Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Some insurers. So you're big insurance company, don't want to
cover AIS errors? What do you mean when you read this? So,
what do you mean we don't want to cover AIS errors?
Who's making the error? AI's making the error? Yeah, AI,
we don't want to protect all right? Can you tell
me a little bit more sure? As businesses hustle to
incorporate AI in everything they do, their insurers want no
(00:25):
part of it. Across the commercial insurance industry, new policies
say they won't cover losses caused by chatbots. Investors are
shunning AI leaders and other momentum names, but if you
look beyond Nvidia and the rest of the Magnificent seven,
there are actually plenty of winners. Healthcare has been a
top performance sector. Investors seem to be embracing drugstocks, insurers,
(00:49):
and medical equipment companies. Again, the shares have been beaten
down as a result of worries about United Health earnings woes,
as well as how the regulatory environment in Washington will
affect drug prices and approvals for new medications. According to
Dow Jones Market Data, ELI Lilly is the best performance
dock in the index this month, up more twenty percent.
(01:10):
The company, which top the trillion out of MARKETCAF threshold.
Friday has been a big winner thanks to the GLP
one drugs, but other top health stocks such as Threem
Healthcare spinoff and a few other ones, they are all
up more than ten percent this month as well, not
twenty but up ten percent. So Tom, can you unpack
(01:31):
this to the average person? What do they mean they
don't want to ensure these AI errors. So, yeah, there's
a couple things in here. In the article was meandering
between healthcare and insurance. So most companies, if you own
a company.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
We need insurance, we need slip and fall insurance, and
what's called general lines or general liability. Then we also
get if we do contracts and we do a lot
of white color work. It says e Ando insurance, and
e Ando insurance is errors and omissions and errors and
(02:06):
omissions like in our business, like we make an error,
we omit something, and somebody sues us, we lose. That's
what the insurance is about. Because we made an error
and crash the company car into a tree. Call the
insurance company and say, hey, we made an error and
omission and we've seem to run the company into a
tree and they say, well, I'm your insurance company, and
(02:27):
they go out and they pay for it.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
But what they're.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Saying here is that AI is moving by way you
can predict it. For underwriting insurance, people have got decades
of information on common human errors that lead to problems
where a company gets sued or gets fined and they
have to reach to the closet and say, ah, I
have an insurance policy to pay for this, and they
(02:52):
flop that out on the table and the insurance company
pays for it. So there's all this history to underwrite
human error. AI is moving really fast. Air Canada plugged
in a chatbot for I believe it is for it
was Air Canada plugged in a customer service chatbot and
they apparently didn't put sufficient guardrails around it, and the
(03:15):
chatbot started self learning or doing something and it started
offering discounts or it started doing things that were not
within the realm of the solutions that it could provide people,
and it gotten big, big trouble. And so now the
insurance company is and by the way, AI works slower fast,
(03:36):
really really fast, so humans don't make mistakes at this
kind of scale. This is where AI can make mistakes
at scale, So the number of claims if you are
you know, Chubb and you're trying to ensure a company,
mistakes made it scale are hard to quantify, so it's
hard to set a premium. So the insurers right now,
(03:58):
do you remember when there was cybersecurity insurance day one?
You couldn't get it because there was all the ransomware
to turn it back on. And what happened was the
insurers temporarily said I'm not covering that, I will not
cover ransom and then as there is more to underwrite
and more to figure out, you know how the insurance
companies work, they come back and they say, now, wait
a minute, we can put a cybersecurity policy together. It's
(04:21):
a different premium, a different price, and we can underwrite this.
What the insurers are saying right now is I don't
know if I can underwrite mistakes made it scale so
day one until I have enough to underwrite here, the
answer is no, and there and some of them are
backing off. It's I think it's that simple. Yeah, I
wonder because I think about it from two different places.
It's kind of like, you know what deep fakes are doing, honey,
(04:45):
is that shoot with that girl.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
No, babe, that's a deep fake. No it's not that's
a deep fake. Babe, that's not me. Right, Okay, Hey,
and mister incorporated, your AI told me that I'm going
to get a seventy two percent discount on this next
Toyota I purchase. I never said that. Yeah, but your
AI said it. Yeah, but we didn't say it. Yeah,
but this isn't your AI represent you. So so in
(05:10):
one sense, companies are going to be saying, well, we
really didn't make the mistake. This is an AI mistake.
