-
Unknown A
I have four pieces of advice for people. Number one, get good sleep. Number two, exercise. Number three, diet. Number four, meditation. And if you want to do that, it's very simple. You get the calm meditation, you get the eight. Sleep, sleep. You get the fit bod for fitness. And then you get nutrients.
-
Unknown B
What a grift. What a grifter.
-
Unknown A
He's just talking about his investments. Those are the four things you focus on. The four essentials you get a good Athena assistant. All of this is brought to you by my NGO, which is is all in. NGO USA gave us 18 million last year. Guys, I forgot to tell you about it. But don't worry, it's in an offshore account for all of us. When we get back to Ethiopia and Vietnam, we have an all in castle built there, okay? Let your winners ride Rain Man David Sachs.
-
Unknown C
And instead we open sources to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it.
-
Unknown A
Love you, best queen of Quinoa.
-
Unknown D
I'm going all in.
-
Unknown A
All right, everybody, welcome back to the all in podcast. The number one MAGA finance, business and personal optimization. Health. Yes, we are now larger in the health space than Huberman, Tim Ferriss and Peter Attia combined. Yes, we've really started to grow the pod. And if you want to, you can subscribe to the podcast on X.com, youTube, Spotify and all those other places. Especially if you want to have an incredibly positive world. Enlightening conversation with Ray Dalio. You can tune in to Friedberg and Ray Dalio on the channel. Great conversation. It's gotten three or four hundred thousand views already on YouTube. How's the feedback been? Dave got so much great feedback on you. Ray Dalio, is it the end of the empire or are we coming back?
-
Unknown B
What's awesome is a lot of the recommendations he shared is becoming policy it seems for the Trump administration. Elon and Besant and others in the administration have echoed trying to get government deficit below 3% of GDP. That seems to be the economic magical number. And if you can do that, rates drop. I think that's resonated. It was great to have him publish that a couple of weeks ago. Talk with us about it.
-
Unknown A
It's great, great bonus content from the team at all in today. We're super excited to have our friend Antonio Gracias joining the show. Antonio is the CEO of Valor Equity Partners and he's made some. He's made some solid investments. He was one of the first investors in Tesla, SpaceX, Athena. Tons of great. Or he's a second investor in Athena after me. Welcome to the program. And Tony, he put slightly more in.
-
Unknown D
Thank you, Jason. I was also on Uber with you, too, by the way.
-
Unknown A
Yes, yes. I did the C. He did the series A, I believe, for the B.
-
Unknown D
What did you do? We were in the B.
-
Unknown A
You were in the Great Pound. Yeah. Yes. You were in the Shervin round. Okay. Well, welcome to the program, Antonio. Gracias. And we've got a full docket today, and we might even have a special caller from the White House today. No promises, but you never know. We are 17 days into the Trump 2.0 presidency, and seems like the main character, gentlemen, is Doge, the Department of Government Efficiency. And they seem to have found a little known agency, usaid. Let's unpack it and talk about USAID and doge, maybe in three acts. The first one, let me just educate the audience on what USAID is and then get y'all's general reaction to it. Most Americans probably haven't heard of usaid. It stands for the United States Agency for International Development. It was established by JFK by an executive order back in 1961. Wall Street Journal summed up its purpose as, quote, make friends and influence countries in the American interest.
-
Unknown A
According to the US Gov website, the purpose of USAID is to extend assistance to countries recovering from disaster. You got a budget of about $45 billion a year under Biden, and that's about 150 bucks per American per year. They have at least 10,000 employees or did. And as of 2023, they had programs in 130 countries. Obviously, there's 195 countries in the world. And the budget doubled under Biden from 26 to 45. The budget was between 15 and 20 billion during Trump's first term. But the White House and I guess Elon and the DOGE team found out about this. USAID went in there and found all kinds of Interesting spend $2.5 million to fund EV charging stations in Vietnam, 2 million for sex changes in LGBTQ activism in Guatemala, 1.5 million to a Serbian LGBTQ group. 70K for a DEI musical, 47K for a transgender opera in Columbia.
-
Unknown A
The DEI musical, by the way, is in Ireland. So if you get. If you make it to Galway, you can see that DEI musical. This went on and on, and it has become quite a story. Antonio, you're our guest here this week. You and I and Sachs and Elon spent a little time at Twitter during the takeover, where I think a lot of these techniques were first put into action. Your thoughts on what's happening with Doge?
-
Unknown D
I mean, look, Jason, first, I want to thank you guys for having me. It's great to see everyone.
-
Unknown E
You can see the Musical.
-
Unknown D
I'd like to see musical.
-
Unknown A
No, I booked it.
-
Unknown D
We're all going to the musical.
-
Unknown B
What is it called? Is there actually a name?
-
Unknown A
The Musical.
-
Unknown B
Yeah.
-
Unknown A
DEI comma, the Musical.
-
Unknown D
Oh, man.
-
Unknown A
It's a heartwarming story. I apologize for getting a job.
-
Unknown E
Sorry, guys.
-
Unknown A
That you're not qualified for.
-
Unknown E
I apologize.
-
Unknown D
Yeah. So I think the Doge story maybe starts with the Twitter takeover.
-
Unknown A
Yeah.
-
Unknown D
Right. So Twitter was spewing the woke mind virus in the world, which is why Elon did to begin with. And when we got there, as you know, it was basically breaking even. And there was going to be 12.5-ish billion dollars of debt to the company. So a billion and a half dollars in interest costs that there was no money to pay, which led to the turnaround, I think, which was the biggest turnaround of all time. Literally the biggest turnaround, I think, ever in history. Second biggest tech deal ever done. 80% of the people gone. That doesn't include all the contractors that were there. And the company is now servicing its debt. And they just priced yesterday one of their bank deals at $0.97. So this is a huge win. Means the company's doing extremely well. Other people bought the bank debt and then the bank debt traded up to a little over 98.
-
Unknown D
So 98 and 5.
-
Unknown A
8.
-
Unknown D
A giant business success. A rousing business success. Jason, you were there for part of it. You saw it. It was a disaster. This place was. It was tampons in the bathrooms and every woken you could possibly imagine. And no one in the office, uh, that the. It was so bad that the pens had gone dry in the conference rooms, which is incredible. And I think that, you know, that's how the.
-
Unknown E
So you mean the pens had gone dry because they were never being used or because they were being used so much?
-
Unknown D
They were never used.
-
Unknown A
We got there on the. Yeah, the Halloween weekend and we started whiteboarding and, you know, the race next gen. No ink.
-
Unknown D
Yeah, yeah. I mean, everything. It was. It's incredible. And. But. But flowers were impeccable. Food being made fresh every day for thousands of people and thrown away three times a day, tossed in the garbage, wouldn't give it to the homeless. It was just. It was shockingly bad. Bureaucracy gone mad. Bad incentives. People don't care. So it was both. I think this turned into two things. One was just stop the wolf mind virus. You know, the interesting Thing is, they do external brand safety checks there now and they have 99% rating and brand safety now. Right. So stock the Wolf, my virus is going in the world, number one. Number two, fix the company. And both have happened. It's been a couple years now, right? Three years now. And both have happened. Not even three years. Two and a half years, really. And both have happened.
-
Unknown D
And I think you take that, that was sort of the warm up act for what's going on at dosh, which is, you know, the President, United States, President Trump wants it to make America great again. And that I think begins with making the government great. And you gotta fix it. It's a turnaround. This is the biggest turnaround of all time. And President Trump has the courage to do it. And he's got a great ally in Elon to make it happen in Doge. And so the numbers are pretty easy, right? We're spending six and a half trillion. We bring in four and a half trillion. We got to find two trillion dollars somewhere. Interest costs a trillion dollars a year. The bond markets were going up, the long bond was going up a lot because people believe that we couldn't stop spending, creating inflation. You see those trading down now as Doge is starting to take effect.
-
Unknown D
We'll see. It's real. The stuff you're talking about, it's sort of extraordinary what's happening in the, you know, Elon said this public, right, Fraud, waste and abuse. He thinks kind of 10% of the budget is probably fraud. I think it might be low, actually. So you're talking about 650 billion, a trillion in waste. I think that's probably about right. That alone fixes the problem. But what's really serious about it, Jason, for me, and what scared me when I, when we first started thinking about this, look, and I'm not there full time. You know, I'm in and out a little bit and trying to help where I can, but I'm not there full time. When I thought, when this started, I thought we had a democracy, that it turned to a bureaucracy. Okay? What I'm afraid of now is we have a bureaucracy that is about to turn into a kleptocracy.
-
Unknown D
I mean, a Latin American style kleptocracy. Okay? The stuff you're talking about, that is pure fraud. And you're making some jokes out of it. The DIA musical. But if you go into the data that's coming out of usaid, what you find is there's a lot of political contributions going on there. Politico Itself being funded by usaid. I mean, that is pure corruption. That's like a Latin American style autocracy. And we cannot let it go there. I mean, I think this happened just in the nick of time. And I'm super grateful to all the people there. There's, you know, 80 plus people there, all patriots gone full time.
-
Unknown A
Okay, so Chamath, you've been watching this. You hear from Antonio, what's your general take on what we saw in the first, I don't know, 20 days of doge or no, 15 days. Sorry, it's 15 days of doge.
-
Unknown E
So let me try to give you a little bit of historical context because I think that that's important. I think whenever I hear so many people breathlessly saying some version of WTF as if this is totally new, it's not new. And I'll give you two examples. But one that I really want to double Click on, the two examples I'll give you is that in 1941, the Truman Committee was formed because there was a fear that the spending by the Defense Department was completely out of whack. And over the next six or seven years, and this is really what gave Truman the credibility to then become Roosevelt's vice president, was they found incredible levels of waste, fraud and abuse during the war, before the war effort, and then after Pearl harbor, during the war process, over seven years, that committee, and this is in $1941, they were tasked and budgeted with only 20 or $30,000.
