July 5, 2025 • 38 mins
We want to hear from you.If you’ve been enjoying the show, we’d love your input. It only takes a minute to answer our listener survey, and your feedback really helps us improve the podcast: https://forms.gle/6j5GLzwK6GQF7Hzx7
In this episode, I sit down again with Jodie Cook—entrepreneur, author, and strategist—for a raw, honest unpacking of privilege, entrepreneurship, and power in the AI age.
From debating the “fairness” of the system to calling out the real enemy of progress, we dissect the narratives holding creators and founders back—and how to reclaim your agency when the rules feel rigged.
Jodie shares how she navigates advantage without apology, the danger of playing small to fit in, and why waiting for fairness is a losing game.
Timestamps:
(00:02) – Naming the Real Enemy
(06:01) – AI, Creativity, and the Fairness Dilemma
(09:47) – Inequality, Entrepreneurship, and the Game We’re Playing
(18:20) – What If We Governed Differently?
(26:05) – Privilege, Responsibility, and the Power You Hold
(28:14) – Untangling Privilege and Personal Agency
(34:26) – The Merit Trap: When Recognition Feels Like Tokenism
Check out today's guest, Jodie Cook:
Jodie's LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jodie-cook/
Jodie's YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@Jodie_Cook
Check out The Futur:
Website: https://www.thefutur.com/
Courses: https://www.thefutur.com/shop
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-futur/
Podcasts: https://thefutur.com/podcast
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thefuturishere/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/theFuturisHere/
Twitter: https://x.com/thefuturishere
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thefuturishere
Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/thefuturishere
Check out Chris Do:
Website: https://zaap.bio/thechrisdo
LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/in/thechrisdo/
Facebook:https://www.facebook.com/BizOfDesign
Instagram:https://www.instagram.com/thechrisdo/
Twitter:https://x.com/thechrisdo
TikTok:https://www.tiktok.com/@thechrisdo
Threads:https://www.threads.net/@thechrisdo
Zaap: https://zaap.bio/thechrisdo
Clubhouse:https://www.clubhouse.com/@thechrisdo
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Is the question, who's thereal enemy?
Is it the AI companies?
Is it the billionaires?
Is it the education system?
Is it the government?
Who is the actual enemy?
If you are born into wealth,it's a lot easier to use your money
to make money.
How much you believe that youare in control of your own destiny
and you can affect your own situation.
(00:22):
There's a popular idea that'sgoing on right now, given the global
economic condition that we'rein, with the parties moving far right.
And it seems like we're headedtowards a recession or much worse.
And there's this conversationthat's happening out in the ethos
about entrepreneurship.
It's this dream that's beingsold to people to keep people poor.
(00:44):
And recently I watched this episode.
There was a hot debate onStephen Barlett's show, the Diary
of a CEO between Gary and ourfriend, mutual friend, Daniel Priestley.
And they're, they're kind ofgoing at it kind of at each other
a little bit, a little hard.
And Gary was going much harderthan Daniel.
And I was a little surprisedwhen I scrolled down to read all
(01:06):
the comments at how one sidedthe support was.
On one hand, Gary was sayingthat rich people should be taxed,
but he doesn't call that asthe redistribution of wealth.
He's not exactly sure how, howto implement this because I wasn't
clear.
And Daniel kept asking himabout this, whereas Daniel is saying,
you know, I grew up relatively poor.
(01:28):
I was able to make somethingof myself and I want to help other
people do the same.
And Gary's like, that's a pipedream that doesn't happen anymore,
that cannot exist.
And he goes on and on aboutthis kind of stuff.
So I thought, I know another entrepreneur.
I know someone who's kind ofbuilt themselves up and has and is
in a position to help people.
Now, I do want to say this toour audience who's listening, that
all strategy is autobiographical.
(01:51):
This is a line I learned fromBlair ends.
So we, we're going to talkabout the things that we've done
naturally and the things thatwe believe in naturally, because
otherwise we'd be kind of a hypocrite.
So I just want to put it out there.
Now, I'm not how familiar, I'mnot sure how familiar you are with
that specific episode or thearguments on both sides.
But let's just, let's justbegin the conversation there, Jodi.
(02:11):
Yeah, let's do it.
Is that okay?
So, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Okay.
I think, yeah.
I mean, you go for It.
How do you all start?
I think Gary's background,he's an economist, and according
to his own biography, he'svery bright, top percentile, goes
to one of the best schools anddoes this thing where he's trading
(02:32):
or leveraging things.
And he's made a fortune,according to him, betting on the
economy doing poorly.
And he's done well.
I think it's called short selling.
And so the reason why Imentioned that is because, okay,
I'm going to put it out there.
I don't have a lot of love forpeople who are academics, people
who make money on otherpeople's money both ways.
(02:56):
Betting on things going welland betting on things when they go
poorly because they don'tactually make anything in the world.
And I have a lot of love,respect for people, small mom and
pop people or multimillionaireor billionaires who craft something,
who provide jobs for peoplewho make life a little bit better.
Because one of those thingsthat we talk about is we're always
(03:18):
looking for some kind oftransformation to go from a desired
state to desired future state.
And the one thing I don'tunderstand is why there's so much
money involved in trading andmoving money around, because none
of them actually do anything.
But what they do is theyprofit from people who, who do do
things.
And I was a little shocked andI was reading all the comments and
how popular Gary's sentimentsare, and it felt like he was saying
(03:42):
to me, to the audience,everything's effed up.
The world conspires againstyou and let's rage against the machine,
but really nothing practicalabout it.
That's my take.
I think that overall it's kindof a scary thought to me to make
rich people the enemy and to make.
(04:04):
To kind of demonize thewealthy, like that fundamentally
really scares me because Ithink it's almost like you create
an enemy out of something likerich people, and then you put them
in a certain place where youhave a certain set of beliefs around
them.
Like, rich people are greedy.
Rich people have cheated toget there.
Rich people, they're not like us.
And you kind of create this usand them.
(04:26):
But then it means that thepeople who want to then get out of
a bad financial situation andthen trying to do the thing, trying
to achieve the thing thatthey're also demonizing.
So it's like, well, which is it?
Do you want to.
Do you want to demonize thewealthy and then not try and be wealthy,
or do you want to demonize thewealthy and still work to do it,
in which case you're neverreally going to do it because you're
(04:48):
always going to createarbitrary, arbitrary ceilings.
Because fundamentally youbelieve that rich equals bad.
And that, to me, is terrifyingas a thing to teach people.
I think so.
I think it's not a great ideato label somebody something that's
not you and then demonize it.
Like, poor people aren't bad,rich people aren't bad, middle class
people aren't bad.
It's just we're in different states.
(05:09):
I do want to acknowledge thisbefore people go super crazy on me
and angry in the commentsbecause Simon Squibb started talking
about this and he had somereally bad blowback on this.
And I want to try to have amore nuanced conversation about this,
more tempered.
And I just want to say this.
I want the game to be fair.
And I want to acknowledge thatthe game isn't fair.
(05:29):
Because if you are born intowealth, it's a lot easier to use
your money to make money.
You get access to the verybest teachers and schools and programs
and neighborhoods.
You don't have to worry aboutfood shortage.
And most of the times you haveparents or people to look after you.
You're not concerned aboutthose same kind of basic necessities
in life and how very wealthypeople pay very little tax.
(05:50):
That bothers me.
I believe in fairness and I'mfor things that level the playing
field, not to punish peoplefor doing well enough to punish people
for doing poorly.
And one very specific topicthat is hot on everybody's mind because
it's so controversial is AIand how AI is going to be disruptive
force to displace workingpeople, especially artists and creatives,
(06:12):
people in my community, peoplenear and dear to my heart.
And one of the things that istrending right now is the Studio
Ghibli filter that's being puton everything right now.
And Miyazaki has been onrecord saying he's really against
AI.
Granted that that same wasmade eight years ago, so it wasn't
like reaction to what's goingon right now.
But the engines are trained onpeople's artwork.
(06:32):
And so there does feel to besomething like unfair about this.
So my thought, my proposal tothis is, you know what?
The AI companies get a lot ofmoney and they're using, according
to the last thing I saw, 10%of the world's energy in processing
power right now.
Just that is a staggering amount.
And it's only going to get higher.
So my thought is we need somekind of universal basic income and
(06:55):
these AI companies that areprofiting on ideas should have to
pay a fairly hefty tax becausethey have very low overhead or people
working for them.
And so they can help tocontribute their fair share in displacing
jobs, but also profiting fromideas that aren't their own.
Why don't we start there, Jodi?
Because I know you haveperspective on AI.
(07:15):
AI is stealing your content.
100% is stealing all of our content.
It's so scary.
We might have talked aboutthis before, Chris, but the first
time I ever used ChatGPT, Ityped into it.
Actually, this has kind oflinked it up.
So I. I typed into ChatGPT,write me an article called how to
Raise Entrepreneurial Kids.
Because I'd written an articleand then wrote that book with Daniel
(07:36):
Priestley, who was in that episode.
And actually, let me just goon a tiny tangent.
When we.
When Daniel and I released thebook Cat Ra Entrepreneurial Kids,
we were sharing about it onTwitter, and we got a message back
from someone who said, look,this just isn't fair.