The audience may be forgiving, but I think it's a
slippery slope on both sides. Right, Paul, what do you
think about how processing this because we're gonna we're heading
this direction. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
I think the attorney has to basically prove one thing,
and that is that the company that deployed the AI
used an internal language model. If they did, it means
that that AI is building off of their own information.
It's not a it's not a public AI.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
So which is fair that that would be fair?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
At that point they're liable sense brandan Yeah.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
I mean, I think this is the biggest example or
a proof that AI is not quite there with things
that are like the most high stakes, Like if you're
talking about health insurance and I'm having a chatbot tell
somebody the wrong thing or misinformed them, Like, yeah, insurance
companies and under has remind me of kind of like
the stock market, where like the stock market usually knows
what's going on and it's like the smarter side of something,
(06:11):
and like insurance seems like they're kind of the smartest
people knowing the risk of something. So it's like to me,
it's them saying that the risk of trusting AI completely
with something that's got life or financial implications like this
that it's not quite there yet because there's some you know,
like who's the liability on, where's the information coming from?
(06:31):
Is there regulations around it? Like is the law up
to date with it where they have like a framework
around how to handle these things. So no, that's not
in place. But yeah, you're right, we'll get there, but
I'm not there yet.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Yeah. I would just I would just be because if
I'm sitting there arguing for both sides, what am I
going to be saying for both sides as I'm arguing.
If I'm the business owner, I'm gonna say, listen, this
wasn't us. Yeah, but that's the language model you guys
use that's aligned with your protocols and your you know,
standard operating procedures. It is so than it is the company.
So I do think it's a slippery slow but this
(07:03):
leads me to the next thing. AI superPAC launches ten
million dollar campaign pushing uniform national policy. What does this mean? Okay?
In uniform national policy? A superpack backed by AI industry
on Monday launch at ten million dollar campaign to push
Congress to craft a national AI policy that will override
(07:24):
a patchwork of state laws. A group told CNBC. The
campaign from Leading the Future will launch over the summer
with more than one hundred million dollars in initial funding,
signaling how to booming industry plans for leverage is wealth
and power in the next year's midterm election. There's a
broad public demand for congressional action and a uniform national
(07:46):
approach to AI, said Nathan Lerner, executive board director of
a Build America AI, the pack's advocacy arm. We are
excited to have created this platform for Americans excited about
the future of AI to engage their members of Congress
and make a difference. The campaign will run TV and
digital social media ads, plus organized ten thousand calls to
(08:06):
lawmakers offices this week alone, According to a memo about
the campaign shared with CNBC, President, trumppere to be convinced already.
He wrote on truth Social last Tuesday that the US
must have one federal standard instead of a patchwork of
fifty state regulatory regimes. Thomas is a good thing a
bad thing, and who doesn't protect.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Okay, a couple points here, point number one. The super
packed is brought by the industry, all right, so let's
cross out consumer. The industry is worried about the industry.
What are they worried about? This is exactly what the
auto industry did when it didn't want fifty different state CPA.
And when you went to buy a car, and I
(08:46):
think it started like the eighties, you noticed that there
were California cars and there were forty nine state cars
used to be able to go in the windowsticker, and
that was because California had different, different emissions laws. Well,
what the industry is saying is, you know what, this
could get expensive. I don't want to pay lawyers in
fifty states to deal with fifty different laws. I want
(09:08):
one set of laws, so the industry is screaming for it.
But what they're going to cleverly do with the pack
is say that the public needs it. The public needs
one law so the federal government can control it. But
what really it is is the industry wants it so
that they can push their lawyers to one set of
(09:30):
bills and then modify those bills so that the laws
or the laws they want. So it's two things. Expense
for the company. I don't want fifty lawyers in fifty states.
