Saudi Arabia; Epstein; Meta Antitrust; Rent Control; WallMart; Heritage; Japan | Yaron Brook Show - Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Yeah, though radical fundamental principles of leadom rational, self interest

(00:33):
and individual wise.

Speaker 2 (00:38):
This is the ran Brook Show.

Speaker 3 (00:43):
Oh right, everybody, welcome to your one book show on
this Tuesday, November eighteenth, of hope. Everybody's having a.

Speaker 2 (00:53):
A great week so far.

Speaker 3 (00:57):
It's it's a little late, I know, I I got
I remember doing shows at eight pm. I'm eight pm
Puerto Rican time, and it's hard. I'm I like com
ready to go to sleep.

Speaker 2 (01:11):
I'm exhausted. But here we are. We're going to do
a show.

Speaker 3 (01:15):
And the reason I had to switch it is because
I was on the what is it Adam Adam and
Stitch Adam Adams Stitch Show earlier today and for about
two hours. So it was a lot of fun. I

(01:37):
enjoyed it, you know. I had a big audience.

Speaker 2 (01:40):
They had.

Speaker 3 (01:42):
Over four hundred people live. No, I wasn't on for
three hours. I was on for just two hours. I
think they continued on for another hour afterwards. But I
was on for two hours and it was it was fun,
good questions, good interactions.

Speaker 2 (01:59):
A lot of a lot of stuff going on.

Speaker 3 (02:01):
In the in the chat, which is nice to a
lot of people listening live in the chat, which is good.
A lot of super chats, so though they don't do
what I do, which is answer every super chat question
you get. They had a bunch of super chats, including
like one four hundred dollars, they didn't even answer it,
so I think, at least while I was on, So

(02:24):
that's interesting.

Speaker 2 (02:25):
I didn't realize people do that.

Speaker 3 (02:27):
But here in the book show we answer all the
super chat questions, all of them, every single last one
of them, even the ones that are trying to insult me.

Speaker 2 (02:36):
We even answer those. Anyway, it was a good interview.

Speaker 3 (02:39):
I'm hoping some of those people who listened, finding intriguing
come on over and.

Speaker 2 (02:46):
Subscribe to the Iran Book Show.

Speaker 3 (02:47):
So if you are here because of Adam Stitch, or
if you're here for some other reason and it's your
first time here, I hope that you subscribe and get
on the kind of regular announcements of when I go
live and all of that's fun stuff.

Speaker 2 (03:02):
So it doesn't cost much, really anything, zero zilch.

Speaker 3 (03:06):
Press that subscribe button, like Particpa in the chat chat
is good. The more engagement, the more the more visibility
the show has out there on on YouTube. So yeah,
so far, not much crossover not like when I did

(03:28):
some of the other shows where you get immediately you
get a spike up of people subscribing to my show.

Speaker 2 (03:35):
It hasn't happened yet. We'll see. Uh, we'll see.

Speaker 3 (03:38):
If it happens later today, rest of the day. We'll
see tomorrow maybe, all right. Chandler says it was great.
Chat was predictable. I didn't have the chance because I
was engaged with the hosts to really follow the chats.

Speaker 2 (03:55):
I don't know what was predictable.

Speaker 3 (03:57):
I don't know what kind of people they have, so
hard for me to tell, but but yeah, give me
one second.

Speaker 2 (04:18):
I forgot to load the AC to make it appropriately cold,
and it was getting way too warm. All right. Uh so, yeah,
that was Jennifer Sais and widows in the chat. Uh
and uh.

Speaker 3 (04:34):
God, yeah, I mean, uh, it was fun. I got
to talk about the philosophy. I got to talk about selfishness.
What's what's more cool than to talk about self interest
and selfishness and why it's why it's right, So it
would be Yeah, hopefully a few people found it interesting
and curious and stuff and came over and and uh
and subscribed over here so we can get our numbers

(04:57):
up because we're stuck at forty thre We need to
get that magic one hundred thousand. They said they were
stuck at fifty and they were having a hard time
growing beyond fifty. All right, in the meantime, we're going
to cover the news, but you should think about questions
and other various ways in which you coul support the show,
like stickers and things like that.

Speaker 2 (05:17):
So jump in with questions that help.

Speaker 3 (05:23):
Shape the show. I answer your questions. I talk about
what you want me to talk about. Pbee has already
got one in.

Speaker 2 (05:30):
If you on Twitter or anything like that, let the
world know that you're listening to your on book show.
Some more people come live and participate and ask questions
and participate and get exposed.

Speaker 3 (05:42):
So yeah, use your social platforms to help me grow.
It's in your self interest, I think. If it's not,
don't do it. All Right, Today in the White House,
President Trump host one of America's a premiere allies. A
country dedicated to individual liberty and freedom and capitalism and

(06:05):
the American way of life and all the good stuff.

Speaker 2 (06:09):
All men are created equal and inalienable rights and all
of that.

Speaker 3 (06:13):
So it was, you know, pleasure to have this person
in the White House, and Trump was so enamored by
how close this country is to the United States that
he promised to sell them F thirty fives, despite of
the fact that the Pentagon's a not too happy about
the bed anyway, I promised to sell them F thirty fives.

(06:33):
So yeah, that happened today, and this person happened to
be the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

Speaker 2 (06:47):
I mean, uh is like, right? I mean, it's Saudi Arabia.

Speaker 3 (06:51):
They have a king, they're a king, and the state
basically owns everything. And women don't have rights. Nobody really
has rights in Saudi Arabia. I mean they're not recognized,
but the state they have rights. The state doesn't protect them.

(07:12):
You certainly no free speech god atheists like me straight
to jail.

Speaker 2 (07:23):
I mean, can you think of.

Speaker 3 (07:24):
A country whose values, principles they guide it, the philosophy
behind it is more dissimilar than Saudi Arabia And probably
a few, but not many like Iran. Right, Kata the
other really good friend of Donald Trump's, and yet nbs

(07:44):
the crown Prince. Remember kings, kings? I thought we got
rid of kings seventeen seventy six, we had somebody say
about kings, and we don't like kings.

Speaker 2 (07:52):
I mean, I may be down.

Speaker 3 (07:53):
With Kurtis Yovn arguing that America should become a monarchy.
Maybe we like kings again. But anyway, a NBS is
a crown prince, but he really is the ruler of
Saudi Arabia. NBS was today at the White House and
got the royal treatment, royal capital of I mean, he
got a fly over, he got a cannon salute, he
got f thirty fives, he got a state dinner, the

(08:14):
first state dinner that they were White House hosting, even
you know everything. I mean, Trump puts unbelievably friendly. I
mean friendlier than he was to Putin. I mean that's
saying a lot. He likes NBS more than he likes Putin. Wow,
certainly friendlier than he's being to Zelenski or even to

(08:36):
even to Nitagiello.

Speaker 2 (08:38):
Although don't tell the gouypers.

Speaker 3 (08:41):
I wonder like the America First crowd, the America First
in the bad sense, What do they think of the
chumminess that Donald Trump expresses towards uh Saudi's Saudis? Anyway,
Saudi Arabia, where the state basically manages the economy and

(09:04):
governs the economy and responsible for all economic development. In
Saudi Arabia, where we have again kings, where women can drive.
Now out what an achievement they can drive. Finally, they
still don't have equal rights, but they can drive. Saudi
Arabia just a culture that is still stuck in the
Middle Ages to a large extent, it's improving at Themogin,

(09:27):
it's improving Nbs.

Speaker 2 (09:29):
Who is a murderer. We know that he got the
world treatment, the world treatment. It's it's wow, it's hard
to believe, right, really, it really is.

Speaker 3 (09:46):
I mean, all American presidents are nice to the Saudist
but Trump is all out, over the top nice to
the Saudis. And part of this has to do with
the fact part of it. Now, we don't want to
suggest the Trump is corrupt, No, we wouldn't want to

(10:06):
do that, but it might have to do with the
fact that over the last few weeks and months, the
Saudi Global Wealth.

Speaker 2 (10:15):
Fund, you know, the fund that gave.

Speaker 3 (10:19):
One of well Trump's son in law two billion dollars
to start his private equity fund. That's Saudi Global Wealth Fund.
They give two billion dollars to god what's his name,
the son in law of Trump for the private equity.

Speaker 2 (10:39):
But that's not enough.

Speaker 3 (10:42):
But over the last few weeks and months, the Saudi
Global Wealth Fund has kind a bunch of deals with
the Trump organization, the Trump organization with several billions of dollars. Indeed,
the Saudis which means the Saudi ow family, which means yeah,

(11:05):
the crown, Prince, uh Trump families some of their biggest
business partners. So Trump gets a few billion dollars and
he gets to sell them F fifty fives.

Speaker 2 (11:20):
I mean, what's the big deal?

Speaker 3 (11:22):
I mean, after all, the Pentagon's only worried that the
Saudis will transfer the technology over to the Chinese. But anyway,
we don't need to worry about that. I mean, why
would they do that?

Speaker 2 (11:34):
Really?

Speaker 3 (11:35):
I mean, there's such they're so culturally, philosophically, value or wise,
so aligned with America.

Speaker 2 (11:42):
They would never betray us. That would never happen. Never happened.

Speaker 3 (11:48):
Who as well as really opposed the selling of F
thirty fives it to the Saudis.

Speaker 2 (11:55):
I mean a lot of the technology today in.

Speaker 3 (11:58):
F thirty fives it was designed by and for the Israelis,
and Israel's really worried about the Saudis having it. It's
Saudi ravers not offend to Israel, not yet anyone. Now,
many people are saying, oh, all this stuff, this negotiations,

(12:21):
the deals, the investments, all of this, it's all it's
all going to have because Saudi is going to join
Abraham Accords.

Speaker 2 (12:28):
Nope.

Speaker 3 (12:29):
NBS was very clear that NBST and so Mohammed bin Salaman,
the Saudi conseerence. NBS was very clear that he was
not going to join the Abam Accords as long as
until Israel had a clear, unequivocult path to a Palestinian state.

(12:50):
A Palestinian state he NBS is smart enough to know
would be a complete another of the disaster pH ise.
But what does he care. He just needs to appease
his domestic politics. He's not going to He's not going
to go out on a limb for Israel or for Trump.

Speaker 2 (13:06):
Trump's going on and the limb for him.

Speaker 3 (13:08):
The power of relationships the other way around, NBS has it.

Speaker 2 (13:12):
He's flooding the market with oil right now.

Speaker 3 (13:14):
Opic is to drive all prices down, which is what
Trump wants. Keep gas prices low. But yes, the Saudi
prince crown prince gains more respect from Trump than our
NATO allies. Then you know the prime ministers and presidents

(13:36):
of countries that have fought by side by side with
the Americans, actually countries that fought in nineteen ninety one
by side with the Americans to protect the Saudis. And
at the Saudis are the guns that get out a
groveling respect. I mean, there's something very sick about America

(13:57):
that allows itself to to be in this position. By
the way, the Saudis have promised promised to increase their
plan investment of seven six hundred billion in the United States,
of which not a dollar is being invested, yet too
close to the one trillion dollars.

Speaker 2 (14:18):
Trump was very happy.

Speaker 3 (14:20):
Remember this is a trillion, and in his a trillion
commitment is meaningless.

Speaker 2 (14:30):
I mean, what investments? Where's this investments? What are you
gonna buy? And it's like all these.

