Inflation cools, market rips, Ripple/MSFT beat regulators, NATO summit, cocktails of youth

00:00We don't have a cold open. Well, since you guys decided to go rogue and, agreed on a vacation week and then decided Friedberg decided he would go rogue, it gave me a little your time when I was white water rafting.

00:10Hold on a second. Friedberg did not decide to go rogue. You went rogue. Your 2 peers decided to go rogue. I was taking the week off.

00:17They both sent on the tech screen, we wanna do a show this week. And I said, sure. I'll do it. I mean, yes, what

00:23I'll do. You went rogue. Yeah. That's what I said.

00:26There was no vacation, I agreed too.

00:28You don't even know your schedule. You're you're too busy writing 30 Tweets songs about Hunter Biden.

00:33Why would all of a sudden there be a skip week in the middle of July is because you are off.

00:37No. We said It's not what he said. When we scheduled

00:39the summer, his vacation after

00:41he had agreed.

00:41I also have to give producers a week off now and again because they work into the weekend, editing the stuff since

00:46your editors produce 2 editing. You can just swap them

00:48out. I have 2 editors. Yes. I gave everybody the week off.

00:51The point is that when one of us If you

00:53have said, no. No.

00:54Is off on a given week, the show goes on. That's what you always say. The show has gone. But then when you have a need to go on vacation

01:02No.

01:03Then, you know, it gets canceled.

01:04No. What would have happened was what would have happened was I would have put one of my producers on for that. We got already given the other one But because we all said we were gonna be off that week, I gave everybody off that week because I said, let's take advantage of this. That's what actually happened. But that's fine because

01:17Using that to us, We had to have I

01:19literally, you deliberately both said to you in the chat. We're off this week. We're off this week, and we confirmed with your teams multiple times we were off this week. It's no big deal. If you wanna go 52 weeks either,

01:28we wanna record this week.

01:30On Wednesday. On Wednesday, when everybody had already been given off, I know that everybody who works really, sir.

01:35You just went

01:35I treat some people. I we Nick and I both responded. We're off this week.

01:39Please. Don't pretend like you're a great boss. We don't know what about

01:42boss you are. I know that a search will work for you. Do not get days off. But I treat the people who work for you by heart.

01:49In your organization.

01:50Try to my organization.

01:52Let's see. Average tenure of one of your employees. It's like 6 months.

01:56No. No. Actually, it's more like, 4 or 5 years right now. I mean, I have people for 5 to 10 years now. It's pretty impressive,

02:02actually.

02:03You know what's interesting? My tenure is actually bimodal. It's either years years years years years Yeah.

02:08Or out the door. 1 year. 4 months. Yes. That's the way it should be.

02:12Either you hit the notes or you don't, and you should know quickly.

02:14There's nothing in the middle. Yeah.

02:16It that's the way it should be, actually. I was sitting by the, the river. I went white water rafting on the, Rogue River when, Friedberg went rogue. Why am

02:25I the one who went rogue?

02:26Because I don't like you. And that's the reason. I'm not blaming the other 2 guys. I'm friends with them. It's obvious.

02:34So I'm just joking. Just joking with these 3 p l

02:37Oh, when did I become the enemy?

02:48We open source it to fans in a discoloration. Alright. The big news this week is inflation has eased to 3% in June. We'll throw up a chart here. It's a slowest pace in more than 2 years.

03:03So the feds increases have worked. And I guess the question now is, are we gonna have a sustained, high interest rate, or is it gonna get cut slowly? Chamath and Friedberg, you've been talking to a number of people about this. I think all in summit 2023 speaker Larry Summers has been pretty vocal about this. What's your take?

03:25Friedberg. Yeah.

03:25I mean, I think Larry said publicly that he that rates are gonna need to be higher for longer than what the market is currently showing. We talked last week with Brad, obviously about what the market is showing rates to be, and he's assuming some rate cuts will start to happen in December, and that's really what the market is saying. It's gonna happen. And Brad's point was the market knows better than the forecasters. But Larry Summers has publicly shared that he thinks that that that is actually not correct.

03:53And, you know, again, diversity of of views is important to understand that there are structural things that are happening in the world right now in doing a decoupling from China, which is inflationary because, you know, China provides cheap goods and cheap manufacturing for a lot of industries and many of those industries sell to consumers. So, ultimately, those prices are gonna show up in consumer costs. There's a increase in energy transition expenditure and security, globally, and Summers have pointed out that those are not free. They have to be funded. And, obviously, taking on more funding means you're gonna have to pay higher interest rates for investors to provide that capital to do that funding.

04:32So there are more structural longer term trends that some folks in the summers camp have been arguing are gonna be driving inflation higher and keep rates higher for longer than what the market is currently showing. And I think it's really worth noting that point of view, particularly given how quickly the market thinks rates are gonna start getting cut.

04:53Shamoff, you've been talking about the interest rates and that you believe it'll be persistent. So higher for longer you're sticking with higher for longer on the interest rates, I assume?

05:02Yeah. I think the more important thing from that JKL is so what do we do about it? And I think the most important point of view that I'm trying to get to is where do I think the equity market is going to go? And You know, all roads at least right now look like the market is getting set to go materially higher. And the reason isn't whether, you know, terminal rates are at 2% or 3% or 3.5%.

05:28I don't think that matters that much. What matters more are the trillions of dollars that are sitting on the sideline or in other defensive assets that need to then pivot around and get put back into growth assets once you know that the worst is behind us. And I think that's what a market always looks for before real sentiment changes. And what's important to note is that by the time most people figure out that the sentiment has changed, it's already actually too late. And so, ah, I think right now in the next sort of like 12 18 months is really when the bottom is put into the market.

06:04It's before the Fed starts cutting. It's when rates are still going to be relatively high But the really astute sharp in this market will get ahead of it, and they will start to buy what they think will be an eventual rally. And then it's gonna get supported by the fact that if not enough people are also wrong, You get caught on the wrong side. You don't necessarily have to be short. You just aren't long enough.

06:35And what that does is put pressure on your business model. So if you're a mutual fund, if you're a hedge fund, and you've missed most of this rally, which most people have because it's really only been 5 or 6 companies. So I think that Larry is right. I think that I still believe what I've said for a while, which is rates will be higher for longer. But what I didn't believe before was that the market was set to go up.

06:57I think we did a great job. I think literally that When I made that comment November of 21 about starting to sell, it was the absolute top of the market. Yeah.

07:06You nailed that one. You know that one.

07:07Nailed it. Yeah. And I think my commentary now is that we're putting in the bottom. And I think the market is set to go materially higher even if rates are persistently higher for a while.

07:19Just to challenge you on that second point, the the bottom really was put in maybe last summer. You're really speaking to the psych and the dynamics of capital allocation. There are people who were scared maybe and thought the bottom could get much worse. And they didn't want to put money at play. There were some people who are brave enough to put money in play in the last 12 months.

07:39I'll I'll give myself a pat on the back. I did Jay trading starting last summer, and I'm up, whatever, 25%. Something crazy like that because I picked all the big tech companies. But you're saying now, because

07:49that's but that's a good example, just to pick on that, the reason you did well, was mostly because they were oversold.

07:56Meaning, that was part of those tech.

07:57Yeah. If you look at those big tech companies and but that's not a thing if you're trying to own great companies. The reality is those 7 companies, one of them in video is actually firing on all cylinders. Everybody else just stopped acting like a fucking moron. And that's not a sustainable business strategy, meaning you know, burning 1,000,000,000 and 1,000,000,000 of dollars a quarter totally wastefully with all kinds of random free stuff to a bunch of entitled employees.

08:26And then taking that away doesn't ensure long term success for anybody. All it does is just turn against the bleeding And so you have more material short term cash flow. And the markets are gonna reward it, especially in a moment where it's the trade off is against rates, short term rates that are 5 or 6%. But from here, right? The real long term value creation is still going to go to the companies that are building true product market fit and product value.

08:55And our

08:56and are really growing in a material way from adoption and usage, not from cost cutting, because people see through that. And When rates start to get cut, they'll see through it even faster. The only time cost cutting gets rewarded is when short term rates are this high because people love short term cash flow.

09:15Yeah. And it was when the the moment I saw Zuckerberg and Airbnb, Uber, other places just start and, obviously, Google and Microsoft start making cuts. You're like, okay, people are going to lower their costs. They're doing triage, as you're saying. To make the balance sheet, to make the arrangements.

09:30Works in the final third of a bear market. Okay. So But triage does not work in a bull market. You don't get rewarded for triage

09:37in the bull market. I totally get it. You have to innovate. You have to build great products. So, Saxman, you're looking at the overall market.

09:43I think we talked about the average recession or downturn is six quarters plus or minus 1 or 2. Historically, we are entering the 7th quarter of the downturn, at least in tech, started by tech in the first quarter of 2022. Here we are in the 3rd quarter starting in July of 2023. What's your take on what the next six quarters look like? Are we going to be sideways?

10:05Are we going to, as Tremont saying, Hey, there's a lot of people who are trying to pay catch up. They miss this bump. And now they're competing, and they have to, at the end of the year, capital allocators are gonna show, in their yearly reports what they did this year, And now they're like, hey. We gotta put some some bets into some high growth companies. Is this the setup for another mania and, maybe unhealthy behavior?

10:26Jason, I don't think it's

10:27gonna be a mania, but I do think that the market is ripping today because the market is basically pricing in the idea of off landing along with inflation being tamed. So you had a positive CPI report at 3%. You had a hot job support a week or 2 ago. And there's a interesting article in the Wall Street Journal today talking about the odds of a soft landing improving.