You can't teach people thatthey can just go and be anything
they want, that they can havebig dreams, that they can make something
of themselves.
(07:56):
You just can't do it.
And they shared this reallylong message.
And I was like, I don't know,what do I.
Like, what do I say?
Do I get involved?
And Daniel just responded, whydon't we call our next book how to
Raise Kids with Low Expectations?
As a.
Just as a response.
But, yeah, so the first thingI put into ChatGPT was write this
article, how to RaiseEntrepreneurial Kids.
(08:19):
And it.
And it came out.
ChatGPT came out with my exactarticle that I'd already written.
And it was like, this isliterally my content.
It's in there.
But now someone else can typea few prompts in and few questions
in and get the exact same article.
Like, it's so unbelievablydidn't sound right.
But I feel like where I amwith so much of this is that, yes,
(08:39):
the system's rigged.
Yes, it's not fair.
Yes, it's really, really,really annoying.
But I do kind of think that Iwould so much rather see what I can
do and take personal agencyrather than the entire system.
I feel like, for me, that'sthe difference between business entrepreneurship
being a bit scrappy, makingpirate moves, going, yeah, that's
(09:00):
not fair, but I'm gonnasucceed against the odds versus,
I guess, going into politics,because really, that's what it is.
You take this Fundamental,institutional, like inequality, and
you try and attack that.
So it's.
I feel like it's verydifferent ways of approaching the
same problem, because Ifundamentally believe that we are
all on the same page with this.
Yeah, I think so, too, Jodi,but I don't think we're approaching
(09:22):
it like we're on the same team.
I think it's.
You're in Team A or Team B,and I think that's also part of,
like, how government andsociety is set up so that we're busy
squabbling with each otherwhile the Barons take everything.
And I think that's a problem.
I feel like it would be reallynice if Daniel and Gary could agree
that ultimately they'refighting for the same thing, which
(09:42):
is equality, which isprosperity, which is people being
happy.
And they're just approachingit in very, very different ways.
They're not really.
I feel like the argument isn'tactually with each other.
No.
And they try.
So there's a couple of thingsthat were kind of strange about how
that conversation unfolded.
I think Stephen was brilliantin setting up the debate, and he
(10:03):
was fairly neutral about this.
But what he didn't do, whichbothered me a lot, was he wasn't
moderating the conversation at all.
Gary was allowed to talk foras long as you want and just be as
interruptive as he wanted to be.
And Daniel, bless him, stayedcool the entire time.
I would have lost it at some point.
I would have said, gary, canwe just agree to one rule?
I won't cut you off, andplease don't cut me off.
(10:23):
And if you ask me a question,I'll do my best to answer it.
And if I ask you a question,you'll do your best to answer it.
And we can just agree todisagree when we don't agree.
But let's just have somedecorum when we're speaking.
And oftentimes he would justhammer Priestley with some questions,
like, let him finish.
And I don't know how Danieldoes this, but he has the patience
(10:44):
of an angel.
And my patience would havebeen tested at that point.
So I would have appreciated alittle bit more moderation from Stephen
on that.
But Daniel came in to fight oneconomics, whereas anytime it came
up with the issue ofentrepreneurship, Gary was like,
that's not my thing.
He would just say, that's notmy thing.
And so I was thinking, so wejust only can debate about the things
(11:07):
that you know about, and wecan't talk about the things that
I can bring to the table.
And if Daniel said Well,that's not my thing about economics
and academics.
I don't want to debate that either.
So it was kind of a weirdsetup for the two of them to go at
it.
So I think there was somethingfundamentally kind of not balanced
in terms of like giving eachperson an opportunity to speak.
(11:29):
Whether you agree or disagreewith anybody, I think it's important
to let the other side speak.
I would quite like it ifdebates had some kind of electric
shock system where if someonetalks for too long, they just get.
And that's it.
So there's no need for moderation.
Maybe this could be done withAI in the future.
You won't even need panelhosts, you won't need facilitators.
It's just like when someone'sspoken for too long, they get a little
(11:50):
electric shock.
When someone hasn't answeredthe question, they get a little electric
shock.
And then we just run ourdebates like that.
I think that's some kind ofdystopian future.
And I think there was a moviein a book written about this somewhere.
Yeah, yeah, there's probably many.
The Hunger Games, 1984. Who knows?
(12:11):
We have to use physical punishment.
But I was just thinking, outof mutual respect, this.
Let's have a conversationabout this.
So on the one side, it's like,I think Gary's an activist and he
may or may not run for politics.
I don't know.
And it's a very populous sentiment.
And I do want to address someof the things he's talking about
because I do agree with a lot,but I just don't agree that we have
(12:33):
to shut down the other side.
To say, like, that's silly.
So Gary's story is that hismom and dad are working class blue
collar people and he grew upin a time when they could afford
to buy a home.
And being able to own a homeis part of the dream to kind of make
it.
And he goes, today no one canbuy a home because all the barons
and the tycoons have taken allthe property from you and have raised
(12:54):
the rate so much so that youcan't afford to live where you live.
I think that's a real problem.
But I also kind of think,like, I'm growing up in this time
or maybe that time is over.
Maybe in the 30 years in whichI've been working, the, the real
estate market, the politicalclimate, the economic climate has
changed so much so that peoplewho are new in business today or
(13:15):
new in life can, can afford tobuy a home anymore.
I don't know I don't know.
But I know my parents worked areally long time 50 years ago to
be able to afford a home for us.
And the time in which it tookme to buy a home was much less.
Here's.
Here's point of reference.
I think my parents bought.
I think it's called aPonderosa home, which for them was
(13:36):
like, a big deal.
I don't know if that really means.
And I think the house waslike, a $250,000 house, which back
then is a lot of money.
And then I remember, like,within five years of graduating from
school, starting my business,my wife and I, we bought our first
home together.
And that house was $510,000,and I was able to pay it off pretty
quickly.
(13:56):
And so, like, for me, relativeto my parents coming to America and
my ability to buy a home thatis may not adjusted for inflation,
but twice as much as theirhome in less than five years of just
being an art school student,that says, like, we're moving the
right direction, but maybe notso much today anymore.
(14:16):
And I'm not professing to beany kind of real estate or economics
expert here.
I'm just kind of usinganecdotal stories here.
Have you seen who moved my cheese?
Or have you heard that phrase?
I've actually read the book.
Yes, the book.
And then, oh, man, I.
So I've read.
I've seen the.
I haven't read the book.
I've seen the YouTube videothat's a tiny video version of it,
(14:37):
where you have these micerunning around the maze, and they're
like, who moved my cheese?
He moved my cheese.
And I feel like, as marketers,we're so used to that, because it's
like, oh, I used to run theseads and to this audience, and now
it doesn't work.
Someone's moved my cheese, andyou go find the new cheese, and then
someone else has moved my cheese.
And then you think everythingthat you think that works in marketing
at some point runs its course.
(14:58):
And then you have to find thenew cheese, and it's just a thing
that you keep constantlyhaving to do it.
And even though I think somany marketers, business owners have
this vision and this dream ofthis one marketing channel that just
works every single time,forever and ever and ever, and they
never have to touch it ever again.
It's like, it's not going to happen.
There's no point even thinkinglike that.
(15:19):
But if you think that thecheese is always moving, then what
it makes me think is, what arepeople going to Say about this time
in the future, if we'relooking back at the 70s, 80s, 90s
and going, oh my God, youcould buy a house for this much and
you could do this for thismuch and you had all these opportunities
that you don't have anymore,what are people going to say about
2025 in the future?
And they'll say things like,oh my goodness, this technology was
(15:42):
brand new, it was moving everything.
These people could come out ofnowhere and they could make huge
businesses with just one person.
We could have the firstbillion dollar company with one per
one employee or no employees.
And oh my God, you could buyAI domain name because they were
available and now there's none available.
And it's like, I feel like youjust have it every single year and
(16:03):
it repeats again and again and again.
And there are going to bethings that people look back at 2025
and say that if you think in acertain way, you will miss at the
time when it's happening,which is just as dangerous as demonizing
the wealthy.
It's like thinking there's noopportunities around right now when
they're so unbelievably are.
So I feel like I so muchprefer believing what's helpful rather
(16:28):
than believing what's true.
It's almost like, yep, sure,there's all these bad things that
could happen and there's allthese bad things going on and there's
all these unfairnesses, but ifyou just think, but I can make it
anyway, then you probably willfind a way somehow.
Okay, so how do we attack thisso that we're contributing to the
dialogue here?
How do we take on one of the.
(16:49):
Pull on one of the threads sothat we can have a meaningful deep
dive conversation about itthat maybe wasn't present in that
conversation where two peopleweren't seemingly talking on the
same wavelength.
Is the question who's the real enemy?
Is it the AI companies?
Is it the billionaires?
Is it the education system?
Is it the government?
(17:10):
Who is the actual enemy inthat conversation?
Or how do, who do we want toidentify as enemy?
Or is that the conversation altogether?
Who do you want to blame?
Yeah, kind of.
Who do you want to blame?
Because I think it's, it'sjust an age old thing that.
Well, it's populism, like you said.
It's.
Yes, if you, you.