-
Unknown E
Okay. Over the next six years, they spent less than a million, inflation adjusted to 2023. This is where I found the data was about 6.5 billion. They spent. You know how much they saved? It's estimated they saved somewhere between 10 to 15 billion dollars in 1941. That's a quarter of a trillion, 20, 23 dollars. The second example is we did this under President Clinton, and that was called the National Partnership for Reinventing Government. So the first thing that I think it's important to acknowledge is this is not new. We've done Doge twice before. Both have been successful. The Harry Truman one was incredibly important because it really set guardrails for how this can be done. Everything in that committee, it was a Senate committee, was unanimous. So it was Republicans and Democrats that found waste, fraud and abuse everywhere. They saved an enormous amount of money.
-
Unknown E
The second, which is interesting is these last two versions of dogecoin were driven and led by Democrats. The same people today who are basically saying, hey, hold on a second, we have congressional committees or we have Inspector Generals, and they lack the awareness to know that their own party was the driving force for this two times before. And I think it's important to just acknowledge that those methods are not good anymore. Right. Because I think what we're finding early days is the rot is super pervasive. There's no accountability. And so I think you need people to look at it with fresh eyes. And what is doge at the end of the day, what they are are read only auditors of the truth. And the press secretary and the White House made this very clear. It's incredible the power that read only access gives you. All it allows you to do is just take the data and present the data.
-
Unknown E
They can't manipulate it. And what they're able to do is publish all of this stuff in real time. And that's why this is so important. Because if it went into a congressional committee, to be honest with you, it would sit there and stew for six, seven, eight, nine months. You would maybe get small little tidbits of it. But now instead, you're just getting the full thrust of it. And what is the biggest thing that I find concerning? I think it's what Antonio said, which is that the media, who are supposed to be this intermediary layer that's totally objective between the government and the people, were not independent at all, but had all kinds of hidden incentives. $8 million to Politico, several million dollars to the BBC. I think it's important to ask what's going on. And by the way, that also has historical context. This is exactly what happened in the 60s and 70s where it turned out that record companies were paying DJs to pay songs.
-
Unknown E
There was a huge set of lawsuits and trial cases, and the result was a change in the law. Right? And we call that payola now, which is you cannot take this money without disclosing it. And so had this money been absorbed by these entities and actually disclosed, maybe we'd be okay. But Nick, I sent you a link. Maybe you can throw it on the screen for these guys. This is a very simple manifestation of this cycle. We talked about this, guys, and we didn't realize how connected it all was. But we were asking ourselves during the election cycle last year, why are all these articles buried? Why aren't we really getting the truth? And it turns out that the people who were responsible for telling the truth somewhere along the chain were cajoled or just told not to tell the truth, influenced by all of this back channel money that was going back and forth from the government to these Folks.
-
Unknown A
Okay, yeah, let me just give some numbers to what you were referencing there. The USAID organization has been giving money, as have other agencies, to journals, databases and subscriptions. There's probably some amount of that that makes sense. However, when we look at this. During Trump, one spend on Politico was averaging around 1.3 million a year, but it suddenly ballooned up to 8 million a year under Biden. And you can see the quarterly payments here on this chart. So there's some normal amount to spend on publications or for a library at an organization. And so what we're looking here is all federal agencies. And suddenly during Biden, there is a very suspicious ramp up in spend to Politico. All of this is breaking. A lot of this hasn't been verified yet. So we'll, we'll put that caveat on it. And then there is a number of 34 million that's been floating around.
-
Unknown A
That's all years back to 2008, not just 2024. Less people have that number juxtaposed or misattributed. When Politico was acquired back in 2021, they were doing about 200 million in revenue. So this would be about 4% of their revenue. It's pretty significant. The BBC also received 2.7 million in funding from USAID in 2023. That was 8% of their annual income. That's a little suspicious. Thomson Reuters, which is the consulting arm of Reuters, they've received $120 million from the federal government since 2011. That's gotta be looked at and double clicked on. And half of that came during the Biden administration. New York Times hasn't actually received all that much 370k from the federal government last year under Biden, it went from 100k a year to like 300. So the new York Times data has been cleaned up a little bit. All of this is to say there's spending going on with the press that certainly doesn't look good and should be verified and challenged, obviously.
-
Unknown A
And we are in a breaking news environment. So we'll see how that information shakes out over time. Which is one of the great things I think about Doge is they're getting this information out there and citizen journalists are looking at public databases. Friedberg. And we're having a conversation about this, a conversation two years ago, Friedberg, when you kept harping on every episode about our debt and about the interest payments, two or three years ago, you were way ahead of the curve. And now here we are. We didn't think anybody would ever take this cause up. And now it is the cause of the moment. What are your thoughts on the first two weeks of Doge Friedberg?
-
Unknown B
Magnificent. Magnificent. I mean, what else is there to say?
-
Unknown A
Eggplant emojis.
-
Unknown B
Yeah, this is the eggplant emoji. It's what we needed. If you zoom out on what Doge is doing, I think the best way to describe it is zero based budgeting. And in organizations that go through zero based budgeting, you do a cycle, typically annually, where you take all of your opex, all of your expenses, and running a company or running an organization down to the studs, you take it down to zero and you rebuild it up. And you say, what are we trying to achieve this year from first principles based on that set of objectives, those goals, what do we need to do? What's the minimal expense we need to run? You don't start with last year's numbers and say, what else do we need to do? And start to add. On top of that, you really do a hard level, high degree of scrutiny on every dollar moving out.
-
Unknown B
And that's what Doge is effectively doing. They're doing a zero based budgeting on the federal government. They're looking at every line item and they're asking the fundamental question, which I don't think we talk about in the public discourse enough, which is what is the essential role of government? And there is a great debate to be had around that point. Should government be providing humanitarian aid in international markets? That's a good debate to be had. Should the government be providing security to nations that can't provide security for themselves? Does the US Government have a role in that? Should the government be providing loans for people to go to universities? Should the government be providing loans for people to buy homes that are overpriced, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera? And as we start to ask the questions of how we're spending money, I think it ends up leading to the most important questions, which is what is the essential role of government?
-
Unknown B
Which I think is the debate that needs to be had in order for the democracy to last. So I'm very happy to see the effort of Doge, and I think that it's the beginning of what I hope will be kind of a long term process of asking the fundamental questions about essential government.
-
Unknown A
And Antonio, zero based budgeting was the first thing you sort of introduced when the Twitter takeover happened. Just what do we need in terms of design? What does the sales team need to hit these sales numbers? How many servers do we need. And my Lord, the waste, fraud and abuse at that company was shocking. They had buildings that were $100 a square foot, if I remember correctly, that were used for storage of the furniture from the previous building that had been upgraded and were storing them in class A office space. You referenced the commissary. Twenty people were having lunch a day, but they had never ratcheted down the amount of food they were making. So each meal was about $800 on average. When you did the math for those 20 meals just in the San Francisco office, maybe you could talk a little bit about how the shock and awe campaign of just freezing spending and then seeing, hey, what actually is necessary to accomplish this task worked out at Twitter and then how you see that being executed, you know, inside of our government.
-
Unknown D
Yeah, thanks, Jason. It was pretty extraordinary actually, the, you know, the Twitter experience. The first thing you do in a journal like that is try and get the checkbook and just turn payments off and then see what happens. Because there are lots of people that shouldn't be getting paid. And sometimes they complain. And sometimes you find the people that complain the loudest are the ones who are committing the worst fraud. They're the worst fraudsters in the whole game, Right. The worst grifters are the ones who are saying they're crying the most amount of foul. And the problem, at least in Twitter, there were financial statements like we could actually there was an audit financial statement and they were basically, they were in some ways correct. I would say there were some issues with the user growth dows, et cetera, and the incentive plans. But the actual, like the cash flow numbers were pretty much correct here.
-
Unknown D
The problem is much, much deeper and it makes this zero based budgeting question much harder, which is the way the government works. A department just basically asks for money from treasury and they sent it out. We all run businesses. There's a reconciliation process. You know, you have a contract, you issue a PO against it. Something comes in, you check that it came in, services is rendered, and then you issue a payable and then, you know, some, a month later you pay it. Right? That doesn't happen to the US Government. There is. That process is broken. It used to happen, it's broken now. And so literally money's flowing out. I used to ask myself this question, why are the numbers always revised? Why are they always wrong? How can the government know how much money it's spent? Just hit the button, the computer and figure it out.
-
Unknown D
Problem is, that button doesn't exist. We spent time early on, I was at Marlock with Elon trying to track through, like, how does the money actually flow? No one could tell us how it actually flows. Where is it going out? People didn't know. And it's totally crazy. And it's the reason it all goes through Treasury.
-
Unknown B
Antonio, can you just explain that to us?
-
Unknown D
Well, so I will try to explain it to you. I'm not sure I have full command of it. I'm not sure anyone does quite yet. It goes to treasury ultimately, but it was supposed to flow through the way it was supposed to work. It was changed in the 70s. In 1973, the Nixon administration in 71. Let me go back. They came off the gold standard, which allowed deficits in 73 at the Nadir of the Nixon presidency. Congress took away from the presidency the executive power, this thing called apportionments, which was the power of the executive to stop spending. So Nixon was abusing it by stopping the senior want. And so Congress go to April. What that means today is the executive, as he reaches in, it's very hard to just stop payments. So what's happening is the. The government is. Is put in a process where they would just have an authorized executive kind of stamp up bill that got paid, that broke.
-
Unknown D
And I don't know when it broke, but it broke sometime. So the money flow now Department gets a budget authorized to it by Congress. It goes to omb, OMB allocates the budget, that department then just sends a money request to treasury to pay. It is not reconciled against what happened. This is one of the reasons.
-
Unknown B
And that's it. There's no. There's no. There's no controller. There's no controller function like there is.
-
Unknown D
In a normal company, 100%. There is no control. There is no controller. There's no reconciliation. The reason they can't pass audits, okay, the reason this happens is because you can't audit something you haven't reconciled. The only audit that I've seen is actually from the Social Security Administration. And when you read it, I've got one of my partners who've read the thing. It's just riddled material weaknesses that are probably all.
-
Unknown B
Are there individuals that have made millions or billions of dollars from missed payments overseas? Is this kind of what's gone on in the missing money in Ukraine? Do you think it's kind of found its way to the wrong places?
-
Unknown D
Yeah, I mean, I don't know what happened to Ukraine. I don't.
-
Unknown B
It's a crazy story.