10:48And

10:48they have some data for that. I don't particularly agree with the sub headline. To try to

10:52Latest data suggests a lot of past inflation was transitory. That seems

10:56Yeah. That I think is is being too charitable to the fact because when they use the word transitory, they were using as an excuse not to raise interest rates. And we just had the fastest rate tightening cycle ever over the past year. That's the reason why inflation has gone down. It was not transitory until they jacked up interest rates from 0 to 5%.

11:17So the Wall Street Journal, I think, is doing a little covering for the Fed there. But nonetheless, I think everybody is pleasantly surprised that a CPI is now down to 3% and, b, you have not had a significant cooling of the jobs market. So certainly the odds now of a soft landing have gone up. And the thing that's sort of surprising about what Larry Summers is saying is that if you believe that inflation's gonna come roaring back. That's certainly a contrarian bet.

11:47That's not what the market is saying right now. What the market is predicting right now and and the reason why stocks are rallying is what the market is thinking is, well, if inflation is down to 3%, and we can end the year at 3 or even lower, then the fact can start cutting next year. And so they're starting to price in rate cuts. But if inflation comes roaring back, you're not gonna get rate cuts And so stock price are gonna go down. I don't see how you kind of have a scenario of even higher interest rates from here along with higher stock prices.

12:17I think you need lower rates to get higher stock prices. And one of Brad's chart shows this if you look at the software index, the median enterprise value divided by next 12 months revenue What you see here is that the mean multiple is 7.7, excluding the COVID distortion, we're at 6.6 now. So there is room for the software index to run up pretty nicely here, you could argue that's undervalued or or fairly valued you see the 10 years of 3.8%. If you compare it to where we were before COVID when interest rates were in the mid twos to around 3%.

13:00Yeah. We got to an 18 x multiple. It was crazy.

13:03Yeah. So so, basically, if interest rates go down, I think for sure you'll see multiples go up. But I think if interest rates gonna keep going up from here, then you're not gonna get that rally, or I don't see why you would.

13:14Well, the thing to keep in mind is I think this chart is not that helpful because this is all unprofitable software companies. So I think the more important thing is to look at the broad based index. The thing with these companies is that even if rates are 3% or 6% or 2% or 1%, that trick is over. These companies are not gonna get out of this cul de sac until they figure out true product market fit, how to eliminate churn, how to drive medium to long term profitability. And most of them, unfortunately, don't have a clear path to that.

13:47And the problem is all of the old legacy software companies, x of Salesforce, have still not got to profitability. So meaning the ones that went public and, like, the early teens are still sucking wind, losing money. So the idea that software businesses generate long term profits is so far, unfortunately, been a fallacy. So that chart I think will stay exactly the the same way it is. I think the bloom is off the roads, but where the money can go

14:13We change that though, Chamath, which when because we need to stop at this point to look talk at these SaaS companies because what would change that if they actually get to profitability and SaaS, what's the chances they get to profitability? Because that would make them look more like my software,

14:25the biggest problem that software as a service businesses have is the same thing that it benefits from, which is cycle time. So the cycle time for a SaaS business to build a feature set, to get product market fit, and to get early revenue is very short The problem with that is that is the equivalent amount of time it takes for a competitor or several competitors to compartmentalize and chop and slice and dice that feature set into a bunch of smaller subscale SAS products that then go after it and cannibalize that revenue. So I think the issue that they have is they show contractually a lot of revenue expansion that looks good on the service. But underneath, these guys are in this constant hamster wheel of trying to build features and trying to keep their head above water and all of that treading consumes enormous amounts of cash. And so from an OpEx perspective, these SaaS businesses, they just suck.

15:20They don't generate free cash flow, except for a few.

15:23Let me let me bring SaaS into the SACs. Do you think that these companies will get to having a PE ratio because a lot of times you pull them up, and it's like price earnings ratio not applicable for this company, because there are no earnings. And you've dedicated your current disaster and you built a $1,000,000,000 company. So give us the other side.

15:40The other side of it is that software says have great gross margins. I mean, you spend all of your R and D creating the first instance of the product and they're they're after every additional the product is basically almost free to provision on the margin. So these are super high margin businesses. Once you achieve dominance in your category, there's a bunch of different modes. You can create a platform.

16:01You have the largest sales and marketing operation. Everyone wants to go with the market leader. So there's, you know, a bunch of different ways to lock in your advantage, and not all those companies are losing money. Growing number of them are making money. I just think that's like a sweeping over generalization.

16:18Got it.

16:18So I still think software business are some of the best businesses. But But

16:22why don't they get you off earning faster?

16:25We're off on a little bit of a tangent here, which is I could've shown you a slide of almost any basket of gross stocks. Yeah. And you would have had something similar, which is they're still trading below their 7 year mean. On a rentable basis. And so my point was simply that if interest rates are coming down, there is room for these

16:47you're right about that. Yeah. Let me

16:49let me bring Freeburg in. Freeburg in the summer's camp, and some other people's camp, they believe interest rates have to go higher to despite the fact that inflation has plummeted, and it feels like a for Powell that this is a mission accomplished moment. The reasons they believe that are the infrastructure and chip bill are gonna pour money into the United States, and we're gonna have massive spending. We already have absurd 50 year low unemployment which is insane. We still have close to 10,000,000 job openings.

17:19We have locked the borders. We now have Democrats, and Republicans back to back saying, we're not gonna let people into the country. We've so I don't know who's gonna work in all these factories if we don't have an immigration policy, So maybe you could tell us if you actually believe this sort of let's call it the summer's doctrine here or the the contrarian summer's position, 6, 7% interest rates are coming because we're going to have persistent inflation. And if you believe that contrarian take

17:50I think there's a general statement that can be made that we are coming out of a 0 interest rate environment into which lasted for a very long period of time. Into a a very stimulatory environment because of government spending. And when you have government spending stimulating the economy, you have a natural market force of inflation coming from the additional capital being pumped into the economy and the purchasing and and all that sort of stuff. Like you pointed out, 50 year low unemployment, and we're trying to create a bunch of new jobs. And who's gonna fill those jobs, you're gonna have to pay people more to get them to take those jobs.

18:38So, you know, you're gonna see a rising wages. And then you're gonna see Can

18:42I ask you a question as a follow-up to that free You pay people more, but there's nobody looking for jobs? We're kind of that's, I think, the conundrum we're in. People want to you

18:52can boost the labor participation rate. You can attract more people to the workforce.

18:56Yeah. And it drives wage growth, but, ultimately, keep this in mind. So the lower wage workers, let's use a simple example of people that work in fast food, they're if their rates go from, you know, 8 bucks to 15 bucks to 25 bucks an hour, the cost of fast food goes up. So on the food price index, you'll see a rise in in food prices. So right now, it seems like the fed and the market are all acknowledging and reacting to, you know, these these I don't I would kind of argue acute conditions that are that are being resolved from coming out of the COVID stimulation.

19:30But there are in place, as the comments have been made, increased spending to NATO because of global security concerns, increased defense spending globally. The current projection from the CDO showing what defense spending is gonna be as a percentage of GDP or percentage of government spending. There are some folks, as you guys all know well, you would speak to in DC who think that those numbers are BS because we're gonna increase defense spending, not cut it. Because of global security concerns, particularly as we decouple from China. And all of the energy transition stuff, the IRA, the chips act, which is a security thing, These are all stimulatory.

20:06So the tides come in and out, but the sea levels are rising. And over time, that translates into a way to manage the inflation, but also to raise the capital, which means you have to pay higher rates. And this is this is in the EU and the US that it seems this is gonna be the case.

20:24So I

20:25feel like we've gone in a circle a little bit.

20:27Which is good, I think, just to show how complex the issues, and we worked trying to predict the weather here or at least understand the weather patterns. So let's talk about the driving force in this. In CPI, the first word is consumer, Shamoff, Stimmy check summer last year and the year before NFT crypto, it, you know, secure your bag summer. I think it was this the same sort of phenomenon and unlimited, you know, double or triple bonus unemployment plus deferring your student loans. Those four things were, you know, pretty much defined in the last 2 years, and all of them have come to a crashing halt.

21:03You can't get unlimited unemployment. You gotta start paying your student loans in September from my understanding. And, you're you

21:11gotta pay your rent.

21:13Oh, yeah. Oh, wow. What crazy concept. So we have 5 factors there. You have to you have to pay your landlord your rent.

21:20So let's talk about the consumer for a quick second here. Is this the last hurrah summer? People consumers are gonna need to get back to work in September because It seems like the credit card debts going up. We talked about that over the last year. And if consumers aren't spending, you know, that's gonna be the driving force.

21:37And that was the goal of raising the interest rates is to maybe get consumers to have a higher car bill, a higher mortgage bill, and to get back to work. Yeah. I mean, I

21:47think that's very well summarized. I think that we, are absorbing all the excess liquidity in the economy that would otherwise have gone into really speculative things. The extra vacation, the extra pair of shoes on Stock x or whatever, the extra NFT, the extra this, the extra that, that's all out the window. A traditional home mortgage is probably doubled in terms of your monthly payments. So, yeah, people will be forced to get back to work.

22:18They'll have to stay in jobs longer. They'll have to just do a much better job of managing their finances. But all of that doesn't necessarily mean that the US economy falls off a cliff. I think that the thing we have to remember is that And I don't think we can explain it actually very well because every time a an economist has tried to do it, I don't think they've really figured this out, but We tend to have a very resilient level of consumer demand. And when you look at the correlation between consumer demand and the underlying economy, even in periods of extreme shocks.

