Putin/Trump; BLS; Intel; Fuel-Econ; Bernie Sanders; Antisemitism | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
And this is al right, everybody, you've got an echo here.
Welcome to your one book show on this Uh what
is it, Tuesday, August twelfth. Uh, let me know if

(00:33):
the volume is good. I am not gonna be talking
too loud here today, but let me know if uh
I need to increase the volume on anything or if
all is good. All right, I'm still in Lisbon, as
you can tell from the background. I'll be here for
another couple of weeks, week and a half. But let's uh,

(00:56):
let's jump into the news. I I I guess the
big story is, or the thing people are most worried
about right now, is Trump's Trump and Putin meeting. On Friday,
Trump and Putin will be meeting in Alaska to discuss Ukraine.

(01:20):
I guess trum Trump wants to end the war. And
you know, one of the real tragic things about all
of this unsurprising, completely unsurprising, is the fact that Trump
is reverting back to the language he used earlier in
the year, where he basically was blaming the war on

(01:42):
Zelensky was blaming the war in Ukraine. He is basically
preparing himself for the meeting with Putin by elevating putin
status and depreciating Ukraine's Trump I think is going to
Alaska basically to hand Poots in a victory. Now, whether

(02:09):
that holds or out, whether the Ukraine can resist whatever
Trump agrees to, where the Europeans can back up Ukraine
and get them to resist, I don't know, but it
does seem like that is the essence of what Trump
is doing. He has again fallen into the influence of
the anti Ukrainian element within his coalition and the Magat coalition,

(02:36):
and it's just absurd the kind of stuff he's talking.
So here's a couple of quotes from his press conference
earlier today, well yesterday, I think yesterday, it was twenty
four hours ago. This is Trump, I mean, this is
he says. I asked a question to a very very

(02:57):
smart man, Victor Alban from Hungary. I said, can Russia
be beaten by Ukraine? He looked at me like, what
a stupid question? He said, Russia is a massive country.
They fight wars, that's what they do. Okay. So first,

(03:21):
Victor Oban is his source of information. Victor Oban, who
is pro Russia, pro putin, Victor Oban, who is a
strong man within Europe, who is bringing Putin like political
dominance to Europe. Now we'll see he's very unpopular right
now in Hungary. There's a possibility he loses the next

(03:43):
election if he allows it for free election. But Victor
Oban is the really really smart guy that you rely
on now to dictate, to teach you about Russia and
the Ukraine Russia War. I mean that in and of
itself is a sad state of affairs, and a sad

(04:10):
state of affairs to talk in that sense about about Oban,
who is who is corrupt? I mean, there's photos of Oban.
I just saw of Oban's a state. Oban has this
massive state outside. It's a former hospital the emperors, the

(04:35):
Austrian Hungarian Empires state outside I guess of Budapest. I
mean it's it's huge. I'm looking at video of this.
It's massive, with grounds and a massive home and stables,
and you've got zebras zebras roaming around in the back.

(05:00):
You know. I'll just remind you Victor Oben is not
exactly He's not a gazillionaire because he produce something. He's
not a successful businessman. He is not an entrepreneur. He
is not a building creator. All Victor Oben has done
is being politics. How do you get this rich from politics?

(05:22):
Always surprising, should be surprising, right, how do you get
this rich from politics? This is rich, particularly for Hungary.
I mean, this guy's unbelievably corrupt. Of course, so is Trump,
so it's not surprising they get along. But anyway, this
is the guy whos getting advice from him, the many

(05:44):
little authoritarian inside the European Union. Here's Trump. More about Russia,
he says, Russia has a very valuable piece of land.
I don't know what that means. It's a warring nation.
That's what they do. They fight a lot of wars.
A friend of mine said, Russia's tough because they just

(06:05):
keep on fighting. They beat Hitler, so did we, and
they beat Napoleon. They've been doing this for a long time.
I said, so can Russia be beaten by Ukraine? He
looked at me like, what a stupid question. Listen is
again Victor Oben? He said, Russia is a massive country,
and they win their country and they win their life

(06:26):
through wars. They fight wars, that's what they do. I
expect to have a meeting with Putin and I think
it would be good, but it might be bad. That's
Trump Hedgrick, right. So Trump is going to Alaska to
meet with Putin. It's not clear what he or his

(06:46):
administration think can be achieved. I think Putin thinks that
what he can do is is, you know, basically, convince
Trump to put pressure on Zelinsky to to capitulate, basically
to surrender. That that is what the striving to achieve,
what Putin is striving to achieve. They not only want

(07:10):
the four provinces. You know, there was some talk about
a land swap, that they would take Luhanska and Dunask
and they would give back the two southern provinces. But no,
that was witkof not understanding Putin. That was witkof making
stuff up. So no, Putin wants all four provinces, that

(07:31):
that they have captured land. He wants Ukraine to capitulate,
to give him everything he's wanted. He's also demanding, still demanding,
as far as I can tell, that Zolensky resign and
that they a pro Russian puppet government be placed in Ukraine,
that Ukraine never Enterrnado, and that Ukrainian forces basically in

(07:56):
some way or another demilitarized. What put In is demanding
is complete surrender. I don't know what Trump has to offer.
Trump has already said that some land swap will be done.
Putin hasn't agreed for the land swap. But I don't
see how Trump gets to dictate to Ukraine that he

(08:19):
needs to give up some of its land. You know,
how does how does how does he get into that
position to do that? It's a landscape. Already has said
that any kind of land swap, any kind of giving
up of land in Ukraine, would have to be approved
by some kind of national referendum, because the constitution is

(08:42):
very clear that no land can be given up. Trump
made fun of that yesterday in his press conference. You know,
he was like, what, you have to get a vote
in order to swap land in order to get a
peace agreement. But it's it's fine. Trump said, to go

(09:02):
to war and have a bunch of people kill, and
kill a bunch of people. I mean, Trump cannot hold,
He cannot hold, and he refuses to hold in his mind,
or at least he refuses to communicate that Russia started
this war, that has fighting in self defense, that fighting

(09:23):
in self defense is noble and good that the bad
guy here, clearly with unequivocally is Putin, who started the war,
who continues the war, who is responsible for all the
deaths and the killing going on. Yet Trump doesn't miss
an opportunity to praise Putin and really congratulate Russia on

(09:47):
its strength and the fact that it's always one of
wars and it's such a military powerhouse. And he doesn't
miss an opportunity to ridicule and go after Zelenski and
emphasize his weakness. I mean, Trump admires strong men, he
admires strength, and his allegiance is his instincts are with Russia.

(10:13):
And when you put him in a room alone with Putin,
those inclinations, the inclinations towards strong man, the inclinations towards
a power and military might, if you will, are going
to win out. And he is going to come out
of this meeting with Putin. I'm almost convinced much more

(10:36):
strongly associated affiliated on Russia's side. And yes he'll get
pushed back from the Europeans, and yes he'll get pushed
back from Zelenski. But Ukraine's in real trouble because to
the extent that they rely in the United States in
order to sustain whatever military efforts they have and whatever

(10:58):
ability they have to triple the Russia. I don't think
they can rely in the United States anymore. Now. It
is possible that the US will continue, even after this meeting,
to sell weapons to NATO, which will then give them
Europeans will pay for it, which will then the Europeans
will give those weapons to Ukraine. That deal which Trump

(11:22):
cut with European nations a few months ago, that might
be sustainable. He might continue to do that. Don't expect
to see any direct military assistance from the United States
to Ukraine. Everything will go through Europe. And even then
I think Trump will be very restrained, but he might not.
He might walk away from it completely. He might walk

(11:44):
away from that deal with you he made with the
Europeans because he might tilt completely to be to the
pro Russian side again. That is where his inclinations lead him.
That is where his ideas lead him. That is his beliefs. Oh,
it's it's it's with Russia. It's with Putin. Now, I'll

(12:07):
just I'll just say this. He shouldn't be meeting with Putin.
A A a proper American president, A rational American president
will not would not meet with Putin. Putin is a thug,
he is an authoritarian. Uh. There's nothing the United States

(12:27):
has to gain from a meeting with Putin. I said
the same thing about his meetings, Trump's meetings with the
dictator of South Korea, the uh, sorry North Korea, of
North Korea in his first term, there was zero to
be gained from that. Indeed, nothing was gained from it,
and a lot to be lost. Uh. And uh, you know,

(12:49):
he basically sanctioned the Buddho dictator and and gave him
legitimacy and before his own people and in the international stage.
North Korea now is a very very very close ally
of the Russians and providing them with all kinds of
material benefits, primarily weapons. There's nothing to be gained with

(13:13):
meeting for Putin. Nothing, I mean, what is Putin? What
is Putin going to give the United States? What is
Putin going to give you know, the West? Nothing? Absolutely nothing.
The only party that can gain from such a meeting
is Putin. Putin who's looking for international legitimacy, Putin who
needs to bow States position domestically and internationally. Putin, whose

(13:37):
economy is crumbling and struggling, might be able to get
a deal out of Trump. One of the reasons Putin
is eager to meet with Trump is because he's worried
about these tariffs, you know, the penalties on people who
trade with Russia, the threat of taris on India and

(13:57):
on China if they trade with Russia. Putin once that eliminated,
and he might get that. He's got a lot to
gain from Trump. Trump has nothing to gain from Putin. Again,
Putin is the aggressor. Putin is the bad guy. Putin
is the one who should be, you know, giving up stuff.