-
Unknown D
Yeah, it is shocking about Ukraine. I will say that I have business Experience trying to work in businesses that had Medicaid and Medicaid, Medicare's payments. I wanted to make that better. Right. We use this to make the world better. And we just stopped because we found so much fraud. I mean, I'm certain we literally have a rule here, government payor in those areas. If it's more than like a third of the business, we don't do it. And in the services space, this is why we just found continuous fraud in the companies we're looking at investing in.
-
Unknown A
Yeah, just threading these things together. You know, you. The really interesting thing with the Twitter pausing of payments was, you know, at some point we were in a meeting, you know, at 1:00am on a Saturday, and it was like, hey, let's turn the credit cards off to see what bounces and, you know, and what happens. And then, of course, we start getting calls and people started routing, obviously, because they knew Sachs was there. You were there, I was there. Hey, you know, a company who I shared an investor with or, you know, in another company said, hey, you know, we're not getting paid for this. And it was like some SaaS software that nobody was using, etc. So you start figuring out, to your point, okay, is this software even being used? There was so much software and services that had been paid that nobody had ever logged in to set up.
-
Unknown A
So it was just being paid as pure graph. Now, you said, Antonio, correctly, the people who come first, like, they're probably the ones who are in on the biggest grift, because, hey, you know, I figured out how to grift this money. How USAID got to the top of the DOGE list, I think, is one of the most interesting aspects of this story. So if you remember, on January 21st, Trump decided he would do a bunch of executive orders, right? And one of them was to pause foreign aid for 90 days. Okay, this seems reasonable. We got to take care of our country. That was part of his mandate for becoming the 47th President of the United States. So a couple of days later, the White House said, hey, this US Aid leadership is trying to circumvent the executive order. In other words, they're just going to keep paying people.
-
Unknown A
Even though the executive order came out that alerted the DOGE team. So Elon confirmed this on X. He said, quote, all DOGE did was check to see which federal organizations were violating the President's executive orders. The most turned out to be usaid. So that became our focus. And according to NBC security, officials at USAID tried to prevent DOGE from even Getting into the building or accessing the systems. To your point, Antonio, the person probably who's got the most to hide is the one who's going to fight the most. Over the weekend, Doge gained access to usaid. And then people started tweeting out all of this crazy spend and things that any American who looks at it and says, wait a second, if we haven't fixed the goddamn water in Flint, Michigan, why are we sending money to Galway or in Ireland to do a DEI musical?
-
Unknown A
This makes no sense. And that's, I think, the key piece of this, Antonio, is can you win the hearts and minds of Americans? Because some of this stuff, I don't know if it's legal or it's not legal or it's against protocol, or it is protocol. We're gonna find out. There's been tons of cases and lawsuits that have been filed. But to your point, this is how Elon found out about usaid.
-
Unknown E
J Cal, let me ask you a question. Where does that place you in your political philosophy around the importance of human rights abroad?
-
Unknown A
Great, great question. You know, I've always felt that the west should act in unison. And if the United States is the greatest economy or the strongest, we should lead. There is something called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The United States, Eleanor Roosevelt wrote this at the un and everybody tries to hit those notes. I think it's great that we try to reduce suffering in the world, but I think we should be doing it not unilaterally and not to try to manipulate governments. And that's the piece of this, that USAID is obviously a grift where people are trying to steal money for their pet projects. And I don't think they're acting in unison and above board to look and say, okay, where's the most suffering in the world? How can we help that? That, to me, seems like a noble thing to do. And if the United States has the budget to help fight AIDS in Africa or poverty, do you think.
-
Unknown E
Do you think there's a chance that some of these human rights issues were embellished to try to get more money?
-
Unknown A
Well, I do think I did this tweet recently. So yes is the answer. If you look at Amnesty International, Amnesty International, where I worked, was one of my first jobs. They were working on people who were imprisoned, tortured, raped, murdered, systematic murder of dissidents for freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, religion, et cetera. And then somewhere along the line, you know, the Amnesty International was tweeting about trans rights. And that's the big focus this is a very small amount of, you know, people on the planet. And I don't think that those human rights violations in any way relate to. To the tragedy we're seeing of people being murdered, tortured, raped, and caned and beheaded in certain places in the world. So there is a way to look at suffering and say we should handle this first. And yes, somebody who, you know, feels they got misgendered, maybe that's way down the priority list compared to systematic rape of women in these war zones.
-
Unknown A
Those will be the high order bits. And so this thing has gotten. The other fascinating thing I think about usaid, which I'd like to get your thoughts on too, Chamath, is at what point did this switch from being the left saying we should not intervene?
-
Unknown B
Right.
-
Unknown A
The left's position always in the 80s, 90s when we were growing up, was we shouldn't be doing these operatives in other countries. We should let democracy flow, let these countries figure it out for themselves. We shouldn't be doing empire building. We shouldn't be doing imperialism. And then all of a sudden, now it's just such a grift that I think everybody's got their hands in the pie. Lindsey Graham's on some nonprofit that gets money from this. I don't know if that's above board or not. Everybody, a lot of people who are formerly in government seem to be part of this NGO train. So the whole thing's just turned out to be a grift, and it's a bipartisan grift, obviously.
-
Unknown E
I think the biggest thing that we will have to confront is that many of the things that we thought were issues or problems may have actually been somewhat embellished because of this money cycle.
-
Unknown A
Sure.
-
Unknown E
And I think that that's going to cause a lot of people to feel really. They'll probably feel really foolish about some of the decisions they made. All the attempts at cancellation are going to look really dumb in hindsight.
-
Unknown A
Yeah.
-
Unknown D
All right, I have some credit to our friend David Sacks here, who's coming online.
-
Unknown A
Okay, here he is, David.
-
Unknown D
And the one thing I want to point out, this goes way back, I think maybe more than a decade ago, David tried to explain to me that neocons had taken over American foreign policy, and they were. Your question about why did Democrats change, why do Republicans change, etc. The neocons took over foreign policy on both sides, Democrats and Republicans, and populated out this very activist, muscular stance, which is bad for America. And I think, Jason, that answers your question as to why the Democrats shifted.
-
Unknown A
All right. With US is David Sachs. How you doing, brother? Are you literally in the White House?
-
Unknown C
I'm in the eeob.
-
Unknown A
Ah, okay.
-
Unknown C
There's like a podcast studio actually in the eob.
-
Unknown A
Oh, fantastic. And you're wearing a suit every day.
-
Unknown C
Yeah, no, you're right. I have to wear a suit and tie every day. I was just listening on your conversation about Doge Jake. I'm surprised that you never figured out a way to get involved in this usaf. I mean, everybody's on the take except you. What's going on?
-
Unknown A
If I had known, I would have started an ngo. Where's my ngo?
-
Unknown E
You had everything except the money laundering. You had the grip, you had the virtue signaling. You had it all. Except the actual money.
-
Unknown C
Let me uplevel this for a second. Okay, so we knew the US government runs a $2 trillion deficit. Every year. We're in debt almost $40 trillion. And we also knew that anytime anyone tries to cut anything in Washington, the whole city screams bloody murder. Okay, so the question is just why? Well, now we know the money is all going to them. It's like round tripping to them. New York Times getting paid. Politico getting paid. Bill Kristol, perennial warmonger, getting paid. Ukraine getting paid. Like 11 out of 12 publications. Ukraine getting paid.
-
Unknown A
Incredible.
-
Unknown C
Viktor Orban, who's the Prime Minister of Hungary, was saying that he's very popular in Hungary. His political opposition funded by usaid. In Poland, the left wing political opposition funded by usaid. And on and on and on it goes.
-
Unknown B
BBC, BBC. You wonder why everyone in the uk, so, yeah, yeah, like everyone believe that BBC is getting paid.
-
Unknown C
Every left wing organization in the world seems to be getting paid by this slush fund at USAID, which disperses about 50 billion a year. That's a billion dollars a week. That's actually a lot of money. And so it makes you wonder, the left in general tries to portray itself as a movement of the people, that it's grassroots. This is the exact opposite. This is AstroTurf. This is basically money coming from the top down out of Washington to fund all of these groups, maybe not even in the United States, all over the world. So it makes you wonder, what is the real level of local support for these left wing policies all over the world?
-
Unknown A
Yeah. Crazy. So you did a big announcement this week on crypto and creating a framework. Finally, I caught some of it. Maybe you could just tell us from the bottom up, what is the mandate from the President and what is your advice to him on how to make crypto move out of the shadows offshore ICOs craziness to legitimacy. What's the plan here to legitimize and regulate crypto?
-
Unknown C
Well, the plan was really spelled out by President Trump and his Week one EO on crypto. And it's all spelled out in there, the principles of the administration on crypto. The President said he wants to support the responsible use and growth of digital assets and blockchains across every sector of the economy. So the principals are all there. And yesterday I was invited up to Capitol Hill to meet with the chairman of the important committees that will be that basically govern crypto. And so we had a press conference there to announce the legislative plan. You can see there, there's Chairman Tim Scott, who's the chair of the Senate Banking Committee to my left. And then to my right is French Hill, who's the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. And then to his right is John Bozeman, who's the chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee.
-
Unknown C
And then to the left of Tim Scott is GT Thompson, who's the chair of the House Agriculture Committee. He's out of frame right now. But those are the four committees that govern crypto. And you may ask, why is the Agriculture Committee involved in crypto? And the reason is because the Ag Committee supervises the cftc, the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, because commodities all came out of agriculture. So it's interesting, you need four committees across the House and Senate to get legislation done on crypto. It's not just House and Senate, it's actually two committees in each of the House and Senate. And so this is the first time where we've had four chairmen of the four key committees all come together and say that they're ready to support crypto legislation. There were a lot of people on X who felt like this wasn't a mind blowing announcement.
-
Unknown C
They wanted something that they could trade on right away. That's not what this was. This was basically a statement of commitment from the chairs, the four committees that we're going to get legislation done this year, maybe in the next six months. I mean, that's really the goal. And we've never had that before. So that is pretty monumental.