22:56So even like the pandemic is one of those moments where, yeah, the demand fell off a cliff, but that's because we were literally prevented from doing anything. We could not buy the things that we wanted to. Right? Or if you even go back to 2007, 2008 in the great financial crisis, the interesting thing about consumer demand is that it snaps back very quickly. So there's this weird dynamic where folks have a base level of spending and They use an amount of debt to basically, you know, subsidize that, and then they're willing to work in order to make sure that that doesn't change.

23:30And I think that that's what we're getting back to. We're gonna get people off the sidelines into the labor market and

23:37Yeah. I

23:38think it's we'll keep going.

23:39Sachs, I think it's all psychology. Like, if you're I think people spending is a function of their optimism, and, like, maybe their last trade or their last bank statement. So it's like, oh, my NFT tripled. Therefore, it's going to triple again next month. And, hey, there's a chance it might go 10 x.

23:55Oh, I invested in the startup. Oh, you know, I'm getting STEMI checks. I'll get another STEMI check. And now if they get 3 or 4 moments in time where, oh, My NFT is now at 10%. I can't defer my student loans anymore.

24:08Oh, I'm a curing interest. Oh, no. The house I bought now has a 15% mortgage, and I was on variable. So what what's your thoughts on the psychology of the consumer here? And is everybody just still spending, but maybe downgrading a little bit.

24:21Maybe they buy the Tesla model 3 instead of the, you know, going for the model s. If they take business class instead of hitting business class or economy plus they they do a staycation and drive somewhere?

24:32I've been surprised at just how resilient the economy has been. I figured that after all the distortions we had in the economy, all the stimulus during COVID, we basically floored the accelerator and then slammed on the brakes with this incredibly rapid rate tightening cycle. I thought for sure that was gonna basically crash the economy. I was in the Drukenmiller camp on this. But I think, again, what you're seeing over the last few weeks is just more and more evidence that it could be a soft landing that we may not have a recession and we might even get rate cuts next year.

25:04But I do think that right now, the risks are probably as balanced as they've been. So if you wanna pull up Nick, can you pull up that chart, the quadrants from the co 2 summit? I thought this was actually a pretty interesting chart that we saw at the co 2 summit as a useful framework for thinking about the scenarios for the economy. 2 quadrant where on one axis you've got inflation. And inflation can be either low or high based on 3% being the dividing line.

25:33And then the economy can be either weak or strong with 4 a half percent unemployment being the dividing line. So if you believe that inflation's coming down below 3% and unemployment's gonna stay below 4 a half percent. I think it's already at, like, 3 a half percent right now. Then you're back in the sustained growth quadrant, in which case, the S and P 500 is gonna keep ripping. On the other hand, if inflation is above 3% with low unemployment.

26:00You're back in the overheating quadrant, which is probably bad for stocks. Now you could have a situation in which inflation goes down and remains good, but unemployment goes way up, in which case that'd be the hard landing. And then the final quadrant is stagflation where you've got high inflation and high unemployment. So I think the quadrants right now are probably as balanced as they have been in quite some time in terms of where we could end up in, let's say, a year.

26:26Yeah. I think that there are some, yeah, there there's some early signals that you can look to to get a sense of where this may be going. Disney World is empty. The lines are really short. I don't know if you guys have any friends that have been to Disney World lately or Disneyland.

26:41Was in the Wall Street Journal. The traffic is falling off a cliff.

26:44Yeah. And there's just there's another go go broke company.

26:49That's a really interesting point is, do you think that the Disney traffic has gone down because the conservative half of the country basically feels ascended, and they're bud light?

27:00Yes.

27:00Yes. Or is it a larger consumer spending problem?

27:02Everybody, everywhere else is still spending. Like, even if you go to, like, look at the world series of poker main event it this year had the historic number of entries, everything is telling you that people are getting their last hurrah. So the fact that Disney has been decaying for the past year is more emblematic of the fact that they've gotten into this social culture war and half the population of America said we're not going to support your business like they did to Bud Light. And I'm not adjudicating the rightness or wrongness of either Bud Light or Disney, but the answer is in the actual results. The people are not walking into the store

27:37just to show this while we're on Disney. So here's a Disney chart for you just to show you the, times at the different parks over the years. It it is in 2023 meaningfully shorter than 2022 or pre pandemic. So I don't know if that's a function of their technology that they've been deploying or if maybe conservatives are not going. But there's also another x factor, which is the previous head of Disney who got ousted and Bob Eiger's back, was the guy who ran parks and he just leaned into changing the pricing and it got absurdly expensive and they got rid of, like, the California pass and all that stuff.

28:10So I think the the the jury's out on this one, Bob Chapic. Yeah.

28:13But there's a broader consumer spending question that I'm I'm saying there there may be some early signals most consumers rely on credit, as you guys know, interest rates are rising and that passes through to consumers purchasing goods. But other folks look at the metric of consumer credit card balance as a percentage of savings or percentage of earnings, which is actually a little bit lower given wage growth and savings that have accumulated regardless there are other signals we can look to. So if you pull up this chart, this just shows a really important, statistic. So 80% of new car purchases are financed, meaning you take out an alone to buy the car, 40% of used cars are financed. And interest rates on, car loans, as you guys can see in this chart, in just the last year or so, interest rates have spiked from under 4%, call it 3.7% to an average of 7% today.

29:04And that obviously translates into a doubling of the monthly payment needed to buy a car. And now if you go to the next image so this is now playing through in terms of used car demand and used car prices. In the last month, it was reported by Cox Automotive, that the pricing for used cars has declined by 4.2%. And so this starts to indicate that there may be a bit of a softness emerging We could argue, yes, this is having a positive effect on the inflationary conditions, but it may also be an indication of consumer spending and that we're starting to get to a point where credit is so expensive and consumer's ability to flex credit is being decreased, and that's starting to translate through into what everyone's been worried about, which is the recessionary or declining effect on revenue declining effect on profit of companies that are selling goods and services. So that is obviously the challenge to Saks's point on that 2 by 2 matrix.

29:57On it, you know, if you if you reduce cost and reduce demand too much, you you can have a recessionary effect. And consumers are a big driver of this, and so many consumers depend on credit. It's a it's gonna be a big condition to watch.

30:09Well, austerity measures are gonna happen. Here's the chart of quarterly revenue for, Disney. Yeah. Still doing great. I bought the stock, and it's it's the one thing in my Jay trading portfolio.

30:20I've gotten crushed on that in Warner Brothers Discovery. Made 2 entertainment bets and what I think are the 2 best companies. How's it in Netflix? But one out of 3 ain't good. Alright.

30:29So some breaking news here. That will try to dovetail together with this Lina Khan and the FTC losing their Activision case. Apparently, and it's breaking news. A partial win is what it looks like. Let me read this here.

30:44Judge gives repo partial win in SEC case over XRP currency. Ripple Labs Inc. Violated federal securities law and its sale of cryptocurrency XRP directly to sophisticated investors, but its sales on public exchanges did not involve securities. A US judge said in a ruling that sent the cryptocurrency soaring XRP was up 25% after the ruling. SCC had accused the company and its current and former chief executives conducting a $1,300,000,000 unregistered security offering by selling XRP, which ripples founders created in 2012 US district judge who was based in New York on Thursday said the company $728,900,000 of XRP sales to hedge funds and other sophisticated buyers amounted to unregistered sales of securities.

31:29But Torres ruled XRP sales on public cryptocurrency changes would not offers of securities under the law because the purchases did not have a reasonable expectation of profit tied to ripples effort. Okay. Those cells were blind bid as transaction, she said, where the buyers could not have known if their payments I'm reading from Reuters here, of money went to Ripple or any other seller of XMPP, interesting. So the buyer becomes the the person who profits from it becomes the the the fulcrum here, XRP sells on cryptocurrency platform. I mean, Jason, you're

32:04not gonna figure real time. This is too complicated. The bottom line is that the headline is Well, I

32:09just wanna make sure the audience gets it. Yeah.

32:11The headline is, I mean, the tweet, ripple sales of XRP do not constitute offer investment contracts according to judge. They won. This is a huge vindication for them. And that XRP is ripping 35%.

32:25Yeah. And it really handcuffs the SEC, what are they gonna do about Coinbase and every other exchange? I mean, if they're not selling securities, I think coin base and everybody else has always maintained. They're selling tokens. This was the this was the fulcrum argument for the SEC, and they just they just lost.

32:42The whole crypto market is ripping right now.

32:44It's an interesting one. The confounding part of this is that the initial sale to accredited investors and hedge funds was done that they violated securities law there when they were selling directly to sophisticated investors. I just looking at it logically, you would think it was the reverse But there's a fascinating turn of events.

33:01I just texted with Brad Garland House, and he says, yes. It does mean that they won, and he feels

33:09vendicated.

33:09Indicated and really happy about the How

33:14do you feed Jake? How?

33:15Well, I feel like I'm gonna launch Jaypoint and sell a token to back, startups. I mean, if if it's a free for all that, I won't tell you tell you what he says. No. I mean, I said, you are using

33:27these guys as security fraud for, like,

33:29the last several years. They've been convicted of securities fraud here. So that's the it's a 2 part judgment. Ripple violated federal securities law and its sale of cryptocurrency. The first line of the story, the there's 2 judgments here.

33:40They violated federal securities on its sale of cryptocurrency to be directly to sophisticated investors, but the sales on public exchanges did not involve securities. So what they're saying is if you sold XRP to hedge funds, That was a security when they did the first offering. But when the public started trading it on public exchanges, they did not have, according to the Howie test, This belief

34:03was it that. Vulnerability was because if you sell to a professional hedge fund, they're accredited.