(14:21):
And my expectation of Putin gives up nothing. And if
he does, it'll be so marginal, it'll be so trivial
that it will be meaningless. But Trump will hail it
as some massive victory and some huge success. You know
this notion that Victor Obun told Trump that Russia's undefeatable

(14:43):
and has never lost a war. Let me list some
of the wars Russia lost nineteen oh five to Japan,
nineteen twenty one, to Poland nineteen forty, to Finland eighty
to eighty nine, to Afghanistan nineteen ninety four. They first
lost in Church Cha than they won in Church year
by two thousand, twenty twelve, in Syria again in Syria

(15:09):
just now. And Ukraine is not going anywhere near as
well as they thought it would. I mean they thought
it would end in weeks days. Maybe we're now in
year three and it's not ending now. The Russians did
have a breakthrough on the Eastern front yesterday. We should

(15:32):
could play to Putin's strength. He could come at us
from a stronger position because they did have a breakthrough
on the front lines. It's not massive, but it is.
It's something, and it has suddenly propaganda value. So he'll

(15:54):
go into that with the stronger high end. But Trump
Trump like strength, and his argument is Ukraine has no cards.
Russia has all the cards. You know. Russia's breakthrough on
the front on the Eastern Front is another card that
Russia has to play against against to show Trump in

(16:16):
terms of see see how successful we are, see how
well we're doing. You can defeat us. You can't beat us.
And Trump is going into that meeting with that mindset
that Russia cannot be defeated, because that's what his friend
friend Victor Auban told him. I don't know, it's a

(16:39):
pretty sad state in the United States when an American
president is going into a meeting with a Russian president
in which, you know, all one can expect is the
capitulation of the American president before the Russian This is,
this is you know, the Trump's friendliness towards Russian is

(17:04):
towards Russia is you know, just suggest the extent to
which he is morally grew upt just the extent to
which he is completely morally corypped. This guy's you know,

(17:25):
I'm just looking at the chat. Sorry, guys, this guy
is completely obsessed. We've got this guy numbmber something something
who is who is is completely obsessed with my chat,
and so he comes on the chat every every day
pretty much, and he asked questions about free will, and

(17:46):
he thinks he's got us on free will. He's got
gotcha questions. But but you know, he doesn't agree with
anything in objectivism. But every day, every day, he's got
nothing else to do in life. He's one of these
must be one of these guys who sits in his
mother's basement and he just keeps coming out and asking

(18:09):
questions about free will and people answer him, and he
just repeats himself, and he goes no way, and it's
just like a little obsession he has with my show.
It's it's weird. It's very very strange why you would
keep doing it? Right. I don't think he's converted anybody.
I don't think anybody has said, oh wow, okay, he's

(18:33):
he's convinced me. He's convinced me. All right, let's see.
So we will be following the Putin Trump meeting Friday.
I don't know what time it's going to be. It's
going to be in Alaska, so that's on the West
Coast time zone. I doubt that on the show and

(18:56):
Friday we'll already have any inputs on that or any
any information about how that went. And we'll probably have
to wait for the weekend to be able to comment
on that. But I'm not I don't have as you
can tell, I'm not anticipating good things coming in for
that meeting at all. BLS. BLS is the Bureau of

(19:20):
Labor Statistics. This is the department that basically brings out
statistics about the labor force, about unemployment, about labor participation rates,
and all the statistics you get about work come from
the Bureau of Labor Statistics. And as you know, I think,

(19:41):
because we talked about it in the show a few
weeks ago. A few weeks ago, you know, there was
a there was a restatement of the jobs created in
previous months, and it was restated dramatically downwards. That is,
it turned out the number of jobs created in the

(20:02):
economy was significantly lower than expacted, significantly lower that had
been reported in the past. Trump was furious because this
kind of placed his greatest economy in all of human
history in a bit of a question mark whether it
really was the greatest economy in all of human history,
which did not please him. You know, of course, Trump

(20:23):
suffers from what Iman called the primacy of consciousness. If
he believes something, therefore it must be true. If he
says something that makes it true in reality, and he
believes a lot more jobs were created, and this economy
is robust and chugging along and doing phenomenally well, and
there's no way the Bueau of Labor Statistics numbers are real.

(20:45):
So when confronted with the situation where where your statisticians
are providing you with information you know, you know with
certainty is false. As Trump knows what certainly because he
feels it, he has a gut feeling about it. Fire

(21:06):
the statistician. So Trump fired the head of the Bureau
of Labor Statistics. He fired him for presenting him with
the wrong numbers. Right, this is what autocrats, This is
what our Theraitarians have done forever. I'm sure Aubon has
done this. I mean Putin does it a little differently.

(21:27):
He doesn't just fire them. He throws them off of windows.
Well he doesn't throw them. They commit suicide. So he
fires them and then they commit suicide. But this is
what our Theratarians do. Right, when you get bad news,
kill the messenger. Trump got bad news. He fired the messenger. Anyway,
today he nominated We have his nominee for the position.

(21:52):
It's EJ. Antonij and TONI with a common PhD right
after his name, just in case you didn't know he
had a PhD. And it's a PhD in economics for
some hole dunk university. But you know, very few people
I know, like very few people I know who have
PhDs who are economists with PhDs have PhD after their name.

(22:17):
I don't. I don't use you run book, come a PhD.
Just show you anyway, So anytime people do that, I'm
a little anyway, EJ and Tony has that he is
also the head of like the chief economists that the
Heritage Foundation, so he's supposedly a big shot anyway. He

(22:38):
is just being nominated to be the BLS Commissioner. His
nomination has to be approved by Congress, so there is
a chance that he won't be although it doesn't seem
like Trump. It doesn't seem like Trump would be willing
to oh put it to so it doesn't seem like Congress.

(23:01):
A congression of Republicans are willing to senate senator Republicans
are willing to challenge any of Trump's nominees. I mean, really,
the nutty ones like RFK got through, uh and and
Tulsa got Gabbad got through, then anybody can get through.
I mean, we've got a bunch of spineless, mindless Republicans
who just do whatever Trump tells them. And I can't

(23:24):
think of worse people in their respective positions by any
political party than RFK and Tulsa Gabbatt. They're about the
worst people imaginable for those kind of positions. Anyway, EJ
and Tony is is an economist. I think he got
his degree from like Northern Illinois or something like that.

(23:48):
But here's the thing about e j Antony when when
he was announced today, all these economists who are actually
all these right wing economists, conservative economists, the libertarian economists
came out and basically the consensus among one of these
is this guy is a completely generamus. This guy doesn't
know statistics, he doesn't know basic facts, he doesn't know

(24:11):
anything about labor economics or labor statistics. That this guy
is only qualification is that he is a completely loyal
to Trump right. I mean he has Jason firm. Now,
Jason is not a conservative, but still like this captures

(24:33):
the spirit of everybody else that was writing there. He says,
I don't think I've ever publicly criticized any presidential nominee
before it turns out he criticized one. But e j
Antoni is completely unqualified to be the BLS commissioner. He
is an extreme partisan and does not have any relevant experience.
He would be a break from decades of non partisan technocrats.

(24:55):
The position of BLS director has always been held by
people who are They just know the stats, they know
how to do this they're not partisan. He is definitely
a partisan. You know, if you look at Brian Albert,
who I think is moulderbytarian, he says Antoni completely completely

(25:21):
does not understand economic statistics. He is a partisan hack
uh and he links to basically he has he has
a charge. This is a This is actually a tweet
that I commented on when he came out, originally not
even knowing j Antony is, but he posted this. This
was in July. He posted this in mid July, and

(25:44):
I quote eg Antoni inputed prices just came in way
below expectations. June was up just zero point one month
of a month, negative point two percent year over year,
while me saw a huge downward revision from flat negative
point four percent month over month, still waiting for tariffs

(26:04):
to be passed on by phone producers. Right now, he's
the commentary that was made import price index, which is
what he was using and looking at measures pre tax sorry,
pre tariff tax tariff, same thing pre terriffriesis the fact

(26:24):
that pre tariff prices are basically flat means Americans are
paying the tariffs. Although I wouldn't expect a Heritage Foundation
guy like yourself to be smart enough t end to
stand basic stuff like that. This is from Joey Politano,
another one of his his critics, you know, EJ. He writes.