-
Unknown B
I used to work in this because when I first launched Climatecorp back in the day, we actually were selling commodity contracts online. So we set ourselves up as an exempt commodity trading platform. And so I remember all this old legislation, there was the Commodity Futures Modernization act, if I remember, when they deregulated the energy market. But one of the features of the Commodity Futures Modernization act was that they created this concept of an exempt commodity contract, which was where you're not delivering a physical good, and that's basically what weather derivatives were, and energy derivatives and other kind of indices were created that didn't have a tangible physical supply. And it was still kind of shoveled in the commodities world. That's why the legacy of all this stuff kind of sitting with agriculture is that the way this is likely going to move forward is it's going to look like a new extension of exempt commodities and kind of treated like that versus being securities.
-
Unknown C
The question you're describing is called market structure. What are the definitions going to be? Because digital assets can be many things. You can have some digital assets are cryptocurrencies. They're actually currencies. Then there's things that are crypto securities, then there's things that are commodities. Bitcoin actually is regulated as a commodity right now. And then you've got things that aren't securities or commodities or like collectibles, you know, like NFTs, things like that. So there's all these different categories. And one of the things that the market needs is just clarity around the definitions so that founders know what the rules of the road are and they can actually just comply with them. So giving them those definitions and describing how a crypto project could start, for example, as a security, and eventually the protocol could become decentralized enough or maybe it becomes a commodity. That whole idea, that's called market structure.
-
Unknown C
And there was a bill in the last Congress by French Hill, who is the chair of the House Financial Services Committee now, that passed the House with 71 Democratic, so it was fairly bipartisan. But then it went nowhere in the Senate because frankly, the bank committee at that time was run by Sherrod Brown, who is anti crypto. So it got stopped in the Senate right away. Now we have Republican control of the Senate and Tim Scott's the new chair of the Senate Banking Committee, and he's expressed support. So I think now we could get a bill on market structure like fit 21 again, which was French Hill's bill last Congress. I think we could do a revised and updated version this Congress. And that was one of the things they all the chairman expressed support for. So I think there's a pretty good chance we could get this done in the next six months.
-
Unknown B
What's the opposition, Sacks? I guess it feels to me like with the market structure question being addressed and answered, you would have also more protection for consumers because now businesses know the rules of the road. They follow the structure that Protects consumers, et cetera, et cetera. Why would people be opposed to moving this forward, moving the legislation forward, getting this all behind us?
-
Unknown C
Well, I think this is an area where there's a really good chance of having bipartisan support. We did in the last Congress. Like I mentioned that the House Bill got over 70 Democratic votes. I think in the Senate, we're gonna need seven votes, seven Democrat votes to get to 60. Right. Which is the number you need if you don't go through the reconciliation process. And I think there's a good chance this passes with significant Democratic support as well as Republican. It's not going to be unanimous or anything like that because there are still forces that are hostile to crypto in Washington.
-
Unknown E
You think it's going to be a discrete bill or do you. I mean, it seems like you're going to have to get a border security and energy and budget bill passed. So it seems like everything's looking towards reconciliation. In which case, would this be an adjunct, like an add on?
-
Unknown C
The question is what you can get through reconciliation. So in order for a bill to go through the reconciliation process, where you only need basically 50 votes, it has to have a budgetary impact or predominantly a budgetary impact. I think it's called the Byrd Rule. And that rule was definitely pushed pretty hard in the last administration. Remember that the Biden administration got the inflation Reduction act passed through reconciliation and all those subsidies for clean energy or whatever. So they've opened the window pretty wide on what can go through reconciliation. But that's the question. There's one other bill that I think is going to move pretty quickly here, too. So I just mentioned the market structure bill. The other area is stablecoins. And Senator Haggerty, he's on the Banking Committee, he just released a stablecoin bill. There's counterparts in the House and what the four chairman indicated is actually they're going to take up stablecoins first and then market structure will follow very quickly.
-
Unknown C
So I think we could see a stablecoin bill pass Congress in the next several months.
-
Unknown A
Sachs, I guess the question is the SEC was and Gary Gensler were the blocker previously with crypto, and they just said, hey, listen, there's an existing set of rules here. Just follow those rules. Obviously, those rules don't exactly apply to the innovation happening in crypto. So the question, I think after stablecoins, which feels like a layup and a great place to start, that'll be a great early win. And it just makes people, I guess that would just reinforce the dollar Supremacy. Right. If it's tied to the dollar, so that's good for America. But maybe you could talk to protecting consumers, because we all saw in the first couple of generations of crypto all kinds of griffs and ICOs and things that were never delivered. So how do you balance those two things? Protecting consumers who may get really enthusiastic about this versus, you know, people who might try to prey upon them?
-
Unknown C
Well, the first thing you want to do if you're going to protect consumers is you want to bring the activity onshore.
-
Unknown A
Okay.
-
Unknown C
Because obviously, when all the activity gets driven offshore, then it's hard for regulators to supervise it. And moreover, it's hard for the market to know who's a good actor, who's a bad actor, what's a good project, what's a bad project. So the first thing you want to do is have the innovation happen onshore in the United States. By the way, it's probably not a coincidence that the biggest fraud in the history of crypto, which was ftx, was based in the Bahamas.
-
Unknown A
Yeah, probably. A little bit of a tell. A little bit of a tell.
-
Unknown C
And it'll be an even stronger tell when the good projects feel like they can come back into the United States. And then you've got the shady ones in the Bahamas or in other countries. They're going to stick out like a sore thumb. Everyone's going to be able to understand that, oh, those guys are too shady to operate in the United States. So the number one thing we need to do is just bring the innovation onshore. In terms of the framework, I think the market structure bill is going to define, here's a security, here's a commodity, here's what you have to do. Here are the disclosure requirements around creating a crypto project. So all of that will be in the bill. And then in the meantime, the SEC has created a new task force under Hester Purce, who's a SEC commissioner, and she is already starting to do work in that regard to define a better regime at the SEC for crypto projects.
-
Unknown C
You mentioned that Gensler said that the SEC's doors were open to crypto companies and they should come in and talk to us and work with us. That was very disingenuous. Crypto companies would tell me they would go see the sec. The SEC would tell them nothing about what the rules were, but they would have enforcement people in those meetings just writing down everything they would say, and the next day they would get sent a Wells notice. So the truth is, the SEC was not cooperating. They were not providing any clarity. They were just honeypotting founders basically to come in, and then they would immediately investigate them. I mean, it was really terrible. Look, we expect founders to play by the rules and abide by the law and be compliant. But when you won't tell them what the rules are and then you prosecute them, there's no fair way for them to comply.
-
Unknown C
So the most important thing is to give them a framework. I think the SEC now is doing that. They're starting to do that already. And then legislatively, we're going to have a bill that does that moving through Congress over the next few months.
-
Unknown A
This is absolutely awesome. We're super encouraged that you're doing this, and we really appreciate you coming on the pod. Wish you could participate in the other three or four crazy discussions we're about to have. But we understand you've got to stay focused on the mission. Anything on the AI front that we can look forward to in the coming weeks that you're working on. I know that's the other part of your mission.
-
Unknown C
Well, the big thing is, like I talked about last time, the President rescinded the Biden EO, which was this 100 page monstrosity. It burned some regulation on our AI companies. I think that decision's been proven even more right in the wake of Deep Seek because we know that China has basically caught up or they're very, very close to catching up. It felt like that Biden EO is written in a vacuum in which the US Was the only player in AI and that if we imposed a bunch of burdensome rules on our companies, that somehow that wouldn't allow China to catch up.
-
Unknown B
Right.
-
Unknown C
And I think it's pretty clear that China is very, very competitive. If we hobble our AI companies, it's going to run down to China's benefits. So I think that was a very good decision. And what the President said in his EO is that we should devise a new AI action plan to replace that Biden eo. And we're working on that right now.
-
Unknown B
All right, David, I've got some anecdotes from DOGE you want to share?
-
Unknown C
I'll give you one anecdote which is, I've been working late here a number of nights at the eob, and I won't tell you where the DOGE guys are based, but, you know, I know where their office is, so I just went by there to say hi. The whole room was full of young coders. I think they were engineers, but they're wearing like, suits and ties. So that's a little different. But they were all working really late. I mean, they're working there late up Friday night. And the facilities people don't know what to do because they've never had people ask to stay late on a Friday night before. So they've had to create new facilities access for these guys.
-
Unknown A
They're like, you're coming to the office and doing work. We don't have a protocol for that. How does that work? We're going to need to get you a key or a badge to come to the building. Well, it's absolutely awesome to see the progress you're making in the first two weeks and continued success. We're so proud of the effort.
-
Unknown C
All right, thanks, guys.
-
Unknown A
All right.
-
Unknown B
Do you guys think the Democrats are going to lose people over their opposition to Doge? Like, is Doge really viewed as oppositional to Democrat Party interests? For the average person, it's a Rorschach task.
-
Unknown E
I think the thing is that there was a coalition that the Democrats had and there was a coalition that the Republicans had. The Republicans did a better job of reforming that coalition. And now I think what you're going to see is a shrinking. I actually got this totally wrong. I don't know if you remember a couple years ago, but my thought at the time was if the Republicans don't figure out how to fix themselves, they were going to go and lose for the next 10 or 15 years. And the reason I said that was they would walk into every midterm and they would just get their ass hit to them. But I think they figured it out. That this is sort of this thing that I've been thinking about a lot is there's a fight in Western societies and it's a pendulum between labor and capital.
-
Unknown E
And it used to be the thought, the conventional wisdom was that the Republicans were pro capital and Democrats were pro labor. And the brilliance of Trump is he took over the Republican Party and made it totally populist, which is to say pro populist labor. And the crazy thing about the Democrats is that they are the most sophisticated liars. Because if you look at what happened under Biden, you had record high stock markets, so it was purely in favor of asset owners. Record high deficits, record high illegal immigration, record high wage suppression. All of these things are massively pro capital. But they tried to present themselves as pro labor. That entire ruse is now being undone. And all of this data, what that does is it'll consolidate the Democrats to a shell of their former self. It'll take a year or 18 months. But I think unless they figure out how to totally hard reset, they're going to be in a really difficult struggle to find a cohort of people beyond 15 or 20% of the population for a long time.