There's lots of people who arenot, who represent normal people
(17:32):
and they are all against thisgroup of elites and it's so, it's
so standard and we do it in,we do it in copywriting we make an
enemy, but when the enemy isthe elites and the normal people
are the normal people, it'slike they have to, they have to represent
something.
And in this debate the elitesare the rich people, but in the AI
(17:54):
conversation the elites arethe AI companies and we're the normal
people.
So it's like, which is thereal enemy?
We got all the enemies.
I have an idea.
So while, while Gary wastalking about the, the ills of the
economic situation thatexists, I was thinking, is there
somewhere in the world whereit actually is more ideal, where
(18:14):
it's working much better thanwhere you have it right now?
And if there such a place, whydon't we model ourselves after that
place?
So I kept thinking, and so asI zoom out, I think there's basically,
as far as I know, three kindof major ways of governance or kind
of economic systems.
There's capitalism, socialismand communism.
(18:35):
And they kind of run thatspectrum, right?
Or we all understand the freemarket system, that's capitalism.
And then we all understandlike communism, everybody's equal,
everybody makes the sameamount of money, which in practice
isn't real at all.
And there's socialism, whichis some kind of blended version of
that, where there's some staterun things and there's some free
enterprise and capitalism.
And that seems to be likewhere most of the world is not pure
(18:57):
capitalism, not pure communism.
But is there a place in theworld that you can think of where
everyone has an equal shot,that rich people pay their taxes,
there's universal basicincome, everything is kind of working
really well.
You travel a lot.
Okay, you're shaking your head.
So for people on the podcast, Jody's.
(19:18):
Like, no, I feel likeeverywhere has its problems.
I feel like you just have tochoose your, you go somewhere knowing
that there's certain thingsthat are wrong with the system and
then believing that you canjust find the place with the problems
that you're okay to deal with.
And not even necessarily in,in politics, but because I, I think
(19:38):
I've lived in about 35different countries, sorry, 35 different
cities.
And not to do with politics,but they all have different weather,
they all have differentwalkability, they all have different
friendliness to women anddifferent safety and all of these
different things.
And I have not yet foundsomewhere that is the absolute perfect
year round sunshine, amazingwalkability, perfect for gyms, perfect
(20:03):
Internet access and high air quality.
The closest is Hawaiiprobably, but then you've got that
whole time zone thing, sothere's always something wrong.
But I feel like that's exactlythe same with this.
And.
And even if there isn'tsomething wrong, you've always got
someone who's going todisagree with that way of running
things, depending on whetherthey're the person who makes the
rules or the person who breaksthe rules, or the person who wants
(20:26):
to live there and work, or thepeople who wants.
The person who wants to livethere and be retired.
So I don't think.
I don't think I've hadanywhere perfect.
Have you?
No, but I've only lived mostlyone place in California.
I've visited many places.
But maybe the model isn'tabout perfect, but like mostly perfect,
where there's a place thatthey seem to have most of it done
(20:48):
right.
When there's equality andthere's an ability to move up the
social economic ladder, thereis a healthy tax, but the tax money
is being used for things totake care of the people.
I feel like it's alwayssomewhere in Scandinavia.
They're the people and theplaces who get it the most.
Right, because they tax a lot,they charge a lot, they look after
(21:09):
people a lot.
But it's cold.
It's cold.
But we're not talking aboutthat though.
I'm just talking about formsof governance, because we can use
the same form of governance ina more moderate climate, I think.
But then the people in, say, Ihave friends in Sweden, they're like,
we pay a lot of taxes.
It's a lot.
And there's also theculturally where they.
(21:32):
They don't seem.
There's the.
The law of Yanta and there'sthis lagom and these things that
there's.
They don't celebrate exceptionalism.
It, like the way that the.
Maybe in America that we do.
So there.
There's some kind of innerconflict that I. I feel when I'm
talking to people from those areas.
Right?
Yeah.
Because if you fundamentallybelieve that people should be taxed
(21:54):
less and they should maketheir own money, then you're not
going to like it.
But if the taxation is higherand that means that the streets are
cleaner and there's lesscrime, then that's gonna suit people,
suit some people at the same.
At the same time, I reallythink it depends on personal preference,
which is so strange becausemaybe we're not that similar underneath
and we all do actually wantdifferent things.
(22:15):
But then does it come back tothe fundamental belief of how much
you believe that you are incontrol of your own destiny and you
can affect your own situation?
Because what is.
Is it a Noel Gallagher quote?
Is it something about the leftdon't care about the aspirational,
and the right don't care aboutthe poor?
(22:37):
Something like that.
It's some kind of phrase likethat said by someone in Oasis.
I don't know what he knowsabout it at all, but I quite like
the idea that it's like,choose your.
Choose the thing that youdecide to care about and then work
back from there.
Yes, well, I'll.
I'll state what I care about,and then maybe you can state what
you care about.
And let's see where we agreeor disagree.
Jodi?
(22:57):
Yep.
I like paying taxes.
I know it's weird.
I like paying taxes, but Idon't like how my taxes are being
used because our streets aredirty, the roads are unpaved, and
there's a lot of homelesspeople in California, and there aren't
a lot of social welfareprograms that help support people
when they're falling down.
And so when you lose your jobor certain things happen to you,
(23:20):
economic crisis, the socialnetwork here is not very strong in
terms of supporting you.
Or, I'm sorry, the social net,not the social network, isn't very
strong in supporting you whenyou fall down.
And when I visit countrieswhere the streets are really clean
and they look after people andthere aren't as many homeless people,
I feel really good about beingthere, and I don't mind paying taxes.
(23:41):
The other part to it is Ithink rich people have many more
loopholes and ways of hidingtheir wealth, about moving the money
around so they're not payingtheir fair share.
Fair share meaning apercentage of the income that they
make relative to everyone else.
And I think that's a problem.
I think there's a WarrenBuffett quote that said something
like, the top nine richestpeople in America pay their share
(24:04):
of taxes.
The rest would not have to payat all, or the 9% or something like
that.
The rest of the 91% won't haveto pay.
And so we know this, and it'sshocking because when we get into
politics and they startauditing people's tax returns, they're
saying, that person who made Xamount of money a hundred, a thousand
times more than you paid zero taxes.
(24:26):
That does bother me.
In a place where we try tohave some equality, that's a problem.
So that's my take on it.
I also like paying taxes.
I also like living in cleanand safe places.
I feel like my favorite placesto live or to be are places where
doing cool stuff iscelebrated, where the goal is for
(24:50):
you to be as successful aspossible, and where there's never
any sense of Tall Poppysyndrome, or like, oh, why are you
getting above your station?
Or anything like that.
Because I just like the ideaof, yes, go for it.
Why wouldn't you?
I think my enemy is not thegovernment or anything other than,
(25:12):
like, your own limitingbeliefs or what you get told is not
possible.
So I heard.
I overheard a conversationyesterday, and it was this little
boy, and he was doing.
He was trying to.
He was trying to ride his bike.
It was like a standard situation.
He had stabilizers, and it'shis first bike.
And his.
I guess it was his nanny.
She was just so good.
(25:32):
She was so patient.
She had infinite patience withthis guy, with this little tiny kid
trying to get on his bike.
And she's just like, no, youcan do it.
No, keep doing it.
No, no, no.
You're going to work it out.
And it's like, everyone needsthat person in their life.
Everyone needs that person going.
Keep going.
I know.
Yes.
It's not fair.
Yes.
Gravity is there, and you hadnever done this before.
I get it, I get it.
But keep going.
And I feel like that's myfundamental belief for just the whole
(25:55):
of society.
And maybe I just live in a.
In a fairyland where I believethat that could be possible for everyone,
but that's definitely theworld that I feel like I want to
live in.
Well, let's do this, then.
Let's acknowledge that both ofus have some form of privilege, because
we wouldn't be where we arewithout some of that.
Now.
There are things that you'rejust born with, and there's the things
(26:15):
that we've earned and worked for.
So we can't be accountable forwhat we're born into.
You're born poor, you're born rich.
You're born white, black,Asian, whatever it is.
Tall, short, you can playbasketball, you can't play.
Whatever it is.
I can't sing.
Right.
So we're just born with that.
So when we map out twoscenarios and you have to ask yourself,
(26:35):
which would you prefer to livein if one of them was true?
Where on one side, it's likeeverything's f. There's nothing you
can do about it.
The system's all broken.
And let's just be angrybecause we're powerless to do anything,
whereas the other one says,the system might be broken, but there's
something that you can doabout it individually, and you'll
(26:56):
be rewarded for the kind ofrisk that you take in the world.
And it may not be True.
But I personally would preferto believe that I actually have some
level of agency where myactions have consequences.
The amount of risk that I takehas a reward.
And I'm going to choose tocontinue to believe that that's possible,
(27:16):
even if it's not.
Because the alternative isjust to resign and say nothing.
I can't do anything.
It doesn't matter if I show upto work or if I don't work or if
I take care of myself ordon't, because the outcome is the
same, because one is more of afatalist point of view and the other
one is kind of, we have morefree will and agency.
What are your thoughts on that?
I also want the same outcomeas you do.
(27:37):
I think that something Ithought of a lot about is it's like
everyone who has kids wantsthe best for their kids.