(26:50):
Joey writes an economists, so dumb I had to explain
to him how the import price index works last month
will now lead to BLS. So somebody who doesn't know
how these statistics have even calculated or even presented, but
it has a PhD after his name, is now gonna
lead a statistics organization that this is its responsibility. Yeah,

(27:18):
he got his PhD from Northern Illinois University. Doesn't rank
even within the top one hundred economics program in the country.
He has published one article with one citation. His pedecessor
had thirteen hundred citations. It just doesn't insight. It's not
a primary criteria. There was another funny one, you know.

(27:45):
He cites this about labor participation rates. This is again
a tweet from e J. A tony millions of people
left the labor force during the twenty twenties and never returned.
They twenty twenty. During twenty twenty, I never returned. They
don't have jobs, but uncounted among the unemployed. This is

(28:07):
artificially reducing unemployment rate. This of course he wrote when
when Biden was president, so he was saying, no, no,
it's much more. You know, it's much more. Unemployment is
much higher than it really is. Biden economy is not

(28:27):
that good. I wonder if you'll make that same argument
now that he is, that he is responsible for those statistics,
and now that it's a Trump economy where I'm sure
that unmployment rate is much lower than is actually being reported.
And you know, just to be clear, given the aging population,

(28:54):
the number of people out of the labor market, you know,
a lot of people retired in over the last four
or five years, so the total population, the total labor
market participation is shrinking. The baby boom is a leaving
the workforce. Brendan Duke writes, an Tony has distinguished himself

(29:22):
with his lack of shame in producing viral, dishonest analysis
that have been criticized by honest conservative analysts. If he
brings that lack of shame to the production of official
economic statistics, their reliabilities, their reliability could be in question,
could is going to be in question? No question. So yes,

(29:53):
I mean this is a joke. Appointment he is, you know,
useless and hopeless, but he might give Trump the numbers
trump wants, and that's the criteria of that counts, right.
Trump wants great employment numbers. I can give you great
employment numbers, all right. So you want a statistician you

(30:14):
can control, just like Trump wants a FED chairman that
he can control. He wants somebody at the FED that
will do what he tells them. And he wants somebody
at Debut of Labor Statistics that does what he wants.

(30:34):
And he probably wants somebody I don't know who reports
the CPI. Whoever reports a CPI. I'm sure that Trump
wants somebody there that he can control. Indeed, there was
a story today about markets now wondering whether they can
really trust economic data coming out of the Trump administration,
including the inflation numbers, whether any of these numbers are

(30:56):
actually real, and it's a really good question. I just
want to read you a tweet from Peter Schiff, right
because Peter's coming to the same conclusion I came to,
but I came to it a lot earlier than he did.

(31:18):
Here you go, this is from Peter Schiff. Trump has
already done more lasting damage to the Republic and economy in
seven months than Biden did in four years. Self enrichment,
budget busting, big beautiful bill, higher federal spending, push to
abolish the debt ceiling, constant Powell bashing, plant to install

(31:39):
a compliant FED chair, support for a week dollar heavy
handed market intervention, coursion of private businesses picking winners and losers,
usipiation of Congress's tariff authority, unconstitutional self imposed export taxes,
creation of a bitcoin strategic reserve and crypto stockpile, scheme
to privatize Fannie and Fredie with what amounts to an

(32:02):
explicit government guarantees, and taking credit on non existent US
economic boom. Not everything Trump has done as bad on DEI,
affirmative action, the border, judicial appointments, low corporate taxes, and
targeted deregulation and banking, energy and labor law, as well
as Israel. He has made note worthy improvements over Biden,

(32:24):
but those achievements will be overshadowed by the adverse consequences
of the bigger picture actions that expand and concentrate federal power,
grow the debt, and move the country further down the
path of authoritarianism and crony capitalism. I wish you wouldn't
use crony capitalism, of cronyism. As a result, the coming

(32:49):
economic debt, dollar and financial crisis will be blamed on
what Trump pretends to stand for, blamed on capitalism. This
will open up a huge window for the socialist wing
of the Democratic Party to blame the color apps on
unbridled capitalism and exploit the private the crisis to pass
far more draconian socialist policies than the nation ever would
have accepted absent their ability to blame the crisis on

(33:10):
Trump and the Republican Party, just like happened during the
financial crisis, Just like happening financial crisis. So yeah, Peter
Shift's absolutely right. And this, uh, in spite of in
spite of what Ann says, Right, this is not just
motivated by Peter's by Trump support a bitcoin, although that's

(33:33):
irrational in and of itself, Trump support a bitcoin, but
it's motivated by the truth. Trump is a disaster for
the economy. Trump is a disaster for this place, right
all right, let me uh, let me just before we
go on to this next item. Yeah, I mean, uh,

(33:58):
you know, there's CNBC story today about will State is
concerned about reliability of governing inflation data. They just don't know.
Let me just say this on the chat number ish.
If you're going to dominate the chat, if you're gonna
post all the time, if you're gonna be there constantly,

(34:19):
I'm going to block you. So it's fine once in
a while to say something, But if you're gonna like
scare everybody away from being on the chat and just constantly,
constantly just post, then I will block you. So again.
Come in and out once in a while, that's fine,
But I don't like it when people are just posting NonStop.

(34:39):
It's just I think it basically takes the people who
are engaged here and interested in participating in the chat
and and keeps them away. And I don't want that
because they're the ones that's support me financially, and they're

(35:01):
the ones that I need to keep going here. I
know some of you have already have already have already
blocked him, but I will block you completely if you
just continue to dominate like this. This is not a
place to get into argument with other objectives about free will,
which god, you do pretty much every day constantly. So

(35:24):
enough is enough. More of Trump's really insanity, So Intel CEO.
Last week, Trump basically said that the CEO of Intel

(35:47):
should resign, and he said he should resign because he
has a conflict of interest because he's invested in a
lot of Chinese companies and this is China, and he's
the CEO of Intel and American company. And he basically
said the CEO should resign Intel. Now, Intel is in trouble,
and Intel is trying to kind of go through a

(36:08):
restructuring and re orientation and try to come out of
a real crisis and put itself, you know, right, the
ship and get itself profitable again. And the consequence of
Trump going after the CEO of Intel, which the president
of the United States should never do. It's none of

(36:30):
the business of the President of the United States who
the CEO is of any particular company. If the CEO
of Intel has done something illegal, arrest him. Other than that,
you have no business, no business and intervening and who
runs American businesses. This is exactly the kind of economic
fascism that Trump is making so much worse in this country.

(36:54):
It's bad enough under other presidents, and it's much worse
under Trump. Uh. Anyway, but this is this is kind
of a typical A typical story. Uh. The CEO of
Intel today, oh yesterday, went and met with Trump and
completely flipped him. Trump is now hugely in support of

(37:18):
Intel CEO Lip Bhutan. I guess lib Bhutan, you know,
sucked up to President Trump, which is what you need
to do? Uh? Trump wrote and is uh you know uh?
In Twitter, I met with mister lip Bhutan of Intel,
along with Secretive comments Howard Lidwig and Secretive Treasury Scott Bessen.

(37:40):
The meaning was a very interesting one. His success and rise.
This is an amazing story. Mister Tan and my cabinet members.
I'm going to spend time together and bring suggestions to
me during the next week. Thank you for your attention
in this matter. I mean, what are these suggestions exactly?
I mean, did Li Bhutan suggest that the US government

(38:03):
increase its subsidy for Intel? Intel is, after all, kind
of the American national champion of micro processes and is
competing with TSMC and Samsung and the Japanese company and
it's not doing well? Is Trump? Is Trump having Lutwig

(38:23):
and Besa and talked to Intel about how the US
government could support it even you know, even more than
it already has. For the Chip Act, which was done
under Biden. Is this just more of an example of
the of the Is this just more of an example
of the economic fascism I'm talking about? But yes, this

(38:48):
is what it looks like. Intel spokesman confirmed the meeting.
He said, quote earlier today, mister Tant had the honor
of meeting with President Trump for candid and constructive discussion
an Intel's commitment to strengthen US technology and manufacturing leadership.
It's fascinating, right, Intel's commitment to strengthening US technology and

(39:11):
manufacturing leadership rather than strengthening Intel. This suggests this is
all about, you know, cronyism and trying to get the
government to support Intel even more. Intel sadly, as much
as I love the company, and as much as it
has this amazing history and is so central and essential

(39:34):
to Silicon Valley, it is or a company that's so
central to Silicon Valley. But the reality is that Intel