-
Unknown A
Well, and it's so dumb to come out against waste, fraud and abuse. So the best argument the Democrats had, it seems, was that, my God, people's Social Security numbers or people's privacy was being violated because they went in and looked at the data and how the money was wasted. This is the like height of not getting the point and not reading the room. 100% of Americans don't want their tax payments stolen. They don't care. If you looked at their Social Security number. This isn't a privacy issue. That Doge is looking at some database and that's what AOC and Schumer were doing. Oh my God, these people are looking at your Social Security number. They have access to your records. Who cares? What matters is how much money is being stolen from the American public. And anyone at any point in time could have picked up this issue.
-
Unknown A
This has been going on. I think you pointed out the last time somebody really addressed this in earnest was Clinton. So this has been going on. Obama, Trump, 1.0, Biden, everybody has been raising the debt. All of this grift has been going on. And it's only this time around that somebody picked up the free money and said here's an issue. Now we see what happens when somebody picks up the issue of stop wasting money. It is a popular issue. This is only going to make Trump more popular.
-
Unknown D
So Jason, if I add what you and Chamath said, I think you're both right. I'm going to give you a very concrete example. Rahm Emanuel is now back from Japan. Okay. He was chief of staff in both the Democratic White Houses post Roosevelt, Clinton and Obama. And he wrote an op ed this weekend, this past weekend that basically said the Democrats have lost their way because they have forgotten what he calls kitchen table issues. The things people, regular people care about. And Chamath, you're right. I mean the reality is they forgot about inflation. They forgot that inflation is terrible for the average person. It's terrible for middle class America. It's okay for people that own productive assets because they just go up in value. But it's terrible for people that are wage earners and that have any savings. It's terrible for older people that are living off savings.
-
Unknown D
Terrible. You know, Rob makes this point that if the Democrats are going to reconform in some way, reform in some way, they're going to have to recapture these kitchen table issues. And if they don't, they'll just be about these fringe social issues, dei, transgender, whatever. And that will never work. They'll never come back into power.
-
Unknown E
Well, I mean, the crazy thing is, like, the Democratic policies are meant to favor capital holders, but capital holders, by and large, deeply dislike the Democrats because of all of these other issues. So they have no home, there is no base from which to build from right now unless they go through a great reset. And part of it is that they have to understand that they are actually not pro labor. They have been pro capital. But that requires such a schism from the deepest believers of the Democratic party who thought, you know, eat the rich, you wear it on your dress. It's so important to you. In fact, actually, you were feeding the rich. You just. And the fact that you didn't even know that is just pathetic.
-
Unknown D
Yeah. What's funny is that Margaret Thatcher famously said that the problem is socialism. You eventually run out of other people's money and you run deficits. Right. And you destroy the country. This happened in Venezuela. This is always the end of socialism. It's how it finishes, how the movie ends. We've seen it around the world. Just look into South America. We were heading that direction. That's when I said earlier, I'm afraid we might become a kleptocracy if this doesn't stop. And I'm so grateful to all the way at Patriots at Doge and the government, the President, for making it happen, because we were heading that direction.
-
Unknown A
So the Democratic Party is lost. They'll continue to be lost. Interesting thing came up this week. On Monday, President Trump signed an executive order laying out a plan to establish the first sovereign wealth fund for the United States. For those of you who don't know, a sovereign wealth fund is essentially an investment fund for a country. It's almost universally based on natural resources. So Norway, Saudi, uae, they all have Australia sovereign wealth funds based upon minerals or typically oil. The United States is not known for having the oil reserves of the Saudis or UAE or Norway. This public investment fund would be apparently anchored by potentially the TikTok shares that Trump said he wanted to get half of by giving a license. A lot of that is unclear what this license would be. It's never existed. But this is the concept. The Treasury Secretary and Commerce Secretary have been tasked with developing a plan over the next 90 days.
-
Unknown A
And the plan should include, quote, recommendations for funding mechanisms, investment Strategies, fund structures and a governance model. Chamath, you were tweeting about this. What is the point of having a sovereign wealth fund in the United states if we're $36 trillion in debt, shouldn't we just pay down?
-
Unknown E
Well, I think it's not.
-
Unknown A
Where is this money going to come from?
-
Unknown E
Yeah, well, it's not an either or thing. And I think the point is that if there are assets that are minted effectively overnight, which I think the 50% share of TikTok would be, so call it 100, $150 billion. The question is what should you do with it and who should govern it? And I think this idea that if you had a group of five elder statesmen. So I'm just going to throw some names out there. David Tepper, Stan Druckenmiller, Ken Griffin, John Doerr or Mike Moritz, Bill Gross or some other bond guy. My point is what you get are five people that are very sophisticated across all market categories. One of them could be the rotating CEO for some number of years, people should rotate in and rotate out. These are unpaid jobs because everybody that has these slots should be mega billionaires. So they shouldn't be doing it for their own personal advancement and they should deploy that capital.
-
Unknown E
So as you sell down the TikTok shares, maybe as you sell federal lands and you generate more oil revenue, take it all and invest it on behalf of America into American companies. I think that's a great, incredible idea.
-
Unknown A
Antonio, you think the government should be in this business.
-
Unknown D
So I think it should. And I agree with Chamath that the governance is very, very important. I think he's got a good idea there. I think it for a different reason is that we don't have an industrial policy in America. Many of our strategic competitors around the world, in particular China have a long term industrial policy and they put enormous amounts of capital behind the industrial policy. A sovereign wealth fund I think would be a stealthy way to create industrial policy in America.
-
Unknown A
So rather than industrial policy in this context.
-
Unknown D
So example, in China, they want to build chip fabs and they want to catch up to tsmc. So what do they do? They take the dollars of trade surplus they get from us every year and they pour it back into making that stuff inside their country. And for decades, part of the problem we've had with China is that capital is free because the banking system just pushes money out to manufacturers and they move the manufacturing because the WTO from the US to China, that's industrial policy. When people say the Chinese have a long term, 100 year vision. The way it manifests is this industrial policy, we don't have that here at all. And we try to do it. We do like the CHIPS act and it goes through commerce. We have government bureaucrats deciding how to spend $200 billion to modernize intel, which needs to happen.
-
Unknown D
I mean, I'd much rather have Ken Griffin, Bill Gross, any of the guys Chamath mentioned deciding, okay, we have five industries in America we want to invest in. Let's make great investments, right? I mean, let's make great investments for America. They've got to be economic, they got to make money for us, but they got to be good for the country. I think that's what most of these sovereign wealth funds do. Some of them make portfolio investments, but many of them, like the sovereign wealth fund in Saudi Arabia, the pif, they're making enormous investments domestically to remake the economy, you know, toward tourism, example. And I think this is a great.
-
Unknown A
They're literally building cities in neom. They've got, you know, a dozen cities being constructed and trying to take an oil economy and shift it to a tourism economy, a technology economy, a private equity economy.
-
Unknown E
Antonio's totally right. Like Scott Besant, part of his congressional testimony, you guys probably saw this, was he laid out this thing that he has that's called the 333 plan, right? And the 333 plan says we want to see GDP growth of 3%. We want to see deficits that are no greater than 3%. And we want to have 3 million barrels of oil produced domestically in the United States. But if you double click on that, if you look at the total energy reserves in the United States, they're three times greater than the total energy reserves of Saudi Arabia. Three times across all forms. So not just oil, if you oil nat. Gas plus coal. If we actually go, as Antonio said, towards an industrial policy that's pro energy where the incremental cost of energy is effectively zero. Where we want just a gross abundance of electrons flowing in America for all the great ideas that could pop up, it is by definition going to generate an enormous amount of revenue for the federal government.
-
Unknown E
And so I think having the sovereign wealth fund be the rainy day fund, if you will, that can bank a percentage of all of that, I think starts to do a lot of really good for the long term strategic guidance.
-
Unknown A
Of the US Freiburg, what do you think here? Is this something where we're making the government too big and now we've got the government competing with BlackRock and Sequoia and Andreessen Horowitz and they're going to be on the board of technology companies and energy companies and investing in it. And then what happens when, you know, Obama, Biden, Trump, Bush, you get different people running these things and then they want to do their pet projects. It seems to me like this could be get awfully conflicted awfully quick. What do you think? Should this be a business our government's in?
-
Unknown B
I think one of the things the government sucks at is capitalism. So I wouldn't make capitalism the mandate of a sovereign wealth fund. Certainly not when we have $40 trillion of federal debt. It doesn't make economic sense. Our cost of capital capital is 5%. That's how much the interest is on this 10 to 30 year debt right now. So it's very hard to actually make real risk adjusted returns when our cost of capital is so high. So I don't think the mandate should be, hey, let's put a bunch of capital in a pool, go and invest it and try and make money for the United States. That seems silly, but my point about the government being really bad at capitalism is that the United States government owns and has access to and will acquire through other means, significant assets and resources that should be monetized in a smarter way.
-
Unknown B
And so I would kind of think about the sovereign wealth fund as being more of a strategic vehicle for monetization of high value government assets. So for example, if Trump does actually negotiate a 50% equity position in TikTok US that needs to sit somewhere, it should not sit in the department of whatever. It should sit with a capitalist manager that then ultimately makes the decision on when and how to monetize that asset, return that cash to the treasury and pay down the debt. Similarly, the US has large amounts of land, has access to other large assets that get transferred in seizures, et cetera, et cetera. So I don't know if you guys remember all this, but there was like bitcoin seizures that have happened over the years. Is the government has cracked down on criminal enterprises, then the government owns this bitcoin. Do you think the smartest people are making the decisions on where and how to sell down that bitcoin?
-
Unknown B
I guarantee you not. I would much rather have a capitalist making that decision. So I would view the sovereign wealth fund being less about raise capital from other means in the government, which effectively means borrowing money through treasuries because of the debt level we have and trying to invest it and much more being about, okay, what strategic assets can the US Government monetize And use this as the mechanism for doing that. And then ultimately, I think the objective should be to return that capital. I do think there's also an opportunity for managing Social Security in a smarter way. So Social Security is functionally going to be bankrupt in eight years. The way the trust is set up, the cash that's there, the assets that are there, and the demand on Social Security given the aging population and the rising payouts every year. So one of the other ways to think about this is what are the long term debt obligations, which is ultimately the point of these sovereign wealth funds, and can they be invested in a smarter way?