They want to.
They want to earn as much aspossible, they want to pass on as
much as possible.
They want to give their kidsthe best start ever.
But when you've got a kid witha rich parent, you're like, oh, you've
got a rich parent.
You had a massive head start.
(27:58):
Like, that's not cool.
So it's almost like, which is it?
Do we want to provide lots ofpeople so they never have to think
about anything?
Or do we want people to alwaysstart from zero because then they've
got where they are withouthaving any help?
I don't.
I don't know what the rightanswer is in that.
And then it almost feels likeif you have come from a, like, very
(28:19):
privileged, privilegedposition, which both, most of us
have, it's then like, do youplay down your kind of ace cards
because you didn't earn them,they just were given to you by parents
or by situation?
Or do you say, do you use themor do you play them down?
And which is the right thingto do?
Because there are so many.
I think about this a lot.
Like there are so many peopleborn with less than me who've made
(28:41):
so much more of it, but thenthere are so many people born with
way more than me who've madeless of it.
So then which is it?
How do you decide which wayyou're going to choose?
And I don't totally know theanswer for that.
And I've probably playedthings down before because you were
almost like, oh, well, yeah,okay, I had this head start, but
no, I got there on my own as well.
And you almost have tosometimes feel like you have to prove
(29:03):
yourself more to kind of provethat you didn't use the Ace card.
But then I also believe inusing your ace cards.
I think it's very, very confusing.
Confusing?
Just life in general.
Yes, but let's, let's justkind of look at, let's abstract some
of these things and see how wefeel because it's easier to understand.
If you were 6 foot 1, modelesque with beautiful cheekbones and
(29:28):
eye structure and all thatkind of stuff and you became a model,
would I be mad at you that youwere born with good genetics?
No.
And we show up to the cinemato watch really good looking people
pretend to be somebody and wecelebrate that.
Or someone can hit that superhigh dolphin note on the microphone.
I'm a net at, you know, thegifts that they were given.
(29:49):
No, I mean a lot of work wentinto refining that instrument that
they play, their vocal cordsand a lot of dedication and focus
and possibly just risking alot to be able to say, I can, I can
make it in this career in thisindustry where the percentage of
success is very, very low.
So I would get mad at anybodydoing that.
(30:10):
And also in, in business when,when I, when I'm coaching folks,
I say, how do you get a reallybig client?
Well, you work with a smallclient and you trade up and you keep
trading up until you get tothe bigger client.
And so if you have resourcesto use, it'd be foolish not to use
the resources.
And if you were born intoaccess and privilege and money and
(30:32):
capital and investment andmentorship, it would be foolish for
you not to use that later on.
How you use that wealth thatyou acquire is really important and
that's on you.
But if you're given a headstart, would you run backwards?
Do you wait?
I don't think so.
That wouldn't be very smart.
It wouldn't be very smart.
But I think people do it.
I think people play down theiradvantages because they believe that
(30:54):
it should be hard.
There's a friend who I've beengoing for walks with here, she's
called Anya.
She's a model.
She's absolutely beautiful.
But it took her a while toalmost accept it, to be like, no,
I'm going to be a model.
It's cool.
Because before then she waspursuing other different careers
and then she was always kindof resisting it.
Maybe because it felt like theeasy thing to do.
It felt like, oh, well, Ilike, I've got these looks, I match
(31:16):
the people in the magazines,therefore that's what I'm going to
do.
It was like, no, I'm going todo this other Stuff, because I think
we arbitrarily make stuffharder for ourselves, because I almost
think it's actually not thattrendy to use all your race cards
or to acknowledge yourprivilege or the stuff that you were
born with and then to.
And then to play that.
I think there's kind of an underdog.
There's like a sexy underdogthing that sometimes means that we
(31:38):
ignore them.
Yeah, I don't know anybodylike that.
And I've always been pushingpeople to use all of the gifts that
you were given.
The way that you look, the wayyou sound, your brain, how you see
the world, your talent.
If you have great hand eyecoordination, use as much of the
gifts you were given as possible.
Because as long as I've beenable to say this part, I think we're
(32:00):
all designed to do somethingvery remarkable in this lifetime,
and most of us struggle tofind what that thing is.
Many of us go to the grave notknowing what it is.
And those of us who can findit are happier, healthier, wealthier
because of it.
And so I don't.
I'm not quite sure, like, ifyou're a beautiful person, you're
like, well, I'm not gonna do that.
Well, that's on you, and Idon't really care.
And you.
(32:21):
You don't have to use that ifyou don't want to.
Like, there's a guy, I. I sawthis on a news report.
He's called a man with agolden voice.
So he's standing out therehomeless, and he's holding up a sign,
you know, please help out.
And somebody discovered himand discovered that he had this really
beautiful radio voice andcould do on that voiceovers, but
he got mixed up in drugs andwound up on the street.
(32:44):
And they cleaned him up andgot him an opportunity, and he does.
He has the most amazing voice.
And since then, he's.
He's done well.
He's battled with his drugaddiction, whatever, alcohol abuse,
whatever.
But he's done really wellbecause he was able to use that voice.
And if you have such a voice,why wouldn't you use it?
And it's almost like you'retaking a gift and you're throwing
in the trash.
(33:04):
I don't understand that.
But, Jodi, it seems like youdo understand this perspective.
So one story that spring tomind is when I was running my agency,
maybe about 10 or so yearsago, I went to an interview to join
the board of a charity, andthere are a few different people
being interviewed to be onthis board, because it was a Cool
(33:26):
company.
And when I was there, I wasbeing interviewed by two people.
One of them was an accountant.
The other one was an HR lawyer.
And the accountant said to me,oh, you stand a really good chance
of getting a place on thisboard because we're looking for a
young female.
And the HR lawyer just put herhead in her hands, was like, don't
(33:49):
say that.
And there was an element of, Idon't want to.
I think I might have actuallysaid to them, like, well, can I.
Can I apply for this positionas, like, an old male then?
Because I don't want the tokengesture seat.
I don't want the seat that'slike, oh, this is the seat.
That.
That means that we're going togive people concessions.
It's like, no, I want to bethere on merit.
I don't want to be there justbecause I'm young.
(34:10):
I don't want to be there justbecause I'm a woman.
I want to be there because Iwould contribute a lot to this board,
and I have some good things tosay, and I know about this topic.
So there's.
I definitely think there's anelement of.
I don't want to feel like I'mjust in this room because of that
one thing that I couldn't even control.
There's something more that'slike, I want to be there because
I've worked really hard andI've earned it, that feels like it
(34:32):
means more.
The person who said that toyou, was their intention to say that?
To patronize you?
No, not at all.
He was being really.
What do you think theirintention was?
He was being really sweet.
He was telling me that I. Istood a really good chance and I
should be really excited.
And I was like, yeah, but I'mnot excited because I want to get
the position because I'm thebest person for the job, not because
(34:54):
I'm like, I don't.
So when.
When we stand by, I guess youand I were.
We're minorities, right?
Yeah.
In that you and I were part.
Of a protected class.
I'm a person of color, Asian,and you're female.
So we're part of a protected class.
And we say oftentimes.
And I'll just say this outthere, and I'm not saying this with
(35:15):
any kind of hate or venom,that when we see a panel of speakers,
generally speaking, they'reheterosexual, older white men, generally
speaking.
And that's the thing.
And we say to ourselves, like,how come they're not.
More diversity.
So when they actually bring onpeople Diversity.
It's like, no, you need tobring me on because of my merit,
because I deserve to be here.
It's like we're fighting themachine that we wanted to change,
(35:36):
which I don't totally get.
Now.
If he said in a patronizingway like, oh, you have a good shot,
like toots, you know, like,what F you, you mother effer.
But it's like, no, we'reactually looking for young, smart,
brilliant women just like you do.
Yeah.
Do we take offense?
Firstly, I would love it if Iheard a British people say toots,
because that would be awesome.
(35:58):
I would have been like, how I.
Said that, by the way.
I was like, that could comeout really wrong.
But you know, is it an Oprah quote?
Just be excellent.
Just the, the kind of antidoteto any ism, sexism, racism, any ism
is just, just be excellent.
And I feel like if you, if youjust believe that you are doing everything
you can to be excellent andthen you get that seat that you think
(36:22):
that you shouldn't need.
Yeah, I don't, it doesn't sitright that right with me.
But maybe that's, maybe that's wrong.
Maybe, maybe I've ignored kindof pirate moves that I could have
made because I'm like, no, Iwant to go against the petrosatian
old white men who are on thispanel right now.
Well, let me ask you thisquestion since you, you reminded
me of that.
(36:44):
Have you had to play something down?
I for sure played things down,so too many things I played down.
One of them is I used to run asocial media agency and I got a Forbes
column about halfway intorunning that social media agency.
And Now I write three articlesa day.
And one of them is aboutLinkedIn because as we discussed
(37:07):
in the last episode, LinkedInis life.
And when I had my social mediaagency, I posted zero times about
LinkedIn.
I didn't talk about LinkedInat all.
Even though that was literallymy topic.
It was literally what I had.
What, what I, what I had wasdoing client doing for clients.
And I just completely playeddown an ace card that I had, partly
(37:28):
because I just didn't see it.