(39:54):
has always been phone to run to Washington, DC whenever
it gets in trouble. That's happened in the nineteen eighties.
And it's sad because this is a company that's over
the last ten years, has done little to innovate it.
Its beat on the wrong business model allowed TSMC to

(40:17):
basically dominate the industry when Intel should be the one
dominating the industry. But that is because it picked a
bad business model and did poorly. Now, Tan, who is
now the CEO, used to be a director or was
a director since twenty twenty two, so he's new to
Intel and he's only been CEO since March, where he

(40:39):
replaced Pat Gelsinger a CEO. Pat Gelsinger was not a
was not CEO of Intel for very long, so Intel
has gone through a number of different CEOs. I think
Tan is really trying to turn Intel around. There is
talk about Intel split into two companies, a chip design

(41:02):
company and a chip manufacturing company with a manufacturing site,
becoming a manufacturer to anybody's designs and in that sense,
competing with TSMC. Whether that happens or not, it's hard
to tell. Again, remember just last week, Trump said that
Tan is highly conflicted and must design immediately. This is

(41:28):
after a Senator Cotton of Arkansas question tance ties to China. Anyway,
this is a developing story, but it's just the interwining
of business and politics at a level an extent that

(41:51):
we really have never seen. I don't think in American
history as bad as it has been in some periods
a Great Depression and other periods, I don't think we've
ever seen a president as engaged, as involved as part
of you know, industrial decisions and business decisions and granting

(42:12):
favors and exemptions as much as as Trump has been. Yep.
So it's going to be it's going to be fascinating.
By the way, the business model that Intel did, which
was a mistake, turned out to be a mistake, was
that it chose to focus both on design and manufacturing.

(42:32):
That it designed its own chips and then manufacture its
own chips, whereas if you think about Nvidia, Nvidia doesn't
manufacture its own chips, it only designs them. If you
think about TSMC, TSEMC doesn't design chips, it only manufactures them.
So specialization. Intel tried to do both and failed it both.
It It lost the design battle to not just in Vidia,

(42:55):
but to Apple. Apple designs on its own chips. It
used to use Intel chips, now design its own chips
and has TSMC produce them. Uh, and it lost the
production to TSMC and Samsung, who you know, Samsung might
design chips some chips, but Samsung will will manufacture whatever
chip you want them to manufacture. TSMC is a foundry.

(43:19):
They don't they don't design the chips, they just make them.
And that is the business model, the one and and
that is all. That is a revolution. The TSMC initiated
a revolution that could have been in America because the
the founder of TSMC was a TI Texas instrument engineer

(43:42):
who tried to get Texas instruments. He tried to get
the legal valley to adopt this business model of just manufacturing,
of specializing in manufacturing and letting other people design, and
everybody purpued the idea. So he went to Taiwan and
created the company there, and and and his questioning it
in crushing.

Speaker 2 (44:00):
It all right, Just remind everybody that we've only got
fifteen minutes for the first hour, and we're about only
halfway to our first hour goal.

Speaker 1 (44:15):
So police consider supporting the show with a super chat
or a sticker. We've got a bunch of we've got
a few people with stickers, but you know, we need
to make our numbers, so we need to do we
need to do a lot better. So please jump in
and support the show of value for value as we say,

(44:39):
we're all trade as right. All right, let's see. Yeah,
here's some bit of good news. One of the things
that was buried in the Big Beautiful Bill was actually
not to appeal because the Big Beautiful Bill couldn't actually
repeal it. But you know, basically an implicit you know,

(45:10):
an implicit one if you will, you know, the average
fuel economy CAFFEE standards. These are standards that were passed
in the nineteen law that was passed in nineteen seventy
five because of oil and bogo. That basically dictates the
auto industry what the average of all the cause they produce,
fuel economy standards have to be and cause it categorize

(45:33):
differently than trucks. We'll get to why that's important in
a minute. But they have a copet, you know, a
copeit whoops, what happened here? Yeah, coporate average fuel economy standards.
And while the Big Beautiful Bill, because it was a
budget bill, could not actually repeal caffee, what it did

(45:57):
do is eliminated the civil penalties for breaking caffee. So
it's still the law that American car makers have to
abide by. Caffe CAFFEE stands for again the corporate average
fuel economy standards. There's no penalty if they don't, so

(46:24):
they can break the law and there's no penalty, so
there's really no enforcement of caffee. Now, of course this
is tricky because another administration can come about in four
years and flip that easily right, start enforcing the law
and put on penalties. But for now, for the next
three years, KAFFEE is dead. Now, Kaffee is still log

(46:47):
extent dictated. The kind of cause that Detroit. The American
car companies are made the cause of the kind of
cause that's selling the United States. You know, for example,
American American cock companies used to make big heavy cars
which were gas guzzlers. Well, Caffee makes it impossible for

(47:09):
them to make big heavy cars. But what they can
do is they can make at SUV's because SUVs are
not categorized as cause issuvs are categorized as trucks, So
they can make a UV's that are gas guzzly but
they're not cause, so they can get away with it
that way. The other thing that you know American cock

(47:32):
companies are being forced to do is they being forced
to make small cars, which they're not very good at making,
and because small cars are very you know, efficient when
it comes to gas, so they'll be forced to build
small cars on average they fit into caffee. You know, theoretically,

(47:53):
they could stop making small cars. They can make big
cause and heavy cars. Again, light cars are dangerous cause
that do badly in accidents. And yet again caffee has
driven the US auto industry to make light cause. So

(48:14):
caffee is gone, at least for now, and American cock
companies can now be more innovative. They can consider other
factors other than fitting in to SUVs versus carse and
average gasoline efficiency standards and all this stuff. They can

(48:34):
actually start thinking about how to build cause that will sell,
how to build cause that people demand. They could actually
the fuel standards can now be determined by things like,
I don't know, things like markets. There are also other
aspects of this. For years, a lot of the design

(48:55):
of cause has been dictated by by the Caffee standards,
but also by things like safety, all kinds of safety regulations.
But the reality is that todays have backup cameras, they
have lane departure on blind spot warnings, they have automatic
emergency breaking. They have all this other safety stuff, they

(49:16):
can now again freeing up commony factors to design the
way they want to design without all these safety requirements.
Just let the technology take over and let the technology
dominate it. So we might be seeing a kind of
a renaissance in design of automobiles and a variety of
automobiles and choice automobiles. We are going to be a

(49:40):
lot less constrained in terms of what is available in
the marketplace. What will determine what is available in the marketplace,
We will determine The design is the market It's what
people are interested in and willing to buy. So it's
kind of exciting. You know, I don't know. I don't

(50:01):
know what impact this will be and whether this will
have a long term impact because car manufacturers might be
afraid that again in three years all this changes. But
at least in the short run, this could be. This
could be interesting to watch. All right, Uh, let's what

(50:21):
is the next topic we were going to talk about.
Let's look at Bernie Bernie Sanders, your favorite senator, right. Uh,
Bernie's on a roll. So let's start with this this
graph that Bernie published. He tweeted this let's see if
I can put this up. Oh, I don't know if

(50:42):
you can see. This is a Bernie tweet. The tweet says,
it is insane that the richest country in the world,
millions can't afford a home and hundreds of thousands are
homeless every night. We need major investments in affordable housing,
not tax baks for billionaires. Standard Bernie line. But this
is the graph he publishers, right, And you know, let's

(51:05):
see if I can get it all into the screen
so you guys can see it. I think you can
see that, it says. It says the top, I'll just
go down. It's hotter than ever to a photo home.
And this is what he's comparing. The blue graph, the
line going up is median home prices, and the red
graph way down below that is basically just flat. Is

(51:27):
real weekly wages on the same scale, not to scales,
same scale. So even if weekly median, even if real
weekly wages went up a lot, hundreds of percent, you
wouldn't see it's on this scale because the reality is

(51:50):
that the scale starts at like two hundred thousand, and
weekly wages are never going to be that high. Well,
don't say never, right, in pleasure fay capitalism. They might be,
but median wages are not that high. So this is
just this is just lying. It's just bizarre. And so

(52:17):
you've got the red line that's flat. It's flat because
you know, on the scale as presented in the graph,
there's no change. But that's that's a scale present in
the graph. It's exactly the point, right, And you know this,

(52:46):
this looks horrific. It looks on this that weekly real
weekly wages are not going up at all, and housing
prices have more than doubled. And this is night from
nineteen sixty seven. And that's just a lie. It's just
a lie. It's just deception, it's just marketing to fool people.

