Putin’s Out of Time, Not Troops

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Jacob Smu (00:04):
Hello and welcome to another episode of Geopolitical Cousins.
It is your producer other Jacob.
Um, today Marco and Jacob Shapiro takea dive into the Ukraine war, which we
haven't touched on in a while, and, andthen really spend the rest of the episode
taking a deep dive into the tariffs andwhat they mean for the US' relationship

(00:25):
with everybody else now and in the future.
That's all I got.
Enjoy the episode.
Go spend time with your lovedones and touch some grass.
See you guys out there.

Jacob Shapiro (00:41):
Uh, we should rename the podcast, poolside podcast 'cause
I'm by the poolside in Monroe, Georgia.
In the middle of nowhere.
I magically have wifi.
This is the first time I've ever beenhere that the wifi actually worked.
So, uh, we're both, we'reboth off the reservation.
Marco.

Marko Papic (00:54):
Yes.
And I'm, uh, still recording thisfrom interior British Columbia.
So.

There we go.
Alright, so we decided to get togetherhere for a quick one, which for us
is probably gonna be like an hour.
Um, because our last two podcastswere our absolutely incredible
trade value leadership column.
Basically, if you haven'tlistened to those episodes,
you need to go listen to it.
If you haven't sent us all the reasonsyou think we're idiots, we want your
email, please send it to us, the emailaddress at the end of the episode.

(01:18):
Um, but Marco, the last time we actuallylike spent time on what was going on
in the news, it was Iran, Israel, shit.
So we have lots of things to catch up on.
It was actually an interesting.
Yeah, go, go ahead.
We

haven't talked about any of this, uh, like what's going on in the
world almost in like a month, if not more.

Which is an interesting exercise to go back and be like,
well, has anything actually importanthappened since the Israel Iran war?
Was the Israel Iranwar actually important?
Like, I actually struggled a littlebit to find things, but um, and, and
like tellingly enough, like when youcalled me right beforehand to, to set
our list of topics for the agenda,you said the Russia, Ukraine War.
I totally forgot that the Russian Ukrainewar was something we should talk about.

(01:54):
So it just goes to showyou, but let's start there.
Um, it's been a pretty seismicshift from the White House.
I mean, a couple weeks ago.
It, it seems like Pete Hegsethwas gonna try and limit weapons to
Ukraine, and he didn't tell anybodyor he surprised the White House.
Um, Donald Trump turned around and saidhe's actually gonna dramatically increase
weapons supplies to European allies.

(02:15):
So they're gonna be selling roughly10 billion, $10 billion worth of
weapons, including air defense,artillery missiles, things like that
to NATO allies and, uh, weapons thatare eventually gonna go to Ukraine.
He's also given.
Russia, a 50 day ultimatum, uh, thatif there isn't peace in 50 days,
they're gonna start talking aboutsecondary tariffs, which, you know,

(02:37):
we're, we're parsing Trumpian languagehere, Trump chronology, but we think
that means secondary sanctions onpurchases of Russian oil from China
and India and other countries.
That's probably what that means.
But who knows?
Um, I'll quote PresidentTrump, uh, from Monday.
Uh, he said this about when he speaksto Putin, I always hang up and say,
well, that was a nice phone call.
And then missiles are launchedinto Kyiv or some other city.

(02:59):
And after that happens threeor four times, you say,
talk doesn't mean anything.
End quote, Donna, we're glad you got here.
After however many months of dealingwith Vladimir Putin that this,
you finally realized the pattern.
That's cool.
Um, where do you wanna takethis, uh, at the offset?
Uh, 'cause you know, we'llprobably get to the end of 50 days.
I don't think Putin's gonna stop.
Or maybe you see something different,but where, what are you seeing, Marco?

I think we have to stop.
Uh.
From the point that JeffreyEpstein is a Russian spy.

Hmm.
Of course.
How could I forget that?

No, I just, I just figured if we're gonna get more clicks, Jacob, the
one thing that we didn't talk about at anypoint in our podcast is Jeffrey Epstein.

Well, I'm, I'm gonna steal this from, from X.
Isn't it incredible that the onlyimpeached president in US history
who wasn't hanging out on JeffreyEpstein's boat was Andrew Johnson?
Not an incredible just fact of reality.