34:09That should not be an issue. You should be able to sell to the union.

34:11So what's the problem? This is an exoneration for them.

34:14The judge says they sound pretty happy

34:16and the market seems to be indicating that this is I mean, would you say the price is up 35%?

34:21Well, I mean, it's

34:22up to 37% right now.

34:24Crypt trades, I wouldn't necessarily put too much on it. I would look at the the actual judgment here, but we all know people trade headlines. So let's let's see where it's at in 5 days. But A

34:34bunch of the all coins are ripping right now.

34:36Oh, boy. Here we go.

34:37It's a judgment that seems to indicate for a lot of folks that these are not gonna be created in securities. I think that this is a really important Just think about how amazing the United States is that the government agencies, the administration in power, can come after corporations. And then we have a court system that can adjudicate and make decisions that follow the rule of law. I know we're gonna talk about Lena Con and her agency's efforts at litigation. But I'm really encouraged at the fact that the court system in the United States doesn't just kowtow to whatever administration is in power at that moment, that they do adjudicate by the law and ultimately provide greater clarity for business, for individuals to operate, going forward.

35:22That there is a better sense now for the market. There's a better sense now for individuals. I'm glad that it isn't appropriate.

35:27Somehow or

35:28have they always

35:28Well, it's a check-in balance.

35:30And I think that's what's so great is that there's now clarity because the courts provided that. Yep.

35:35Has this trend changed? I thought they I thought America always did that.

35:38Yep. I I think it's great. I think it's look. Because you you you obviously have, an a very zealous administration, and a very zealous agency leader who is testing the boundaries. And, you know, Lena Khan's agency is pushing the limits on what constitutes antitrust.

35:54And in the effort to try and push those boundaries, there is a pushback from the courts.

35:59No. But in crypto, it's Ben Gensler and the SCC.

36:01And

36:01it's Ben Gensler and the SCC. I'm sorry. Yeah. Well, I'm talking, but but both agencies. Right?

36:05And so it's good to see that there's clarity emerging and that the courts do their job and that the administration's come in.

36:11Well, I think the lean comp

36:12thing is yeah.

36:13Very different.

36:13I think this was a nuanced argument that the ICC made that required a highly sophisticated interpretation of securities law. And you're supposed to go to the courts for that. I think what the FTC has been doing is basically Just emotionally reactive lawsuit filing. Alright.

36:33So let me just pivot over to Lina Khan's, losing streak here. On Tuesday morning, a federal judge denied the FTC's attempt to delay Microsoft's $70,000,000,000 acquisition of Activision Blizzard. And the FTC's argument is basically Microsoft should not be allowed to acquire Activision it would make Activision's core assets, which is basically Call of Duty, one of the greatest franchises in the history of franchises. Movies or television shows or video games, and that it would be exclusive to the Xbox, Satya Nadella, and Xbox Headfill, Spencer, both said under oath they could not make COD and exclusive, and they wouldn't. And not only that, they said they would allow in No.

37:10It made no sense. I mean They also said they would put it on Nintendo, which of course, because Nintendo and

37:15Sony because Nintendo and Sony are the on their number 1 and number 2 players in this market and Sony alone is basically 50% of the market. So I think like the crazy thing about all of this is if you look at the the legal strategy of the FTC, It's basically that they view themselves as a hammer, and every deal, particularly if it's done by Big Tech is a nail. And so, you know, Amazon Roomba lawsuit. Facebook, some random little company, lawsuit. Microsoft Activision lawsuit.

37:52And it's that emotional reactivity that takes away faith and trust that this organization is intelligent and sober and well run. And that's the shame of it. Because if you actually look across all of the deals in tech that have happened recently, this deal was frankly DOA from the start from a regulatory blocking perspective because of what I just said. The number 3 player, a distant third, buying an asset, why would you take an asset that you pay $70,000,000,000 for and immediately turn it off from 50% of all consoles?

38:29Nobody would do that. Pay sacks. When we look at this and let's widen this aperture to the faith in institutions, because we have the Gary Gensler, hey, do we actually believe that they're acting in good faith, or are they trying to protect fiat currency and not let, an alternative currency take some control and and sort of be a backstop against their behavior in the money printing machine, which is cryptos, you know, big sort of, let's call it, the biology position. And then In this case, Lena Khan was selected, handpicked as a thirty two year old wonder kid who had this incredible thesis that she could predict Who would compete in the future? She was like a minority report freak on.

39:08She alone could decide, you know, who how these, competitions would emerge And she keeps losing. So these 2 institutions now being used for political purposes by the Biden administration, or do you think that they're just poorly executing? What's your take?

39:27Well, I think clearly the legal strategy that Lina Khan has been pursuing is not having much success in the courts. I mean, she just lost this big decision on the Microsoft acquisition of of Activision. But that being said, I'm almost starting to feel bad for her. Because although some of her legal theories may be flawed, I do think that these big tech companies like Google and Microsoft do need a check on their power. And so what I would urge is that Lina Khan needs to regroup, maybe figure out a different legal strategy figure out a different way to take on big tech because someone does need to cut these big tech companies down to size.

40:03They are giant monopolies and they do need to be restrained and controlled, or they will basically consolidate the whole tech ecosystem and abuse their So I think it's actually pretty vital that we have a regulator who is energetic in wanting to check the power of big tech. I think maybe trying to put a damper on m and a was the wrong way to do it. We've talked about this before. Yeah.

40:26It needs to be more surgical. Right? There's so few ways to have

40:28a good it in the tech industry that when you take away M and A, it puts a damper on all risk taking and the deployment of risk capital into the ecosystem. I think it was having too big of a chilling effect. So I think she needs to move away from these M and a cases unless it's a very, very clear case. But I think where she can be more aggressive is on restraining anti competitive tactics. And also maybe busting up these companies.

40:56You know, I'm thinking more and more about this Google case that she has where she wants to basically break up the company because They've got this monopoly, not just in search, but also in advertising. Maybe that's a good thing. And maybe Amazon should have to spin out AWS maybe Google should spin out YouTube because I do think they are abusive in the way they exercise their authority. As a small example over the past week, YouTube just banned a video of Jordan Peterson interviewing RFK Junior. Why?

41:30What gives them the power to interfere in our democracy that way where they just decide for their own reasons that the public can't watch a video of Jordan Peterson interviewing Rf K?

41:42Well, I wouldn't be surprised. Didn't the Supreme Court just say, private companies can serve customers however they want. If you want a gay cake, I don't Baker doesn't have to make it. Isn't the same analogy? No.

41:52I don't think it's the same Well, these are huge monopolies that have tremendous market power that are

41:57So four companies can choose their customers and products, but the big company has a more of a responsibility to be an open platform in your mind.

42:05Yeah. That's the common carrier argument.

42:07Yeah.

42:07Okay. But my point is just they have tremendous market power that they abuse in arbitrary ways.

42:12You have to admit Saks, their her lawsuit strategy is Scattershot.

42:15It's a little bit sprained.

42:17In fairness to her, she said she was gonna do that.

42:19For example, like, But where is the I I agree with you, like, where is the lawsuit on Adobe Figma? That seems like a more obvious one. You have the number 1 and the number 2. Right? There's a clear number 1 monopoly buying the number 2.

42:31And so that could be more of market consolidation than a number 3 player buying

42:35a gating company that the the public doesn't know those names. And Biden put her in there to be anti tech, but to be anti welfare. This is a Her but, no, I just wanna tell you, her position has also been driven by wealth inequality, which is not the mandate of the FTC. I think that's why she's the work modern day FTC head. I'll say it again, my next question.

42:55Because she should be looking at tactics, and the tactics she should do is the App Store on iOS should be open to other app stores. Amazon, you know, is open to 3rd party sellers. They should be looking at the bundling of Microsoft teams and say, you know what? Because you have a monopoly position, you can't add things to the bundle without charging for them. So if you wanna include Microsoft teams, you gotta put a price on it.

43:18And the price has to be a fair market price because you're doing product dumping. You're dumping into the market a free product with your market position Instead, when they launch that, the settlement should be Microsoft team should be plus $8 per month per person, plus $4 month, but it's she shouldn't be allowed to dump products onto the market. I think the tactical stuff Why do you think that I understand about it? Oh, that got a response. Okay.

43:42Friedberg first, Chamath Sachs. Friedberg? Well, I'm just

43:44I'm just asking why? Like, why wouldn't it be okay for Microsoft to put a cheap product out if someone makes an alternative to teams that is a better product with more features than they charge for it and people are willing to pay for it. They'll win in the market

43:56because a bundling bundling and product dumping is illegal according to the the laws in the United States. Well, I'm asking

44:03you, you think that's why

44:04I agree with that. Yeah.

44:05Just a

44:05form of bundling. You gotta make that argument, but, yes, I agree with that.

44:08I do that too.

44:09But, look, the way I judge these things is what is good for the ultimate health of the startup ecosystem? Because entrepreneurship is the thing that we should be optimizing for. Not the power or wealth of big companies, but the vibrancy and dynamism of the Starb ecosystem as a whole. Cause I think that long term what leads to the creation of new big companies. That's what's good for America.

44:31At Cosan.

44:32Yeah. So with FTC, I think Lina Khan hasn't gotten formula right. I think she's challenging some of the wrong M and A deals. But like I said, I like to see her regroup and figure out how to take on these big companies because I do think they have to be restraint. On the other hand, what's happening with SCC And Operation chokepoint is I think they would have basically put the Kibosh on the whole crypto ecosystem.