And I wonder if it's partlybecause I was looking for the difficult
way of doing stuff.
I was like firmly on thestruggle bus, ignoring the turn off
to Easy street and ignoring itand not using it whatsoever.
So I don't know if I've doneit intentionally, but I've definitely
done it accidentally.
And there's probably stuff nowwhere I'm not, I'm not.
(37:49):
I've got.
I've got the ace card, and I'mnot using it because I.
There's something that tellsme to struggle.
Is there any.
Is there any ace cards thatyou're not playing on purpose?
No, I'm trying to play all myace cards all the time.
If I have cards, I play themall the time.
I think the time in which Istruggled with this was probably
through junior high and highschool, not wanting to stand out.
(38:09):
But now the last thing I wantto do is to blend in.
So I play all my cards,whatever cards I got.
That is the episode.
Thanks again for listening toan episode of Jody and Chris Don't
Know Anything.
Is the question, who's thereal enemy?
Is it the AI companies?
Is it the billionaires?
Is it the education system?
Is it the government?
Who is the actual enemy?
If you are born into wealth,it's a lot easier to use your money
to make money.
How much you believe that youare in control of your own destiny
and you can affect your own situation.
(00:22):
There's a popular idea that'sgoing on right now, given the global
economic condition that we'rein, with the parties moving far right.
And it seems like we're headedtowards a recession or much worse.
And there's this conversationthat's happening out in the ethos
about entrepreneurship.
It's this dream that's beingsold to people to keep people poor.
(00:44):
And recently I watched this episode.
There was a hot debate onStephen Barlett's show, the Diary
of a CEO between Gary and ourfriend, mutual friend, Daniel Priestley.
And they're, they're kind ofgoing at it kind of at each other
a little bit, a little hard.
And Gary was going much harderthan Daniel.
And I was a little surprisedwhen I scrolled down to read all
(01:06):
the comments at how one sidedthe support was.
On one hand, Gary was sayingthat rich people should be taxed,
but he doesn't call that asthe redistribution of wealth.
He's not exactly sure how, howto implement this because I wasn't
clear.
And Daniel kept asking himabout this, whereas Daniel is saying,
you know, I grew up relatively poor.
(01:28):
I was able to make somethingof myself and I want to help other
people do the same.
And Gary's like, that's a pipedream that doesn't happen anymore,
that cannot exist.
And he goes on and on aboutthis kind of stuff.
So I thought, I know another entrepreneur.
I know someone who's kind ofbuilt themselves up and has and is
in a position to help people.
Now, I do want to say this toour audience who's listening, that
all strategy is autobiographical.
(01:51):
This is a line I learned fromBlair ends.
So we, we're going to talkabout the things that we've done
naturally and the things thatwe believe in naturally, because
otherwise we'd be kind of a hypocrite.
So I just want to put it out there.
Now, I'm not how familiar, I'mnot sure how familiar you are with
that specific episode or thearguments on both sides.
But let's just, let's justbegin the conversation there, Jodi.
(02:11):
Yeah, let's do it.
Is that okay?
So, yeah, yeah, absolutely.
Okay.
I think, yeah.
I mean, you go for It.
How do you all start?
I think Gary's background,he's an economist, and according
to his own biography, he'svery bright, top percentile, goes
to one of the best schools anddoes this thing where he's trading
(02:32):
or leveraging things.
And he's made a fortune,according to him, betting on the
economy doing poorly.
And he's done well.
I think it's called short selling.
And so the reason why Imentioned that is because, okay,
I'm going to put it out there.
I don't have a lot of love forpeople who are academics, people
who make money on otherpeople's money both ways.
(02:56):
Betting on things going welland betting on things when they go
poorly because they don'tactually make anything in the world.
And I have a lot of love,respect for people, small mom and
pop people or multimillionaireor billionaires who craft something,
who provide jobs for peoplewho make life a little bit better.
Because one of those thingsthat we talk about is we're always
(03:18):
looking for some kind oftransformation to go from a desired
state to desired future state.
And the one thing I don'tunderstand is why there's so much
money involved in trading andmoving money around, because none
of them actually do anything.
But what they do is theyprofit from people who, who do do
things.
And I was a little shocked andI was reading all the comments and
how popular Gary's sentimentsare, and it felt like he was saying
(03:42):
to me, to the audience,everything's effed up.
The world conspires againstyou and let's rage against the machine,
but really nothing practicalabout it.
That's my take.
I think that overall it's kindof a scary thought to me to make
rich people the enemy and to make.
(04:04):
To kind of demonize thewealthy, like that fundamentally
really scares me because Ithink it's almost like you create
an enemy out of something likerich people, and then you put them
in a certain place where youhave a certain set of beliefs around
them.
Like, rich people are greedy.
Rich people have cheated toget there.
Rich people, they're not like us.
And you kind of create this usand them.
(04:26):
But then it means that thepeople who want to then get out of
a bad financial situation andthen trying to do the thing, trying
to achieve the thing thatthey're also demonizing.
So it's like, well, which is it?
Do you want to.
Do you want to demonize thewealthy and then not try and be wealthy,
or do you want to demonize thewealthy and still work to do it,
in which case you're neverreally going to do it because you're
(04:48):
always going to createarbitrary, arbitrary ceilings.
Because fundamentally youbelieve that rich equals bad.
And that, to me, is terrifyingas a thing to teach people.
I think so.
I think it's not a great ideato label somebody something that's
not you and then demonize it.
Like, poor people aren't bad,rich people aren't bad, middle class
people aren't bad.
It's just we're in different states.
(05:09):
I do want to acknowledge thisbefore people go super crazy on me
and angry in the commentsbecause Simon Squibb started talking
about this and he had somereally bad blowback on this.
And I want to try to have amore nuanced conversation about this,
more tempered.
And I just want to say this.
I want the game to be fair.
And I want to acknowledge thatthe game isn't fair.
(05:29):
Because if you are born intowealth, it's a lot easier to use
your money to make money.
You get access to the verybest teachers and schools and programs
and neighborhoods.
You don't have to worry aboutfood shortage.
And most of the times you haveparents or people to look after you.
You're not concerned aboutthose same kind of basic necessities
in life and how very wealthypeople pay very little tax.
(05:50):
That bothers me.
I believe in fairness and I'mfor things that level the playing
field, not to punish peoplefor doing well enough to punish people
for doing poorly.
And one very specific topicthat is hot on everybody's mind because
it's so controversial is AIand how AI is going to be disruptive
force to displace workingpeople, especially artists and creatives,
(06:12):
people in my community, peoplenear and dear to my heart.
And one of the things that istrending right now is the Studio
Ghibli filter that's being puton everything right now.
And Miyazaki has been onrecord saying he's really against
AI.
Granted that that same wasmade eight years ago, so it wasn't
like reaction to what's goingon right now.
But the engines are trained onpeople's artwork.
(06:32):
And so there does feel to besomething like unfair about this.
So my thought, my proposal tothis is, you know what?
The AI companies get a lot ofmoney and they're using, according
to the last thing I saw, 10%of the world's energy in processing
power right now.
Just that is a staggering amount.
And it's only going to get higher.
So my thought is we need somekind of universal basic income and
(06:55):
these AI companies that areprofiting on ideas should have to
pay a fairly hefty tax becausethey have very low overhead or people
working for them.
And so they can help tocontribute their fair share in displacing
jobs, but also profiting fromideas that aren't their own.
Why don't we start there, Jodi?
Because I know you haveperspective on AI.
(07:15):
AI is stealing your content.
100% is stealing all of our content.
It's so scary.
We might have talked aboutthis before, Chris, but the first
time I ever used ChatGPT, Ityped into it.
Actually, this has kind oflinked it up.
So I. I typed into ChatGPT,write me an article called how to
Raise Entrepreneurial Kids.
Because I'd written an articleand then wrote that book with Daniel
(07:36):
Priestley, who was in that episode.
And actually, let me just goon a tiny tangent.
When we.
When Daniel and I released thebook Cat Ra Entrepreneurial Kids,
we were sharing about it onTwitter, and we got a message back
from someone who said, look,this just isn't fair.
You can't teach people thatthey can just go and be anything
they want, that they can havebig dreams, that they can make something
of themselves.
(07:56):
You just can't do it.
And they shared this reallylong message.
And I was like, I don't know,what do I.
Like, what do I say?
Do I get involved?
And Daniel just responded, whydon't we call our next book how to
Raise Kids with Low Expectations?
As a.
Just as a response.
But, yeah, so the first thingI put into ChatGPT was write this
article, how to RaiseEntrepreneurial Kids.
(08:19):
And it.
And it came out.
ChatGPT came out with my exactarticle that I'd already written.
And it was like, this isliterally my content.
It's in there.
But now someone else can typea few prompts in and few questions
in and get the exact same article.
Like, it's so unbelievablydidn't sound right.
But I feel like where I amwith so much of this is that, yes,
(08:39):
the system's rigged.
Yes, it's not fair.
Yes, it's really, really,really annoying.
But I do kind of think that Iwould so much rather see what I can
do and take personal agencyrather than the entire system.