Speaker 3 (14:36):
Countries have made commitments to invest in the United States
and Trump just freaks out when they do that. He's
so happy, he's so thankful, and yet where's the money,
what has gone towards And when one of the astonishing
things that happened today as he was sitting with h

(15:00):
nbs uh and and taking questions from the audience, just
like he has with Zelensky and others, but of course
very differently because because because because ABS super friend very touchy,
somebody asked the question, very impolite question. He asked the
question about Jamal Kashogi, who MBS by all accounts, certainly

(15:25):
by American intelligence accounts, was responsible for the murdering of
Jamal Koshogi. He was drawn in, uh, you know, convinced
that come into the the Saudi Arabian embassy in Istanbul
in Turkey where he was then basically, I mean he

(15:49):
was murdered and then his body was cut into pieces
and I don't know what what did they do with it?
They shipped it out or whatever, right, and I mean
they looked really kept the guy up into pieces.

Speaker 2 (16:00):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (16:02):
Jamalica Shugi was a dissident from Saudi Arabia, a critic
of the Prince, the Crown Prince.

Speaker 2 (16:08):
And the the the King, who.

Speaker 3 (16:11):
Had left Saudi Arabia and worked at the time for
The Washington Post as a as a columnist and basically
conference Muhammed bin Saliman Bin Saliman ordered his execution. And
as a consequence, you know, as a consequence, you know,

(16:33):
he was during the Trump administrations. As a consequence, I
think they they wagged the finger at him, but nothing
really happened. Now, Biden when he came in, said, oh,
I don't like the Saudis.

Speaker 2 (16:43):
They killed journalists. We're against the Saudis.

Speaker 3 (16:46):
Uh and and he kind of, you know, had a
bad attitude to was the Saudis until he needed them
because he wanted the old prices to come down. And
then he went groveling to Saudi Arabia and and uh
and and he kissed the ring. Uh So anyway, uh
NBS was asked about Kashogio. Trump was asked and and.

Speaker 2 (17:06):
Uh Trump's response was, look, a lot of people didn't
like Koshogi. A lot of people didn't like him, and.

Speaker 3 (17:13):
It's it's kind of you know, it's kind of sad
what happened to but things happened. Things happen, and that
was it. NBS basically said, he wasn't responsible. He didn't
do you know, people who are responsible, they've taken they've
been taking care of they've they've they put them in
jail or whatever.

Speaker 2 (17:30):
But he's no he didn't do it, and Trump just
played along.

Speaker 3 (17:34):
And in spite of the fact that it's American intelligence,
American intelligence that claims that NBS ordered the killing of Kushogi.
You know, lots of countries killed the people. We shouldn't
get too excited about political assassination.

Speaker 1 (17:52):
Not.

Speaker 3 (17:52):
According to Trump, this goes back to the twenty fifteen
campaign where he said about Putin. When asked about Putin
killing journalists, he said, Eh, we kill people too, what's
the big deal? Hmm, what just happened? Could have ever happened?

(18:14):
While recording? All right, that didn't.

Speaker 2 (18:18):
Work, okay, but YouTube is working. All right, We'll have
to upload this later, all right.

Speaker 3 (18:24):
Yeah, anyway, there we are. There was some talk about
a defense pack that you know, the United States. I mean,
I don't think the United States needs Saudi help to
defend the United States. So the defense pack basically means
that the United States will defend the Saudis, and that

(18:45):
might be finalized and signed while NBS is in the
United States. Even that Trump is not going to require
as in the past, there was this demand, we'll give
you a defense pack if you joined the Ambama codes.
Sadi Rave is not budgeting we will not We will

(19:06):
not recognize Israel. We will not normalize relationship with Israel
until Israel guarantees a path to a Palestinian state, which
is you know, basically, yeah it is.

Speaker 2 (19:19):
Al should shoot themselves.

Speaker 3 (19:21):
In the in the forehead and then we'll recognize it.

Speaker 2 (19:26):
Yeah, wonderful, all right. I mean, this is fan Parsi
Trump style. Lots and lots and lots of love.

Speaker 3 (19:37):
For dictators, kings, authoritarians more broadly, lots and lots of
love for them. You know, we've now have a treaty
to defend Kattau against its enemies. We'll soon have a
treaty to defend Saudi Arabia against its enemies. What a

(19:58):
world in which I mean maybe Putin will come and
maybe we'll sign a treaty to defend Russia against those
pesky Ukrainians. Maybe we can get a treaty with China
to defend China against you know, if it attacks Taiwan,
if the Taiwan defends itself, will come and help them
defeat the Taiwanese, I.

Speaker 2 (20:18):
Mean, faceesus. But by much? Why do we have a
defense treaty with Saudi Arabia?

Speaker 3 (20:23):
Not a good country, not a real true ally of
the United States, not a friend does it share values,
shouldn't sell them at thirty five's, and we shouldn't give
them the latest greatest American military technology.

Speaker 2 (20:41):
And we should not.

Speaker 3 (20:43):
Rush to the defense as we did in nineteen ninety one,
which I think was a mistake.

Speaker 2 (20:50):
All right, reminded that if you're new to the show.

Speaker 3 (20:54):
And you're not a subscribe, but please subscribe, subscribe to
the show.

Speaker 2 (20:58):
That way you'll get announcements when we go live.

Speaker 3 (21:02):
All right, let's see, Yeah, Jeffrey Epstein, it just doesn't
go away. Jeffrey Epstein just doesn't go away. Today, the
House and the Senate both passed a legislation that authorizers
or commands I don't know how you want to phrase it,
the Justice Apartment to release all their files on Jeffrey Epstein.

(21:30):
And because we know this is without question the most
important issue of the day, it will determine the fates
and future of America, Republicans who resisted this for a
long time all basically came on board and voted for it.
Now that Trump said this is good, it's good to go.
So I think it passed the House with one member

(21:52):
opposing it. All Republicans, including the majority leader who to
speak of.

Speaker 2 (21:59):
The House, who resisted bringing it to the floor for months.
He also voted for it. I mean, it just shows
what a pathetic.

Speaker 3 (22:08):
Political party the Republicans have become. So, yeah, expects Epstein
files or not. Who knows what the next step is.
I don't think Trump would have given this the thumbs
up if you really thought there was going to be
a massive dump of real, comprehensive.

Speaker 2 (22:29):
Epstein files being disclosed.

Speaker 3 (22:32):
I mean, he's fought too hard for too long, a
too high a political cost to just.

Speaker 2 (22:40):
Want them all released suddenly.

Speaker 3 (22:43):
So Mark Epstein, who is Jeffrey's brother, and I don't
know if he knows anything, but he's saying, is a
quote from him, the reason they're going to be released,
The reason for the flip is that they're sanitizing these files.
He says, there's a facility in Winchester, Virginia where they're

(23:03):
scrubbing the files to take Republican names out. Now you
know the wild conspiracy theory. I don't know that there's
any proof of this or even any evidence of this,
but it's Trump, it's Cush Patel, it's Bondie.

Speaker 2 (23:26):
Would this surprise anybody.

Speaker 3 (23:31):
No, no, it wouldn't surprise anybody. So we'll see, we'll
see what happens. We'll see what get released, what's in
the release stuff. A lot of a lot will be redacted,
is my guess. But a lot of people are probably
worried tonight about what gets released, because if you're a Democrat,
for sure that'll get released for sure. Indeed, we've already

(23:54):
got our first casualty, and that is a guy actually
in some ways respect which is Larry Summers, who is
the former president of Harvard who basically had to resign
from Harvard because he said he he says some politically
incorrect things about women in science. Uh, somebody who actually

(24:19):
saw the inflation coming and and is a you know,
he's a neil Kinsian economist. He's not my favorite type
of economist, but you know, pretty sharp, pretty smart, pretty
smart guy. But it turns out that he is in
the files, and there's a whole thing in the fire
in in exchange that's already been released, in the emails

(24:39):
that have already been released, there's a whole thing about, uh,
some relationship he had with a a men mentee of his,
a young professor young female professor, not under age or
anything like that, but still as somebody who was who

(25:02):
was he mentored, also an economics professor. So he came
out today with the statement saying, I'm deeply ashamed of
my actions and recognize the pain that they have caused.

Speaker 2 (25:15):
He was married, by the way, at the time. I
think he still is.

Speaker 3 (25:19):
He said again, I take full responsibility from my misguided
decision to continue communicating with misster Epstein. It turned out
that Epstein was giving him relationship advice. And this is
up to days before Epstein was, you know, arrested for
the second time.

Speaker 2 (25:38):
So this is after he's already been convicted for solicitation
of a minor. This is after rumors spending, this is
after news stories are published, This is after everybody basically
knows what and who Jeffrey Epstein is.

Speaker 3 (25:55):
And Larry Summers has continuing a friendship there and he's
regular guest at his house and he's he's getting it
relationship advice, relationship advice, Somemer says, while continuing to fulfill
my teaching obligations, I will be stepping back from public

(26:15):
commitments as one part of my broader effort. Yeah, I
mean he's been a regular commentator on economic and political
issues on the center left, and he's also, you know,
a member of the chat Chipet board. He's also a
member of the Center for Mega Progress, which is a
liberal think tank from which he has a resience. So

(26:40):
he's no longer affiliated with that organization. So people are
cleaning house, he's cleaning house house. So it is I
think what's going to happen. One thing we definitely know.

Speaker 2 (26:53):
Is that a lot of.

Speaker 3 (26:57):
Stuff is going to come out. A lot of stuff
is going to come out about Democrats. Whether anything comes
out about Republicans is aught to tell because it might
be withheld, it might be held back, it might be redacted,
it might who knows. But I think a lot of
a lot of ugly stuff.

Speaker 2 (27:17):
Is going to come out about about leftists.

Speaker 3 (27:22):
You know, people like Reed Hoffman, who is the founder
of LinkedIn, and certain people may be a JP Morgan
Chase no suggesting JPU Diamond, but but other people lower
down in JP Morgan Chase, other Democrats, certainly the Clintons
and other Democrats.

Speaker 2 (27:42):
Around will all.

Speaker 3 (27:46):
I think we'll all be we'll all learn a lot
more about them and the relationship with you Epstein. I'm
sure you all sitting at the edge of your seat
because you can't wait to find out.

Speaker 2 (27:57):
What's in those files.

Speaker 3 (28:00):
The Trump stuff might not come out that quickly. I
doubt Prince Andrew's gonna go to jail. I mean, he
has been taking his prince He's not prince anymore, He's
just Andrew. So the princey nest has been taken away,
the prince princy, prince title be taking away. He is
had to move, He's had to leave his castle and
move to to just a regular house. His I think

(28:22):
his his budget has been cut. So so yes, he's
he's been taken down to the size.

Speaker 2 (28:31):
Uh. So we will see, we will see. Uh it's.

Speaker 3 (28:38):
It's gonna be interesting, just because of the way Trump
flipped and and all of that, and just because remember
Larry Summers. I just would remind everybody who was also
Treasury secretary under Bill Clinton. I think it was Treasury
secretary under Bill Clinton. So so, but you know, somebody

(29:01):
high up there, high up there. There are other people
who have been mentioned, so we will see.

Speaker 2 (29:08):
Uh. From across the various.

Speaker 3 (29:13):
Political spectrum, people who engage with Jeffrey Epstein for a
while uh.

Speaker 2 (29:19):
And but even Nom Chomsky, that'd be interesting.

Speaker 3 (29:29):
Uh So, yeah, a lot of names, a lot of names,
all right, something positive for a change, and I mean
really positive and interesting and yeah, encouraging and stuff.

Speaker 2 (29:47):
So, as you know, one of the priorities of the.

Speaker 4 (29:51):
FTC, the the the the Federal Trade in Communication uh
whatever agency, one of the priorities of the FTC, which
which is responsible for what is it responsible for mergers,
approval of mergers, and the ensuing for anti trust so it,

(30:15):
together with the Justice Depardment, goes after So this is
I'm sorry, this is the Federal.

Speaker 2 (30:19):
Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission.