44:54I mean, if you basically come out and say that there's no such thing as a token that every single token is basically a security, then that's the end of crypto as a potential center of innovation. Now we can argue about what the utility of it is. We can argue about whether there's long term gonna be anything there. I don't really know for sure, but I would like the United States to be the place where he figured this out, not driving it overseas. So I'm happy that the judge found in favor of Ripple without knowing things specifically about what ripple did.

45:26And I'm not endorsing their behavior or tactics or whatever, but I'm happy that there is now a precedent that says that you can have a token like XRP that is not a security because that is gonna enable more innovation in the ecosystem because it was really going the other way. Before. And my critique of what the SEC was doing is they were basically seizing power that they did not have. I mean, basically Gensler unilaterally was telling Americans that they cannot hold or buy or trade crypto. Because when you say that every tokens of security, and they can't operate on exchanges, you're basically saying that Americans don't have the right to engage in crypto.

46:06And I think that was basically a bridge too far.

46:08Tremati, you wanted to get into that?

46:10Well, I just think that part of the thing that I think maybe the FTC suffers from is that being a common is a very young academic. And maybe what we need to have

46:22a little bit more of

46:25a higher batting average or slugging percentage here is just to actually have somebody that understands how business works. Because I think the Scattershot approach doesn't do much, and I think it just wastes taxpayer money by funding these frivolous lawsuits that then sophisticated organizations like micro up and meta just went. Yeah. And so where does it leave us? It it weakens the institution.

46:45It makes the laws frankly, not enforced where they need to be. And the whole point is not a marketing exercise or a PR exercise to go after companies you dislike, but to actually enforce the laws of Calacanis and market dynamism. And so to not do that, I think, is very egotistical I think it's emotional, and I think it sets the US back because the things that should get stopped don't. And then All this other stuff is just a red herring and a waste of time in taxpayer money.

47:15Yeah. I think you absolutely nailed it there. I think both of you nailed it, Saxa and Chamath there. I think she to focus on product dumping. You can pull up the screenshot here.

47:23Predictorial below cost pricing is well within the FTC's mandate. You can go look up just predator or below cost pricing, FTC, and you can read all about it. It's absolutely clear that you cannot put products out there at a lower price. And so you have to have a granular discussion. Is teams Microsoft teams a product or a feature?

47:42I think we all know it's a product. And so that's an easy win for her. Interoperability. Should Android people be not allowed to use iMessage? Should people on iOS not be able to use the Play Store or buy digital assets from Amazon?

47:57Obviously, Apple should be stopped there. So interoperability And then there's one that's a such a clear easy layup for her. And, you know, we'd all like to see her succeed, but I think she is absolutely doing Biden's bidding With an anti tech, anti wealth creation, anti Calacanis, frankly, pro union punishment. I think this is punishment Tech being too successful. I don't think it's logical.

48:20If you really want to get them, go after dark patterns. And if you don't know what dark patterns are, that's when you subscribe for the Wall Street fucking journal online, and then you have to call them to unsubscribe. And there are so many dark patterns, and I think Amazon's getting in trouble for this for prime one of the most loved products of all time, obviously. But dark patterns could be stopped by the FTC, and that's where they can really, really do damage. I I heard today that there getting Chamath GPT for giving out wrong answers.

48:48It says right on it. It's gonna hallucinate and give you a wrong example. This is an experiment. Another example of the FTC going after, you know, the wrong thing. So just I think she needs a sniper rifle, not a shotgun.

49:00She's gotta she needs to get a kill shot. Where's the kill shot coming from?

49:05Let's kill Google.

49:07Well, yeah, and that was pretty controversial when you said blow it up. I mean, I would love to hear you say more on that. Yeah.

49:12Well, I paraphrased a line from RfK Junior who is paraphrasing line from JFK, which is he wants to shout out the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter to the winds. I said that after they banned the Jordan Peterson RfK interview, that we should shatter Google into a thousand pieces and scour to the winds. And that thing went vastly viral. There's a big part of this country that has really pissed at Google in the way they're exercising their arbitrary power. How many did they get?

49:3712,000 likes? I just think that the people running that company I I don't understand how they make these decisions. Just makes no sense.

49:44Well, Friedberg, you work there. What are your thoughts on breaking up Google and how they make decisions?

49:51Look. I'm a free market guy. As you guys know, I think that consumers vote with their dollars and their eyeballs and their time. And, ultimately, as we see with Disneyland, in Disney World, if people don't like the behavior of a business, they're gonna stop giving their time and their money to that business.

50:11The way, Friedberg, were you shocked at the fall off in traffic?

50:14I actually immediately thought I'm gonna take my kids to Disneyland.

50:20Please, Republicans stay home. Disney hates you. Do you guys know how expensive that VIP tour? Yeah. I think it's a VIP tour.

50:27It's so expensive. And I'm like, man, if I

50:29could stop being so cheap, no more problem we have with you. Is that your driving a twelve year old Audi that gets six miles to the gallon when you can drive

50:38a great car? I love the Audi RS 7.

50:42A hole in the ozone, you hypocrite. And you're a hypocrite because you should you deserve that You deserve that. What is it? $10,000 for the day to bring your kids to Disneyland VIP, or you could do fashion. It's it's just how you're somebody in a wheelchair.

50:57It's ridiculous, the, the cost, but, yeah, you get to cut all the lines and everything.

51:00I think it's a

51:01nice style. So I generally don't love the crowds. So if it's gonna be less crowded, I'm more interested in taking my kids it's already hard enough to deal with it. You know?

51:08So speaking of, you know, Friedberg made this point about the administration being overzealous, Did you guys see this article on the glut of electric cars that are piling up now?

51:18Yeah.

51:18On dealers, lots? Yeah. Can we shift gears to this?

51:21The way, I think this is a big part of what I said earlier about interest rates on car loans. Well, no, this

51:25is a big thing is more because of the bureaucracy of the government not allowing these credits to back basically work across all different kinds of cars. This this should not exist for the reason. This is not a demand issue. This is a business

51:37Let's shift gears to the car's privacy issue.

51:40Government intervention and market dynamics. Is that the driver?

51:43Oh, yeah. So Axio. So it says here the

51:45legacy auto industry is beginning to crank out more

51:49EVs challenge Tesla, but there's one big problem, not enough buyers. There's a growing mismatch between EV supply and demand. Even though consumers are showing more interest in EVs, we're still worried about purchasing 1 because of either price or charging concerns.

52:03Range, anxiety.

52:06Yeah. A lot of these new companies that are are they're not new companies, but they're new to EVs don't have charging networks.

52:12Yep. And that that's an issue. And then also if you've never owned an EV and you don't live in a city because now we're going down of people who live outside of cities and you see two hundred mile range, you remember your trip where you drove three hundred miles or four hundred miles and you're like, Well, then I can't have this car. If you have a Tesla, you obviously can, but then Tesla also made the chess move of lowering their prices and having record sales. So their margin went down, but their sales went up.

52:39And everybody can wait a year. Like, that's, I think, that when people don't realize about cars, you can always get another year out of your current car.

52:46So according to this article,

52:48the nationwide supply of EVs in stock has grown

52:48nearly 350% this year. To more than 92,000 units, which is a 92 day supply of EVs, whereas by comparison, dealers have 54 days worth of gasoline powered cars in inventory. So even though interest is growing in EVs, they're simply too much supply.

53:15Too much supply.

53:16It's because all these other companies like Ford and GE are now producing tons of EVs, but they don't have the charging networks. And they're new to the EV game and they don't really produce great cars, great EVs. Tesla does not have this problem, by the way. And what I come back to is just the administration's industrial policy. I mean, the administration just gave all these subsidies and credits to big companies like Ford and GE to make EVs, but no one wants those cars.

53:44Yep. By the other problem.

53:46And so they're they're actually interfering in a free market where Tesla is the big winner because they took a huge risk and create a product people wanted. And now you've got these big stodgy old companies trying to catch up, but no one wants their cars.

54:01And the administration, which is pro union, is anti Tesla because they don't have a union. And so they put the thumb on the scale and give them the credits instead of giving the credits to Tesla, although Tesla lowered their prices, and I think they now qualify. But the prices are so low for Tesla, and the cars are so sophisticated, listen, not to talk up our guy's book, but I I think the other big issue here that's not mentioned, the story, is interest rates. I mean, if you if you could give these things away at 2%, 3%, 4% interest rates, that's a big difference, isn't it? Yeah.

54:30You're right. Monthly car payment.

54:3280 percent of new cars are financed. Okay.

54:36So that's the beginning and end of this, probably. I mean, it's it's it's three factors going on here.

54:40And interest rates on auto loans have doubled like the chart I showed. So Yeah. You know, it's it's a huge impact on demand overall.

54:46And it's not know, if you if you know the adoption curve of technology, I think we're getting into the big middle, the fat middle, and then going to the laggards. And the laggards want an F One Fifty or a Cybertruck. And until Lowe's emerge or a Suburban, that's electric, you know, three rows with, a lot of storage. Those those don't exist yet.

55:05Alright. So, Jake, let me ask you a question. Okay? So you've got an administration that is overzealous. It's Friedberg said on industrial policy, basically subsidizing these, like, old stodgy broken companies like Ford at the expense of innovators like Tesla, they are bringing a bunch of anti M and A FTC lawsuits that you don't like.

55:26They are cracking down on crypto, which you may like, but in an overly aggressive way, the course is throwing that out. How would

55:33I have the rules fair? Yeah. Please finish things up. Keep going. Yeah.