Yeah.
So, uh, let's talk Russia, Ukraine.
That was a joke by the way.
I have nothing really smart tosay about the Epstein thing.
Uh, but maybe I will at some point.
I dunno.
Hmm.
Yeah, we'll figure it out.
Uh, I think, uh, I think the Russia,Ukraine thing is interesting because
first of all, it reveals how I thinkstupid, the notion that Trump is
pro-Russian really is, you know, I'vegotten inundated Jacob with questions.

(04:11):
From friends, family, clients,from everybody about, Hey, what's
this 180 degree turn to Russia?
And I'm like, what's turn to Russia?
The man is pro-Trump.
He's not pro Russia.
Mm-hmm.
He's not pro-China.
He's not pro-Israel, by the way.
He's not pro anything.
He's just pro-Trump.
And so he shows up and hesays, I want peace in Ukraine.

(04:33):
This war is unsustainable.
And objectively speaking.
Donald Trump is correct in this,this, this conflict is unsustainable.
And this notion that the West shouldcontinually support Ukrainian efforts
to reclaim their territories isgoing to end Ukraine as we know it.
Like we, like the west,will bleed Ukraine dry.
This is an unsustainable conflict.

(04:54):
It it has to end.
Uh, so Trump says, okay, well I'm gonnaend it and I'm gonna look cool doing it.
Um, and so he slaps zelenskyaround in the White House.
Uh, which wasn't completelyincorrect because part of the
problem is that Zelensky has beengiven a blank check by previous
administration and many Europeans.
And so he needs to be put in linewith this notion that yes, you do

(05:16):
need to negotiate with the Russians.
And he's like, but they're murderers.
Yeah.
Well that's kind of like whatwar is, you know, like, welcome.
Hello.
Yeah, thank you.
So thanks for being with us.
And so the media latches on to that.
And of course previous Russia hoaxedthe stuff and it's just like, oh my God.
Donald Trump has gone fullymature and candidate here.
Um, meanwhile, Donald Trump expects Putinto react to all of this, including to the

(05:42):
fact that American officials are startingto take Russian interest seriously.
Whether it's, you know, not havingUkrainian nato, whether it's like,
Hey, we wanna keep these territories.
Oh, interesting.
Okay, fine.
Let's talk about it this entiretime, Trump expects Putin to be.
Fair and objective.
Yeah.
And say, okay, cool.
Thanks.
Like, let's, let me reciprocate.
But what I don't think that theyunderstand in the White House or really

(06:05):
anywhere, media, journalist, analyst,nobody is that Putin has a real problem.
He promised Don Bus, which isDonkin, Luhansk, together, two,
all OBLs of Ukraine make donbas.
The problem is that a third,a third of donk, a third of
this territory, like 30% of it.

(06:27):
Russians have not been ableto conquer for 11 years.
I mean, not like three years since2022, but since 20 14, 20 15 conflict,
there's this part of Dons that theUkrainians are just defending valiantly
and impressively, and so Putinhas a problem I genuinely believe.
Putin feels like he got 90% of whathe wanted from Ukraine, so I actually

(06:50):
don't fall into the camp that he'sjust gonna keep stringing it along
until the Russian tricolor, you know,is waving across Elise in Paris.
Like that shit's not gonna happen.
He's got 90% of what he wants.
He can't conquer Donk for11 years for God's sakes.
People, he's not gonnainvade Estonia or Poland.
If he invades Poland.
Quite frankly, Poland willreinve and conquer Moscow.