That's expensive for me. Number two, if all I have
to do is worry about one bill in Congress, then
I know that I've only got one hundred senators I
need to talk to, and I only need fifty one
(09:50):
of them. And I know whoe are the right to
checks for campaigns so they can control it. So whenever
you hear there's a super pack from the industry, you
always step back and say, okay, wait a minute, what
are they trying to do? And at the end of
the day, I don't see the consumer being helped in
all this. I see the AI industry saying, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
let's write the rules before we have fifty states of
(10:12):
precedents because what they don't want is a lawsuit. Louis
in a lawsuit here where the consumer maybe was victimized
of a deep fake and AI didn't have sufficient controls
to identify it as a deep fake. You could have
people wrongly accused of crimes and convicted. And so they
don't want the states to be doing this. They want
one set of federal laws and the super PACs job
(10:34):
is to do it, but to make us all think
it's for us the consumer to protect us.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
Paul I would be looking for this happened in the
crypto industry. Actually, when you saw the crypto lobby get
on their heels with a lot of the anti crypto
regulation that was being forced in by the Biden administration.
Coinbase basically started a program called Stand with Crypto and
they published every politician's position on all those policies. That
(11:00):
was terrible for a lot of Democrats, which started to flip.
We started to see a bipartisan approach. I would be
watching the companies that have a lot to lose in
the AI industry, and there are a handful of them
that are out there that might pose a counter argument
to this and try to go to exactly what thom
is saying, and that is put the consumer at the front,
(11:23):
because that's how Coinbase did it with Stand with Crypto,
they put the consumer investors and you had millions and
millions of investors, individual investors calling their congressman at every
state level, senators, House reps, etc. If that were to
happen here, which is what I would be in fear
of if I was running this super pac as someone
organizing against it.
Speaker 1 (11:43):
Brandon, where are you at with this?
Speaker 4 (11:45):
I think it's bad news. I remember a couple of
years ago. I mean yeah, two years ago, it was
like Elon Musk and Warren Buffett and a bunch of
people saying that this is the equivalent, if not worse than,
or more serious than, the nuclear arms race, like what's
happening with AI and we any of us think of
one thing in the history of the world that's ever
gotten better when the federal government has gotten involved and
made a uniform policy around it. I can't think of
(12:08):
a single thing. So I think it's gonna like whenever
you're farther removed from like the people like you said,
if it's like state by state, it's gonna be precise,
it's gonna be like like matching what the people from
that state one. But if it's federal, it's gonna be
like this giant packet of laws that lobbyists right that
it's probably gonna create new barriers of entry and regulations.
So it's gonna make it harder to compete in that industry.
(12:30):
So and then you know, you have all the creepy
stuff too, what could be done with the I with
like monitoring and tracking and who the hell knows like
what's getting written into the thing with that, with what
the government's allowed to do in situations of national security. So, yeah,
bad news. I don't like it.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
You know what? It reminds me of yesterday? Again, this
goes back to the conversation we had with the FED,
the head of FDA. We're talking about the patent laws.
Remember one time you and I did something with the
patent laws, the medical patent laws that we have. I
don't know if you listen to the conversation. I asked them,
I said, what are we doing because these insurance companies
(13:04):
are coming with a patent on a product that they
have right on a certain cure that they have whatever
take them a few years to get it approve. Once
they do, they have seven to twelve years of monopoly
to be able to price it out as much as
they want. Then they can get lawyers to extend the
patent for another eighteen years and it becomes thirty eight years.
And you see, now it's like the product is really
worth twenty eight cents, but they're selling it for fifty
(13:25):
nine hundred dollars. To day the patent's done, it drops
to nine dollars. And everybody says or came up with
some ideas and who did that to give themselves immunity
and protection for competition? The lobbyists and a healthcare industry
and the big farm we can talk about this is
a way of them protecting themselves AI and doing a
similar things to say no, no, no, we're protected and
(13:49):
gradually knowing they're probably going to break a few things
in a big way and when they do, they kind
of want immunity. Tom am I reading that correctly? On
how they're using this.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Oh yeah, the industry will have well, take a look
at what happened with vaccines. You know, what did the
vaccine makers do?
Speaker 1 (14:09):
Right? They want to sue us for something first six
years or whatever it was.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
If you want me to run fast and you have
to give me a permission to make a mistake, is
what they said.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Well they did. They certainly made a lot of mistakes
with that. Twenty twenty six is around a corner. And
for some of you guys that have a dream, you
have a vision, you have something that you get excited about.
This is something I want to share with you that
I was excited about for three and a half years.