55:37We've just gotten off of a 1 to 2 year spike in inflation caused by runaway def it's spending and over stimulus. So my question to you is, is the economy doing so well? Because of or in spite of this administration.

55:53I think it's, innovators and consumers drive the economy. I think I voted for Biden and, over Trump because I think Trump would have stolen the election. And there's a treasonous felon felonius horrible human being. And I thought it was existential crisis for America. Now if you could put up a Republican candidate like Chris Christie, who I just, mooch scaramucci just put me in touch with Chris Christie.

56:18He's coming on the show. So Nicky Hall and Chris Christie are coming on the show. You couldn't deliver you couldn't deliver DeSantis. For the show. So I will deliver Chris Christie, and Shamaz is gonna deliver Nikki Haley.

56:28I'm gonna vote. I'm giving my announcement now. If Chris I'm gonna vote for Chris Christie, I think. I think Chris

56:35Christie subject. I wasn't asking you about No.

56:37I mean, I I I I was asking you about whether you think

56:40the administration is helping the economy or hurting the economy?

56:45I think the runaway spending to Friedberg point last year is made me a single issue of voter, and I think that their spending disqualifies them for me voting for them. I need somebody who's gonna balance the budget or get I

56:58love you now. Oh my god.

57:00No. I mean, I can agree with you on some things. I'm, like, hand solo, you're like C3PO. I need you. To navigate an asteroid field, but I need you to also just shut the fuck up when I'm doing it.

57:08Okay? So just let me cook as the world's greatest moderator. Now I do agree with you on this. You're you're absolutely correct. If we don't get the balance sheet right, nothing else matters.

57:18And I I don't think Trump's crazy spending and Biden's crazy spending is not gonna get us out of this. We need somebody to control spending a period full stop. I don't know how you where how are you guys feeling about the election at this point? I guess we could

57:31pick that book, the deficit myth.

57:33Okay.

57:34That book is the problem.

57:35It's it's

57:36that we can always just issue money because we are the currency that everyone wants to hold. And the flawed logic is that we are at the currency that everyone wants to hold until we issued too much debt.

57:50Yeah. We've rehashed this. I mean, the interest payments, I think, are the backstop Chamath. When we start hitting those interest payments, people are gonna start going, we're paying more in interest just like people with their home mortgages or like, you know, I should have bought a smaller house because I'm paying so much in interest. I should have bought a model 3 instead of a model x, I I over I overspent.

58:09So is that gonna be the backstop for the United States itself? Is there any path of controlling spending? Is there any candidate who will get spending under control, or is it just too unpopular?

58:17RFK. You think? Okay.

58:19And the re and the

58:20reason is because he's so against the military industrial and he wants to pass an executive order that bans pharmaceutical advertising. Those things would have a pretty large ripple effect in the economy. And in spending and in entitlements. So it'd be interesting to let it play out. Alright.

58:37So really care about Yeah. Those things would be pretty meaningful changes.

58:44Sachs, anything from you on, any theory on how we could control spending in this country. If there's any backs on IE, my theory, when we start paying huge interest payments, maybe we get our act together. Is there any candidate? At the

58:55end of the day, the market's probably gonna impose discipline on us.

58:59That's sort of my point. Yeah.

59:00Yeah. You're right. The cost of borrowing will become so Painful.

59:04That is the argument that Larry Summers and other contrarian economists contrarian to the administration's policy. Have been making. I'm sorry. I don't wanna put that in his mouth, but that the cost of borrowing is gonna be high as long as spending remains high. So when you see security and climate transition type and stimulatory spending going on, chips act, IRA, all this sort of stuff, it it's not cost free.

59:28You have to pay more to the buyers of your debt.

59:32Yeah. I mean, we're trying to can speak to this, the vague, you know, So it's, if you give your place a lot of bets, the big doesn't go down. It goes up when the debt goes up. So anyway.

59:41Just on the market imposing discipline on the federal government, you know, one of the things we've talked about is whether there could ever be an alternative reserve currency. And the theory was that as problematic as the fiscal situation as there's no real alternative to the US dollar. The BRICS countries are about to introduce an alternative currency that's based on gold. So it seems like what the BRICS countries would like to do is use gold.

60:08Go back to gold standard. Yeah.

60:10Gold certificates. As an alternative. That's basically what we're talking about. So it's announced they're gonna be rolling this out. We haven't yet seen how or what the details are gonna be, but

60:21That's scarcity built into it.

60:24That would be the alternative as you go back to a gold standard and the Brooks countries move to that. Now I know a lot of people may not think that's much of a threat, but I was reading actually some really interesting articles about how big the Bricks countries are now. And if you look at them on a purchasing power parity basis, the Bricks countries just surpass the G Seven. In terms of GDP. So if you if you measure the size of their economies based on exchange rates, then the G Seven is still bigger.

60:55But if you look at in terms of PPP, actually, the bricks are now bigger than the G Seven.

61:01And growing faster.

61:02Just and then for people who are catching up, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and, other, what are considered emerging markets, but are quickly becoming Yeah. Brazil, Russia, India, China, bricks.

61:15And there's a bunch more who wanna join.

61:17With this ripple ruling, I think this becomes a boon for people to say, well, scarcity of Bitcoin and Bitcoin's stability, I think, where it's trading right around 30 k between the 10 K previous average in the 60 k peak, maybe that becomes the gold standard, in the future. And it, you know, if people can feel a little bit more secure in it, now are we gonna see, like, 10 counter lawsuits and everybody's just gonna sue the SEC and stand up for themselves? I think that's what's gonna happen now. The if Ripple wins this, or, you know, if this ripple thing does work out appeals, whatever, then For sure. The standard operating procedure is

61:54They're not gonna wanna

61:55No settlements. And I think that's what M and A is gonna happen. All M and A, it's like, well, now the settlement is off the table. We're gonna fight. And you know what?

62:04You can afford a lot of lawyers if you sold a lot of tokens or you're a big money printing machine. Quick plug for the summit go.

62:10Yeah. Well, we have At this point, the ability to announce a bunch of our speakers for summit, which is super exciting. So we have Toby from Shopify, Stephen Wolfram, of Wolfram Alpha, Mathematica. Obviously, Mr. Beast, Everyone knows Mr.

62:30Beast.

62:31Mister Beast is coming?

62:32Mister Beast is coming. Can we take a

62:34well, in the green room, can I ask him to take a picture of my daughters?

62:37You can do it.

62:39Yeah. I can. Okay. Cool. Woah.

62:40I don't know if that's

62:41I think

62:41it'll be interesting to ask Toby. I tweeted this out this whole thing that he did where he canceled everybody's meetings and that allows people to reset it with a little calculator that shows how much money that meeting costs in terms of Great. That

62:54is 10.

62:54It's in

62:55the Google calendar too. It's this meeting cost $3000.

62:58And then just launched an AI. He launched he launched this AI thing called the sidekick.

63:02It's awesome.

63:03It replaces, like, all board meetings.

63:05Yeah.

63:06If you're if you're, like, a banker,

63:07it it also tells you how to do basic stuff. That you need to do to get your business set up. It's fantastic.

63:13Reconfigure a website in real time to increase sales, and it'll tell you why sales are falling off a cliff. It's like you're a little, you know, and he said, like, every superhero needs, a psychic and Robin. Boom.

63:25So we got Rob Henderson, Nicky Paul, Vinod Kosla, Bob Mumgaard from Commonwealth Fusion, Jenny Just, Brian Armstrong, Alexandra Boquez, of the Botes sisters, famous chest streamers. We have the 5th bestie Braggersoner, Larry Summers, and a few others that we can't announce just yet. We'll announce closer to the summit or at the summit. We reserved a 100 general admission tickets for after we announce speakers. So we're gonna update the website with these speakers, and we're reopening GA ticket sales until those 100 final tickets are sold out.

64:02So if interested in joining us, It's gonna be a fantastic event. Jason, organizing amazing parties all three nights, Sunday Monday, Tuesday night. Can't wait to find out about him.

64:12Okay. It's a great contact

64:13and great speakers. Yeah. Go

64:14for it. 1st 1st night's party, I mean, this is subject to change, is, the bestie who love me. Casino Royale, James Bondi, wear your best James Bond, Tuxedo, play roulette, baccarat, whatever.

64:26White Bowties. Yes.

64:27Exactly. Second night party is gonna be bestie club, like the breakfast club, eighties, big eighties. Where are your

64:36best things happen? White club where people down

64:38the road

64:38and Best to go. Yeah. Okay. Okay.

64:39And then the last night, the rays, and we're gonna go late. I don't know how late. We're gonna go late. We're gonna have a rave. It's gonna be besty runner, a blade runner cyberpunk send up, where your best blade runner cyberpunk rave outfit, sax is gonna dress like the 5th element.

64:58Redmade for Saks and for, JACOUN to a certain extent, there are no winners and more. NATO has, brought Sweden, and obviously Finland came in right before them because of Putin's invasion of Ukraine. And here we go, Zelensky, denounced NATO Alliance's administration policy as absurd and disrespectful. 1st sentence of, Saks's very long tweet storm Biden's best efforts to put a happy face on it. Villainous will be remembered as the NATO summit where tensions boiled over.

65:28Obviously, this photo has become a bit of a meme. Thrown up on the screen right here. Zelensky, literally, not figuratively, having NATO turn his back on him. On stage from being the cost celebrity last year to everybody. I, you know, and again, it's, it's just a picture.

65:46There was a, I would say, press conference with Biden who said Zelensky was stuck with the US. And, I'll let Saks take it from there.