Speaker 3 (30:24):
Anyway, they since the first Trump administration and then doubling
up on that during Biden, they have been going after.

Speaker 2 (30:37):
They've been going after.

Speaker 3 (30:39):
Tech, big tech, big tech, the devil, the Devil incarnade,
which is big tech.

Speaker 2 (30:45):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (30:45):
And they've been going after big tech and uh they've
been doing this, uh.

Speaker 2 (30:52):
Since the first Trump administration.

Speaker 3 (30:53):
And you know, we know the Google case, the Google
case basically the FDC one, and Google was viewed as
a monopoly, but then the remedy was viewed by the
marketers pretty minor, but it was still a remedy, and
it was still bad, and it was still this idea
that Google is Google is a is a monopoly. Well,

(31:15):
today the judge ruled in another case, there are a
number of them going through the courts. A judge ruled
today in a federal court in the US districts of
the District of Columbia in DC.

Speaker 2 (31:30):
In an eighty nine page ruling, he ruled shockingly.

Speaker 3 (31:37):
That Meta, the parent of Facebook, did not create a
monopoly in social networking through the acquisition, through that acquisition
of What's.

Speaker 2 (31:49):
Up and Instagram.

Speaker 3 (31:51):
Indeed, according to him, you know, rivals like TikTok and
YouTube continue to expand, it to grow and the actual
challenge Meta throughout this period.

Speaker 2 (32:02):
And therefore, he would it was not a monopoly. Uh.

Speaker 3 (32:07):
And this is great, I mean, finally, a judge was
some connection to reality.

Speaker 2 (32:13):
Of course, the whole premise of anti trust.

Speaker 3 (32:15):
As you know, I think, is a model wrong both
morally and economically. It's an it's an ignorant standard. It's
a it's a standard completely driven by politics and by
a desire to knock down the successful and to penalize success.
But it is it is good to see that at

(32:35):
least Meta did not lose this one. I don't think
this has anything to do with Zuckerberg being nice to Trump.
This is an independent judge. I don't think this judge
is friends with Donald Trump. Uh and and I don't
think this is indeed, I think this is one of
the j is got in trouble with Donald Trump.

Speaker 2 (32:53):
This is Judge James E. Bosberg.

Speaker 3 (32:57):
And uh yeah, I mean he said the FDC he
continues to insist that matter competes with the same old
rivals it has for the last decade, that the company
holds a monopoly among that small set, and that it
maintained that monopoly through anti competitive acquisitions.

Speaker 2 (33:13):
He then said that.

Speaker 3 (33:14):
The agency needed to prove that argument, and the conclusion
is the court's verdict today determines that the FDC has
not done so. So applause, she is this is good news.
You know again, I wish, I wish I were in
most cases like this.

Speaker 2 (33:35):
I wish the whole issue. I mean.

Speaker 3 (33:36):
Iman was once asked what would it be her first
priority if she became like president of something, you know,
political priority. What would you argue for? What would she
encourage people to do? And she said, get rid of
the anti just laws, and I agree with him. Anti
just is the first thing that should go into the
dustbin of history, the dust been of bad laws, bad regulations,

(33:58):
destructive to freedom. So antitrust, I mean, this is I mean,
as we know, Matta is super ambitious. They're pouring hundreds
of millions of dollars I think billions of.

Speaker 2 (34:14):
Dollars into AI. They are.

Speaker 3 (34:24):
That's bire Okay, they are very very Oops. I don't
want that to happen. Something closed, something's going on with
the computer. I'm not exactly what it is.

Speaker 2 (34:35):
Anyway, that is there.

Speaker 3 (34:38):
They are now free to grow and feed to invest
and feed to expand they still lossuit against Amazon. Uh,
they still lost suit against Apple.

Speaker 2 (34:49):
So let's hope that these lawsuits will also fail.

Speaker 3 (34:57):
They lawsuit against Amazon, it's probably gonna go to try
in twenty twenty seven. Not clear when the lawsuit against
Apple actually.

Speaker 2 (35:06):
Goes to trial. So yeah, all right, cool, some good
news is good, all right, so we all know. Mmdani
has suggested as a big part of his proposals for

(35:32):
reducing the cost of living in New York City, making
New York City great again. Oh no, I mean a
photobill again.

Speaker 3 (35:39):
Is suggesting a rent control, and rent control, as I
think you all know, is one of those things that
economists pretty much across the board, left right center, like tariffs,
all agree, is a really really bad idea.

Speaker 2 (35:55):
That it doesn't lower the cost.

Speaker 3 (35:59):
Cost of Reynolds, that it destroys the rental market, that
actually increases the cost and reduces supply. It's just a
really bad idea and should shouldn't be embraced.

Speaker 2 (36:13):
Just like they all know. Tab's a bad idea.

Speaker 3 (36:16):
Doesn't stop Trump from doing tabists, and it's not something
mum Donnie from advocating for price controls like many others. Well,
this has kind of been almost consensus of my economist
and it's just taking for granted.

Speaker 2 (36:30):
Yeah, economists, this is what they believe.

Speaker 3 (36:32):
There was a yesterday, well two days ago on Sunday,
I guess Sunday, November sixteenth, there was an O bad
a guest essay in the New York Times by a
prominent economist, indeed by somebody who is the director of

(36:52):
the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research. And you know
this is a prestigious place. John Cochrane is one of
the economists at the Stanford Institute of economic policy research.
This is, you know, people affiliate with Hoover Institute, which

(37:14):
is a basting of free markets.

Speaker 2 (37:15):
A part of this institute.

Speaker 3 (37:18):
The director of this institute, Neil Mahoney, is a well
known respected economists. He wrote this up ad with Barat Ramamuti.
I think maybe I'm pronouncing that wrong. And the headline
of this editorial was economic economists hate this idea. It

(37:40):
could be a way out of the affordability crisis. And
it basically argues it basically argues for rent control and
price control and price control on things like utilities, because
we know you paid way too much money on other

(38:00):
and if we only had a price control and electricity
that problem would go away. So public in the New
York Times, and of course it's a prominent economist, a
famous guy. But more importantly, we're talking about an article
published reputating the entire field of economics by John Cochrane's boss.

Speaker 2 (38:24):
Now, I know, I don't know how many of you
know John Cochran.

Speaker 3 (38:26):
I've mentioned him often on the show over the years,
but John Cockran is one of the best economists out there.

Speaker 2 (38:32):
I like John Cochrane a lot. His writing is clear.

Speaker 3 (38:36):
Uh often passionate, but economic logic. He uses economic logic.
He also can do really really really complex.

Speaker 2 (38:47):
Math, which I admire even if you can't follow.

Speaker 3 (38:51):
But he he is is a really good economist. He
is one of the best living economists out there. And
somebody that I read regularly and somebody who I've sent
you to his blogs many times. The blog it's called
Grumpy Economist. And anyway, this morning he was grumpy or

(39:12):
whenever he wrote this. He wrote this the same day
he wrote this, that's on Sunday as well, So he
was grumpy. He was grumpy because his boss had just
written something that he really really really really.

Speaker 2 (39:24):
Disagreed with.

Speaker 3 (39:27):
And he has to be nice, and the article suddenly
starts out nice, but he lays into them.

Speaker 2 (39:35):
He really lays into him.

Speaker 3 (39:37):
So if you're interested in the issue of price controls,
if your issue, interested in rent controls, if you issue,
if you're interested in kind of the debates and discussions
around economic policy in the world in which we live,
what happened, something's gone, something was weird, it's happening once,

(40:00):
then I encould you actually to read John Cockin's es
say it's on his it's on his substack.

Speaker 2 (40:06):
On his Uh. Oh god, this is all screwed up. Uh.
Computers just behaving weird.

Speaker 3 (40:19):
And I don't know if this has to do with
the big outage that happened this morning. Its clouds something. Uh,
but the computer is acting weird. So give me just
a second to fix this particular thing. Uh and uh
and we'll be right back with you.

Speaker 2 (40:37):
A copy paste this paste?

Speaker 3 (40:42):
Okay, yes, yes, continue, continue and it's working in there
we go all rights. Continue enough times and things start
working all right. But something happened here. Wait a minute,

(41:06):
I lost some of your super check questions. That's not good,
not good. I'm sorry, give me, give me a second,
give me a second. While that is ridiculous. That is ridiculous. Uh,

(41:27):
all right, so I lost all of these.

Speaker 2 (41:33):
I'm gonna just copy paste them so.

Speaker 3 (41:36):
I'm sure I have a record of them so I
can answer all of them.

Speaker 2 (41:44):
Oh God, come on, give it a break. Let's see. Well,
let me do that. Yeah, we got that all right anyway,

(42:05):
So I encourage you to go read it.

Speaker 3 (42:07):
It's at the gumpe economist dot com. I generally encourage
you to uh read and follow h John Cochrane. I
want to read you I'll read you a few passages
out of it because I think it's it's just worth
doing given given how how.

Speaker 2 (42:25):
Good it is.

Speaker 3 (42:26):
And uh, I think it's important this is that this
case be made.

Speaker 2 (42:31):
Uh and uh.

Speaker 3 (42:34):
John makes it. It's of course, as we know the
mall cases, the is the fundamental one. That is, that
is what.

Speaker 2 (42:41):
Ultimately gets people.

Speaker 3 (42:43):
To vote for for price controls and for this is
not really the economics of it, but because as I said, nobody,
I mean, this is the thing about these economic economics
professors who give credibility to theory and ideas that everybody
knows a horrible you know, and the people you know,

(43:06):
Trump administration economics doing that for for Trump.

Speaker 2 (43:11):
And now we've got somebody doing it for Mamdani who
again should should very much know better.

Speaker 3 (43:18):
That is, it's just it really is just uh yeah,
it's just how it's just upsetting. So it's good to
see somebody like like you know, John just showing that
it is a BS and it is wrong, and that

(43:41):
economists are still willing to defend the principles behind their
their profession in spite of the fact that it's their
boss writing the nonsense, right which makes it you know
a little bit more difficult when it's your boss writing
the bad stuff.

Speaker 2 (43:58):
All right, one last copy paste.

Speaker 3 (44:00):
And I am done, and we can we can then
revert back to to me being pretty focused on you guys.

Speaker 2 (44:11):
Okay, done it? All right?

Speaker 3 (44:12):
Uh to the tom So the numbers I'll say, in
terms of funds raised a little bit off again. It
is doing this to my email. And I have no
idea why in enough space in your home folder? Oh

(44:36):
I see, all right, weird. We're just going to leave
it as it is and we're going to see what happens.
Maybe other stuff with collapse because for some reason my
computer now doesn't have any space on it.

Speaker 2 (44:52):
I don't know what we added.

Speaker 3 (44:54):
Let me just do something. Let me delete something I
know that I can delete. Say about all those guys,
you know, just bear with me for a bear with
me for a minute. Then let's do let's do this.

(45:19):
I'm gonna just delete a bunch of stuff that will
increase the space on the computer so the computer can breathe.
Breathing is good for a computer, and we want that
to happen. And then find a empty trash, empty trash

(45:41):
and that will help a little bit, all right, All right,
So it's you Don Cockran, you know, so he says,
you know, what are they saying. They're saying that, you know,
shop the rising rents and until the builds where I
have ac unfamily budgets. And of course what John Cogran

(46:01):
is saying is that's a market signal.

Speaker 2 (46:04):
That maybe they should move. Now.