I kept telling my kids one day, one day, I
kept telling my wife one day, one day, one day,
(14:39):
and it all starts like this, with a decision and
a plan. I want you to watch this video. Go ahead, rob,
So I want to show you something. For three and
a half years, I will drive past the street and
I will look at this property, eleven acres on the airport,
one of the last properties of its kind. I said,
one day I want to own this property. We eventually
bought it. When we did, there was nothing here. I said,
(15:00):
I want to build a soccer field here. Boom, we
got a footsal soccer field. This hangar here. I said,
you know what, for election night, why don't we do
a live event? Just turn into an event, the biggest
live stream worldwide on YouTube on election night, two thousand
people were here. I said, let's take that hanger on
the other side, Let's turn in into a gym, basketball
jiu jitsu. Wait, boom, now it's a gym. Let's take
(15:23):
that upstairs, which was a two bedroom for the pilots.
Let's open it up and fit fifty one employees there. Boom,
we have that. Now. I got a bunch of other
things to tell you about that we got going on here,
But everything started with the plan. If you're watching this
yourself saying Pat, I got big plans as well. I
host didn't even call the business Planning workshop. If you
haven't yet registered, but you got big plans, click on
(15:43):
a link below yet registered. I will see you there,
and by the way, keep this in mind, guys. The
next seventy two hours. It's estimated that people are going
to spend a ton of money on Black Friday on
many different things. Spend is one thing. Invest is another one.
If you got big plans for twenty twenty six, invest
into yourself. Go register for this. I'll sue you December
(16:04):
twelfth to cover a two hundred page manual. So you
can write a plan going into twenty twenty six. If
you enjoy this video, you want to watch more videos
like this, click here, and if you want to watch
the entire podcast, click here,
Some insurers. So you're big insurance company, don't want to
cover AIS errors? What do you mean when you read this? So,
what do you mean we don't want to cover AIS errors?
Who's making the error? AI's making the error? Yeah, AI,
we don't want to protect all right? Can you tell
me a little bit more sure? As businesses hustle to
incorporate AI in everything they do, their insurers want no
(00:25):
part of it. Across the commercial insurance industry, new policies
say they won't cover losses caused by chatbots. Investors are
shunning AI leaders and other momentum names, but if you
look beyond Nvidia and the rest of the Magnificent seven,
there are actually plenty of winners. Healthcare has been a
top performance sector. Investors seem to be embracing drugstocks, insurers,
(00:49):
and medical equipment companies. Again, the shares have been beaten
down as a result of worries about United Health earnings woes,
as well as how the regulatory environment in Washington will
affect drug prices and approvals for new medications. According to
Dow Jones Market Data, ELI Lilly is the best performance
dock in the index this month, up more twenty percent.
(01:10):
The company, which top the trillion out of MARKETCAF threshold.
Friday has been a big winner thanks to the GLP
one drugs, but other top health stocks such as Threem
Healthcare spinoff and a few other ones, they are all
up more than ten percent this month as well, not
twenty but up ten percent. So Tom, can you unpack
(01:31):
this to the average person? What do they mean they
don't want to ensure these AI errors. So, yeah, there's
a couple things in here. In the article was meandering
between healthcare and insurance. So most companies, if you own
a company.
Speaker 2 (01:46):
We need insurance, we need slip and fall insurance, and
what's called general lines or general liability. Then we also
get if we do contracts and we do a lot
of white color work. It says e Ando insurance, and
e Ando insurance is errors and omissions and errors and
(02:06):
omissions like in our business, like we make an error,
we omit something, and somebody sues us, we lose. That's
what the insurance is about. Because we made an error
and crash the company car into a tree. Call the
insurance company and say, hey, we made an error and
omission and we've seem to run the company into a
tree and they say, well, I'm your insurance company, and
(02:27):
they go out and they pay for it.
Speaker 1 (02:28):
But what they're.