(53:07):
So let's look. This is from a blog post by
North Smith, but I'd seen this graph on Twitter earlier
and it was ridiculous from the beginning. So let's let's
look at some stats. Right. Here's let me straighten the cut.
You can see it better. This is median uh sell
price of houses divided by median personal income. So this

(53:32):
is median price of a home divided by median personal income.
And you can see that, Yeah, it's up that home
prices relative to ecome are up, but nowhere near as
much as Bernie sand is. Nowhere near kind of the
the hysteria or the you know, demagoguy of what Bernie

(53:58):
Sanders is claiming. Yep, we all know it's much more
expensive today to buy a home than it was in
the nineteen seventies, but not that much more expensive because
while home prices have doubled, earnings have gone up as
well significantly during that period. So right now, what is

(54:22):
this saying. In the eighties and nineties, it took about
eight years of work to Florida home. Since then it's
climbed to about ten years to folda home, all right,
that's all. That's more so in the eighties and nineties
you had to work for eight or nine years to
flot a median home to you had to work eight

(54:44):
years to for the media home. Today it's ten years.
So it's gone up, you know, by twenty five percent,
and that's not good. It shouldn't go up at all.
You know, if supply kept up with demand, then it
wouldn't go up at all. But it has, all right,
But is this the kind of panicky of a Bernie Sanders. No,

(55:07):
And if you look at where the challenges if you
look mortgages, because right now interest rates and mortgages are
relatively high. They are, But the reality is then in
terms of the monthly burden, that is, how much, how
much what percentage of your hours of work per month
does a mortgage cost you. It's about the same as

(55:30):
it was in the mid two thousands, and it's below
what it was in the nineteen eighties and even in
you know, in the in the late nineteen eighties. So
historically mortgages are not that expensive, not if you look not,
you know, not if you look not if you look

(55:50):
back enough. And then if you look at the down payment,
the down payment, that's where the big difference is. So
it's much more expensive. It's much more difficult today to
to make the down payment, which tells you the interest rates,
as high as they are today, relatively low as compared
to what they were in the nineteen eighties. But so

(56:11):
most of the burden in terms of working hours, in
terms of years to work, is born in order to
achieve the down payment. Just thought you'd find that interesting.
And again, home places are way more expensive than they
should be, particularly on the coasts, particularly in the West

(56:33):
and the Western the United States kind of Colorado West.
They're very expensive, and the reason is supplied. The reason
is almost exclusively supply, and supply not matching demand. In
other words, there's lots of demand to live in those places.
And you can argue about why do people want to
live in California, but they do, And then the question

(56:56):
is why is supply not keeping up with demand? And
that has to do with regulations, zoning and everything else.
So Bernie's just panicking everybody and hysteria and being upset.
But this is typical of the kind of economic lies

(57:16):
that the left constantly tells us. But of course that
the right now shares in terms of how bad the
economy is. Things are always presented by them as much
much worse than they really than they really are. Just
one other comments about Bernie. He's also on video today
being asked about whether Ramas has any culpability in people starving,

(57:40):
any culpability in people starving, and he basically says no,
it's one hundred percent Israel's fault, right, So there is
no responsibility on the part of Ramas for starvation in
the gods of the script, and you know, he knows

(58:01):
exactly what he's doing, and he knows exactly what he's saying.
But that's that that's the kind of morality that you get,
which leads me to a next topic. Yeah, this one, Uh,
you know, this kind of went I went into kind
of a little rabbit hole today, uh, and I thought
i'd show I'd chase some of this with you. It

(58:25):
started with just a post by by the latest interview
of Tucker Caulson. Tucker Calson interviewed mother a Japiah Stefano
Falus Stephanopholos, and she just goes on a rant about

(58:46):
the horrible treatment that Christians get in Israel and how
Israel just discriminates against Christians and and uh oppressed the Christians,
and uh Israel runs in a potheid system and everything,
and this is just so detachable reality. I've talked about

(59:07):
a potheight in Israel and the complete fiction that that constitutes.
I give the example of my mother being in hospital
and her doctors being Arabs, and her sharing a room
with Arabs, and just the whole thing is bizillre. People
either don't know what a potheight is, they don't know

(59:28):
what Israel is, or they're just plain lying. And I
think for most people claiming Israel is in a potheid state,
it's just them just lying. They are blatantly lying about
what is going on in Israel. And she is lying.
This mother, This woman is lying. Mother, a Japia is

(59:49):
lying about the condition of Christians and Israel. Christians and
Israel do better than any other country in the Middle East,
and they are treated as equal citizens. They indeed, as
I've said many times, in many respects, they are treated
better than the Jewish citizens of his Ould because they
don't have to go to the army. They don't have a
draft imposed on them. Only Jews, well only secular Jews really,

(01:00:14):
or non ultra religious Jews have a draft imposed on them.
You know, she's claiming that Christians are treated better in
Muslim countries. How is that possible when the Christian population
in every Muslim country is declining dramatically, and the Christian
population in Israel is increasing significantly because they're having babies

(01:00:39):
and they're not just being discriminated against, so they're not leaving,
whereas the Christians of Lebanon, of Syria, of Iraq have
all left. Even in Egypt, which has a large COPPT population,
Christian they're leaving. They're leaving because they're being discriminated against.
So the only explanation for this kind of lying, this

(01:01:01):
this out and out deception, this out and out you know,
making up of the fact, is that these people are
antisemitic and and and Tucker just hates Jews, and he
keeps repeating it, and he keeps going after it, and
you know, he's he's already an apologist for the Holocaust.

(01:01:23):
He's an apologist for the Nazis, and and he just
repeatedly engages in interviews with people who present falsehoods about
about Jews and conspiracy theories based on the idea the
Jews are evil. Somehow from that, I got to uh

(01:01:46):
to this guy called Joe webbon Joe Webbeon is is
the president founder of Right Response Ministries. He's a scene
your pastor at the Covenant Bible Church, which is located,
I guess in the north side of Austin, Texas, of

(01:02:07):
all places. So he's a minister, you know, he's a
senior pastor. I don't know what the difference is between
a pastor and minister of this you know, evangelical church
in Texas. Anyway, this guy is a piece of work.

(01:02:30):
One of his missions in life is to try to
get rid of Jews in America. Jews in America are
an evil force. They exploit Christians by charging them usury.
They are responsible for the porn industry, and they have

(01:02:52):
an allegiance to Israel that goes beyond their allegiance to
the United States. So they are responsible for the fact
that the United States support And this guy looks normal.
He speaks, you know, he's very articulate, and he's soft spoken,
and he's not some weaving nutcase. And he has he

(01:03:13):
has proposed a plan to humanely, humanly remove Jews from
America by crushing them to self deport And the way
to do that is to oppress them religiously. That is,
to make it impossible for Jews to practice Judaism or

(01:03:35):
to practice Judaism openly in the United States, and make
the United States much more explicitly a Christian nation. This is,
of course, part of the whole Christian Christian nationalist He's
part of the Christian nationalist agender. His plan is also
to make dual citizenship illegal, So if you have an
Israeli citizenship and a US citizenship, you have to choose

(01:03:57):
and hope. He hopes that the Jews choose these Raeli
citizenship and therefore leave the United States. He also wants
to make the porn industry illegal. That has banned pornography
in the United States. Well, that will force all the
Jews to leave, because the Jews are behind pornography, supposedly,
which is a complete bs idea ultimately, and then he

(01:04:23):
wants to make usury illegal. Usury means I guess, excess interest,
and of course Jews make their money in America through
usury through I guess exploiting the Christians by charging them
a very high interest rates. So if we can make
usury illegal, we can kick out the Jews that way.

(01:04:46):
I mean, he very much sounds like a nineteen thirties Nazi.
They didn't start out with concentration camps and murder. Their
initial ideas were to just find a way to get
the Jews to self deport, to make their life so
horrible in Germany that they would all leave. I mean,

(01:05:13):
this isn't again. This is a pastor and a big
I think, big successful a church. And you know he's
not some wacko and the fringes. He is part of
a movement, he defines himself. He proclaims himself and defines

(01:05:35):
himself as a Christian nationalist. And he you know, he
wants and believes that this country needs to be a
Christian country and needs to emphasize its Christian roots. I mean,
I find this interesting. What are the Joam Hassonis of
the world going to think of this? You know, Joam

(01:05:56):
Hazonian Israeli Orthodoxy Jew who who really founded and has
spearheaded the National Conservative movement. As the National Conservative movement
gets taken over by Christian Conservatives who don't want Jews anyway,
how's that going to play out now? He says that

(01:06:20):
while the founding fathers largely held positive views about Jewish
Americans in the colonial era, you know, because the Bible
is in Hebrew and you know there were real Christians, right,
you know, they also believed that the country was basically

(01:06:41):
a Christian country. And what he wants is to ban
Jews from holding any public office, Banjos from voting. He said,
Jews cannot hold public office. I'm quoting him. They can
live here, and they can live here peacefully and all
these kinds of things. But no, this is a Christian
and those who reject Christ and hate Christ. They can

(01:07:03):
be in the calm and we should mistreat them that
they don't get to drive. He says, it's okay to
have a country. Listen to me, Christian, You're allowed to
have a country. You are. It is okay to say no,
this country, this nation is for us and aup austerity.
It's not for Hindus, it's not for Muslims, and it's

(01:07:24):
not for Jews. It belongs to Christians. This is the
Christian nationalist movement. I'll just note that Defense Secretary Pete
Hegseth has praised kind of has identified himself as a

(01:07:48):
Christian nationalists, has praised the Commune Communion of Reform Evangelical Churches,
which defines itself as Christian nationalists. Now, they are not antis,
and they do not believe in discriminating against Jews. But
they do believe in America being a Christian nation. And

(01:08:09):
they are skeptical about the idea of women voting. Definitely
skeptical the idea of women voting. So there's disagreement among
the Christian nationalists about whether to deport with encourage self
deportation of Jews on our but women, they pretty much
share the idea that, yeah, women voting is not a

(01:08:29):
great idea. Heg Seth's secretary of Defense in the United States.
Not some marginal character. This is kind of scary stuff
when you think about Christian nationalism is not It's not
a trivial It's not a marginal sacked within the nationalist movement.