Speaker 3 (46:07):
I like that line of argument. I like the idea
that people should actually move. I say this all the time, right,
I mean mobility and being able and willing to you know,
to move in order to find job, to move in
order to get cheaper real estate. I mean, if New
York is too expensive for you, then it's too expensive
for you, then you shouldn't live in New York. So

(46:36):
if the families don't follow the screaming market signal to move,
but the money comes from somewhere, he writes, rent control
and energy price caps wreck havoc on landlords and electricitic
electric utility budgets. The money must come from somewhere, and

(46:58):
in control is the same a tax on landlords used
to subsidize the rents of current tenants. You may, you know,
you may picture a giant corporation, but many landlords of
sympathetic individuals who worked hard and saved and used apartment
to fund their retirement. Corporations are owned by four one
k plans of sympathetic workers too, But economists should know

(47:21):
better than to teget your heartstrings for who should get
resources forcibly taken from whom.

Speaker 2 (47:30):
Force forcibly. If you ask what the optional way to
tax people in general in order to lower housing costs
for politically attractive group current lieutenants, the screaming answer is not,
let's stack the people who currently own the building.

Speaker 3 (47:45):
Sure, tax the rich. If you want to go down
this route, it's a lot more efficient. Tax all the rich.
If you ask what the optional way to help families
who just got stuck with higher rents, the screaming answer
is send them a check, but then let them move
to an apartment that fits their needs.

Speaker 2 (48:08):
In other words, move, That's the real answer.

Speaker 3 (48:13):
A rent control only makes rental affordable for the lucky recipients.
It does not make rental housing more affordable for other people.
It does not increase the number of people who have housing. Indeed,
it reduces that number. It just changes who gets it.
It does not even make housing more affordable on average

(48:33):
for those who want it. Must now pay with time
and inconvenience, or pay by foregoing the great opportunities that
moving to the city provided.

Speaker 2 (48:43):
The biggest losers of in control.

Speaker 3 (48:45):
Are the young, the mobile, the ambitious, immigrants, and people
without a lot of cash. If you want to move
from Fresno to take a job in San Francisco and
move up, and you don't have millions lying around to buy,
you need rentals.

Speaker 2 (49:03):
Rent control means they're not available.

Speaker 3 (49:10):
There is no blob of government money or policy that
can make something affordable for one without making something else
less affordable for another.

Speaker 2 (49:30):
He goes on to write, and I think this is
really good everything.

Speaker 3 (49:33):
Everyone is focused on building, building more houses, but supply
is so much more than building. There is trenders supply
in using more efficiently what we have now. Most cities
have laws against renting parts of a single family home
or sharing larger homes. Think how many spare bedrooms are
empty every night. There is plenty of housing supply in

(49:56):
the US, it's just not in places where people want
to move. Others moving out is supplying and greatly impeded.
Older people stay in two big houses and apartments in
locations close to work and school, opportunities that young families desire,
but the older people no longer need. Why do they

(50:18):
stay then, Because if they sell, their tax on capital gains,
even just due to inflation, and they also lose the
property tax exemptions and of course rent control protection.

Speaker 2 (50:32):
If they happen to be renting.

Speaker 3 (50:34):
Each older person who cashes in, downsizes, or moves the
neighborhood more suited to them supplies a house or apartment.
The non portable fixed rate thirty year mortgage, an invention
of our federal housing subsidy regime, leads people to stay
where they are where they are, rather than move to

(50:55):
where they want to go and free up a scarce house.

Speaker 2 (50:58):
Or condo for someone else.

Speaker 3 (51:01):
Strong Apparently, consumer protection in quotes laws in rental contracts
dry up the supply, especially to the marginalized. If you
can't kick people out, you're much more careful who you
let in. This is the same principle as if you
can't fire people, you're not going to hire them. Limits
on short term rentals limit rentals, remove rent controls permanently,

(51:25):
and house houses and condos can be rented. Many houses
and apartments need rehab, not new construction, which which can
happen very quickly once owners the rehab know that they
will not be robbed of their investment. Even affordable housing
leads people to stay where they are rather than move

(51:47):
to better opportunities for them and free up an apartment.

Speaker 2 (51:50):
For someone else.

Speaker 3 (51:51):
Affordable housing in quotation marks because it's rationed with long
waiting lists. When Javia Mulay ended control in Buenos Iris,
rent went down instantly, nothing had to get built.

Speaker 2 (52:07):
It can happen in Manhattan. Nothing rings more true.

Speaker 3 (52:14):
Of our government than restrict supply, subsidize demand, and watch
prices skyrocket. Universities in healthcare oppost to children. Along with
housing and energy, landlords and utility companies are not, in
fact making a killing here. Land owners benefit energy faces.

(52:35):
Landowners benefit energy faces rising costs like anything else. AI
not Corporate apartment companies, electric utilities, and old companies are
the hot stocks of the moment. So, I mean, this
goes on and on and on. It's really good, really good.

(52:57):
So I encourage you to read. I mean a few
lapses here and there in uh, you know what I
would consider collectivistic writing, but it's probably you know, he's
part of the culture.

Speaker 2 (53:07):
There's it's it's hard to get away from that.

Speaker 3 (53:10):
But but but here it is, you know, this is
this is the kind of stuff that needs to be supported.
This uh really going afterwards after these people? By I mean,
if if if all economists wrote this, if all of
them chimed in, if all of them attacked this paper,

(53:32):
if all of them said that the financial questions was
not caused by capitalism, if all of them wrote papers
right now about rent control and why it's damaging, is
why it's harmful, and why it's wrong, then maybe.

Speaker 2 (53:41):
We wouldn't get it.

Speaker 3 (53:43):
The challenge is that the good stays way too silent,
way too silence.

Speaker 2 (53:59):
Uh.

Speaker 3 (54:02):
You know, he says, you know, the authors say there
in control will only be temporary, and he writes many
enterprise controls in the last seventeen hundred years, seventeen hundred
years and likely more on this earth have promised to
be temporary, targeted and combined with structural reforms. I cannot
think of a single one that ever has done. So,

(54:24):
if you want Mumdani to succeed politically, you will do
a lot better than to advise him against self delusion
and not to paner to his ill informed instincts. A
last thought, Mamdani, if he does follow through in his policies, well, indeed,

(54:47):
make Manhattan much more affordable, chase away the wealthy people,
all the businesses and business owners and apartments will be cheap.
Detroit is affordable too. Careful what you wish for, you
just might get it. So congratulations John Cochran, a good article.

(55:09):
We need more more of this with the kind of
mal indignation, kind of Mael indignation that he exhibits, kind
of the the pissed off attitude, the this is this
is just this is just garbage, This is wrong. How
can anybody think this kind of attitude? It's exactly what
we need in our culture. The left kind of has it,

(55:31):
but we don't see it from the female outside. And
uh yeah, it's good to see John exhibit, you know, basically.

Speaker 2 (55:44):
Express it that way. It's great, all right. I think
I think, yeah, I think we're good. Let me just
do this. I think the email will network, right, So yeah,
go read John Cochran if you're interested in have you
Melay and the rent control? He did that. There was

(56:07):
a bunch of articles about that around early in the year,
around March, so you can find that here's another part
of the affordability thing. Right.

Speaker 3 (56:19):
So another thing that Mam Doni has promised us is
when Donnia has promised New Yorkers that.

Speaker 2 (56:24):
He will he will introduce.

Speaker 3 (56:28):
Government run grocery stores. We know how government run anything,
how good it is. So he's going to introduce government
run grocery stores because government run grocery stores are going
to lower costs. And people make fun of it and
think that's funny and ridiculous. But then you know, Mam
Donnie has done his homework and he knows a little
bit about the stuff, so he says, you know, so

(56:51):
the reality is that his proposal, if you read it,
his grocery stores include real supply chain management, large volume purchasing,
vitally vertical integration into warehousing. I mean, yeah, this is
are you inn a business? This is how people run businesses.

(57:11):
This is actually one a particular company I can think of.
Can you you guys think of a particular company that
runs its grocery business like this? You know, supply chain
management really really good, in supply change managment, excellent, world
class large volume purchasing, they created it, and votergo integration
into warehousing.

Speaker 2 (57:30):
They're there.

Speaker 3 (57:31):
They're the best in the world at it. Who who
who actually runs their business that way? Who actually does that?

Speaker 1 (57:36):
Oh?

Speaker 3 (57:37):
Yeah, it's a small company called Walmart. So why isn't
Walmont in New York? Why a grocery price is.

Speaker 2 (57:46):
So high and Walmart not in New York? Hmm? Anybody
know why Walmont is not in New York Because it's
banned from New York. I mean, it's banned from New York.

Speaker 3 (58:04):
So there's a reason why the cost of living is
high in New York because regulations kill the low cost providers.

Speaker 2 (58:13):
I mean.

Speaker 3 (58:14):
You can go back to a new story in New
York Times from Matt six, twenty thirteen, a respite in
efforts by Walmart in New York. Basically after losing a
battle in September to open its first store in New
York City, Walmart Stores appears to have scaled back its
efforts to gain a foothold in the nation's largest city.

Speaker 2 (58:34):
The company is.

Speaker 3 (58:35):
Pulled back after it's pushed to open a store in
the East New York section of Brooklyn fell through, and
after it terminated its contracts with five lobbyist consultants it
had hired to help win approval for that project. So
I mean, let's have New York City run stores.

Speaker 2 (58:55):
Why not?

Speaker 3 (58:55):
I mean, let's give them, Donnie, let's give them the opportunity.

Speaker 2 (59:01):
But let's also let Walmart in and let's see who
can create better vertical integration and superior supply chain management
and volume purchasing. I mean, let's go, let's compete. But no,
we know that's impossible.

Speaker 3 (59:20):
And to justify the whole, I'm gonna I'm gonna build
my own, my own grocery store. They're gonna ban more
grocery stoes, not introduce more. They're gonna reduce competition, not
increased competition. Let's change this to that and then redo it. Right,
that makes more sense.

Speaker 2 (59:39):
All right?

Speaker 3 (59:39):
Reminded I to ask questions, super check questions. So we
have a second half of the show. It's coming up soon.

Speaker 1 (59:44):
All right.

Speaker 2 (59:45):
Uh, quick update on Heritage. Uh.

Speaker 3 (59:49):
One of Heritage's board members a very prominent professor from Princeton,
Robbie George, one.

Speaker 2 (59:57):
Of the I don't know.

Speaker 3 (59:58):
I mean, I I look, I'm not big in conservative stuff,
and I'm not a big fan of conservatives generally, but
Robbie George is like the academic conservative. I mean, he's
he's a big shot. He is like the definition of
what it means to be a conservative. Well, Robbie George
has left Heritage Board. More people are leaving. We talked

(01:00:22):
about Adam Ossoff resigning. I've seen other people now resigning
and leaving. And you know, the board itself, we've got
one of its most prominent members, Robbie George, leaving.

Speaker 2 (01:00:34):
And and and of.

Speaker 3 (01:00:35):
Course kind of the post liberals are salibating this because
Robbie George is an enemy of post liberals. He's kind
of an old line Conservative. And yep, I mean it's
it's a it's a real changing of the god, I
think within kind of the conservative movement as as the
the kind of older you know, most substantive people are escaping.

(01:01:02):
I think escaping is the right wood from from the
anti Semitism and the uh, the you know, crazy ideas,
really insane ideas of so many people within this, within this,
within the new conservative movement that yeah, they're running like

(01:01:25):
they know the ship is sinking, they know it's kind
of over and they don't want to be there and
they don't want to be a part of it. They
don't want they want they they're canceling themselves. They're canceling
themselves out of association with these people.

Speaker 2 (01:01:38):
Good for them, it's the right thing to do. And uh,
it's it's good to see that even kind of conservatives
are doing and not just like Adam who's an objectivist.
All right, I think that's all I had to say
about heritage. Oh yeah, Japan. Lots to say about Japan.

(01:01:58):
Let me just let me just see. We'll just run
through a bunch of different little items about Japan. But
Japan just popped into the news today. A few things.
One is, Japanese economy is doing very badly.