I feel like, for me, that'sthe difference between business entrepreneurship
being a bit scrappy, makingpirate moves, going, yeah, that's
(09:00):
not fair, but I'm gonnasucceed against the odds versus,
I guess, going into politics,because really, that's what it is.
You take this Fundamental,institutional, like inequality, and
you try and attack that.
So it's.
I feel like it's verydifferent ways of approaching the
same problem, because Ifundamentally believe that we are
all on the same page with this.
Yeah, I think so, too, Jodi,but I don't think we're approaching
(09:22):
it like we're on the same team.
I think it's.
You're in Team A or Team B,and I think that's also part of,
like, how government andsociety is set up so that we're busy
squabbling with each otherwhile the Barons take everything.
And I think that's a problem.
I feel like it would be reallynice if Daniel and Gary could agree
that ultimately they'refighting for the same thing, which
(09:42):
is equality, which isprosperity, which is people being
happy.
And they're just approachingit in very, very different ways.
They're not really.
I feel like the argument isn'tactually with each other.
No.
And they try.
So there's a couple of thingsthat were kind of strange about how
that conversation unfolded.
I think Stephen was brilliantin setting up the debate, and he
(10:03):
was fairly neutral about this.
But what he didn't do, whichbothered me a lot, was he wasn't
moderating the conversation at all.
Gary was allowed to talk foras long as you want and just be as
interruptive as he wanted to be.
And Daniel, bless him, stayedcool the entire time.
I would have lost it at some point.
I would have said, gary, canwe just agree to one rule?
I won't cut you off, andplease don't cut me off.
(10:23):
And if you ask me a question,I'll do my best to answer it.
And if I ask you a question,you'll do your best to answer it.
And we can just agree todisagree when we don't agree.
But let's just have somedecorum when we're speaking.
And oftentimes he would justhammer Priestley with some questions,
like, let him finish.
And I don't know how Danieldoes this, but he has the patience
(10:44):
of an angel.
And my patience would havebeen tested at that point.
So I would have appreciated alittle bit more moderation from Stephen
on that.
But Daniel came in to fight oneconomics, whereas anytime it came
up with the issue ofentrepreneurship, Gary was like,
that's not my thing.
He would just say, that's notmy thing.
And so I was thinking, so wejust only can debate about the things
(11:07):
that you know about, and wecan't talk about the things that
I can bring to the table.
And if Daniel said Well,that's not my thing about economics
and academics.
I don't want to debate that either.
So it was kind of a weirdsetup for the two of them to go at
it.
So I think there was somethingfundamentally kind of not balanced
in terms of like giving eachperson an opportunity to speak.
(11:29):
Whether you agree or disagreewith anybody, I think it's important
to let the other side speak.
I would quite like it ifdebates had some kind of electric
shock system where if someonetalks for too long, they just get.
And that's it.
So there's no need for moderation.
Maybe this could be done withAI in the future.
You won't even need panelhosts, you won't need facilitators.
It's just like when someone'sspoken for too long, they get a little
(11:50):
electric shock.
When someone hasn't answeredthe question, they get a little electric
shock.
And then we just run ourdebates like that.
I think that's some kind ofdystopian future.
And I think there was a moviein a book written about this somewhere.
Yeah, yeah, there's probably many.
The Hunger Games, 1984. Who knows?
(12:11):
We have to use physical punishment.
But I was just thinking, outof mutual respect, this.
Let's have a conversationabout this.
So on the one side, it's like,I think Gary's an activist and he
may or may not run for politics.
I don't know.
And it's a very populous sentiment.
And I do want to address someof the things he's talking about
because I do agree with a lot,but I just don't agree that we have
(12:33):
to shut down the other side.
To say, like, that's silly.
So Gary's story is that hismom and dad are working class blue
collar people and he grew upin a time when they could afford
to buy a home.
And being able to own a homeis part of the dream to kind of make
it.
And he goes, today no one canbuy a home because all the barons
and the tycoons have taken allthe property from you and have raised
(12:54):
the rate so much so that youcan't afford to live where you live.
I think that's a real problem.
But I also kind of think,like, I'm growing up in this time
or maybe that time is over.
Maybe in the 30 years in whichI've been working, the, the real
estate market, the politicalclimate, the economic climate has
changed so much so that peoplewho are new in business today or
(13:15):
new in life can, can afford tobuy a home anymore.
I don't know I don't know.
But I know my parents worked areally long time 50 years ago to
be able to afford a home for us.
And the time in which it tookme to buy a home was much less.
Here's.
Here's point of reference.
I think my parents bought.
I think it's called aPonderosa home, which for them was
(13:36):
like, a big deal.
I don't know if that really means.
And I think the house waslike, a $250,000 house, which back
then is a lot of money.
And then I remember, like,within five years of graduating from
school, starting my business,my wife and I, we bought our first
home together.
And that house was $510,000,and I was able to pay it off pretty
quickly.
(13:56):
And so, like, for me, relativeto my parents coming to America and
my ability to buy a home thatis may not adjusted for inflation,
but twice as much as theirhome in less than five years of just
being an art school student,that says, like, we're moving the
right direction, but maybe notso much today anymore.
(14:16):
And I'm not professing to beany kind of real estate or economics
expert here.
I'm just kind of usinganecdotal stories here.
Have you seen who moved my cheese?
Or have you heard that phrase?
I've actually read the book.
Yes, the book.
And then, oh, man, I.
So I've read.
I've seen the.
I haven't read the book.
I've seen the YouTube videothat's a tiny video version of it,
(14:37):
where you have these micerunning around the maze, and they're
like, who moved my cheese?
He moved my cheese.
And I feel like, as marketers,we're so used to that, because it's
like, oh, I used to run theseads and to this audience, and now
it doesn't work.
Someone's moved my cheese, andyou go find the new cheese, and then
someone else has moved my cheese.
And then you think everythingthat you think that works in marketing
at some point runs its course.
(14:58):
And then you have to find thenew cheese, and it's just a thing
that you keep constantlyhaving to do it.
And even though I think somany marketers, business owners have
this vision and this dream ofthis one marketing channel that just
works every single time,forever and ever and ever, and they
never have to touch it ever again.
It's like, it's not going to happen.
There's no point even thinkinglike that.
(15:19):
But if you think that thecheese is always moving, then what
it makes me think is, what arepeople going to Say about this time
in the future, if we'relooking back at the 70s, 80s, 90s
and going, oh my God, youcould buy a house for this much and
you could do this for thismuch and you had all these opportunities
that you don't have anymore,what are people going to say about
2025 in the future?
And they'll say things like,oh my goodness, this technology was
(15:42):
brand new, it was moving everything.
These people could come out ofnowhere and they could make huge
businesses with just one person.
We could have the firstbillion dollar company with one per
one employee or no employees.
And oh my God, you could buyAI domain name because they were
available and now there's none available.
And it's like, I feel like youjust have it every single year and
(16:03):
it repeats again and again and again.
And there are going to bethings that people look back at 2025
and say that if you think in acertain way, you will miss at the
time when it's happening,which is just as dangerous as demonizing
the wealthy.
It's like thinking there's noopportunities around right now when
they're so unbelievably are.
So I feel like I so muchprefer believing what's helpful rather
(16:28):
than believing what's true.
It's almost like, yep, sure,there's all these bad things that
could happen and there's allthese bad things going on and there's
all these unfairnesses, but ifyou just think, but I can make it
anyway, then you probably willfind a way somehow.
Okay, so how do we attack thisso that we're contributing to the
dialogue here?
How do we take on one of the.
(16:49):
Pull on one of the threads sothat we can have a meaningful deep
dive conversation about itthat maybe wasn't present in that
conversation where two peopleweren't seemingly talking on the
same wavelength.
Is the question who's the real enemy?
Is it the AI companies?
Is it the billionaires?
Is it the education system?
Is it the government?
(17:10):
Who is the actual enemy inthat conversation?
Or how do, who do we want toidentify as enemy?
Or is that the conversation altogether?
Who do you want to blame?
Yeah, kind of.
Who do you want to blame?
Because I think it's, it'sjust an age old thing that.
Well, it's populism, like you said.
It's.
Yes, if you, you.
There's lots of people who arenot, who represent normal people
(17:32):
and they are all against thisgroup of elites and it's so, it's
so standard and we do it in,we do it in copywriting we make an
enemy, but when the enemy isthe elites and the normal people
are the normal people, it'slike they have to, they have to represent
something.
And in this debate the elitesare the rich people, but in the AI
(17:54):
conversation the elites arethe AI companies and we're the normal
people.
So it's like, which is thereal enemy?
We got all the enemies.
I have an idea.
So while, while Gary wastalking about the, the ills of the
economic situation thatexists, I was thinking, is there
somewhere in the world whereit actually is more ideal, where
(18:14):
it's working much better thanwhere you have it right now?
And if there such a place, whydon't we model ourselves after that
place?
So I kept thinking, and so asI zoom out, I think there's basically,
as far as I know, three kindof major ways of governance or kind
of economic systems.
There's capitalism, socialismand communism.
(18:35):
And they kind of run thatspectrum, right?
Or we all understand the freemarket system, that's capitalism.
And then we all understandlike communism, everybody's equal,
everybody makes the sameamount of money, which in practice
isn't real at all.