65:55These NATO meetings are supposed to be symbols of unity and harmony and the alliance coming together to show how on the same page they are. And this meeting, it sort of ended up there, but it's not the way it it started. Zelensky had been told, the Ukrainians have been told before the summit that there would not be a timetable for their admission to NATO on the agenda. Stolton had said it weeks ago, Biden had said it weeks ago, this controversy had played out already in the pages of the New York Times and other publications, So he knew that it would not be on the agenda. And yet, he went into the meeting, demanding that they put it on the agenda, trying to muscle his way into admission into NATO, which Biden, I think, to his credit, has resisted because Biden understands that this is an escalation that could lead to World War 3.

66:47As Biden explained, the members of NATO have an article 5 commitment to defend each other's territories. So if Ukraine is admitted to NATO, then we would end up being directly involved in this war, or at least that's the risk. And so Biden's position

67:02is that

67:02the alliance will emit Ukraine at some point in the future when the conditions have been met. And that wasn't good enough for Zelensky, and he basically threw a diplomatic tantrum.

67:15Why?

67:15I mean, do you wanna explain from his point of view? I mean, I

67:17think from here.

67:17Curious what you would think his why would he do something like that? Is, I guess, my question. Yeah.

67:21I think there's a couple of different reasons. Okay. So I think the less positive explanation is that his sense of entitlement has reached incredible proportions that you had here the entire west and especially the western media has been falling over him for a year, The West has given over a $100,000,000,000, and he just feels entitled to more and more aid. And I think that really rubbed the attendees the wrong way. You had Ben Wallace, who's the secretary of defense for the UK, basically chastised Zelensky for his in gratitude.

67:58And just so you understand, I mean, Ben Walls is a superhawk. He is super pro Ukraine and if he had his way, we might even be directly involved in the fighting. Biden actually vetoed Ben Walls becoming the new head of NATO. That's why Stoltenberg on another year. So you've probably got one of the most hawkish members of this club recommanding Zelensky for, again, this lack of gratitude basically to the alliance.

68:25Now I think from Zelensky's standpoint, his view is that, hey. We had a piece deal. He didn't say this, but this is my reading between the lines that we had a piece deal at Istanbul we could have ended this war. And you sent Boris Johnson to tell me, we don't wanna make a deal. We wanna pressure Putin, and we're gonna give you the weapon systems to win this war.

68:46That was the deal that he thought he was making. And now it turns out that the US doesn't have enough ammunition to give him. I'm talking about the key type of ammunition in this war. Which is artillery shells. The US has basically run out of 155 millimeter artillery shells, which are the key type of ammunition that's using these howitzers and these tanks and so forth.

69:08And artillery is the main weapon being used in this war. It's what's creating most of the casualties. So it must have come as a rude awakening to Zelensky to find out that his partners don't have enough ammunition to give him. And I'm still stunned that we spent over 800,000,000,000 a year on defense, and we could run out of ammunition. I mean, how does that happen?

69:31I mean, how royally screwed is the American taxpayer when we spend 800,000,000,000 a year and we are out of ammunition already? It is mind boggling to me. Mind. Now the pro it's mind boggling. Right?

69:42I mean, how incompetent has our military industrial complex become that this could even happen?

69:47We need more competition, start up, shout out, partner lucky, friend of the pot.

69:51But anyway Most sincerely.

69:54I mean, I know he hates you, but I I do think that the solution is 10 more Palmer Lucky's. I mean, I think the Silicon Valley's anti supporting the military is a crazy position that meets to change, and we should make more weapons and have VC backed companies making weapon systems that are more affordable and and, you know, more advanced. Obviously.

70:13This is actually not a case of needing some smart bomb or some super sophisticated package tech. This is basically just plastic industrial production, and we've hollowed out so much for our industrial production that we don't have the capability to scale up the manufacturing of these artillery shells is gonna take us according to the Pentagon. They started the war at 14,000 shells being produced a month, mainly for training purposes. They've scaled that to somewhere between 2030,000 a month now. And they're saying that they will get to about 90,000 in somewhere between 2025 2028.

70:48Yeah.

70:48We're gonna have 3% unemployment as we talked about earlier. We're talking about multiple years. Work in these factories. Right?

70:53Yours it's gonna take multiple years to scope these factories.

70:56But Saks, who's gonna work in these factories? We're at 3% unemployment. Like, we we don't have factory workers in this country. We have to let them in gonna need more immigrants.

71:05That's not the limiting factor here. But if you're wondering why did the US give cluster bombs to Ukraine. It's because we're out of ammo to give, and it's all we've got left are these stockpiles of cluster munitions. That is why the United States is violating international law, a treaty that

71:23we haven't signed, but a 120

71:24other countries have signed not to use cluster munitions. And yet, we are giving them to Ukraine because according to both Biden and Jake Sullivan, we are out

71:37Do you think we shouldn't give them the cluster bombs? Is that your position?

71:40Well, I wouldn't have put ourselves in this position. I mean, we're in a

71:43But, well, on the cluster bombs,

71:44would you give them or not? No. I is degrading to America's moral authority to be violating international law, to be using and endorsing customer munitions. But we put ourselves in this situation,

71:54The counter to that, of course, is Russia's using them on Ukraine soil. This is Ukraine soil. Don't they have the right to defend themselves and use the same weapons that the invader is using?

72:04That's disputed.

72:05It's known.

72:05Yeah. It is.

72:06If the Russians were using them, would you think it would be fair for the Ukraine since they're being invaded?

72:12The thing that I find curious about these accusations is that when people talk about these examples of the Russians using cluster munitions, they talk about an example here or an example there. There are these isolated cases, which doesn't sound right to me. It seems to me that if you're gonna use cluster munitions, why wouldn't you just use them at scale? That is what the Ukrainians are gonna be doing now because again, it's all we've got left to give them. Now what the Russians have said is that in retaliation, they're gonna start using cluster munitions at scale.

72:39So regardless of the truth of those allegations, Jason

72:43Yeah. It's an essence now.

72:44Escalating this war. Yes. And and the reason why Ukraine.

72:48So just a whole The reason why

72:49it started in 20, a 120 countries signed an agreement not to use cluster munitions. It was just because they link her.

72:56Yeah. It's terrible.

72:57On the battlefield long after, and you have kids walking on them and civilians.

73:00We're still cleaning them up in many locations around the world. They should be banned forever. Yeah. I agree. Let me give get your take on this, Saks, as we wrap up here on the Saks red meat section and then go to science corner.

73:10Putin did what NATO couldn't do for decades, which is get Finland and Sweden who are famously independent, like a lot of the Nordics, to join NATO. They both joined because of his invasion of Ukraine. And he's been very serious that if filming were to join or if Sweden were to join, that this would be, a trigger for him. If military contingents and military infrastructure would deploy there, we would be obliged to respond symmetrically and raise the same threats to those territories where threats have arisen for us. He's done nothing.

73:44Do you think that Sweden and Finland are a huge l for him, and do you think he'll have any kind of response to it? Do you think they should have been allowed in to NATO?

73:54I think it's an l for everybody. I mean, we used to have an understanding that we'd have a buffer zone between Russia and the West. And that was good for everybody. Finland was neutral. And I think it was good for Finland.

74:07I mean, during the entire cold war, they were at much greater risk facing the Soviet union on their border. Which was a much more powerful, a much more expansionist country than Putin's Russia has been. Even if you don't like Putin's Russia, the Soviet Union was the evil empire. It was much worse in every dimension. And Finland managed to survive the cold war remaining neutral.

74:29And so now you're right that I think this invasion of of Ukraine has ultimately caused Finland and Sweden to join NATO. But we are now directly NATO is gonna be directly on their border steering eyeball to eyeball with nuclear weapons. The Russians have now nuclear weapons into Belarus. So this is a ratcheting up of tensions that I think is not good for anybody.

74:54Who should get to decide? Friedberg, who joins NATO? NATO, the countries I wanna join, or Russia?

75:01What do you mean NATO? I don't understand.

75:04It's it's a pretty basic question. You know? Right now, it's Russia saying Ukraine cannot join NATO. It's a line in the sand. Obviously, Finland and Sweden just joined this year.

75:13So I'm I'm curious your take on the NATO alliance. And if it's good for humanity

75:19I think look. Obviously, this is a this is a different difficult calculus if you Yeah.

75:23That's why I'm asking the question.

75:24If NATO wants to escalate tensions with Russia by accepting Ukraine. It's obviously gonna require a significant influx of capital by some estimates up to $2,000,000,000,000 to increase the security capacity of NATO given the instigation that would arise from accepting Ukraine in tornado with Russia. So that is one path that the other path is to not accept Ukraine and to NATO and minimize the investment needed reduce the escalatory cycle with Russia to some degree for some period of time, see where things go with Ukraine and the conflict between Russia and Ukraine,

76:05Well said,

76:06but not get actively involved. So it's a it's a difficult calculus. I I think everyone everyone wants to jump to some decision about what should be done here, but This is a very hard decision. Very hard situation.

76:14What do you think about Finland and Sweden joining? Is it a is it a major win for NATO in the west? Is it a major alpha, Russia, somewhere in between?

76:21I don't really know.

76:22Yeah. And I think that's as honest as you can get. Yeah.

76:25Like I said, I think it's just sort of bad for everybody. But in the United States, among the foreign policy establishment, they tend to think that any country joining NATO is an asset for us. And I would argue that it's a liability because it requires the US to defend these countries. Again, if Sweden or Finland gets in a war, we are making a guarantee to send American boys and girls to go defend that country. Now they also make a guarantee to defend us, but realistically, Are we gonna benefit?

76:56Does our security benefit by having Sweden or Finland?