Speaker 3 (01:02:11):
It turns out that Japan is in a recession and
the cause of that recession is blamed on Trump's tariffs.
And I like what Richard Hanania has to say about this.
He writes, we contracted the economy of one of our
closest allies in the world for three quarters of a century,

(01:02:33):
and the main check on China.

Speaker 2 (01:02:35):
We did it. Don't let anyone ever tell you America
can't win.

Speaker 3 (01:02:41):
See, our tariffs are having not only hopable impact on Americans,
they were also having a real impact on our allies,
on our friends, on countries that a bulwark against our
so called enemy China, and indeed, Japan is now right

(01:03:02):
now in quite a.

Speaker 2 (01:03:06):
Quite a fight with China.

Speaker 3 (01:03:11):
Japanese new Prime Minister, the margat Thatcher, you know Japan
they call her right the Iron Lady. She basically said
something like, you know, if China invades Taiwan, we might
have to intervene on Taiwan side.

Speaker 2 (01:03:25):
We might have to defend Taiwan. I mean, this made
Beijing super angry, and they have told people, They told
the Chinese people not to go travel to Japan.

Speaker 3 (01:03:39):
Five hundred thousand tickets from Chinese tourists have been canceled.
Trade Japan and China I think, I think China's the
biggest trade partner for JAPANO. They're both big trade partners
with one another. They are right, they are so trade

(01:04:00):
is being damaged right now. This is after she had
recently met with Xi Jimping, the President of China, where
they tried to improve relations, and she stepped on it.
And now it's my choice now. She stepped on it
by saying something that true and just and right.

Speaker 2 (01:04:20):
But yeah, I mean.

Speaker 3 (01:04:26):
It's a lot of Chinese. Chinese are boycotting in Japan,
and this could have a real impact on Japan. Chinese
airplanes have breached Japanese airspace, some ships breached the airspace.
There's a lot of tension. It's not going to evolve
into anything substantive, substantial. I think Japan will probably retreat

(01:04:50):
in some way or say something that is moderate the
whole thing, and they'll get back together and they'll play kumbaya.

Speaker 2 (01:04:57):
But this is the country that we're peanut with the.

Speaker 3 (01:05:01):
With the tariffs, this is the country that's going through
hally economic times.

Speaker 2 (01:05:07):
But it's also.

Speaker 3 (01:05:09):
Disappointing because this uh, this new prime minister, takai Ichi Takaichi,
the first female prime minister in Japanese history. UH and
and somebody you know compared to Marga Thatcher is not
Marga Thatcher.

Speaker 2 (01:05:26):
Her solution to.

Speaker 3 (01:05:29):
Japan's comment economic plight is more government spending. She is
going to be proposing, i think next week, a massive
stimulus bill to stimulate the Japanese economy, even though Japan
has gone through many, many, many of these stimulus bills
and they never seem to really work. They don't work
because stimulus bills don't work. She is she's very much

(01:05:53):
a Kinesian in that sense. She's very much big government.
The bond market in Japan is going you know, or
nuts about this because Japan has what two and fifty
four percent GDP debt to GDP st have a huge
amount of debt, it's not clear, and they're running a deficit.
It's not clear how they can do the stimulus package

(01:06:14):
without blowing up debt.

Speaker 2 (01:06:16):
So interestates are going up.

Speaker 3 (01:06:18):
So basically they're telling the goverment, if you want to
sell us more debt to finance the stimulus, you're gonna
have to pass a lot of interest to compensate for
the popossibility that you will never be able to pay
this back. So Japan actually has fifty year bonds. The
interestate there has gone up a lot, but so have
their thirty and forty and year.

Speaker 2 (01:06:39):
Bonds that have all gone up in price, which is
going to make it more difficult for Japan because if
it if it borrows money at very high interest rates,
then it has to pay that interest out of its budgets,
just like the.

Speaker 3 (01:06:53):
United States, and that will only increase its deficits, increase
its debt.

Speaker 2 (01:07:00):
Is a real challenge, real challenge.

Speaker 3 (01:07:04):
The Japanese government faces, and of course this is all
because they want to spend more money, which is I mean,
you could fix the Japanese economy pretty quickly and pretty
easily if you're willing to do it, But nobody's actually
willing to do it, and nobody holds the ideas that
are necessary in order to do it. And finally, I
saw this as a headline in Bloomberg Japan. Stakaichi says

(01:07:28):
companies corporations should focus focus too much on shareholders. They
should stop making money, and she wants to pass a
law that requires them to focus more on employees. So
part of the slowdown is too many companies are laying
off too many employees and want to raise employee wages.
We want to force companies to raise employees wages and

(01:07:51):
thus raise the.

Speaker 2 (01:07:53):
Economy, improve the economy.

Speaker 3 (01:07:55):
I mean this is I mean John Cochran should write
an essay and why this is, I don't know what's
term stupid economics, really really bad economics, really really really
bad economics. So they have it, really really really bad
economics dominating the day.

Speaker 2 (01:08:14):
Pretty much everywhere unfortunately.

Speaker 3 (01:08:17):
And let's see, I need to make one more change
here so I can actually see this right there, we go,
all right, we are going to move to your super
check questions, and.

Speaker 2 (01:08:34):
You can continue to ask questions. There's plenty of times
continue to ask questions.

Speaker 3 (01:08:38):
In particular, I'll encourage you to ask, you know, questions
at the twenty dollars level so we can chip away
at our goal. It's going to be difficult to tip
away the goal with one or two dollar questions, but
they're appreciated, but just more difficult. We are probably short

(01:09:01):
of our first hour goal, even though we've passed our
first hour goal and was now in our second hour.

Speaker 2 (01:09:05):
So please consider helping us get to the second hour goal.
It's five hundred dollars, so we're short about three hundred.

Speaker 3 (01:09:11):
Dollars to get there, so please consider that. And you
can do that with stickers. You don't have to ask
a question. I know a lot of you don't have
questions or don't want to ask questions. You're just shy.
So you can use a sticker and with a sticker,
you don't ask, you don't have to ask a question.
And you can do a sticker for a couple of bucks.
You can do a stick of full you know, a

(01:09:33):
variety of different amounts of money. We have already got
some stickers from like Gael, Thank you, Gail, and Stephen Harper,
thank you. And John Skogins, thank you, you know. And
they did five dollars, ten dollars and some you know,
usually my stickers, you know, I get many of them
are one, two, three dollars, all right, so trade value

(01:09:56):
for value bringing the stickers. There's Lincoln just did five dollars,
so you know most of you can do. Lincoln's a student,
so I'm sure most of you can do five.

Speaker 2 (01:10:05):
Dollars as well. A few five dollars and we get
to our goal. It wouldn't take that long, all right.

Speaker 3 (01:10:12):
So I get a question by email and a super
chat contribution via Pepal, which is an option for you guys.
So I'll start with that because it was also I
think like one hundred dollars or seventy five dollars.

Speaker 2 (01:10:27):
Or something like that was significant amount. So I'll start
with that question, and then I'll take the questions that
you have asked today, So feel free to jump in
with more questions.

Speaker 3 (01:10:41):
While I'm answering this question, he wants to pose a hypothetical.
I don't particularly like hypotheticals, but let's go with it.
This is hypothetical. This is Joe. Joe lives in eighteen
o two in Jackson, Mississippi. He is twenty years old.
He's just inhabited a cotton plantation. Now he believes slavery

(01:11:03):
is wrong, and he teaches slaves humanly. At the age
of forty, he discovers objectivism and becomes an ardence supporter
and promoter. Now it's a little challenging, given the nine
rand wasn't even a glimmer in anybody's hope. She hadn't
been born yet. But okay, we're gonna roll with the hypothetical. Right,
what should Joe do? It's now eighteen twenty two, free

(01:11:30):
as slaves and sell his plantation, donate a small amount
amount to objectivest movement, and he used the rest of
his money to live a dull life since going cotton
is the only thing he knows.

Speaker 2 (01:11:42):
Two, keep the plantation free the.

Speaker 3 (01:11:45):
Slaves, hire cotton workers, and try to grow his business
against all odds. Three, keep the plantation and the slaves
and use the large portions of the annual of his
annually generated wealth to fight slavery and promote objectivism, and
sleep well at night by rationalizing that they njustifies the means.

Speaker 2 (01:12:11):
Four, same as three, but he.

Speaker 3 (01:12:13):
Never gets a good night's sleep since he knows that
slavery is a horrible institution and owning slaves is an
absolute evil.

Speaker 2 (01:12:20):
Thanks Joe, all right, So what should Joe do now?

Speaker 3 (01:12:27):
In my view, he's only got two options here, that
is either one or two. That is, you cannot own slaves.
Owning slaves is just unacceptable. There's no excuse for it.
Certainly once you discover objectivism, as he has in eighteen
twenty two.

Speaker 2 (01:12:44):
He can't own slaves. It makes him a monster. Owning
slave is monstrous, particularly.

Speaker 3 (01:12:52):
You know, when it's optional, particularly when it's the slave,
particularly when you're not you know. I think I think
all the funding fathers should have released their slaves. It's
sad that they didn't. It's horrible that they didn't. They
all had their rationalizations, but they should have. So he
should free the slaves. And then the only question is

(01:13:14):
should he also sell the plantation and you know, live
a dull life as he says, we'll get to there
in a second, or hire cotton workers and try to
go his business against odds.

Speaker 2 (01:13:27):
I'd say, you know, either one of those options. But
I don't agree with the evaluation of them, like he's
made good money.

Speaker 3 (01:13:35):
Supposedly, according to this, he's made good money. He's an
auden support.

Speaker 2 (01:13:39):
Of objectivism, so he's giving money away.

Speaker 3 (01:13:41):
He's got money, you know, why is cotton only thing
he knows? He's only forty, many, many, many people have
reinvented themselves at the age of forty. Why can't he
become an entrepreneur. Why can't use the money from selling

(01:14:02):
the plantation to buy a factory, invest in a railroad,
build a railroad, build a steam engine. I don't know,
there are a million things he could do. The idea
that you know, he's going to live a dull life
since going cotton is the only thing he knows. Well,
there's no such thing as the only thing you know,

(01:14:24):
I mean, particularly if you like objectivism, know something new,
reinvent yourself. I mean, it's such a passive attitude. It's
a you know, there's so many things. I mean, go
travel the world, see the world, come back with ideas
and what kind of business you can start. You've got money,

(01:14:46):
you've got time, do something interesting with it. Go get
a PhD at a university, uh and become an abolitionist.

Speaker 2 (01:14:53):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:14:53):
But the idea that you're going to live a dull
life because the only thing you know is growing cotton
is such an awful, horrible perspective on human life. There's
always more to know, there's always more things you could do.

(01:15:15):
And even if he wants to stay in the cotton industry,
the idea that going to business against all odds, I'm
not sure of that at all. Like, cotton workers are
more incentivized to work for you because you're actually paying them.
You know, you might even hire some of your form
of slaves, pay them a good wage, and now they're
much more motivated. They're going to be, you know, significantly

(01:15:38):
more productive than they used to be a slaves. Maybe
you can even think about automation and bring in machines
to help. I mean, the cotton mills were invested around
this period, maybe a little after, I think around this period,
So bring in machinery. You know, again, as an objectivist,

(01:15:59):
you always want to grow. Oh, you always want to challenge,
You always want to figure out new things.

Speaker 2 (01:16:05):
You always want to do something new and different. So
it's sad that your option one or two, you're assuming
boredom and dullness and impossibility or massive difficulties that are
not worth it when I don't think that's the case

(01:16:26):
at all. So one or two, you can't own slaves.

