly on his headset walking? Or how are a what .

what am I what am saying is, uh, irrespective of what the the goals of the direct listing, where the result is the same as a traditional .

ipa 的 一个 um .

I can I give a shadow actually to accompany that？ David sax, um sure.

Oh, pipe.

yes. Tract, which is an incredible company that basically like helps you capitalize your contracts with your customers. And IT is is is basically this incredible thing that i'm seeing and it's and there's a couple of others that do as well.

Um clear bank is another one, but you can fund your company non delusively. And at some point, I think we should actually talk about the state of the union invention. Maybe we can do that in a couple of next episode. Have a lot of thoughts on where I think venture capital is going. And when I see things like pipe, I am just like completely so happy because I just think IT, it's uh it's it's going to change the the the way in which venture investing is done.

It's a very brilliant idea. You know a piped C S twice to get twelve th three um piped ck is a two sided marketplace. If you have reoccurring SaaS revenue or any kind of reoccurring revenue, somebody did IT with the sub stack.

So I think pump leona, the guy who pumps uh, bitcoin, he has a newsletter that makes whatever quarter million dollars a year. Um he sold for ninety five cents on the dollar his for looking submitted for the year and bought bitcoin with IT when I was at thirty five. So he's like doubling down.

But if your asset company, when we have many of them in our portfolios, you could take all of your monthly sell them on the marketplace to somebody else, not pipe. Pipe doesn't bit is some other financial persons says i'll give you a ninety four cents on the dollar, will be ninety two cents on the dollar, be eighty five cents on the dollar. And so if you if you have a ten million, our book of business paying monthly.

you can get that ten million now and deploy IT. But I let's agree the part, let's start with the future venture capital.

one hundred percent. I mean, it's changing dramatic.

changing dramatically. And I I think these non deluded ways of growing a company will completely impact pricing. You know, free money, post money, the amount of equity that employees can and should own these businesses.

You know, what is the value of brands? Like, know, I like people know who David taxes and who Harry hurst is. People doesn't generally don't even care anymore like you know if i'm calling from sqa, what does that mean anymore um they're going to say who from sicko is cold? Uh, so these are all really interesting topics that I think that we're talking about.

Another path that is the public markets, you know right I mean public markets are becoming the new late stage private market and it's really both this back in early stage I P O direct listing models or um are are changing dramatically and its and there's more speculative risk seeking in the public markets in a way that I don't think we've ever seen um and it's uh it's creating an opportunity for companies Better still.

You know what in a traditional um kind of sets might be called you know early stage or still businesses, a lot of risk being able to go public and and you know kind of take their companies out and let the public market switch on and on how well they are going to execute and and how well they're going to be able to develop their product to their market. And it's by the way, it's something we've seen historical with biotech where there's kind of very binary kind of bets that uh and binary outcomes because the markets are known and you don't need to kind of production build a business around IT. But now we're actually taking both business for risk, market risk, technology risk, market risk um and at all stages.

I think you're gona see these um these scenario where people will build public portfolios, public uh public company portfolios that will perform a lot like venture portfolios, right? You'll have one or two businesses have a ten baggar and you zero a chunk bittle go to zero and a chunk k ditto have some modester turn on them. And it's going to be yeah, it's going to be this this tremendous learning experience because lot of people will put all their money into one stock, but they think is already been made.

It's already, it's already done. It's net less, it's netflix. It's you know their promise of the future is one hundred percent certain. And the reality is the promise of the future is five percent certain.

And so depending on the Price are entering and how many these things you buy, you could build a portfolio that could have a good return. But it's it's going to a be a lot of speculative betting and a lot of losses. And if you don't diversify gonna lose a lot of money. And you know so the question is also how does that involve .

regulatory chamati you communicating that to the market? Because you'll have some spiracles I go out. I would think virgin gache is in that more like their deep tech researching phase and then you have other ones that are already you know turning the the bringing the register, right? So how do you communicate that to retail investors or the audience or that's up to them to do the research?

How do you think about that? I mean.

there's as well as the bad inventory they are getting added?

No, look, yeah, I do a tweet storm. I do a one pager. I have a multivu detailed investor presentation that's taped and then we have a typically a one hundred to three hundred page s four.

So you can congress into finding out the true story of a business at whatever point you want. IT really just does come down to doing your work. I mean, a lot of the folks on twitter, you know when you see the market to straight down and they complain, my reaction is stop crying and do your own work.

Um and there is like we have complete transparency this process. So IT is up to people to do their job. And the the thing that I think is happening right now as people think that they don't have to do a job and that money is free and it's not it's hard to make IT.

It's hard to make good investment. It's hard to build the company. Everything is hard.

Nothing is really easy. Because if I was easy, everybody would be doing IT all the time. And so that's that's what I would love to lead people.

I really gotta go, guys. I love you guys, but let's serve with venture capital next. You love you boys, free. David, love you, love you, David. You dag love you guys.

I love you. I love you too much. I ve, I do love you.

I mean, we love each other. And we can say IT. And then the guys on this side out dragging in.

dying, everything with dragging out.

because we love you, David. See all next time. Bye, bye. Red pills got. Red pills got, little red pills got in.

I been on a bend on this rent.

Go more. I need more rapes. Give me those rapes from miami. Give me, give me.

唱 rap 资料 恶心。 And miami.

Boy, kill.

Go right. Anybody give a shit about N F. T?