Speaker 2 (02:29):
Saying here is that AI is moving by way you
can predict it. For underwriting insurance, people have got decades
of information on common human errors that lead to problems
where a company gets sued or gets fined and they
have to reach to the closet and say, ah, I
have an insurance policy to pay for this, and they
(02:52):
flop that out on the table and the insurance company
pays for it. So there's all this history to underwrite
human error. AI is moving really fast. Air Canada plugged
in a chatbot for I believe it is for it
was Air Canada plugged in a customer service chatbot and
they apparently didn't put sufficient guardrails around it, and the
(03:15):
chatbot started self learning or doing something and it started
offering discounts or it started doing things that were not
within the realm of the solutions that it could provide people,
and it gotten big, big trouble. And so now the
insurance company is and by the way, AI works slower fast,
(03:36):
really really fast, so humans don't make mistakes at this
kind of scale. This is where AI can make mistakes
at scale, So the number of claims if you are
you know, Chubb and you're trying to ensure a company,
mistakes made it scale are hard to quantify, so it's
hard to set a premium. So the insurers right now,
(03:58):
do you remember when there was cybersecurity insurance day one?
You couldn't get it because there was all the ransomware
to turn it back on. And what happened was the
insurers temporarily said I'm not covering that, I will not
cover ransom and then as there is more to underwrite
and more to figure out, you know how the insurance
companies work, they come back and they say, now, wait
a minute, we can put a cybersecurity policy together. It's
(04:21):
a different premium, a different price, and we can underwrite this.
What the insurers are saying right now is I don't
know if I can underwrite mistakes made it scale so
day one until I have enough to underwrite here, the
answer is no, and there and some of them are
backing off. It's I think it's that simple. Yeah, I
wonder because I think about it from two different places.
It's kind of like, you know what deep fakes are doing, honey,
(04:45):
is that shoot with that girl.
Speaker 1 (04:46):
No, babe, that's a deep fake. No it's not that's
a deep fake. Babe, that's not me. Right, Okay, Hey,
and mister incorporated, your AI told me that I'm going
to get a seventy two percent discount on this next
Toyota I purchase. I never said that. Yeah, but your
AI said it. Yeah, but we didn't say it. Yeah,
but this isn't your AI represent you. So so in
(05:10):
one sense, companies are going to be saying, well, we
really didn't make the mistake. This is an AI mistake.
The audience may be forgiving, but I think it's a
slippery slope on both sides. Right, Paul, what do you
think about how processing this because we're gonna we're heading
this direction. Yeah.
Speaker 3 (05:25):
I think the attorney has to basically prove one thing,
and that is that the company that deployed the AI
used an internal language model. If they did, it means
that that AI is building off of their own information.
It's not a it's not a public AI.
Speaker 1 (05:42):
So which is fair that that would be fair?
Speaker 3 (05:45):
At that point they're liable sense brandan Yeah.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
I mean, I think this is the biggest example or
a proof that AI is not quite there with things
that are like the most high stakes, Like if you're
talking about health insurance and I'm having a chatbot tell
somebody the wrong thing or misinformed them, Like, yeah, insurance
companies and under has remind me of kind of like
the stock market, where like the stock market usually knows
what's going on and it's like the smarter side of something,
(06:11):
and like insurance seems like they're kind of the smartest
people knowing the risk of something. So it's like to me,
it's them saying that the risk of trusting AI completely
with something that's got life or financial implications like this
that it's not quite there yet because there's some you know,
like who's the liability on, where's the information coming from?
(06:31):
Is there regulations around it? Like is the law up
to date with it where they have like a framework
around how to handle these things. So no, that's not
in place. But yeah, you're right, we'll get there, but
I'm not there yet.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Yeah. I would just I would just be because if
I'm sitting there arguing for both sides, what am I
going to be saying for both sides as I'm arguing.
If I'm the business owner, I'm gonna say, listen, this
wasn't us. Yeah, but that's the language model you guys
use that's aligned with your protocols and your you know,
standard operating procedures. It is so than it is the company.
So I do think it's a slippery slow but this
(07:03):
leads me to the next thing. AI superPAC launches ten
million dollar campaign pushing uniform national policy. What does this mean? Okay?
In uniform national policy? A superpack backed by AI industry
on Monday launch at ten million dollar campaign to push
Congress to craft a national AI policy that will override
(07:24):
a patchwork of state laws. A group told CNBC. The
campaign from Leading the Future will launch over the summer
with more than one hundred million dollars in initial funding,
signaling how to booming industry plans for leverage is wealth
and power in the next year's midterm election. There's a
broad public demand for congressional action and a uniform national
(07:46):
approach to AI, said Nathan Lerner, executive board director of
a Build America AI, the pack's advocacy arm. We are
excited to have created this platform for Americans excited about
the future of AI to engage their members of Congress
and make a difference. The campaign will run TV and
digital social media ads, plus organized ten thousand calls to
(08:06):
lawmakers offices this week alone, According to a memo about
the campaign shared with CNBC, President, trumppere to be convinced already.