(01:08:53):
It is a major thrust of the national movement. Anyway,
I thought i'd end with the candicell tweet. It's always
good to end with the candas own tweet. This one
not explicitly antisemitic, but we all know Candace Canadas rights.
Someday people realize that the Enlightenment was actually a free

(01:09:15):
Masonic darkening of mankind. They have been lying about science, technology,
and most importantly our history. Artificial intelligence is their next
big effort. I didn't know that artificial intelligence was a
free Masonic darkening darkening of mankind? Did you guys know this?

(01:09:35):
I mean, the rights is nuts. These people are completely insane.
One of the people responded to who are tweet saying
the Enlightenment is a con job by secret elites rewriting
history to suit themselves. Now they're pushing AI as the
next chain to lock humanity down, and Candace responds, correct,

(01:10:02):
all right, anyway, people are nuts, and we've got anti
Semites to the left of us and anti Semites to
the right of us, and antisemitism is clearly growing and
influencing the United States. There's no question about that, because

(01:10:22):
it's on both sides. It's Bernie Sanders with his boondey center.
Of course he's Jewish, which is with his just obscene
hatred of Israel and supportive of Hamas. And on the
right you've got Tucker Calls and Canada so on, and
these religious nuts and the Christian conservatives. And really what

(01:10:45):
you're seeing come together is really Lennapeacup's prediction in the
dim hypothesis. You're seeing the nationalists and the religionists unite
under Christian conservatives of conservatism. And then the question is
to what extent can they actually find a political leader
who can actually take it to the next step and

(01:11:09):
dominate this country. But that is the scary part, That
is the really scary part. Oh, Henrik say, stuck in
the middle with you, you know, anti simi to the
left of us, anty sent the rights of the stuck
in the middle with you. I don't know it doesn't
quite work right, all right, That is the news guys

(01:11:31):
for Tuesday, August twelfth. Tomorrow, we'll be going in the
same time, same place, same time, so again it'll be
I know it's inconvenience, but given my travel schedule, this
is we will be doing it at twelve pm East
Coast time. We'll be back to more normal times to

(01:11:52):
the Iron Book show. On Thursday and Friday, they'll be
closer to three pm four pm, and then I'm hoping
to do a show on Saturday as well, but we'll
certainly have a show on the next three days in
better timing. Just a quick reminder that we're way off

(01:12:12):
a goals. So if, if, if you guys would like
to support the show. This is a trader principle, and
you know the show is made possible by you. Couldn't
be could be could be happening without you, so please
consider supporting it. I got I rented this nice office
so we could have a regular shows. Uh, and the

(01:12:33):
office is expensive, so please consider supporting the show so
that I can continue providing it and providing it on
a regular schedule even when I travel. So yes, super
chat is open and you can do a sticker. We've
got a bunch of people who've done sticker. Thank you, John,
really appreciate it. Let's see John, thank you, call Meisenbel,

(01:12:58):
thank you, Jonathan home as Always, thank you, William, thank you.
Let's see Faye, thank you. And I think Silvanos did
a sticker. Yes, Silvana, thank you, Ryan, thank you. Thanks. Guys,
really appreciate the stickers. Those are great. We need another
fifty dollars to get to our first hour goal, and

(01:13:20):
then another two hundred and fifty if we want to
get the second hour goal. Don't have a lot of questions,
so this could be pretty pretty quick here, so if
you want to ask a question, jump in quickly. Before
we went out for Silvana's. This is perfect for him.
He loves these early star dates. I remember when I

(01:13:41):
when we did them regularly at twelve o'clock. He was
a big fan of that, and then I moved him
later and Savanna's kind of has a hard a time
making making the shows since then. All Right, Duski Drewski
new Rochelle, a suburb forty minutes for Midtime Manhattan and
has managed to keep rents in check, rising just one

(01:14:03):
point six percent since twenty twenty. By aggressively building housing
over the past decade, the city has added more than
four five hundred units. I mean, this is not science.
This is not rocket science. It doesn't require a PhD.
Even in economics. If you want to lower rents, if
you want to keep home prices under control and rents

(01:14:24):
under control, all you have to do is allow housing.
And it's not if you care about low income housing,
the way to do it is not to build low
income housing. It's just to allow developers to build whatever
housing sells in the marketplace. Because as people move out
of their previous homes to higher end homes, the previous

(01:14:45):
homes become low income housing or the equivalent of So
you don't need to try. All you need to do
is build, build, build. The more you build, the lower
housing prices will be. And it's not that the state
or the city has to build. All they need to
do is get out of the way of builders who
want to build, get out of the way of developers them,

(01:15:11):
let them build, and housing prices will come down. This
is true every way and always. It's simple supply and demand.
This is not hard. It's not complicated. You can see
you can see demand fousing, and places like California, and
you can see supply of housing let's say in Silicon Value,
or in Orange County or in LA and you can
see there's a mismatch. And the way markets clear when

(01:15:34):
there's a mismatch is prices adjust and if demand exceeds supply,
prices adjust us upwards. And by adjusting upwards, they have
a strict demand. Thank you, Roski shows Bud. All my
friends have nuclear weapons? Why don't I have one yet?

(01:15:56):
Aladdin the Dictator, I don't know that one. All my
friends have nuclear weapons, Why don't I have one yet? Well,
you gotta buy one, Gotta get one, p Eddie, thank
you for the stick. I really appreciate that. Let's see,

(01:16:18):
I don't see a question. If you meant to ask
a question, it didn't capture it, so you might want
to put it into the chat. Savannah's asking a question
as well. It seemed that Trump has leaned away from
Putin a few weeks ago. What change? Putin must have
played a card under the table now, I don't think so.

(01:16:38):
I think with Trump it's always who speaks names last.
And look, I think Trump has always been pro Putin
has always leaned into Putin, and then he got Putsin
disappointed him by refusing all of Trump's efforts to come
to some kind of negotiated settlements. So Trump kind of

(01:17:02):
by default was disappointed. And then he went to the
NATO meeting and all the European European leaders really really
really kissed his ass, really groveled before him, really, you know,
did complimented him and all this stuff. And you know

(01:17:27):
what really happened was that, Okay, he said, oh, maybe
these Europeans are not so bad. And he came back
and he was much more pro Ukraine and kind of
deal with NATO and NATO buying the weapons and all
of this stuff. But then you know, he still wanted
to negotiate a settlement. That's still his preference. And look,
a lot of people in Maga are very anti the US,

(01:17:50):
supporting Ukraine and very pro Russia. And I'm sure over
the last few weeks a lot of the mega folks
have gone to him and said, what happened? Why are
you switching to being a pro Ukraine? This is wrong,
this is not what we voted for all of that stuff.
So Trump decided to try again, he said, Witkoff off

(01:18:12):
to Russia and Witcuff had a three hour meeting with Putin,
and it turned out that Whitcoff had no clue what
Putin was saying just these three hours, and he came
back and said, oh, Putsin seems to want to deal.
So Trump is back dealing with Putin, partially because of

(01:18:33):
misunderstanding that Witcuff said that there was some exchange of land,
which Putin denies. So who knows. But I think somebody
got to him. I don't think it's Putin that got
to him. I think it's Maga Maga influences that got
to him. It's people like heg Seth, who are very
pro Russia that got to him. There's a there's a

(01:18:56):
real battle within the White House. You've got hegg Seth,
there's pro Russia, and you've got Markorubio who's pro Ukraine.
And they're going at each other. And look, Putin might
be a little desperate right now. Look the economy, Russia's
economy is doing really badly. Ukraine has over the last
few weeks really gone after Russian oil infrastructure, blowing up