-
Unknown B
Why is the Social Security entities ultimately owning 3% yielding bonds when they could be owning interest in equities? So I would kind of think about that strategic pool of capital being managed by this as well, and less about the mandate of go be a capitalist investor for the United States, raise money and make money. I think leave that to the markets. But when it comes to strategic assets, I think this could be a good.
-
Unknown A
Vehicle for when the Silk Road got shut down. Yeah, we seized 144,000 Bitcoin. And that's sitting somewhere in some Department of Justice.
-
Unknown B
It got sold off. Yeah, they sold. I think they sold that off.
-
Unknown D
They sold it.
-
Unknown A
No, I think we still haven't. I think that was like the idea was that was going to become the bitcoin strategy. So I mean, you could also come up with taxes to fund this.
-
Unknown B
The DOJ sells these. So, like, who do you think of the DOJ is making the bitcoin market decisions? And is that the right person to be monetizing these assets?
-
Unknown D
I mean, David made an interesting point about security I just want to follow up on, which is when you think about Social Security, it's $6 trillion of our 36 trillion debt. And it's actually a fake treasury bill. So just one of the things we figured out in early days before the inauguration on Doge is like that $6 trillion sits on the ledger. It's just a paper ledger over. So actually if it gets paid out, it's also be very inflationary. It's just a fake Treasury. I led it over. That pays a very low rate. And here at Valor, one of my partners, John Shulkin, has been reading to try to help. The only thing we find in this audit in the government, the Social Security Administration actually has an audit. It has an audit. And when you go through the audit, it's crazy. The material weaknesses going back to Doge that you find.
-
Unknown D
Yeah, it'd be way Better to have that invested in a way that was economic for people with real money.
-
Unknown E
By the way, guys, as we're pressing for this, guys, as we're speaking, the federal judge just put a temporary restraining order on Doge and has barred Elon and his team from accessing US treasury payments data.
-
Unknown A
All right, so now we're going to have a real grudge match between the public, federal.
-
Unknown B
Which judge was it?
-
Unknown A
Federal judge.
-
Unknown E
Federal judge, yeah.
-
Unknown D
Would you know why Chamath does say why?
-
Unknown E
No. But Elizabeth Warren is doing a victory lap, so I'm sure that she's part of it.
-
Unknown A
So the government agency set up by the President can't look at the database of the Treasury.
-
Unknown D
So just to be double click here, Doge is not a new agency. It's the renaming of existing agency. I can't remember the name of it. We'll have to find it. Elon tweeted about this some weeks ago. That was set up under Obama actually to do this to credit an audit function to the government. What's crazy about this ruling to me is Congress, basically the Constitution delegates to the executive the ability to spend the money and they go through Congress. It gets actually appropriate in Congress and the executive spends it. How can you spend money if you don't know where it went? How can you be responsible? Right. You have the authority to spend it without the. And how can you responsibly spend it if you actually can't Go look and see where it goes.
-
Unknown E
Guys, this is flying fast and furious. President Trump just unveiled his framework for his tax plan. No tax on tips. No tax on senior Social Security. No tax on overtime pay. Renew the middle class tax cuts. Adjust the salt cap. So again, very pro. As I said, pro labor, pro populist. Eliminate all special tax breaks for billionaire sports team owners.
-
Unknown A
No.
-
Unknown E
All right, I'm no longer. I already sold the team. I already sold my fees.
-
Unknown D
Oops.
-
Unknown E
Close the carried interest. Close the carried interest tax deduction loophole which allowed you to claim carried interest.
-
Unknown B
Antonio, I better run.
-
Unknown A
Oh, no.
-
Unknown D
I'll be back in a few hours and sell some things.
-
Unknown E
Isn't that incredible? I mean, he is really going for the jugular. Wow. Amazing. I support this 100%.
-
Unknown B
The SALT deduction is coming back. Is that right?
-
Unknown E
Yeah, marginally, though I don't think he's going to give it the way that it was before. But isn't this incredible? I mean, who's going to stand up and lay on the railroad tracks for being able to amortize a multi billion dollar sports team, purchase or that when you make a fund investment you should get long term cap gains treatment. Who is going to be that person in this Admit nobody's going to stand up for these things.
-
Unknown A
I think we should just stop doing venture and just start NGOs. We just start a whole rat's nest of NGOs to ship money around.
-
Unknown D
You could have an incubator.
-
Unknown A
Yeah, absolutely. If you've got a great idea for an ngo.
-
Unknown E
Why. Why did you launch launch in every single single random developing country in the world?
-
Unknown A
I mean if I know you would.
-
Unknown E
Have had 8 billion of AUM because of a USAID.
-
Unknown A
Just launch one in Vietnam and we could have. Yeah.
-
Unknown D
NGO launch go launch. I love it.
-
Unknown A
We could have had a. Yeah. A launch accelerator in Vietnam for transgender. Yeah.
-
Unknown E
The Jason Calcanis launch fund of Equatorial Guinea.
-
Unknown A
It is so crazy though to come out and you know, watching the Democrats just the self own of coming out and being like, we have to stop people from stopping wasteful spend. Like they just don't seem to understand how unpopular these are.
-
Unknown D
Kitchen table issues like Rahm said. I mean everyone cares about that. And if you don't care about that, if you care about these fringe issues and not the things people care about on the kitchen table.
-
Unknown A
Well. And if you think about the transgender sports issue, biological males playing in female sports leagues, that issue that Trump just did an EO yesterday for was such an obvious issue of fairness and has nothing to do with transgender. Just has to do with like biology. If a, if a biological male plays basketball on a biological female team, somebody's going to get hurt and that person's gonna score 100 points. It's just obvious. And the fact that the Democrats couldn't see that issue being 100% for or 95% makes no sense. Like it's just such an obvious litmus test of logic.
-
Unknown D
I mean, look, man, the Constitution is a document about fairness. The people that founded this country, the patriots, found this country. They did it cause they were treated unfairly at home. All of us here are one generation away, right. Or two generations away from immigration. And the reality is that's why people come here, man. It's un American. It's un American.
-
Unknown A
We got two people here who are immigrants.
-
Unknown E
I'm reading the TRO and it looks like this TRO means temporary restraining order. And it's actually Nero's. Who from Doge can get read access down to two people. Tom Kraus and Marco Elez.
-
Unknown A
Oh, okay. So they don't want to have the whole team be able to See what's at Treasury. They just have to have a process and some sign off. Okay, that sounds not unreasonable.
-
Unknown D
I just want to point out two people to, to look at no matter how good they are. I'm sure we're 24 7. Look at all the payments in the US government is not a lot.
-
Unknown A
Yeah, it does seem like it needs to be more than two, but it doesn't seem like they're saying you can't look at it. They just want to have some controls in place.
-
Unknown D
I mean feels to me like that's an administrative block. That's like the narrowest thing you could do. Okay, yeah, you come in, but you can just send two people and just these two people. So if they get sick or something happens, no one else comes in. That seems to me to be truly. It's a mystery block to slow it down.
-
Unknown A
Yeah, well we're interpreting this in real time. The facts will come out over time. Let's wrap up on Google. Google dropped 7% after reporting earnings on Tuesday. Chamath revenue up 12% year over year to 96.5 billion. Wow. Cloud revenue is up 30% year over year. 12 billion YouTube ads surging 14% to 10.5 billion. Net profit was around 26.5 billion, up 28% year over year. So they are really focusing on profitability. Obviously full year numbers. This is just extraordinary. Total revenue 350 billion with 100 billion in net profit. Cloud and YouTube finished 2024 with a combined run rate of $110 billion. YouTube is basically Netflix inside of inside of Google and their Google cloud is essentially AWS inside of Google. The thing that made investors get concerned Chamath is that Google said it would invest 75 billion billion in capex in 2025. 42% jump over 2024.
-
Unknown A
29% more than analysts expect. Obviously this has to do with data center servers and the AI build out. What do you think about that number? 75 billion obviously in relation to what we saw with Deep Seek doing it with maybe a little bit less. Maybe they're lying. Is this just an absolute waste of money or gargantuan number or is it something they can easily with that amount of profitability and cash they have absorb and use in the future.
-
Unknown E
I think I should stipulate that Google's models are probably the best of all the models across a broad base of capabilities. If you test for them. And so let's start there which is whatever they're doing is working. The thing that they need to do is be able to translate those models now into better products. And I think that that will happen slowly. Like for example, if you look at deep research, most of the people online that are evaluating deep research would now say that OpenAI is both faster and just better on the margins. All of these things can be improved. I don't think that's a comment on the base model. I think it's a comment on post training and how they're attempting to productize these things. So the other thing that Google has is a money machine that directly benefits from these AI driven optimizations on ad targeting.
-
Unknown E
The only other company that has anywhere close to the same credibility is Meta. So I think what both of these two companies need to do is do a better job of explaining how that 75 billion gets segregated. How much of that goes to these AI enabled models that actually do better ads optimization. There's a, there was a really interesting discussion by a former meta machine learning engineer on X about how they did it. It's pretty amazing, it's staggering. But if they could say half the money goes to that and the other half goes to more speculative pre training and post training, I think the market would have eaten it up. So it's probably more of a disclosure issue for Google because I would say right now their model quality is the best.
-
Unknown A
You have thoughts on this build out, Antonio? Obviously, I think you've been involved with XAI and obviously involved with Twitter and X previously and Colossus's colossal build out that was extraordinary to watch in such a short period of time. Do you have concerns that like some people do, that this build out is too expensive and there'll be too hard to monetize all that expense or is it maybe a little bit of hand wringing? And the opportunity in AI is so obviously huge that you just got to take the leap of faith and if you build it, the revenue will come.
-
Unknown D
Yeah, I think chum Moth has the right framework here which is return invested capital. And what he's saying by if Google had said, hey, half the money is for ads and half the money is for post training, the market would have seen that half the money has a higher return on capital. And Google's return on capital is actually going up after the implementation of AI models into their company. And I think that sort of abstracts the entire market, which is people are waking up that return invested capital in data centers will matter, that the models are basic commodities and super competitive. In the best case, it's kind of a landward in Asia. It's a melee in A worst case, just total commodities. What does matter is the return on capital data center, which is influenced by how good the data centers are. So you mentioned the XAI data center.