He wrote on truth Social last Tuesday that the US
must have one federal standard instead of a patchwork of
fifty state regulatory regimes. Thomas is a good thing a
bad thing, and who doesn't protect.
Speaker 2 (08:25):
Okay, a couple points here, point number one. The super
packed is brought by the industry, all right, so let's
cross out consumer. The industry is worried about the industry.
What are they worried about? This is exactly what the
auto industry did when it didn't want fifty different state CPA.
And when you went to buy a car, and I
(08:46):
think it started like the eighties, you noticed that there
were California cars and there were forty nine state cars
used to be able to go in the windowsticker, and
that was because California had different, different emissions laws. Well,
what the industry is saying is, you know what, this
could get expensive. I don't want to pay lawyers in
fifty states to deal with fifty different laws. I want
(09:08):
one set of laws, so the industry is screaming for it.
But what they're going to cleverly do with the pack
is say that the public needs it. The public needs
one law so the federal government can control it. But
what really it is is the industry wants it so
that they can push their lawyers to one set of
(09:30):
bills and then modify those bills so that the laws
or the laws they want. So it's two things. Expense
for the company. I don't want fifty lawyers in fifty states.
That's expensive for me. Number two, if all I have
to do is worry about one bill in Congress, then
I know that I've only got one hundred senators I
need to talk to, and I only need fifty one
(09:50):
of them. And I know whoe are the right to
checks for campaigns so they can control it. So whenever
you hear there's a super pack from the industry, you
always step back and say, okay, wait a minute, what
are they trying to do? And at the end of
the day, I don't see the consumer being helped in
all this. I see the AI industry saying, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,
let's write the rules before we have fifty states of
(10:12):
precedents because what they don't want is a lawsuit. Louis
in a lawsuit here where the consumer maybe was victimized
of a deep fake and AI didn't have sufficient controls
to identify it as a deep fake. You could have
people wrongly accused of crimes and convicted. And so they
don't want the states to be doing this. They want
one set of federal laws and the super PACs job
(10:34):
is to do it, but to make us all think
it's for us the consumer to protect us.
Speaker 3 (10:39):
Paul I would be looking for this happened in the
crypto industry. Actually, when you saw the crypto lobby get
on their heels with a lot of the anti crypto
regulation that was being forced in by the Biden administration.
Coinbase basically started a program called Stand with Crypto and
they published every politician's position on all those policies. That
(11:00):
was terrible for a lot of Democrats, which started to flip.
We started to see a bipartisan approach. I would be
watching the companies that have a lot to lose in
the AI industry, and there are a handful of them
that are out there that might pose a counter argument
to this and try to go to exactly what thom
is saying, and that is put the consumer at the front,
(11:23):
because that's how Coinbase did it with Stand with Crypto,
they put the consumer investors and you had millions and
millions of investors, individual investors calling their congressman at every
state level, senators, House reps, etc. If that were to
happen here, which is what I would be in fear
of if I was running this super pac as someone
organizing against it.
Speaker 1 (11:43):
Brandon, where are you at with this?
Speaker 4 (11:45):
I think it's bad news. I remember a couple of
years ago. I mean yeah, two years ago, it was
like Elon Musk and Warren Buffett and a bunch of
people saying that this is the equivalent, if not worse than,
or more serious than, the nuclear arms race, like what's
happening with AI and we any of us think of
one thing in the history of the world that's ever
gotten better when the federal government has gotten involved and
made a uniform policy around it. I can't think of
(12:08):
a single thing. So I think it's gonna like whenever
you're farther removed from like the people like you said,
if it's like state by state, it's gonna be precise,
it's gonna be like like matching what the people from
that state one. But if it's federal, it's gonna be
like this giant packet of laws that lobbyists right that
it's probably gonna create new barriers of entry and regulations.
So it's gonna make it harder to compete in that industry.
(12:30):
So and then you know, you have all the creepy
stuff too, what could be done with the I with
like monitoring and tracking and who the hell knows like
what's getting written into the thing with that, with what
the government's allowed to do in situations of national security. So, yeah,
bad news. I don't like it.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
You know what? It reminds me of yesterday? Again, this
goes back to the conversation we had with the FED,
the head of FDA. We're talking about the patent laws.