77:00We don't

77:00even allow you to defend us? No. So every time you add a country to NATO, you're making a commitment for Americans to have to go defend that country. And I would argue that's a liability, not an asset for America. Now, you know, what it's an asset for is a military industrial complex.

77:18Because all these countries when they join NATO, because we need to spend 2% of their GDP on defense. And you can only spend that money on defense contractors who are interoperable with the NATO platform, which is basically these approved Western contractors.

77:32What is that?

77:33So the defense industry loves NATO expansion, the military Well,

77:36they're locked in. They're locked into vendor lock ins. Absolutely. Oh, I didn't know there was vendor lock, and that's like when you rent, like, You know, a union hotel or something. They're like, you gotta use wolfgang puck, and it's, $800 a person for coffee.

77:49One of the requirements for a country to join NATO and Ukraine already had been on this path for the last few years is called interoperability. You have to make your military interoperable with NATO, which means that you use weapons as well as tactics and strategies, but weapons that are on the approved NATO list. And if you looked at the summit we just had in Vilnius, when all the planes came into the airport, you had these anti aircraft batteries and howitzers and all these tanks, all these weapons were being shown off by our defense contractors at the NATO summit. It was like a confab for the MIC. Alright.

78:29So you have to understand

78:30that NATO is a business, and the more countries that join NATO, the more money our defense contractors make.

78:37Yeah. And

78:37But the price of that for the average American is that our sons and daughters one day might have to go defend these countries.

78:46And the it reduces the risk of Russia going into another country. It would be the other steel man of it, but let's go on to science corner. Every fa fave everybody's favorite part of the show is science corner. Saks, you can go use the bathroom, and, Chamath and I will be absolutely engaged in Friedberg science corner. Let's go.

79:08We were talking about what

79:09to talk about. As you guys know, I said, hey. We could talk about the sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic. Likely gonna drive the biggest hurricane season we've ever seen this coming season. Super compelling, good topic.

79:19We were gonna talk about this minimal sell But then just yesterday, this paper was published, which I think deserves a lot of attention. And we've talked about yamanaka factors. And reprogramming cells, you know, adjusting the epigenetics of a cell to make it youthful, basically reversing aging. And, you know, a couple episodes ago, I talked about how there's great proof and evidence now that aging is a result of degradation or changes in the epigenome, the little molecules that stick on top of the DNA in a cell that decide what proteins are expressed that make that cell different from all the other cells, the difference between an I cell, and a muscle cell and a skin cell if the epigenetics of that cell, even though they all have the same DNA in the nucleus. And so the yamanaka factors, these 4 chemicals that allowed the expression of these 4 specific genes cause cells to become stem cells that can turn into any other cell.

80:12The problem with applying yaminaka factors To reverse aging is that it turns the cells into cancer cells if you apply too much, so then there were all these efforts on doing short bursts of yamanaka factors And more recently, there's been an effort to do gene insertions, through viral vectors. You basically get a virus to deliver a gene into a cell that causes that cell to express some of the yamanaka factors that makes that cell more youthful. And there's actually clinical trials underway right now, to apply this as a medicine for, for vision loss, where you can make the, the, the retinal cells actually useful. Yeah. Really incredible.

80:50So the the problem right now is that we don't really know how to target the cells, how to provide the right amount of yamanaka factor stuff and how to get it there is that these gene expressing viruses, or what do we do? But this paper that was just published yesterday shows that you can use small molecules. Basically small molecules are like Advil or Tylenol or, you know, there there's about 1800 molecules in a in a certain reference library that's used in medicine. And what this research team at Harvard medical, and, and some other, facilities, MIT and other places, in collaboration we're able to do is they basically did a screen a combinatorial screen. So they took all these different molecules that are known to be used in medicine, and they combined them together and created different cocktails.

81:36They then took those cocktails, and they applied them to the cells to see if they could reverse aging. And in fact, they found 6 different cocktails of small molecules that we're able to have the same effect as we see with the yamanaka factors in short bursts to cause these cells to actually reverse their aging and become youthful again. I cannot overstate how important this is. This is probably the most important trajectory of what's underway in biology since the discovery of DNA. This ability to actually make cells youthful again, it can, in fact, ultimately result in a pill or a series of pills that can reverse aging.

82:13That is why it is so exciting right now. And we're seeing this data coming out from this research team, and I have heard separately about data that has not yet been published by other research teams following the same track to do the same thing, that it turns out it may in fact be possible to create pills with small molecules in it, things that your body can absorb and end up in your bloodstream and go into different cells that actually rejuvenate the cells, fix the epigenetic data loss that happens in those cells, causes them to become more youthful. You could see a cream that you could apply to your skin that takes away wrinkles. Ultimately, you could take something that makes your heart healthier, your liver healthier, and actually reverses aging in the individual cells by the absorption of these small molecules into those cells that ultimately cause the expression of these genes and change all the transcriptome as called in a cell and makes it more useful. It is unbelievable work.

83:04Everyone should be, I think fascinated by this And where it's headed, it is so exciting that there are multiple teams that are having breakthroughs on this work that could ultimately translate into clinical trials and products that could be used by people.

83:16The obvious question, can we get this to Biden before the debates?

83:19Oh. Oh.

83:20Hey, well. Chamath, you're you're, you're a racist joke, please. Come on. Sorry. Let me just step on your range, Joe.

83:26I am so tired.

83:27I had such a big night last night.

83:30Man.

83:31He's like, I can't even get a your latest joke up.

83:33I drank so much wine.

83:35Why is it in there?

83:36I am fucking gassed today.

83:40When you say you drank so much wine, How many bottles were opened, and how many glasses did you have? To be honest, I'm gonna put the over under at 6 glasses.

83:48There was 6 of us.

83:495.5 glasses. 5. There was

83:516 of us. It's probably 7 or 8

83:53bottles, but it's just like it was just so delicious. And then I don't like to eat a lot when

83:54I'm drinking really, really good

84:01wine.

84:02Oh.

84:02And then oh, man. Wow.

84:05Okay. That's alright. 5 to 5. You got the over of the under sacks. 5.5 glasses.

84:10I got the hat.

84:10I I drank so much. I had the night sweats. I woke up. I was like, oh, not so much. It's so hot.

84:14Then I get that night sweats.

84:15I mean, you're

84:15too much meat. So you were drinking red wine.

84:17You were not drinking white wine.

84:18No. No. No. No. White.

84:19White the whole night?

84:21Yeah. Champaign. Oh, the champagne

84:24will get you. Champaign will get you.

84:26That champagne catcher. What is the worst hanger? Is it red wine, champagne, or white? I'll get you worse.

84:31I think it's like the sweeter it is, the higher the alcohol content, the more it really just fucks with me. Personally.

84:36Sand producer Nick coming in hot. $7 pictures of sangria all night. He says sangria. That's because they pour sugar in it, dude. Sangria.

84:46The more

84:47sugar it's just it's just it's just a sugar bomb. It's terrible.

84:50I gotta run. I'm gonna I'm gonna be in Italy, so maybe we could catch up and have dinner, Chamath. I don't know where you'll be, but I'll try it shortly. I will look you up when I'm in Italy. Maybe, I don't know any buses are gonna be in Italy anytime over the summer, but

85:01I may go to Italy. Are we

85:02taping next week or no?

85:03Oh my god. Can we do it live in Italy?

85:06I'll be in Italy next week, actually. What are we doing next week? Are we taping next week or no? I don't know. If I say we're not taping then Friedberg going broke, So I'll say

85:16Keeps playing.

85:16To you, Friedberg, since apparently, you know how to hack the fucking YouTube channel.

85:20Well, you took the passwords back.

85:22Of course, I did. I need to have 2 factor. When you hacked it, I was like, who was trying to log in? And then, I was like, oh my

85:29god. Worry about Jacob. I'm gonna get your phone next time. I'm gonna take your

85:32phone Oh, you're doing a little hacker?

85:34You know, while you're in the bathroom, I'm gonna run into your house and take your phone.

85:37Thanks. Thanks. That's you running into my house. Well, Jake, hell, I will say

85:41I'll tell I'll tell you my honest opinion. I I missed you last week. I think that the show is better with you. I think that

85:48you bring a character and a personality that I miss when you're not around.

85:48And as much as we fight, like brothers that truly hate each other, I really do respect and appreciate what you do on the show. And I and I honestly felt it was a big hole last week. So despite all of our issues, I think It's great to be doing the show with you. I wanna let you know that.

86:07Thank you. That's very that's very heartfelt and kind. Who wrote it? Who wrote that

86:12Is that Allison about that? Chuck Yucati. How do I make JKEL feel better?

86:18How do I express emotion to a friend? How do I behave like a loyal friend?

86:23Yes. A

86:23hack the YouTube channel and publish a road episode? No. That's not how you do it. Alright. Listen.

86:28For the drunken hangover dictator. C3P Friedberg, the Sultan of Science, the Prince of Panic attacks, the queen of and crazy hair. Don't care. The architect. Steve Bannon with a high IQ.

86:46His name is David Sachs. I am the world's obviously greatest moderator after the shit show of last week. And this has been Best episode of any podcast ever recorded, and we'll see you all next week. Ching done. Maybe, here we'll grab some pasta.

87:04Love you, Alexis.

87:05Love you, guys. Bye bye.

87:11Rainman, David Sachs. We open source it to the fans in a gone crazy weather. Uh-uh. We should all just get a room and just have one big huge order because they're all It's like this, like, sexual tension, but we just need to release her mouth.

87:51Good for you.

87:52Where did you get Murphy's artifacts?