-
Unknown D
It's 100,000 GPU cluster, it's the most dense coherent cluster in the world and it will just train faster and better than other clusters and it's also built for the most cheaply and the fastest. So XL have the highest turn on capital and I also think the best train data and therefore will win. I think Google will also win because they have their TensorFlow chips, they make some of their own chips, they do focus on ROIC and they have a great monopoly to kind of fund it all. So I don't think it's overblown. I think this is going to be, as you guys have said before in the podcast, bigger than industrial revolution. But it's also true that you need to have a good roic and if you don't, you're not transparent about it, you can see what happens.
-
Unknown B
I would argue Google's probably been the most frugal, thoughtful and well managed computing infrastructure investor of all time. You know, the 98 to 2005 era at Google, it was all about just cheap throwaway racks. That was the big advantage they had is they weren't using the expensive Oracle servers and they had a two to three year kind of depreciation timeline on those, but they were super cheap and so the ROIC was quite good. Then they got into energy efficiency, which they realized was a big driving cost. They started to build systems that were more energy efficient. As a result they lasted longer and then their depreciation schedule moved up to three to four years, meaning they could kind of write down the value of the servers over three to four years. And then from 2010 to 2015 era there hardware system for cloud allowed them to kind of extend through repurposing the utilization and they increased their depreciation to four to five years.
-
Unknown B
And then in 2021, I don't know if you guys remember this, they made this kind of big change to their depreciation schedule on data center infrastructure to six years. So when they invest capex in a data center, they would write down the servers over a six year cycle because of AI optimization on maintenance. So they started using AI just for internal management of the infrastructure. So I would view the $75 billion CapEx actually as a very positive signal for the company. I think that it means that they have a really strong line of sight on how they're going to have full Utilization and great return on this. If you do the math, ROIC math on this $75 billion assume a 20% ROIC. You've got to be generating, call it roughly an incremental $15 billion of profit a year plus the amortization of the 75 billion.
-
Unknown B
So take the 75 billion divided by 6, that's 12 billion plus 15 billion. So basically they would need to make an incremental 27 billion of operating profit a year on the 75 billion for this to meet their ROIC performance. That doesn't seem crazy because that's just under 20% of their annual operating profit. This is a very kind of, I think, important point, which is Google doesn't just do this to, to build out AI in the future. They have a really strong line of sight on how this can kind of increment and you don't have a huge hurdle for them for this to pay back. So I don't know. I would kind of, to Antonio's point, I'd view this as a positive. I think if you use their historical ability to manage infrastructure and make predictions on investments as an indicator of the future, this is a strong and positive indicator.
-
Unknown B
And I do think that for all the naysayers out there that think that search is going to evolve to chat, you could look at this as being a really important proof point that Google has the confidence that they're going to be able to move from search to chat. And as Chamath points out, they've got great performative models. And I would view this more of as a positive than a negative. If they were underinvesting, I would be worried that they didn't know where to invest, but to see them make this degree of investment highlights the confidence in the strategy.
-
Unknown A
And Tony, I don't know if you've been watching the agent space or deep research that came out from Google and then closed AI, I mean OpenAI launched their copycat version of this product. Sorry, I don't have short feelings on it. I'm curious your thoughts on job displacement. We're looking at self driving, obviously. Waymo's got cars on the road, obviously. Tesla, which you were previously on the board of and I know you were the first institutional investor in Tesla. Self driving is pretty good. I only get like one or two disengagements per hour and they tend to be the ones where I just want to take the turn, a little sharper kind of thing. So that's getting pretty close. BYD is very close. You got a lot of job Displacement that occur, millions and millions of drivers in 10 years could lose their jobs. Researchers working at Gartner Group, whatever, Boston Consulting Group, it feels like there could be massive job displacement.
-
Unknown A
Do you have concerns about that in the American economy and globally?
-
Unknown D
There's a lot of handwriting about this, and it's real in prior moments of large disruption that there have been job displacements because there's generous people who get retrained for something else. You can't retrain. So I think there were studies Melanfree did of the steel industry in Pittsburgh in the 70s that the cost of each steel worker job loss was about a million dollars to the economy because these people couldn't be retrained. And that might happen here, but I have a more benign outlook. Personally, what I think is going to happen is that you will have job loss, but the amount of productivity that will be released in the US Economy is going to be extraordinary. Right. So GDP growth is a function of the number of people working times productivity. It's very simple. Economists want to make it more complex than that, but it's the number of people working times productivity.
-
Unknown D
If you go, if it goes up to 5, 6, 7, 8%, you get a massive boost in GDP growth. And then what happens? Well, people can get retrained, they can get different jobs, different services happen. People start companies. The application layer of LLMs is just starting. The barrier to start a company is quite low. Things like launch probably explode because there's all these people who don't have jobs anymore that were accountants and want to start something. It's hard to know what happens. You know, I believe in American agility, I believe in this country. I believe that we will figure out, figure out a way to make this all work. And if there's enough productivity and money in the economy that's flowing, people will find new jobs, they will find new business to start, they will find new things to do. We have to get out of the way, take regulation down and let Americans be creative and unleash the American productivity machine.
-
Unknown D
Let's make that happen.
-
Unknown A
Yeah, that's, I think, really strong thoughts. And I mean, that's the game we're seeing on the field. How many companies are we seeing hit $1 million in revenue with five employees where that used to take 25. So the efficiencies there chamath your outlook on this issue since it seems to be coming up again specifically with truck drivers and Uber drivers and all kinds of other research jobs that seem to be be doing pretty well or can be done Pretty well by AI. Where do you stand on this issue today?
-
Unknown E
I think it's a process. Buffett wrote about this in an annual letter and what he described was the changing nature of jobs during the agrarian revolution. And what you saw was a large cohort of people who supported themselves through farming. And then the total quantum of those jobs shrank by 90% when you had industrialized farming and tractors and whatnot. But the economy, to Antonio's point, grew around that business and added other kinds of businesses that didn't make sense in that moment. And I think what you see is that when economies get more and more evolved, you see the growth of services businesses that sort of are these things that can only happen when you have excess. Right. The person that you pay for closet organizing would not have had a job in the turn of the agrarian revolution or the industrial revolution. But they can, they can exist in 20, 20 something and frankly they can make a good job the life coach.
-
Unknown E
There are all these jobs that just kind of come out of nowhere.
-
Unknown A
Podcaster, influencer, all of that.
-
Unknown B
Venture capitalist, capital allocator.
-
Unknown A
Absolutely. Mutant strawberry creator.
-
Unknown E
Yeah. So I think that you're cut that waiting for this next turn of creativity like the big problem that we all have. Maybe I'll take the more glass half empty version of what Antonio said is we really haven't been unlocking people's creativity over the last 15 years. We've been trundling around except safe of a few companies which we all know and we can just repeat them endlessly, but we know which ones they are that are truly innovating and at the edge. Everybody else is kind of diddling around navel gazing. So the real problem is that we have not had a lot of reps in being creative. I'll give you just a very simple example, Nick. Can you find this even extremely State industries? Did you see the BYD clip of the car?
-
Unknown A
And I thought yes, with a little swipe.
-
Unknown E
How tragic is it that you look at this and you're blown away? And you're blown away for two reasons. One is A, I didn't think that that was possible and B, why doesn't it exist in America? But the reality underneath the hood is extremely benign how this is implemented. And so I think that the problem is we spent so much time losing the script. I think Antonio's right. When you unshackle people to not focus on the mental load of getting the pronouns right or the this or the that, you won't be so overwhelmed by things like this because you will have Already been pushing the boundaries of human creativity. We need to get back to that. We need to let these creative people cook. And I hope that that happens, and I think that that will happen. Freeberg, can you do a science corner on the FDA approval for the non opioid painkiller?
-
Unknown B
Not today.
-
Unknown E
No, I know, but could you do it, like, in a couple weeks?
-
Unknown B
Yeah. By the way, the one I wanted to do is that new macro study on GLP1s, which I think is super interesting.
-
Unknown A
Oh, tell us.
-
Unknown B
You guys remember I talked a while ago about how they were able to mine VA data? So the va, right, they take care of veterans, and they have all the medical records, and on an anonymized basis, they can make that data available to researchers. And so if you guys remember this, this is how they identified that the Epstein Barr virus, or the virus that causes mono as being statistically certain to be the trigger for multiple sclerosis. In the cohort of hundreds of thousands of patients that were in this data set, no one got Ms. That didn't get Epstein Barr virus. If you did not get Epstein Barr virus, you did not get Ms. I don't know if you guys remember. I did the science corner a while ago. Anyway, so the data set that you can mine at the VA is incredible. So they pulled all the data from everyone that's been on the GLP1 agonists, and they identified all of the health effects across multiple indications.
-
Unknown B
The statistical difference between the cohorts. Okay, so this research team out of St. Louis pulled all the data from the VA database, and basically they looked at, you know, 1.2 million people with diabetes that didn't take anything, compared to 215,000 that took the GLP1 receptor agonists and another 600,000 people that took other drugs for diabetes. So basically, this cohort segmentation allows them to isolate the effect of the GLP1 drugs. And as you can see here, this shows across hundreds of thousands of patients, the effect of the GLP1 on a hazard ratio, which means, like, how likely are you to have the following health condition versus the population that's not taking the GLP1s? And then on the right, if you scroll to the right, Nick, are the increase in risk, and on the left are the things that go down. So the increase, the only thing that increased is like, you know, 8% or 10% increase in nausea and vomiting.
-
Unknown A
Yep.
-
Unknown B
Can't confirm musculoskeletal complications, grd, which is, you know, gastric reflux from sleep disturbances, indigestion yeah. And sleep disturbance related to indigestion. So it's all abdominal stuff. Now if you go over here to the benefit side, so the benefit side is what conditions did you see a decrease in? So you have a decrease in shock, a decrease in hepatic failure. So liver failure, respiratory failure, cardiac arrest. In fact, on cardiac arrest, you see a 30% decrease in the probability of having cardiac arrest from the cohort that's on the GLP1 versus malaria, bulimia.
-
Unknown A
Wow.