Speaker 3 (01:16:30):
That is completely untenable, unacceptable, cannot happen. Lincoln, thank you
twenty dollar sticker. That is amazing. Normans of Randroid, thank
you for Oh, thank you for the sticker.

Speaker 2 (01:16:44):
Nomaha.

Speaker 3 (01:16:44):
R Android did ninety ninety cents and that's great. A dollar,
all of you can do a dollar. Oh, you can
afford a dollar value for value. By the way, I'm
looking for eleven people. Eleven new people, people who haven't
done this before. Are not contributing monthly to the one
book show. I'm looking for never eleven people to become
contributors to the Iran Book Show over the next month

(01:17:06):
and a week or two weeks, so by the end
of the year. You know, I've got a number in mind.
I'm looking for eleven. I'll let you know how we progress,
if we progress. But yeah, if you could support the
Iron Book Show on a monthly basis by going to
Patreon dot com, that would be amazing. I would immense
gratitude because it would it would help a lot. It's

(01:17:29):
so much better to have a predictable social thing. I mean,
sober chat is great, but the foundation of the Iran
book show financier finances are Patreon and PayPal.

Speaker 2 (01:17:40):
That's the foundation. All right, let me take.

Speaker 3 (01:17:46):
Some of the questions that were originally Some of them
have disappeared, but I saved them, so we got them,
all right. Pbe actually asked the first question. It's a
twenty dollars question, so you know, start off with it.
And another hypothetical kind of people says, imagine an invitation

(01:18:09):
to the White House by Trump, What principle logical steps
determine whether attending would be wrongly sanction his presidency under
what conditions?

Speaker 2 (01:18:21):
That is debate, et cetera.

Speaker 3 (01:18:23):
Could a meeting be a great, good opportunity, God, it's
an interesting question. I can't think of a context in
which it would be a good opportunity.

Speaker 2 (01:18:36):
By the way, Wes, thank you for the fifty dollars.

Speaker 3 (01:18:39):
Really really really appreciate your support, consistent support over time,
So thank you, thank you, thank you. So meeting Trump
in the White House, it's unlikely you would have any
opportunity to really address anybody. It's unlikely you get a

(01:18:59):
microphone to America, so you get to talk to Trump.
There's nothing you can say to Trump that will make
any difference one way or the other. I guess the
only thing that it could the benefit of it would
be to give you kind of a presence at the
White House, which would then be broadcast to the world,

(01:19:22):
and maybe give you know, your own book is maybe
that will increase subscribers and increase interest in objectivism. Ultimately,
if you're giving a microphone, it gives you a platform
from which to advocate for things. But then if you're
giving a microphone, then the question is visiting the White

(01:19:42):
House getting all this is if you're not going to
criticize Trump. Does it come across as if you are
agreeing with him, as if you respect him?

Speaker 2 (01:19:54):
Is if you have anything in common with him?

Speaker 3 (01:19:59):
And so I would only do it if I had
the opportunity to address the same audience that saw me
visiting Trump, who knew I was really Trump, also know
how much I opposed Trump, and of course that would
never happen, so the meeting would never happen, so I
would never get invited. So no, I'm not going, I
think is the bottom line. Now, you know you could

(01:20:19):
create I'm sure a circumstance. But I don't see the point.
I really don't see the point. It strikes me as
a waste of time, waste.

Speaker 2 (01:20:30):
Of effort, and too much of a sanction.

Speaker 3 (01:20:34):
And yeah, given what I've said about Trump, it's never
gonna happen. Although look jd Vance said that Trump was
an AASI in twenty fifteen. So I guess if you
grovel enough, if you kiss the ring enough, if you
if you apologize enough, then maybe you get a second

(01:20:54):
chance and maybe you can go see the man that
ain't happening.

Speaker 2 (01:21:00):
It ain't happening. As you know, I'm not that type.

Speaker 3 (01:21:06):
Lincoln says, do you know what the application process for
AIU is? It looks really useful for my career goals,
but I ran into issues with accessing the website. I'll
send you an email if it's complex. I don't think
it's complex at all. I mean, AIU now as a program,
does not require an application. You just have to sign up,

(01:21:27):
so you have to apply for scholarship. I don't think
that's complex. But I really don't know. The best thing
is to email the people at AAR in charge of that.
If you email me, I could forward it to somebody.
But I actually don't know what the process is.

Speaker 2 (01:21:44):
I don't know how complex it is to apply for
scholarship for EAU classes. But you should do it now.
This semester is about to start in January, so you
get it done. Get it done. Thanks Lincoln.

Speaker 3 (01:21:59):
Michael ben Shapiro just at a video attacking Steve Bannon.

Speaker 2 (01:22:03):
Oh it's about time, nine years too late. Will he
be able to stop.

Speaker 3 (01:22:09):
The New Right on his own or it's too powerful
and too irreversible At this point, the old Right is
the wine of republic. You know, I don't know. I
don't know much about the right. And look, he's not alone.
He is alone maybe among the big podcasters. But again,

(01:22:30):
Robbie George just left the.

Speaker 2 (01:22:33):
Heritage Foundation board.

Speaker 3 (01:22:35):
I read you letters from people who left the Intercollegious
Studies Institute Board, you know, at a Moss office left.
There are a lot of people who were in the
kind of Republican right circles that are disgusted by Tucker
and Foyintes and all these guys. So I don't think
he's alone in thatsense, but he is alone in terms

(01:22:57):
of a public figure. Is it going to be an
enough for everything? That they're doing to stop what is happening.
You know, I just I just don't know. It is
very very hard to tell. I'm not involved enough in
the inner workings of the rights and Republicans.

Speaker 2 (01:23:17):
I don't know, hy powerful lot. I don't know. If
you saw the the latest of this young Republican staffer
in New York who did a video or portraying jusus cockroaches,
he's been fired. Uh, it took it took a little
bit before he was completely fired, but he was ultimately fired.
So there was some backlash against us. There's some backlash

(01:23:39):
against it, but.

Speaker 3 (01:23:40):
It's also the rot is more disgusting and deeper than
anybody thought.

Speaker 2 (01:23:48):
How much what is actually going to give? I just
don't know. I just don't know. All right, Yeah, note,
I'll go with them.

Speaker 3 (01:23:58):
Where they burned the books, they were all too burned
people as well, Henry Heine.

Speaker 2 (01:24:02):
I think that's right. I think that's right, Lincoln says,
But you're on they have top golf players and F
one races and oil money, So that make the illiberalism
okay according to Trump, Well not just according to Trump,
it's also.

Speaker 3 (01:24:20):
According to the to the golf players who go there
the Formula one racers who race there. The engineers go
and build them their big cities and big.

Speaker 2 (01:24:32):
You know, infrastructure projects.

Speaker 3 (01:24:34):
It's it's okay based on for a lot of people
who sanction the kind of theocracy, the kind of evil
that is.

Speaker 2 (01:24:44):
The Saudi regime, and it's sad.

Speaker 3 (01:24:48):
It's sad that people are not willing to take them
all stand against these kind of things. We would live
in a much better world if people did, if people
actually took them all. Stand again against you know, against
the Saudi people like the Saudi region, regimes like the

(01:25:09):
Saudi Region.

Speaker 2 (01:25:12):
But we don't live in that world. We live in
the world we have. This is what we have. This
is what we have to deal with. All right.

Speaker 3 (01:25:19):
Let's see, Ryan, Thank you Ryan. Cities across Canada raise
the Palestinia Jamas flag over the weekend.

Speaker 2 (01:25:28):
God, it's so sickening. It is so sickening. They raised
the flag a murderous, genocidal rape, mass murderers, that's what
they raised the flag of. It strikes as you mool
for any government to raise a flag other than its
own flag at the request of a group.

Speaker 3 (01:25:44):
Can you comment on the principle involved? Well, yeah, I
mean a government shouldn't raise anybody's flag.

Speaker 2 (01:25:50):
I agree with that.

Speaker 3 (01:25:51):
The principle is you represent the people of the particular
place and space that you are at. You're not advocates
for some other country in that sense. America first, it
is true, but it is disgusting and offensive and horrible
and beneath contempt to raise the flag of an evil organization,

(01:26:16):
an evil entity that is dedicated the destruction of Canada,
I mean from us at the end of the day,
is not just about Israel. It is dedicated the destruction
of Western civilization, with Canada barely hanging on with its
fingernail is still a part.

Speaker 2 (01:26:34):
Of So it is.

Speaker 3 (01:26:38):
It is very disappointing and it's very sad that that
is that that happened and continues to have alex You
on objectivism, hold that the key to happiness is the
pursuit of your own of your and zones value, own

(01:27:01):
one's own values. What evidence would you give to a
young person and how to find their own values? Any
recommendations and resources to help this process?

Speaker 2 (01:27:15):
You know, I don't know. I think Gene Binswanger, Gene
Roony Binswanger, and and maybe uh gena Golan.

Speaker 3 (01:27:25):
Both have h suggestions and maybe a psychologist and maybe
gene as some workshops and how to do it. I
think Tou's funny and his Happiness seminar does some of this,
but fundamentally, it's about introspection. It's about introspecting about what

(01:27:47):
you like, what you love, what gets you excited, what
you're passionate about. Uh.

Speaker 2 (01:27:55):
And you know, starting there, starting with you know what
really makes you passionate.

Speaker 3 (01:28:04):
And it doesn't end there because you have to make
sure that those values are life performing values. You have
to make sure that after rational analysis, they are values
you should pursue because it's likely to lead you to happiness.
But you know, you've got to You've got to do
a lot of introspecting and thinking about what it means.
One of the best ways to discover your values is

(01:28:30):
through art, particularly through novels. Novels the portray heroes novels
to people doing things in the world, and who excites you,
who gets who gets you really excited about stuff? And
and and and you know, I want to be like him?
And then well, how can I be like him? What

(01:28:51):
kind of values do I need to pursue in order
to be like him. So it's a matter of defining
your mal values they are Iran can help and fountain
Head Atleashark can help. And then it's defining what specific values.
Given those mall values you're going to pursue. You have
to start with them all values. You have to start

(01:29:12):
with abstractions. I want to I want to be a hero.

Speaker 2 (01:29:16):
I want to be.

Speaker 3 (01:29:19):
Incredibly productive, I want to be of course, you want
to be rational, that's that's the primary right.

Speaker 2 (01:29:24):
But break it down.

Speaker 3 (01:29:26):
What kind of person do you want to be? What
kind of character do you want to have? Before you
can get to I want this job, of that job,
or I want you know this call that call, you
have to start with what kind of character you want
to be? What kind of human being do you want
to be? And again here the best way to do that.

(01:29:48):
The best way to do that is read novels. Read
romantic novels of heroes like Who Go and a lot
of the even the swashbuckling heroes of the Night.

Speaker 2 (01:30:00):
Entently, what appeals to you about them? Who are the
good guys? Who would you like to be like? What
is it about that person that makes you like them?
Who Go? Is the best for this, but.

Speaker 3 (01:30:12):
Any romantic or somewhat romantic literature or movies. But there
are very few movies that have the same effect. You
don't get to characterization like you do in a novel.
In a novel, you dig deep into character. You don't
in movies. So use art, Use art, use.

Speaker 2 (01:30:29):
The novel for that.

Speaker 3 (01:30:32):
And introspect and you know, maybe even look at people
around you that you admire and you respect. What is
it about them you admire in respect? What is it
about them you would.

Speaker 2 (01:30:47):
Like to be like? What would you like to emulate?
And you know, follow that.

Speaker 3 (01:30:58):
So that's the beginning. That's the beginning, But it's a
lot of introspection, kind of a creating a hierarchy of
values for yourself. Andrews says a friend. Thirteen year old
son asked his parents what it means to be good.
My advice was to address the beneficiary question first, good

(01:31:20):
for who and convince him to do things that are
good for him.