(01:19:21):
refineries and that is taking a huge toll on the
ability of Russia export oil and these potential tariffs that
will increase penalty for countries dealing with Russia, I think
is worrying Putin. So Putsin has reasons to reach out
to Trump to try to mitigate, you know, try to

(01:19:47):
try to try to convince Trump that he's the good
guy again. So we'll see what happens. But Putin's in
a corner. Putin's not in good shape. And in spite
of the fact that you know, Ukraine is not advance
dancing on the ground, Ukraine is really, really, really making
it painful for Russia to continue this war with drone

(01:20:08):
attacks all over Russia, deep into Russia and blowing up
infrastructure in Russia, and that is causing real economic calm.
Russia can only sustain this war because it exports oil
thanks a Roonnas Catherine. Let's assume Ukraine surrenders. What do

(01:20:34):
you think of Russia's knicks plans. Do you think the
EU reacts? Well, I mean, if Ukraine literally surrenders, then
I don't think EU does anything. It just, you know,
it just accepts whatever Ukraine wants to do. I think
Russia's plans are a slow takeover of Ukraine, a replacement

(01:20:55):
of Zelenski in Kiev to some kind of puppet regime,
and over time an integration of more and more of
Ukraine into Russia, and maybe Ukraine becomes just like Belarus,
which is basically a puppet government of the Russian government,
and Russia is now established. I think once that happens,

(01:21:15):
and once Russia has a chance to refurbish its army,
you know, to get its economy on unreasonable footing, then
I think the next step is, you know, the Baltics.
I have no there's no question in my mind that
Putin wants the Baltics Stone near Lithuania and in Latvia back,

(01:21:43):
you know, as part of Russia. I don't think he's
ready to take on Poland. I don't think he wants
to take on Central European anytime soon. That's maybe decades
in the future, but it's not now now. I think
the target will be the Baltics, and I think, you know,
particularly with Trump hesitant to an Article five and NATO

(01:22:06):
weakened by a Ukrainian surrender, I think, you know, he
could probably munch into the Baltics and face the tiny
little countries. It wouldn't be that hard fame to just
dominate and take over the Baltics. The only reason you
wouldn't do it is he's afraid of a native response.
But if NATO's willing to let Ukraine surrender, and if

(01:22:29):
Trump is willing to hand over Ukraine to him, then
why not go for the Baltics. Why not be ambitious?
So I think that's where he goes next. This will
only embold in him. Evil is always emboldened by weakness,
and Trump is exhibiting weakness just like Biden did. I mean,

(01:22:49):
there's very little difference between these guys when it comes
to phone palsy and weakness. Adam, regarding Chians and Israel,
I'm not sure what that means. Look up the Johnny Suji,
world's highest paid Israelly, VP of hardware tech at Apple,
responsible for Apples M four, the first main chip with

(01:23:13):
a newal Net processor, and for two of three R
and D labs in Israel. So I'm not sure what
the Xians mean, but yeah, I look him up. I mean,
obviously a phenomenal engineer. He might be the highest paid Israeli.
But you know, given that we've had two major Israeli

(01:23:36):
tech companies sell basically sell to US, companies over the
last few months. There are a lot of new billionaires,
billionaires or multi billionaires in some cases in Israel right now,
I mean, Israeli tech sector is booming, and these new
billionaires are going to take their money and invest in

(01:23:57):
new tech companies in Israel. And you know, if if
you want a great investment right now, Israeli tech is
where to put your money. All right. That quote was
from Sasha Bell and Coin the Coin film, Oh the Dictator.
That was we discovered the reason the Dictator doesn't have

(01:24:19):
a nuclear weapon is because he killed the scientists when
they disagreed about the shape of the missile's nose. Points
you around. That's pretty good. I like that. That's funny,
and the fact that he killed his nuclear scientist is
completely appropriate and uh imperfect. All right, I forgot our sponsors,
so let me remind you that our sponsors are hander

(01:24:41):
Shot Wealth, hander Shot, Wealth dot Com, Handershot Wealth dot com,
slash ybs hand a shot with two t's hender Shot
pretty straightforward with two t's wealth, all one would dot
com slash ybs. Uh. They have a product that can
reduce or at least dramatic defer your capital gains taxes. Uh,

(01:25:04):
it's it's a it's a really cool play. It's a
it's a complex play. It's not something you can do
by yourself. It's not something you can just get your
financial advisors to do. There's a whole strategy around this.
It involves taking on leverage, it involves investing in particular
types of funds. It's managed by a company called AQR.
You can learn about it by going to my YouTube

(01:25:25):
channel and checking out my sponsor videos, in this case
my interview with Robert Handershaw where we talk about this. Uh.
And Yeah, if you have, or you live off of,
or anticipate a significant capital gains events, then I encourage
you to I encourage you to check out the video
and check out Handershot Wealth Management. Alex Epstein alex Epstein

(01:25:54):
dot substack dot com is the world authority on all
things energy, climate change, environmentalism. Check him out, check out
his substack, subscribe and supportive efforts, but more importantly, read

(01:26:14):
his stuff, because reading his stuff, you will, you know,
you will learn so much about this essential industry, the
energy industry, and about everything going on right now with
the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress. And what they're
trying to do and deregulation, not deregulation, what exactly is happening.

(01:26:35):
You will learn from him because he's intimately involved in
all of that right now. So check out Alex Epstein
dot substack dot com. And finally, the Iron Institute. Iron
Institute wants to remind you that they have an app
on phones, Android and Apple. The app basically has iron

(01:26:57):
Man content. It's the Ironman Institute app Iran content. It
has all of Land and Peacock's courses, it has AARU classes,
it has just a bunch of just a lot of
objectives content. If you are if you have an interesting
studying objectivism and studying Iran's philosophy, get the app. It's
a great way. You know, when you're stuck somewhere and

(01:27:18):
you want to listen to some classes, or if you
want to just sit at your desk and listen, that
is the best way to access It's the easiest way
to access it and listen. So go to Iran dot
og slash start here, Iran dot org slast start here,
and you can get a direct link to the app
stores to download the app. All right, Thank you to

(01:27:39):
our sponsors. Also reminded you guys to check out to
become monthly supporters on Patreon dot com. Patreon dot com,
just check out the run Book show and become monthly supporters. Okay,
Esoteric Dichotomy, Hi Ron many channels I watch, engage on
YouTube with community polls, allows audience to vote in potential
video ideas. Gard's interest. Is it useful? You know? I

(01:28:02):
guess it is. I did a few poles a few times.
I need to get organized around that. Yeah, let me
reintroduce poles that it could be fun to do, and
I'll start doing it again. It's harder for me to
do while I'm on the road, just because there's a
lot I have to juggle here. But if I have

(01:28:23):
the time before show starts, I'll try to do that. Nrick,
can Ukraine sustain the battle and win with just European support? Well,
it depends how big European support is. If Europe is
willing to go all out and really support them and
arm them, if Europe is allowed to continue buying weapons
in the US and then then pass them on to

(01:28:44):
the Ukrainians. Yes, I think Ukraine can win. This is
connected An's question. What would Ukraine winning look like in reality,
what it looks like is is pushing the Russians out
of Ukraine. It basically looks like beating them back. And
some people might say that's impossible and it cannot be done,

(01:29:05):
But I don't think it is impossible. I think it's
just a matter of they're kind of having the right
kind of weapon systems. I think that they can make
it so painful for the for the for the Russians,
and that they will ultimately be able to push them back.
They will completely demotivate their troops. The Russian troops, they're
already unmotivated. They just had to pound them. And to

(01:29:28):
pound them, they need artillery to pound them. They need
missiles to pound them. They need drones to pound them.
They need sixteens, and they need sixteens with the right
kind of missiles. They not they crippled if sixteens that
are being sold to them. Europe has those weapons systems,
It has European airplanes, it has European artillery, it has

(01:29:48):
in European missiles, and yes, I think with Europe, Ukraine
can push the Russians out, and they can also make
it very very very expensive for Russian to engage in
this world. They're already doing that, as I said, by
attacking their refineries, and they're all installations, and I think
they can do a lot more of that with the
right weapon systems. So that's what it looks like. In reality,

(01:30:10):
it looks like maybe it means a long and prolonged
what do you call it, a battle of attrition once
the Russians are out of Ukraine, because Russia won't give
up that easily. But I think even that will end
because I think that if the Ukrainians have the right
weapon systems, they can make it really, really painful for

(01:30:31):
Russia to sustain a war of attrition. It doesn't mean
invading Russia. It just means getting them back to the
border and keeping them there. And again, I think all
of that is doable. I think it's if they actually
achieve that, then I think Putin will be out of
a job. I think somebody will replace Putin in that