-
Unknown B
Schizophrenia.
-
Unknown C
So.
-
Unknown B
So this goes to the point, if you guys remember the interview I did a couple months ago with the CEO of Eli Lilly, that they have all these clinical trials going on right now for different indications for the GLP1 receptor agonists that they're seeing that there's health benefits beyond just the weight loss in reducing things like kidney disease. Let me ask you, obviously liver problems, mental problems, and so on.
-
Unknown E
Do we know why? And, and if we don't know why, do you think it's because this is suppressing the food and it's the, the lack of food or the change in the food consumption that's creating this. Do you know what I'm asking? Like, do you think the drug is actually. Yeah.
-
Unknown B
Yep. So you should watch the interview I did with Ricks. In fact, this is a good moment to call it out. If you haven't seen it. It's actually. Yeah. I think he highlights that this class of drugs, there are, you know, genes get turned on and off. So there's a, you know, what's called a gene expression cascade that occurs with certain compounds. So we know that the GLP1 receptor agonist means that it binds to these GLP1 sites and there's a cascading effect of genes that then get expressed. And what that seems to do is turn off things like inflammatory markers. It turns on things like Sirtu genes which can actually increase cellular repair. So there seem to be other benefits from these drugs beyond just the appetite control. And it's not the appetite control itself, but there seems to be other effects.
-
Unknown E
Let me ask you a question.
-
Unknown B
From these receptors being activated, would you.
-
Unknown E
Put your kids on this?
-
Unknown B
No.
-
Unknown E
Okay. Would you put your wife on this?
-
Unknown B
I would consider it. And I would consider it for myself too, just for the anti inflammatory effects.
-
Unknown E
How will you make that decision?
-
Unknown B
Well, for me personally, and the thing that I weigh against is the muscle loss and the bone density loss. So I think that if you look at the biggest kind of effect on these on the downside basis is you should increase your protein in your diet, you have to do weightlifting. There's things that you would do, and frankly, if you do those things anyway, if you increase protein in your diet and do more weightlifting, you're actually going to see very good health benefits from just doing those things that may actually outweigh the benefits you get from the GLP line.
-
Unknown D
I have a question for you, Dave, which is, and this is the question is when you look at that data and you talk to the CEOs, how much do you think really long term, when the long term sizes are out, is going to be that it was the drug or just that being obese is very bad for you? And so when you take your body fat down dramatically, all these other gene expressions happen anyway. Right. So do you think it. Which one will it be?
-
Unknown B
Well, this is what they're starting to isolate, and I will say, Antonio, they are starting to see that there are other expressions that are not related to the obesity and people that don't have obesity that they're using, that are using these drugs. So they're seeing that cohort data now, a clinical studies, Phase two were published, and I think we're gonna see phase three in some of these indications soon. But it is looking very positive that it's not just the loss of obesity. Now, to your point, being obese, not exercising, eating poorly, destroys your health. You stop that, everything gets better. If you lift weights, Fribourg, can you.
-
Unknown E
Tell us when you decide to do this?
-
Unknown B
I will, yeah. If I do do a GLP1 receptor agonist, I will let you guys know. Right now, I actually feel. Feel like I want to go through a process of increasing my weightlifting routine more. I've been trying to create a more kind of rigorous schedule. My schedule just sucks. So that's been the hardest thing for me. But I actually want to go through that first before making that decision.
-
Unknown D
You're actually kind of cool, David. Oh, I'm sorry.
-
Unknown E
No, I was just curious why that order I don't understand.
-
Unknown B
I want to measure the effects because I do think that if you actually get into a regular weightlifting routine and you increase protein in your diet, which is another thing I've been making a concerted, measured effort to do, which is hard. As a vegetarian, by the way, you see pretty significant health effects. And so I'm trying to get through the process of increasing muscle composition before I'll make the decision on whether or not to add GLP1. I don't want to kind of confound the two factors.
-
Unknown A
You know what I did that Made it super easy for me is I got egg whites in a carton and I have this incredible crunchy spicy garlic thing that everybody momofuku and everybody makes and everybody's crazy about. Just in the mornings, I'll eat whatever it is, 10 ounces, 12 ounces of egg whites with that spicy stuff. It's delicious. It's awesome. And I just try to, you know, get that whatever, 30, 40 grams of protein first thing in the morning. And then doing the rucking. Well, this is is easy. Like you just wear a 35 pound weight vest, Freeberg, and you walk a mile or two and you will get.
-
Unknown E
Like, my problem, Jason, with all of this is that every time I see something. So I saw Gary Breca on the Sean Ryan podcast recently and Sean Ryan asks him like, what are a handful of things that you recommend for everybody? Right? And he recommends mineral salt and then he recommends a methylated vitamin. He recommends amino acids, whatever. There's a protocol. Then if you happen to catch a clip on X of Andrew Huberman, he'll have a protocol and then Brian Johnson has a protocol. And the problem is all these protocols are slightly the same, but they're just different enough where it creates a huge cognitive load in a normal person like myself. To your point, Friedberg, who's busy, who's got a job, who's got kids, how do you decide? And so I would really love something to be sort of like, I don't want to say gold standard because you can't say that, but that is like, what's the real bang for your buck?
-
Unknown E
What Antonio said, you know, are you just better off just losing the 50 pounds?
-
Unknown B
And then this is why these products are successful and I think will be continue to grow pretty dramatically, Antonio, is because it is pop a pill and it solves all those problems. It doesn't require cognitive load.
-
Unknown A
And it will be in a pill format soon. Right? I mean, the pills are almost here.
-
Unknown D
I think it would be very cool actually, David, if you do this to Chava's point about, you know, people being confused, if you did the every, the every person's kind of story around this journey and you documented it totally, you know, like you did, you did like this is my weight. I did weightlifting first, then I did GOP one and you actually did like a weekly thing where you checked in and Even it was 10 minutes up on X or something where you just gave people the journey in a way that wasn't so complicated. Because I think people are confused. Chamas. Right. I mean, I have I have very good doctors. You guys have good doctors, but if you don't, you don't know what to do.
-
Unknown E
By the way, the problem for me, just to give you a sense of it, I had a doctor in la, I had a doctor in San Francisco. I would have them do their own versions of things. Then I would have somebody else help me compare. It cost me way too much money. And all that complexity did was make the quality of my healthcare actually go down. And instead, what I really wanted was just a very simple protocol that said, take the metformin because it's good for you, take the vitamin D, take the omega 3 fatty acids, otherwise, just eat this meal plan. And it would help me a lot more than I've had to cobble it together myself. Because, by the way, when you see something like, you know, Gary Brucka is very, very articulate, very smart. But when I see him on the Sean Ryan podcast, the first thing I do is I go and populate an Amazon cart with all the things that he said.
-
Unknown E
Because my instinct is, well, I should do the right thing for myself. This is a couple hundred bucks. It's worth the investment. But then the day after, somebody else says something else, you know, so I'll be really interested.
-
Unknown A
A little ocd, though. Chamath, I've known you for a long time. You get very obsessive with.
-
Unknown E
Well, my father died because of poor health. My best friend died of poor health. I feel like you, you should at least do the things that are preventable.
-
Unknown D
That post Chamath did with you, he was like, half naked in the mirror. He looks great. What are you talking about? He looks great. If, if you, you could look like that, you'd do it too.
-
Unknown A
No, no, no. I'm talking about, like, when you had the glucose monitor. I'm sitting with him at the poker table, he's got the glucose monitor, and he's taking a sip of wine, he's checking the glucose. He's taking. He's having like a piece of brute. Then he's checking the glucose monitor. It's just like, literally, he becomes obsessive. Then with the. You know, then we had a. I.
-
Unknown D
Mean, come on, if that's this AI.
-
Unknown A
Stop this generative AI.
-
Unknown E
You know what's so funny about this picture? All these generative AI, all these clowns on the Internet are like, they don't understand that when you're 6 foot 2, these are big legs.
-
Unknown A
When you're 6 foot 2, those are not big.
-
Unknown E
When you're a short king. Yeah.
-
Unknown A
When You're a short king.
-
Unknown E
When you're like when you're 5, 7, 5, 8. I get.
-
Unknown D
I get it.
-
Unknown E
Why you guys. Because you guys are all stubby and short. I don't get it.
-
Unknown A
This is the problem with generative AI. You can tell it's a fake photo. You can tell that that was generative AI because nobody has legs that day. How could you have biceps and then legs blushing? Unbelievable. What a thirst trap.
-
Unknown B
Now you guys are going to find photos of Antonio and I. We're going to throw them. Unbelievable.
-
Unknown A
Listen, I have embarrass your co host day four pieces of advice for people. Number one, get good sleep. Number two, exercise. Number three, diet. Number four, meditation. And if you want to do that, it's very simple. You get. You get calm meditation. You get the eight sleep, sleep. You get the fit bod for fitness. And then you get nutrisense for your. You got nutrients. Those are the four things you focus on. Make sure you have a good. You get a good Athena assistant. All of this is brought to you by my NGO, which is all in NGO. USA gave us 18 million last year. Guys, I forgot to tell you about it. But don't worry, it's in an offshore account for all of us when we get back to Ethiopia, Vietnam, we have an all in castle built there. Okay? The belt with our ngo. We'll see everybody next week.
-
Unknown E
Love you boys.
-
Unknown A
We love you.
-
Unknown D
Good seeing you guys, man. Thank you.
-
Unknown A
Great job, Antonio.
-
Unknown D
Thanks guys.
-
Unknown C
We'll let your winners ride Rain Man.
-
Unknown A
David, Satch.
-
Unknown C
And I said we open source it to the fans and they've.
-
Unknown B
Just gone crazy with it. Love you, Queen of Quinoa.
-
Unknown A
Besties are called that Is my dog.
-
Unknown E
Taking a notice in your driveway?
-
Unknown C
Oh man.
-
Unknown D
My habit will meet me at.
-
Unknown E
We should all just get a room and just have one big huge orgy because they're all just useless. It's like this like sexual tension that.
-
Unknown D
They just need to release somehow what.
-
Unknown C
You'Re about Feet be wet your feet.
-
Unknown A
We need to get murkies.
-
Unknown D
Our back.