And there's socialism, whichis some kind of blended version of
that, where there's some staterun things and there's some free
enterprise and capitalism.
And that seems to be likewhere most of the world is not pure
(18:57):
capitalism, not pure communism.
But is there a place in theworld that you can think of where
everyone has an equal shot,that rich people pay their taxes,
there's universal basicincome, everything is kind of working
really well.
You travel a lot.
Okay, you're shaking your head.
So for people on the podcast, Jody's.
(19:18):
Like, no, I feel likeeverywhere has its problems.
I feel like you just have tochoose your, you go somewhere knowing
that there's certain thingsthat are wrong with the system and
then believing that you canjust find the place with the problems
that you're okay to deal with.
And not even necessarily in,in politics, but because I, I think
(19:38):
I've lived in about 35different countries, sorry, 35 different
cities.
And not to do with politics,but they all have different weather,
they all have differentwalkability, they all have different
friendliness to women anddifferent safety and all of these
different things.
And I have not yet foundsomewhere that is the absolute perfect
year round sunshine, amazingwalkability, perfect for gyms, perfect
(20:03):
Internet access and high air quality.
The closest is Hawaiiprobably, but then you've got that
whole time zone thing, sothere's always something wrong.
But I feel like that's exactlythe same with this.
And.
And even if there isn'tsomething wrong, you've always got
someone who's going todisagree with that way of running
things, depending on whetherthey're the person who makes the
rules or the person who breaksthe rules, or the person who wants
(20:26):
to live there and work, or thepeople who wants.
The person who wants to livethere and be retired.
So I don't think.
I don't think I've hadanywhere perfect.
Have you?
No, but I've only lived mostlyone place in California.
I've visited many places.
But maybe the model isn'tabout perfect, but like mostly perfect,
where there's a place thatthey seem to have most of it done
(20:48):
right.
When there's equality andthere's an ability to move up the
social economic ladder, thereis a healthy tax, but the tax money
is being used for things totake care of the people.
I feel like it's alwayssomewhere in Scandinavia.
They're the people and theplaces who get it the most.
Right, because they tax a lot,they charge a lot, they look after
(21:09):
people a lot.
But it's cold.
It's cold.
But we're not talking aboutthat though.
I'm just talking about formsof governance, because we can use
the same form of governance ina more moderate climate, I think.
But then the people in, say, Ihave friends in Sweden, they're like,
we pay a lot of taxes.
It's a lot.
And there's also theculturally where they.
(21:32):
They don't seem.
There's the.
The law of Yanta and there'sthis lagom and these things that
there's.
They don't celebrate exceptionalism.
It, like the way that the.
Maybe in America that we do.
So there.
There's some kind of innerconflict that I. I feel when I'm
talking to people from those areas.
Right?
Yeah.
Because if you fundamentallybelieve that people should be taxed
(21:54):
less and they should maketheir own money, then you're not
going to like it.
But if the taxation is higherand that means that the streets are
cleaner and there's lesscrime, then that's gonna suit people,
suit some people at the same.
At the same time, I reallythink it depends on personal preference,
which is so strange becausemaybe we're not that similar underneath
and we all do actually wantdifferent things.
(22:15):
But then does it come back tothe fundamental belief of how much
you believe that you are incontrol of your own destiny and you
can affect your own situation?
Because what is.
Is it a Noel Gallagher quote?
Is it something about the leftdon't care about the aspirational,
and the right don't care aboutthe poor?
(22:37):
Something like that.
It's some kind of phrase likethat said by someone in Oasis.
I don't know what he knowsabout it at all, but I quite like
the idea that it's like,choose your.
Choose the thing that youdecide to care about and then work
back from there.
Yes, well, I'll.
I'll state what I care about,and then maybe you can state what
you care about.
And let's see where we agreeor disagree.
Jodi?
(22:57):
Yep.
I like paying taxes.
I know it's weird.
I like paying taxes, but Idon't like how my taxes are being
used because our streets aredirty, the roads are unpaved, and
there's a lot of homelesspeople in California, and there aren't
a lot of social welfareprograms that help support people
when they're falling down.
And so when you lose your jobor certain things happen to you,
(23:20):
economic crisis, the socialnetwork here is not very strong in
terms of supporting you.
Or, I'm sorry, the social net,not the social network, isn't very
strong in supporting you whenyou fall down.
And when I visit countrieswhere the streets are really clean
and they look after people andthere aren't as many homeless people,
I feel really good about beingthere, and I don't mind paying taxes.
(23:41):
The other part to it is Ithink rich people have many more
loopholes and ways of hidingtheir wealth, about moving the money
around so they're not payingtheir fair share.
Fair share meaning apercentage of the income that they
make relative to everyone else.
And I think that's a problem.
I think there's a WarrenBuffett quote that said something
like, the top nine richestpeople in America pay their share
(24:04):
of taxes.
The rest would not have to payat all, or the 9% or something like
that.
The rest of the 91% won't haveto pay.
And so we know this, and it'sshocking because when we get into
politics and they startauditing people's tax returns, they're
saying, that person who made Xamount of money a hundred, a thousand
times more than you paid zero taxes.
(24:26):
That does bother me.
In a place where we try tohave some equality, that's a problem.
So that's my take on it.
I also like paying taxes.
I also like living in cleanand safe places.
I feel like my favorite placesto live or to be are places where
doing cool stuff iscelebrated, where the goal is for
(24:50):
you to be as successful aspossible, and where there's never
any sense of Tall Poppysyndrome, or like, oh, why are you
getting above your station?
Or anything like that.
Because I just like the ideaof, yes, go for it.
Why wouldn't you?
I think my enemy is not thegovernment or anything other than,
(25:12):
like, your own limitingbeliefs or what you get told is not
possible.
So I heard.
I overheard a conversationyesterday, and it was this little
boy, and he was doing.
He was trying to.
He was trying to ride his bike.
It was like a standard situation.
He had stabilizers, and it'shis first bike.
And his.
I guess it was his nanny.
She was just so good.
(25:32):
She was so patient.
She had infinite patience withthis guy, with this little tiny kid
trying to get on his bike.
And she's just like, no, youcan do it.
No, keep doing it.
No, no, no.
You're going to work it out.
And it's like, everyone needsthat person in their life.
Everyone needs that person going.
Keep going.
I know.
Yes.
It's not fair.
Yes.
Gravity is there, and you hadnever done this before.
I get it, I get it.
But keep going.
And I feel like that's myfundamental belief for just the whole
(25:55):
of society.
And maybe I just live in a.
In a fairyland where I believethat that could be possible for everyone,
but that's definitely theworld that I feel like I want to
live in.
Well, let's do this, then.
Let's acknowledge that both ofus have some form of privilege, because
we wouldn't be where we arewithout some of that.
Now.
There are things that you'rejust born with, and there's the things
(26:15):
that we've earned and worked for.
So we can't be accountable forwhat we're born into.
You're born poor, you're born rich.
You're born white, black,Asian, whatever it is.
Tall, short, you can playbasketball, you can't play.
Whatever it is.
I can't sing.
Right.
So we're just born with that.
So when we map out twoscenarios and you have to ask yourself,
(26:35):
which would you prefer to livein if one of them was true?
Where on one side, it's likeeverything's f. There's nothing you
can do about it.
The system's all broken.
And let's just be angrybecause we're powerless to do anything,
whereas the other one says,the system might be broken, but there's
something that you can doabout it individually, and you'll
(26:56):
be rewarded for the kind ofrisk that you take in the world.
And it may not be True.
But I personally would preferto believe that I actually have some
level of agency where myactions have consequences.
The amount of risk that I takehas a reward.
And I'm going to choose tocontinue to believe that that's possible,
(27:16):
even if it's not.
Because the alternative isjust to resign and say nothing.
I can't do anything.
It doesn't matter if I show upto work or if I don't work or if
I take care of myself ordon't, because the outcome is the
same, because one is more of afatalist point of view and the other
one is kind of, we have morefree will and agency.
What are your thoughts on that?
I also want the same outcomeas you do.
(27:37):
I think that something Ithought of a lot about is it's like
everyone who has kids wantsthe best for their kids.
They want to.
They want to earn as much aspossible, they want to pass on as
much as possible.
They want to give their kidsthe best start ever.
But when you've got a kid witha rich parent, you're like, oh, you've
got a rich parent.
You had a massive head start.
(27:58):
Like, that's not cool.
So it's almost like, which is it?
Do we want to provide lots ofpeople so they never have to think
about anything?
Or do we want people to alwaysstart from zero because then they've
got where they are withouthaving any help?
I don't.
I don't know what the rightanswer is in that.
And then it almost feels likeif you have come from a, like, very
(28:19):
privileged, privilegedposition, which both, most of us
have, it's then like, do youplay down your kind of ace cards
because you didn't earn them,they just were given to you by parents
or by situation?
Or do you say, do you use themor do you play them down?
And which is the right thingto do?
Because there are so many.
I think about this a lot.
Like there are so many peopleborn with less than me who've made
(28:41):
so much more of it, but thenthere are so many people born with
way more than me who've madeless of it.
So then which is it?
How do you decide which wayyou're going to choose?
And I don't totally know theanswer for that.