Speaker 2 (01:31:24):
What do you think of that?

Speaker 3 (01:31:29):
Yeah, I mean I like that, But you've got to yes,
You've got to first address the reality that what it
means to be good is what it means to be
good for whom. Good is not some floating abstraction, so
good for whom, and that the benefit should be to you.
Morality tells you how to be good for you, or

(01:31:51):
that you should be good for you, and then you
can think. Then you can stop breaking down to what
did that actually mean? What does it mean to be
good for myself?

Speaker 2 (01:32:00):
Yes?

Speaker 3 (01:32:01):
I think that's probably good to start with the beneficiary question.
I think that's right.

Speaker 2 (01:32:18):
All right. That is all the twenty dollars questions we have.

Speaker 3 (01:32:21):
We can still take more, plenty of room to take more,
so I feel free to ask more twenty dollars questions.
All right, let's run through these, Liam says in part
one in our couss talk at OCONN, released today. He
makes it sound as if nine to eleven was the
pivotal moment in American loss of self esteem and pride,
the beginning of a downward, suicidal spiral.

Speaker 2 (01:32:43):
But most young people.

Speaker 3 (01:32:45):
Voting for Trump Omamdani don't remember or think about nine
to eleven. This wave of tribalism and low self esteem.
Is Karn't winning out over the Enlightenment. Well yeah, I
mean that's the fundamental cause. But nine to eleven was
the existential manifestation of that, and It doesn't matter if
people today don't remember nine to eleven or didn't live

(01:33:07):
through nine to eleven.

Speaker 2 (01:33:08):
The culture was shaped by nine to eleven.

Speaker 3 (01:33:12):
The way people hold themselves, the way people project, the
way politicians talk, their parents' generation, their teachers generation, their
grandparents' generation, you know, the professor's generation, the business leaders generation,
were all shaped by the.

Speaker 2 (01:33:28):
Failure of nine to eleven.

Speaker 3 (01:33:30):
And look, the failure of nine to eleven is the
consequence of cont winning out over the Enlightenment. The point
on cause making is that that manifested itself in the
response to nine to eleven, or even in the pre
nine eleven lack of defending ourselves. And what's happening today
is just the playing out of that. That's just the
continuation of that. But nine to eleven really showed us

(01:33:58):
the count won over the Enlightenment. I listen to Lendon
Peacocks America versus Americans, versus America, America versus Americans, or one.

Speaker 2 (01:34:06):
Or the other, right, and he lays it out, American
sense of life dead. And why is it dead?

Speaker 3 (01:34:16):
Because kant one. And it's not that it happened all
at once. It happened in the fifty years before it's slowly, slowly,
slowly eroded. Nine to eleven is what made it real?
Nine to eleven. The response at nine eleven is how
it manifest and then it just is an issue of

(01:34:38):
playing out. It's then just an issue of they lie
and they lie, and we're weak and we can't do it,
and we're you know, and that leads directly to where
we are today. And you don't have to live through
it yourself. The culture lives through it, and it sticks
in the culture. It retains in the culture. Lincoln, as

(01:35:01):
Michael Corleone and the Godfather says, my father is just
like a senator a president. They also have people killed,
classic thug against the mentality from Trump. Yep, I mean yeah,
I mean he's a classic thug. Jewis says that the
talk is called America versus Americans. Highly recommended Leanta Peacock's

(01:35:27):
talk from two thousand and three, I think just before
the Iraq War starts. Harpa Campbell says, did you see
Bill Maher go off on Mumdani and socialism, arguing that
socialists and democrats.

Speaker 2 (01:35:39):
Are not the same thing? Do you agree?

Speaker 3 (01:35:41):
It would be incredible if you ever got on his
show it would be, but I haven't. Yeah, I basically agree.
I mean, socialists and democrats are not the same thing.
There are plenty of democrats who are not socialists, or
Democrats are a broader umbrella organized that basically houses some socialists,

(01:36:03):
But most of the people who call themselves democrats are
not socialists. There's plenty of people on the center left
that are better in economics than many people on the
right today, or more free market than people on the
right today. So no, I don't think democrats necessarily a socialist,
but some socialists are democrats. James, will America see a

(01:36:37):
Malay in your lifetime, even half a Melay. You never
know when good things are good movements spring up and
gain momentum during horrible times.

Speaker 2 (01:36:46):
Yeah, you don't know, So I don't know. I'm not
going to make a prediction. It doesn't look like it.

Speaker 3 (01:36:51):
It looks like we're heading in a different direction, and
maybe it'll take decades before things get bad enough for
Melay like character to spring up. But you're right, you
never know. Things could get better quickly. It could get
better quickly.

Speaker 2 (01:37:06):
So Yep, Clark, it's not really fascism.

Speaker 3 (01:37:12):
A mob boss isn't being a fascist when he says
it would be a shame if something happened to your company.

Speaker 2 (01:37:18):
Trump will need to improve.

Speaker 3 (01:37:21):
To get up to the level of a fascist. I mean,
I think that's right. I mean, I don't think Trump
is a fascist. I've said this many times. I think
Trump is a thug. He's a nothing. He has no ideology.
He's a mob boss and he has the mentality of
a mob boss. And he and he does a lot
of things based on that. And that's why you respect
are the mob bosses. I mean, he respects Putin, he

(01:37:43):
respects NBS, he respects she because he views them as
other mob bosses. And he doesn't respect Zelenski or leaders
of other democratic parties countries because they're like they're like
maybe they're weak mombo bosses, but they're not real mob bosses.

Speaker 2 (01:37:58):
They're not the real thing. They're not powerful. Clark says,
we have gone from let's make a lot and let's
make a deal.

Speaker 3 (01:38:07):
Yes, everything's about a deal, and the deals more and
more and more, you know, add to the bottom line
of the of the Trump family.

Speaker 2 (01:38:19):
Ryan like the show. Thanks for watching. Yeah, press that
like button.

Speaker 3 (01:38:23):
It really helps in the algorithm helps with the algorithm,
so please press the like button. I heard it World
War too. Historian say Germany was winning itself to death.
It took over so much territory so quickly, it couldn't
solidly genuine have genuine control over it, and it ultimately
lost at all.

Speaker 2 (01:38:41):
I mean there's an element of that.

Speaker 3 (01:38:43):
But now, really, I mean first didn't learn anything from history.
I mean, Napoleon had the same problem in Russia. Don't
they know about the Russian winter? Don't they know about
long supply chain, supply lines when you go deep into Russia.
Don't they have They never had a geograph lesson to
see how big Russia is. Why open a second front

(01:39:06):
when you still haven't closed up the first front? So
just strategic mistakes, and I wouldn't call it winning itself
to death. I'd say Germany made really big, big strategic
errors in World War Two, and it underestimated, of course,
the United States and what impact it would have by
joining the war.

Speaker 2 (01:39:27):
Now, Javi jagorithm.

Speaker 3 (01:39:28):
When evil smells weakness, does it often appear to be
winning in the beginning of its campaign. Yes, I mean,
ultimately it loses, but in the beginning it can definitely win.
And the Nazi is a good example of that. There
are plenty of other examples in history. Look at the
Soviet Union. It seemed to be winning for a very

(01:39:50):
long time and then it failed. Ultimately, evil fails. That's
the thing about a dark age is coming. It'll fail,
just a question of when. Jggreez no worries if you
didn't get to it. But did you watch the educational
video on Fentannel. I emailed you. Legalizing drugs would likely

(01:40:13):
stop this problem, but it seems wrong to sell heroin knowing.

Speaker 2 (01:40:17):
Its bodily impact thoughts.

Speaker 3 (01:40:20):
I mean, it might be wrong to sell heroin, but
somebody will because somebody wants to use it, So there
are always going to be people who sell it. I
haven't watched the documentary. Again, the Fensannel issue will be
would be solved with legalization. But okay, so it's wrong
to sell heroin, but people will open up kiosks all

(01:40:41):
over the place selling heroin, and people will buy it,
and the price will go down, and organized crime will
disappear and most of our problems will go away. And
if you know, a lot of companies and a lot
of people will rally around ways to get a people
off of their addiction. So that so that, and that

(01:41:03):
will reduce the harm and the danger of.

Speaker 2 (01:41:10):
Using heroin.

Speaker 3 (01:41:11):
So yeah, I mean, I just there's no I don't
see any downside of legalizing drugs, is the bottom line,
all right, let's see Abram Compost. It's I'm a right
of center millennial. In college, we were shocked at how

(01:41:31):
fast socialism grew on the left. Now it's creeping into
the right. Many X many gen z X talk like
Warren and call curse trade free trade. Yes, I mean,
I mean saying this for over ten years that this
would happen. The right has no basis on which the

(01:41:52):
defend free markets. It has no basis on which the
defend freedom. More broadly, the right is statist and has
even old line conservatives. They claimed to be free marketers,
and I don't know, Buckley, and they're like, they claimed
to be free marketers except when it didn't suit them
to be free marketers. And they couldn't defend the free

(01:42:17):
market without relying on God and religion, and that's not
a very good defense. So they had no moral defense
of capitalism, and as a consequence, they couldn't actually defend capitalism,
and as a consequence, they could never win on a
platform of capitalism.

Speaker 2 (01:42:31):
The last guy who tried was Goldwater, and he failed.

Speaker 3 (01:42:36):
Reagan did a little bit of that, but Goldwater is
the last guy who really tried to defend capitalism, and
he failed because he wasn't convincing. He had nothing really
to say, and he relied too much on religion to
extend that he said anything. Jonathan Thoughts on twenty one

(01:43:02):
twelve by Rush, Did Rand ever hear it?

Speaker 2 (01:43:06):
I don't know. I don't think so.

Speaker 3 (01:43:08):
I've never heard she did. I'm not a Rush fan
just because I don't know. The music never clicks for me.

Speaker 2 (01:43:15):
But I know there were a lot of Rush fans here,
So I don't really have many thoughts on it. But
I don't think. I may never listened to it now,
but I but yeah.

Speaker 3 (01:43:26):
Fuku Custan from Taiwanese Dollars Cool high Doctor book. What
are your What are the similarities did MBS's regime and
pre seventy nine posia DC possibility of a conservative uprising
and CASA similar to the one that overthrew the Shaw
greeting some tape.

Speaker 2 (01:43:45):
It really it's a good question. It's really hard to
tell because.

Speaker 3 (01:43:50):
I don't know enough about the culture within Saudi Arabia,
but my senses that it's unlikely to be a rebellion
against NBS. But he could be assassinated, and then who
knows who replaces him. That could take Saudi Arabia a
completely new direction. Remember this is the problem with authoritary regimes.

(01:44:10):
Even if you get kind of a benevolent dictator, which
a lot of people claim NBS is. I'm skeptical, but
a lot of people claim he is, then it's easy
to assassinate that person and the person who replaces him,
even if it stays within the family, one of the
children of the king could have a completely opposite ideology,

(01:44:31):
and Saudi Arabia could move towards move towards a much
more conservative, you know, sunny conservative, militant ideology. I don't
think NBS has it, but I also don't think NBS.
I mean NBS is being careful on how fast he websternizes.

(01:44:52):
So arguably NBS has learnt the lesson from the Shah
and is being very careful, watchful, and is not doing
the liberalization too fast because he's probably afraid of that
happening to him. But this is why we shouldn't be
supporting Saudi maybe the way we are, because it could

(01:45:13):
change and it could become a real enemy of the
United States very very quickly. It's why generally we shouldn't
be supporting authorbtarian regimes. Jamie, I've heard different reasons for
the cause of the Great Depression. Can you go into
detail about what real cause was.