(01:30:51):
case and ultimately cut a deal because they become too
expensive and too horrific for the Russians to continue. Denver,
Colorado has eliminated parking minimums for new development. Yeah, that
is a good step. That's one step towards getting more
condos being built and says how many more years? Well,

(01:31:13):
it depends on the weapons. If Ukraine had gotten the
weapons two years ago, then we'd be done by now.
So and it doesn't matter how many years. I mean,
that's Ukraine's business, not your business, not my business. Ukraine.
You know, how many how many years should it take
you to regain your home? When when when you know

(01:31:35):
gangs take it over? Should you just give up? Should
you just walk away where they're going to walk to
where they're gonna go? Do you just accept watching rule
over you? Because it's going to take a long time.
But I don't think it has to take a long time.
I think I think we're talking about a couple of
years and they're done, maybe less than that, maybe within

(01:31:58):
a year if they have the right weapons. But they
don't and we're not supplying them, and the Russians are
not supplying them. And yeah, we're contributing to them with
our tax dollars. It's very little tax dollars. We're getting
a lot for those tax dollars. It's one of the
better investments who we're making in terms of our tax dollars.
I have no problem using tax dollars to fund parts

(01:32:21):
of the Ukraine War. Right now, we're not doing that.
The Europeans are buying weapons from US, so there's no
tax dollars being deployed. But look, it's a feign policy decision.
Is seeing the Ukrainians defeat Russia in American interests? Yes,
I think it is. Russia is a real threat to
the United States, it's a real threat to NATO, and

(01:32:41):
we'restole members of NATO. So it's absolutely in our interests
to see Russia defeated. And it's worth paying. Given that
we spend all the gazillions of dollars we pay today
in taxes, it's worth taking a little bit of our
tax money and using it for that. It's a lot
less than it appears because a lot of what we'd
be selling, or a lot of what we'd be transferring

(01:33:03):
to Ukraine if I were running things, is a lot
of old stuff that we don't need. Stuff we don't
need because it's not useful in any confrontation with China.
Stuff we don't need because it's close to expiration day,
like different missiles and different artillery shells. It's most of
what the Biden administration gave to Ukraine was stuff that

(01:33:27):
we have no need for. It was going to be
destroyed by the US army anyway. It was going to
just be blown up because it was useless for the
United States. Instead of that, might as well send it
to Ukraine and use it to kill Russian troops who
was invading your country. So you know, is it worth
the United States supporting Israel? Yes, it is worth the

(01:33:49):
United State supporting is Wral, even though I'm fine with
the United States not supporting the financial it's worth it
because the United States gets much more benefit from Israel
than the cost militarily than the cost of the military
support that it provides Israel. Uh And and Israel is

(01:34:13):
fighting the US's enemy, just like Ukraine is fighting the
US's enemy. All right, Jacob, I'm a teacher and just
received my free Aari box of books. Great way to
start the year. Kids already walking around with their copies
of Atlas and Anthem. That's amazing. That's amazing that you're

(01:34:34):
teaching Atlas and Anthem. Good for you, Jacob, Thank you.
I think we should all be thankful for that. And
it's it's future generations. This is how you change the world.
Expose these kids to the good ideas. There's nothing much
more than we can do, and if they're exposed in school,
then their whole attitude towards Ion Ran changes. This is

(01:34:54):
something the teacher gave them. This is something that's part
of the school curriculum. How offensive could it be? I
love it. The books the teacher program is one of
my favorites all time because it just brings it into
the school system and it gets these kids exposed to
Iron Rand when it matters. Jonathan Honing says, I'm not

(01:35:20):
investing for individual investors outside of a fund. It took
about a year to get my government required Series sixty five. Yep. Yeah,
because your investors, I'm sure, were worried that you didn't
know enough about finance and about markets after all those
years of experience, So you had to get a government

(01:35:41):
certificate proving that you were okay to help people invest
their money. But good for you, Jonathan, Congratulations. I hope
it goes really, really well. Nate, do you think Bush
Junior and Cheney purposefully lied about weapons and master's tr
ruction in I Rak or was it an intelligence failure?

(01:36:03):
A lot of people like to call Bush and Cheney
evil war criminals. I don't think. I think they're war criminals,
but for very different reasons than most people call them.
Did they lie about Women's Master destruction? Probably not. I
think it was an intelligence failure. It was wish for thinking.
I think they encouraged the intelligence community to come to
the conclusion that they did, but they didn't lie about it.

(01:36:29):
They just prodded them to that. But I think their
war criminality is that they engaged in a war in
Iraq and in Afghanistan that they did not provide the
American military with the tools to win. And that's what
makes some war criminals is that they send American kids
to die in a war that they knew without the

(01:36:53):
tools to win that war. But that's a whole lot
of discussion and says I'm reading The Living again after
many years. Very inspiring book. Yes, very emotional, very moving
book and very inspiring Ollie. What are your thoughts in
the UK's Online Safety Act. I mean, I think it's horrible.

(01:37:14):
I think that it's an additional attempt to try to
regulate what's going on online and people's behavior online. While
I think that finding ways to protect children for pornography
is not a bad idea and doing in ways that
don't violate people's privacy is something worth thinking about and

(01:37:39):
worth considering. Maybe this is where some kind of crypto
it can really help. Crypto tooken that verifies adulthood, I
don't know, but keeps you anonymous. So the finding ways
to protect kids from pornography is a valid goal on

(01:38:02):
the one hand, but you know, telling people they can
and can oppose though, interfering in people's ability to engage
online and violating people's privacy and making emburden some individuals
to do what they whatever they want on if adults
do whatever they want online is not acceptable, and you
have to find a balance. And I don't think from

(01:38:24):
everything I've read that the UKs Online Safety Act finds
that balance. Savannas. I love these start times. They're right
in the middle of my workday, all right, Michael, If
we fail to convince someone of objectivism, is it their

(01:38:44):
problem or problem? Well, it could be either one, or
it could be it could be both, right, I mean,
it could be that you are now doing a good
enough job explaining. It could be that they're not open
to having their minds changed. He could be both of those,
But I don't think he can come a priority in advance,

(01:39:06):
you can determine which one it is. I don't know, Michael, again,
is Trump's plan to allow for more deregulation so they
may so they are more productive companies he can shake
down and extort I know, I don't think so. I
don't think that's why he's deregulating. I think he's on

(01:39:27):
some vague notion, and deregulation is good for America, good
for his plan, good for good economy, so he can
boast about the great economy and the greatest economy. I
think the boasting is more important than shaking down for him.
I think he's just an emotionalist. He doesn't have a plan.
I don't think there's a plan at all. I mean,

(01:39:48):
he extots and he extorts and shakes down because the
opportunity arises, and he does it because that's what he does.
I don't think there's a whole scheme of how to
do it. Uh. Michael said, says, well, the new leftist
strategy no longer be woke but class consciousness, like Mumdanni.

(01:40:09):
I don't know. I mean, there, Mum Donnie, is some
combination of woke in class consciousness. I don't know. How
sea the class consciousness is. Maybe there's a revival of
Marxism within the let within leftism. We will see. I'm
doing By the way, if you live in Colorado, I'm
gonna be doing a debate in Colorado Springs in November.

(01:40:30):
I think it's November thirteenth. Uh, in Colorado Springs. I'm
debating a socialist at the University of Colorado, Colorado Springs.
So if you if you're in that area, uh, come
on over and and and uh more information when I
have it, I'll I'll let you know. But there is
this revival in interest in socialism, so it's a great

(01:40:53):
time to be doing, uh a debate like this. This
is a This is gonna be sponsored by Steamboat Springs Institute,
Steamboat Institute Esoteric Dichotomy. Instead of sovereign Wealth Fund, could
a regular corporation with lots of individual investors get into
infrastructure and utilities and give dividends. Yeah, I mean any

(01:41:16):
company can get into infrastructure if the government allows it to.
I mean today all of that is sidelined for the government.
So give dividends. I mean, dividends is what you give.
But you have to be profitable to be able to
give dividends. So yes in theory and allows a fair
capitalist country. That's what would happen. Whether it's individual investors

(01:41:40):
or not, it would be corporations that basically build the
infrastructure and run the utilities. I don't quite maybe I'm
not quite getting the question. All right, guys, thank you
to all the super Chednis. Thanks for the support. I
will see you tomorrow on the same time, same place,
and yeah, I have a great rest of your week.

(01:42:03):
See you all tomorrow. Bye, everybody.

All Episodes

Putin/Trump; BLS; Intel; Fuel-Econ; Bernie Sanders; Antisemitism | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Stuff You Should Know

Dateline NBC

The Herd with Colin Cowherd

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Putin/Trump; BLS; Intel; Fuel-Econ; Bernie Sanders; Antisemitism | Yaron Brook Show