And I've probably playedthings down before because you were
almost like, oh, well, yeah,okay, I had this head start, but
no, I got there on my own as well.
And you almost have tosometimes feel like you have to prove
(29:03):
yourself more to kind of provethat you didn't use the Ace card.
But then I also believe inusing your ace cards.
I think it's very, very confusing.
Confusing?
Just life in general.
Yes, but let's, let's justkind of look at, let's abstract some
of these things and see how wefeel because it's easier to understand.
If you were 6 foot 1, modelesque with beautiful cheekbones and
(29:28):
eye structure and all thatkind of stuff and you became a model,
would I be mad at you that youwere born with good genetics?
No.
And we show up to the cinemato watch really good looking people
pretend to be somebody and wecelebrate that.
Or someone can hit that superhigh dolphin note on the microphone.
I'm a net at, you know, thegifts that they were given.
(29:49):
No, I mean a lot of work wentinto refining that instrument that
they play, their vocal cordsand a lot of dedication and focus
and possibly just risking alot to be able to say, I can, I can
make it in this career in thisindustry where the percentage of
success is very, very low.
So I would get mad at anybodydoing that.
(30:10):
And also in, in business when,when I, when I'm coaching folks,
I say, how do you get a reallybig client?
Well, you work with a smallclient and you trade up and you keep
trading up until you get tothe bigger client.
And so if you have resourcesto use, it'd be foolish not to use
the resources.
And if you were born intoaccess and privilege and money and
(30:32):
capital and investment andmentorship, it would be foolish for
you not to use that later on.
How you use that wealth thatyou acquire is really important and
that's on you.
But if you're given a headstart, would you run backwards?
Do you wait?
I don't think so.
That wouldn't be very smart.
It wouldn't be very smart.
But I think people do it.
I think people play down theiradvantages because they believe that
(30:54):
it should be hard.
There's a friend who I've beengoing for walks with here, she's
called Anya.
She's a model.
She's absolutely beautiful.
But it took her a while toalmost accept it, to be like, no,
I'm going to be a model.
It's cool.
Because before then she waspursuing other different careers
and then she was always kindof resisting it.
Maybe because it felt like theeasy thing to do.
It felt like, oh, well, Ilike, I've got these looks, I match
(31:16):
the people in the magazines,therefore that's what I'm going to
do.
It was like, no, I'm going todo this other Stuff, because I think
we arbitrarily make stuffharder for ourselves, because I almost
think it's actually not thattrendy to use all your race cards
or to acknowledge yourprivilege or the stuff that you were
born with and then to.
And then to play that.
I think there's kind of an underdog.
There's like a sexy underdogthing that sometimes means that we
(31:38):
ignore them.
Yeah, I don't know anybodylike that.
And I've always been pushingpeople to use all of the gifts that
you were given.
The way that you look, the wayyou sound, your brain, how you see
the world, your talent.
If you have great hand eyecoordination, use as much of the
gifts you were given as possible.
Because as long as I've beenable to say this part, I think we're
(32:00):
all designed to do somethingvery remarkable in this lifetime,
and most of us struggle tofind what that thing is.
Many of us go to the grave notknowing what it is.
And those of us who can findit are happier, healthier, wealthier
because of it.
And so I don't.
I'm not quite sure, like, ifyou're a beautiful person, you're
like, well, I'm not gonna do that.
Well, that's on you, and Idon't really care.
And you.
(32:21):
You don't have to use that ifyou don't want to.
Like, there's a guy, I. I sawthis on a news report.
He's called a man with agolden voice.
So he's standing out therehomeless, and he's holding up a sign,
you know, please help out.
And somebody discovered himand discovered that he had this really
beautiful radio voice andcould do on that voiceovers, but
he got mixed up in drugs andwound up on the street.
(32:44):
And they cleaned him up andgot him an opportunity, and he does.
He has the most amazing voice.
And since then, he's.
He's done well.
He's battled with his drugaddiction, whatever, alcohol abuse,
whatever.
But he's done really wellbecause he was able to use that voice.
And if you have such a voice,why wouldn't you use it?
And it's almost like you'retaking a gift and you're throwing
in the trash.
(33:04):
I don't understand that.
But, Jodi, it seems like youdo understand this perspective.
So one story that spring tomind is when I was running my agency,
maybe about 10 or so yearsago, I went to an interview to join
the board of a charity, andthere are a few different people
being interviewed to be onthis board, because it was a Cool
(33:26):
company.
And when I was there, I wasbeing interviewed by two people.
One of them was an accountant.
The other one was an HR lawyer.
And the accountant said to me,oh, you stand a really good chance
of getting a place on thisboard because we're looking for a
young female.
And the HR lawyer just put herhead in her hands, was like, don't
(33:49):
say that.
And there was an element of, Idon't want to.
I think I might have actuallysaid to them, like, well, can I.
Can I apply for this positionas, like, an old male then?
Because I don't want the tokengesture seat.
I don't want the seat that'slike, oh, this is the seat.
That.
That means that we're going togive people concessions.
It's like, no, I want to bethere on merit.
I don't want to be there justbecause I'm young.
(34:10):
I don't want to be there justbecause I'm a woman.
I want to be there because Iwould contribute a lot to this board,
and I have some good things tosay, and I know about this topic.
So there's.
I definitely think there's anelement of.
I don't want to feel like I'mjust in this room because of that
one thing that I couldn't even control.
There's something more that'slike, I want to be there because
I've worked really hard andI've earned it, that feels like it
(34:32):
means more.
The person who said that toyou, was their intention to say that?
To patronize you?
No, not at all.
He was being really.
What do you think theirintention was?
He was being really sweet.
He was telling me that I. Istood a really good chance and I
should be really excited.
And I was like, yeah, but I'mnot excited because I want to get
the position because I'm thebest person for the job, not because
(34:54):
I'm like, I don't.
So when.
When we stand by, I guess youand I were.
We're minorities, right?
Yeah.
In that you and I were part.
Of a protected class.
I'm a person of color, Asian,and you're female.
So we're part of a protected class.
And we say oftentimes.
And I'll just say this outthere, and I'm not saying this with
(35:15):
any kind of hate or venom,that when we see a panel of speakers,
generally speaking, they'reheterosexual, older white men, generally
speaking.
And that's the thing.
And we say to ourselves, like,how come they're not.
More diversity.
So when they actually bring onpeople Diversity.
It's like, no, you need tobring me on because of my merit,
because I deserve to be here.
It's like we're fighting themachine that we wanted to change,
(35:36):
which I don't totally get.
Now.
If he said in a patronizingway like, oh, you have a good shot,
like toots, you know, like,what F you, you mother effer.
But it's like, no, we'reactually looking for young, smart,
brilliant women just like you do.
Yeah.
Do we take offense?
Firstly, I would love it if Iheard a British people say toots,
because that would be awesome.
(35:58):
I would have been like, how I.
Said that, by the way.
I was like, that could comeout really wrong.
But you know, is it an Oprah quote?
Just be excellent.
Just the, the kind of antidoteto any ism, sexism, racism, any ism
is just, just be excellent.
And I feel like if you, if youjust believe that you are doing everything
you can to be excellent andthen you get that seat that you think
(36:22):
that you shouldn't need.
Yeah, I don't, it doesn't sitright that right with me.
But maybe that's, maybe that's wrong.
Maybe, maybe I've ignored kindof pirate moves that I could have
made because I'm like, no, Iwant to go against the petrosatian
old white men who are on thispanel right now.
Well, let me ask you thisquestion since you, you reminded
me of that.
(36:44):
Have you had to play something down?
I for sure played things down,so too many things I played down.
One of them is I used to run asocial media agency and I got a Forbes
column about halfway intorunning that social media agency.
And Now I write three articlesa day.
And one of them is aboutLinkedIn because as we discussed
(37:07):
in the last episode, LinkedInis life.
And when I had my social mediaagency, I posted zero times about
LinkedIn.
I didn't talk about LinkedInat all.
Even though that was literallymy topic.
It was literally what I had.
What, what I, what I had wasdoing client doing for clients.
And I just completely playeddown an ace card that I had, partly
(37:28):
because I just didn't see it.
And I wonder if it's partlybecause I was looking for the difficult
way of doing stuff.
I was like firmly on thestruggle bus, ignoring the turn off
to Easy street and ignoring itand not using it whatsoever.
So I don't know if I've doneit intentionally, but I've definitely
done it accidentally.
And there's probably stuff nowwhere I'm not, I'm not.
(37:49):
I've got.
I've got the ace card, and I'mnot using it because I.
There's something that tellsme to struggle.
Is there any.
Is there any ace cards thatyou're not playing on purpose?
No, I'm trying to play all myace cards all the time.
If I have cards, I play themall the time.
I think the time in which Istruggled with this was probably
through junior high and highschool, not wanting to stand out.
(38:09):
But now the last thing I wantto do is to blend in.
So I play all my cards,whatever cards I got.
That is the episode.
Thanks again for listening toan episode of Jody and Chris Don't
Know Anything.
Popular Podcasts
United States of Kennedy
United States of Kennedy is a podcast about our cultural fascination with the Kennedy dynasty. Every week, hosts Lyra Smith and George Civeris go into one aspect of the Kennedy story.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com