Speaker 2 (01:45:33):
And can you recommend books on it? Oh, I don't
know if I have a book right now.

Speaker 3 (01:45:39):
I mean George Selgian's latest book, but it doesn't really
go into the causes as a primary look.

Speaker 2 (01:45:46):
I think the general agreement around the cause is that
the Federals of when the stock market collapsed in nineteen
twenty nine, the Federals of tightened the money supply.

Speaker 3 (01:46:00):
And created a credit crunch, which ultimately led to massive
bank failures, which the Fed responded to by again tightening
the money supply, which led to again more bank problems
and the spiraled out of control. And of course, because

(01:46:23):
it was it was tightening the money supply, there were
no loans to make the businesses to recuperate and to
build and to grow, and that is really what led
to the Great to the Depression. Now, adding to that
with things like Hoover increasing taxes, increasing all common government
programs and spending, refusing to reform the banking system, and

(01:46:46):
changed the FED policy.

Speaker 2 (01:46:49):
What else a smooth holly.

Speaker 3 (01:46:50):
So there's a lot of other factors that added to it,
but the fundamental was that the FED just made a
massive of destruct a blunder in the way it responded
to the Federals of exiled it.

Speaker 2 (01:47:09):
To avoid is.

Speaker 3 (01:47:10):
Recommending a book by Mario Rothbad and the Great Depression.
I don't trust any of Marie Rothbod's historical books. He's
a good economist, but I don't trust this history.

Speaker 2 (01:47:20):
I mean, the histories that I've read have been way
too biased by his.

Speaker 3 (01:47:30):
You know, his view of the cause of relationships, and
then he picks and chooses the facts to present to
you that you know confirm is biased. So I don't
trust Mario Rothbod with history, or with morality, or with philosophy.
You know, economics okay, But other than that, I don't
trust him economic history. I don't trust him. So I

(01:47:52):
wouldn't recommend that book. But there are plenty of books
out there about the Great Depression that I mean, Milton
Friedman wrote a good book basically didn't write a book,
but he wrote a book on the history of the
United States, which there's a section on interestates in the
United States and a section and the Great depressione Selgian recently.

Speaker 2 (01:48:15):
Has a book of the Great Depression.

Speaker 3 (01:48:17):
I don't I don't know who I could point you
to with a one definitive statement on the causes of
the Great Depression. But I've read a number of books
where the Great Depression is part of it, and they
explain the Great.

Speaker 2 (01:48:28):
Depression that are pretty damn good, the explanations that they give.
It's basically the Fed. The Fed screwed up royally. Lincoln
says Book for President twenty twenty nine.

Speaker 3 (01:48:39):
What did I do to Lincoln to, you know, to
have him wish me such awful outcomes like becoming president?

Speaker 2 (01:48:50):
Michael?

Speaker 3 (01:48:51):
Would you say, have you Emblay is more of an
objectivist or more of a body and he feels more
randy into me.

Speaker 2 (01:48:57):
I don't know, I don't know, how do you measure that?
I don't like. I don't like that way of thinking
about it, more like more like I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:49:05):
He's he's got elements of iinn ran, but he's very
much a collectivist in terms of how he presents himself.
His small defensive capitalism is very weak and not randy
in at all. He won't defend self interest. He defends
basically capitalism on kind of a collectivistic, altruistic basis. He
has a certain spirit and admiration for business that he

(01:49:29):
can only come from mind rand In spite of what
I just said, I don't know what he would look
like as a body, and often he the with body
is hate him.

Speaker 2 (01:49:38):
So maybe he's not earth body.

Speaker 1 (01:49:40):
You know.

Speaker 2 (01:49:40):
Just tak him for what he is, don't try to
pigeon him him into a Randian or with body and
or something like that.

Speaker 1 (01:49:47):
He is what he is.

Speaker 3 (01:49:48):
He's got good things, he's got not so good things
generally as a politician, particularly given the world in which
we live.

Speaker 2 (01:49:55):
He's a breath of fresh air. He's wonderful.

Speaker 3 (01:49:59):
And thought really fought. Lincoln says, is Ironran University is
separate from a campus. They look similar to me. I
don't know any I'm not sure, and I don't think
there is an iron Ran University anymore.

Speaker 2 (01:50:12):
There's AARU. Because there's something to do with the accreditation.

Speaker 3 (01:50:17):
We're not allowed to call it Ironran university, so it's
are you campus is where a lot of the courses
like Lena Peacock and Iron ran that are available for free.

Speaker 2 (01:50:26):
So that's a little separate.

Speaker 3 (01:50:28):
I'm going to talk to people at AOI clean it
all up and maybe clarify to everybody.

Speaker 1 (01:50:33):
What is what?

Speaker 3 (01:50:36):
Merrabins, my nine year old asked the question Lamouck asked
in eighteen o nine, can you I'm going to express
my ignorance. I'm not sure what that question was, so
maybe maybe in the chat you can you can tell
me what it is. Lincoln, we raised gen z on climate, allamism,

(01:51:02):
school shootings, film mongering, anti American TikTok videos, and post
nine to eleven security theater and act Surprised that they're insane. Yeah,
I mean again, I don't like the word insane, but yes,
we have corrupted them, scared them to death, taught them
wrong ideas and wrong explanations for what's happened in the past,

(01:51:22):
and there were surprise they've turned out the way they are.
Alex twenty bucks well spent getting to work on finding
my heroes. You only need ten more Patreon members now,
thank you, oh thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:51:35):
Alex really appreciate that. I really appreciate it.

Speaker 3 (01:51:38):
By the way, if you're ten dollar a month Patreon subscriber,
you get the podcast of the Roon Book Show with
no commercials.

Speaker 2 (01:51:45):
No commercials hector, Oh, would you handle? Would you handle
going to a Christmas party with your partners? Not so interesting? Friends?
Should just go?

Speaker 3 (01:51:58):
Anyway to find a positive or find a positive escape up? Well,
I mean it depends how uninteresting are there? Is really
going to be painful? Is there a way you can
get into the spirit of it? I mean, you're there
with your partner, she he whatever, you have a bond
with them, your hang out with them mostly, Isn't that

(01:52:18):
going to be fun?

Speaker 2 (01:52:19):
So I mean, try to find the positive in it.

Speaker 3 (01:52:23):
I mean, the reason you're going is to hang out
with your partner, So hang out with your partner and
find a way to make that an enjoyable venture. If
it's really painful, if it's really unenjoyable, really, then yeah,
find a find a polite escape route. But you know,
hopefully this is not gonna be the last time you're
probably gonna be invited to something like this, And if

(01:52:45):
your partner becomes more permanent, then it might have be
something you have to learn how to handle and deal with.

Speaker 2 (01:52:54):
Jamie? Is you as responsible for you on being an enemy?

Speaker 3 (01:52:57):
Given America and UK helped who of a democratically elected leader.

Speaker 2 (01:53:02):
In nineteen fifty three, was that justified?

Speaker 3 (01:53:05):
No? I don't think they're responsible. I don't think the
hatred of America has anything to do with that. You know,
it's already how many generations have gone by since nineteen
fifty three. How many people remember or care about what
happened in nineteen fifty three. I don't think Iranians the
day do. It might be reinforced to them and they
you know, then it might be drummed into them, but
I don't think it's the actual cause of the issue.

Speaker 2 (01:53:28):
Was it justified? It's really hard to tell. He was stealing.

Speaker 3 (01:53:34):
Oil reserves that were developed by the British and the Americans,
So in that sense, he was a really bad guy.
He was going to team up with the Soviet Union.
He was a real socialist. Also, it's not clear that
it's really this CIA and the UK that deposed him.
A lot of it had to do with the internal
politics in Iran, you know, and the way internal politics

(01:53:59):
any are structured.

Speaker 2 (01:54:02):
What is justified?

Speaker 3 (01:54:03):
Probably even if the alternative. Shaw shouldn't be supported the.

Speaker 2 (01:54:09):
Way he was, and his.

Speaker 3 (01:54:12):
The evil things that he did should not have been
promoted and supported by the United States. Andrew, I tried
to super chet this the last time. Did you see
the human like robot that Russia unveiled? Russians unveiled sput
it on the runway and fell over, which sent Russian
engineers running to rescue.

Speaker 2 (01:54:32):
I did not, But that sounds perfect. Sounds perfect on
so many different levels. That is good, Neil.

Speaker 3 (01:54:40):
Is it likely that Trump's presidency will run out before
handing over the f.

Speaker 2 (01:54:45):
Thirty fives and the next person can cancel it? Probably? Probably,
although I'm not sure. I'm not sure.

Speaker 3 (01:54:52):
Yeah, they probably have to build them because I don't
think they have them just sitting around, and it takes
a while.

Speaker 2 (01:54:58):
But it's not clear that the next and we'll cancel them.

Speaker 3 (01:55:01):
Why do you think it will? I mean, I don't
see who the next president would be who would cancel them.
I like numbers doesn't in the Dark Ages imply it
lasts a while, probably, but who knows what that means.
I don't believe that there's going to be at Dark
Age's again, a global Dark Ages seems to be me
to be very unlikely unless we have like a nuclear war.

(01:55:25):
I think there'll always be bastions out there of civilization
holding out, given the extent of the distribution of knowledge
in the world today. All right, last question, get those
super chats in, guys. I've done my part, Lincoln has
done any fot You've got a lot of super chats
in today, so I appreciate that, Lincoln, Thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:55:44):
I think we'll call it a night.

Speaker 3 (01:55:46):
It's late, and we've already had two hours, and it's
ten o'clock here or close to ten o'clock here.

Speaker 2 (01:55:51):
I will see you guys tomorrow.

Speaker 3 (01:55:56):
I think tomorrow it's going to be at let me
just see Wednesday tomorrow we should be good at two
pm East Coast time, So tomorrow will be a full
show two pm eas Coast time, three hours.

Speaker 2 (01:56:10):
I look forward to it. Oh, Jamie just came in.
Follow up question on Iran.

Speaker 3 (01:56:14):
Is their hatred justified by America propping up and protecting
the Shah.

Speaker 2 (01:56:19):
Given bad things he did to Iranians? Yeah, but think
about it.

Speaker 3 (01:56:25):
You know, the hatred has led to and is led
by a regime whose biggest victims are Uranians. I mean,
at the end of the day, the regime, the regime
of the ones who hate America. Iranians don't hate America.

Speaker 2 (01:56:44):
I don't know.

Speaker 3 (01:56:45):
If you saw a few years ago they painted a
big American flag and Israeli flagged on the sidewalk, on
the sidewalk of a university campus, so that the students
would tread on them, would stomp on them, and ninety
of the students went around. They refuse to stomp on
the American flag. So America is very popular among common Uranians,

(01:57:05):
particularly young ones. I think the main reason the leadership
hates America has nothing to do with the Shaw and
has everything to do with the fact that America represents
everything that they hate. The materialism, economic success, capitalism, secularism.

Speaker 2 (01:57:24):
That's what America represents them, and they hate it for that.
And if you listen to them, if you listn't actually
what they say, that's what they talk about. They don't
talk about the Shaw.

Speaker 3 (01:57:33):
The Iranian intellectuals, the Iranian mulas talk about the secular
nation of America, and that's why it.

Speaker 2 (01:57:40):
Should be hated and destroyed. All right, guys, thank you,
see you tomorrow and yeah, see tomorrow. Hi, everybody

All Episodes

Saudi Arabia; Epstein; Meta Antitrust; Rent Control; WallMart; Heritage; Japan | Yaron Brook Show

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.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;}Saudi Arabia; Epstein; Meta Antitrust; Rent Control; WallMart; Heritage; Japan | Yaron Brook Show