Remember one time you and I did something with the
patent laws, the medical patent laws that we have. I
don't know if you listen to the conversation. I asked them,
I said, what are we doing because these insurance companies
(13:04):
are coming with a patent on a product that they
have right on a certain cure that they have whatever
take them a few years to get it approve. Once
they do, they have seven to twelve years of monopoly
to be able to price it out as much as
they want. Then they can get lawyers to extend the
patent for another eighteen years and it becomes thirty eight years.
And you see, now it's like the product is really
worth twenty eight cents, but they're selling it for fifty
(13:25):
nine hundred dollars. To day the patent's done, it drops
to nine dollars. And everybody says or came up with
some ideas and who did that to give themselves immunity
and protection for competition? The lobbyists and a healthcare industry
and the big farm we can talk about this is
a way of them protecting themselves AI and doing a
similar things to say no, no, no, we're protected and
(13:49):
gradually knowing they're probably going to break a few things
in a big way and when they do, they kind
of want immunity. Tom am I reading that correctly? On
how they're using this.
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Oh yeah, the industry will have well, take a look
at what happened with vaccines. You know, what did the
vaccine makers do?
Speaker 1 (14:09):
Right? They want to sue us for something first six
years or whatever it was.
Speaker 2 (14:13):
If you want me to run fast and you have
to give me a permission to make a mistake, is
what they said.
Speaker 1 (14:18):
Well they did. They certainly made a lot of mistakes
with that. Twenty twenty six is around a corner. And
for some of you guys that have a dream, you
have a vision, you have something that you get excited about.
This is something I want to share with you that
I was excited about for three and a half years.
I kept telling my kids one day, one day, I
kept telling my wife one day, one day, one day,
(14:39):
and it all starts like this, with a decision and
a plan. I want you to watch this video. Go ahead, rob,
So I want to show you something. For three and
a half years, I will drive past the street and
I will look at this property, eleven acres on the airport,
one of the last properties of its kind. I said,
one day I want to own this property. We eventually
bought it. When we did, there was nothing here. I said,
(15:00):
I want to build a soccer field here. Boom, we
got a footsal soccer field. This hangar here. I said,
you know what, for election night, why don't we do
a live event? Just turn into an event, the biggest
live stream worldwide on YouTube on election night, two thousand
people were here. I said, let's take that hanger on
the other side, Let's turn in into a gym, basketball
jiu jitsu. Wait, boom, now it's a gym. Let's take
(15:23):
that upstairs, which was a two bedroom for the pilots.
Let's open it up and fit fifty one employees there. Boom,
we have that. Now. I got a bunch of other
things to tell you about that we got going on here,
But everything started with the plan. If you're watching this
yourself saying Pat, I got big plans as well. I
host didn't even call the business Planning workshop. If you
haven't yet registered, but you got big plans, click on
(15:43):
a link below yet registered. I will see you there,
and by the way, keep this in mind, guys. The
next seventy two hours. It's estimated that people are going
to spend a ton of money on Black Friday on
many different things. Spend is one thing. Invest is another one.
If you got big plans for twenty twenty six, invest
into yourself. Go register for this. I'll sue you December
(16:04):
twelfth to cover a two hundred page manual. So you
can write a plan going into twenty twenty six. If
you enjoy this video, you want to watch more videos
like this, click here, and if you want to watch
the entire podcast, click here,
Popular Podcasts
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
Are You A Charlotte?
In 1997, actress Kristin Davis’ life was forever changed when she took on the role of Charlotte York in Sex and the City. As we watched Carrie, Samantha, Miranda and Charlotte navigate relationships in NYC, the show helped push once unacceptable conversation topics out of the shadows and altered the narrative around women and sex. We all saw ourselves in them as they searched for fulfillment in life, sex and friendships. Now, Kristin Davis wants to connect with you, the fans, and share untold stories and all the behind the scenes. Together, with Kristin and special guests, what will begin with Sex and the City will evolve into talks about themes that are still so relevant today. "Are you a Charlotte?" is much more than just rewatching this beloved show, it brings the past and the present together as we talk with heart, humor and of course some optimism.