(07:11):
Yeah.
Good luck.
That's my hot take.
Yeah, so my point of all of thisis, you know, Putin has a problem,
which is that Donald Trump gotelected too early, quite frankly.
He got elected too early.
He got elected about12, 18 months too early.
And what I mean by that isthat Putin, that last 10%.
Objectives that Putin needs is kindof important domestically in Russia,

(07:34):
which is that how do you go backto all your nationalist military
bloggers who are basically trying tosay that they're out Putin, Putin.
How are you gonna go back tothem and say, oh, hey guys.
By the way, Donald Trump is president.
Cool.
We got all sorts of goodiesout of, uh, America.
They're recognizing oursphere of influence.
They're letting us keep theseterritories, they're making sure the

(07:55):
Kiev doesn't get into nato, so we won.
Right?
And they're gonna say, but you promisedthis Naya Ross, you promised this dumbass.
Like, what's up with this?
Like third of Dons we haven't conquered.
And so that I think is the fulcrum.
You know, sometimes these geopoliticalevents, they have like a fulcrum.
The thing that needs to be resolvedand what needs to be resolved is
that when you look at the map.
The Russians haven'tconquered part of Ukraine.

(08:18):
They promised their people.
Um, it's not about Kiev,it's not about West Ukraine.
It's not about the rest of Europe.
It's just that sliver.
I mean, if you look at a map,it doesn't look that big.
It's a third of vignettes.
Nobody cares about it.
It's just empty space.
But Putin does.
And that's, that's the problem.
That's the challenge here.
And of course, everybody inthe us, most of the mainstream

(08:40):
media is like now shocked that,uh, Trump is turned on Putin.
I'm not.
I never assumed that he waspro Putin to begin with.
In other words, Donald Trump isvery disappointed and he feels he's
being strung along, as he said.
I think that's his direct quote.
Um, and I can just imagine DonaldTrump's eyes glazing over Jacob if I
was in the White House explaining tohim, well, you know, Mr. President,

(09:03):
like the Putin wants to conquer Dons,which is part of a dump us, you know?
And I can just see him beinglike, I don't give a fuck.
You know?
Like this is like, this is petty.
What are you talking about?
W and that's where sometimes thesedomestic political issues get in the way
of rational geopolitical negotiations.

Uh, it's so hard to talk about you.
I'm literally like looking into a pastureright now where my wife and my daughter
and my niece are like driving throughthe fields with a, with an electric car
who says that the world sucks in 2025.
Um, there's a couple thingsthat I, I would say to that.
The first is, I, I think you're right.
And it's, it's not even that he's,that Trump is pro-Trump, and I
think Russia makes this mistake too.
I've said this before, yes, but I thinkit bears repeating because I, I don't

(09:44):
think it's getting through to people.
I don't think Trump is strategic.
He doesn't think long term.
He is an instinctual being he's a child.
He wants what he wants, when hewants it, and when he doesn't get
it, he throws a tantrum and nowhe, in his mind, is the leader.
Of the free world and the mostpowerful country in the world.
So you better do exactlywhat I say when he says it.
So I'm sure that there were people maybeup to Putin himself that were like, aha,

(10:07):
we've got the guy in the White House.
We've got the dude who was gonnalike, you know, we've cultivated this
guy for decades, uh, via Jeffrey.
And everything else.
No.
Like he's literally wants whathe wants when he wants it.
And this is why I think Zelensky,like, I think if you go back to
that episode in the White House, Ithink Zelensky did the right thing.
I think that he actually, by pushingback against Trump and throwing his hissy
fit like he was responding, he was ableto give himself space to actually come

(10:30):
closer to Trump and for Trump to feellike he had moved him along in some way.
I, I think when you look back, like Iknow you've been anti zelensky on that,
on that tirade, and maybe he meant todo it, maybe he didn't do it, but that,
that's one thing about Trump, he's notstrategic, so he will change his mind.
Like on a dime, and that's somethingfor the Russians to learn too.
The second thing I just wanna say isthat I think you're right that Putin has
downgraded his desires to to Dansk, buthe wanted the Russian tricolor in Kyiv.

(10:54):
And his promise and all of hisessays and talks about Ukraine.
Like he, he wants to sort of getthere and that's where I think it's
not gonna stop and where it's gonnaget to what you've talked about, like
Ukraine as a, as a garrison state.
And then the last thing isjust, this is also an example of
Donald Trump's charisma because.
Iran, Israel didn't affect him.
Jeffrey Epstein doesn'tseem to be affecting him.
As you know, there's thosepeople on social media burning,

(11:16):
make America great again.
Hats okay, like, it's like LeBron, I've,I've made this metaphor before, like
as soon as LeBron comes back, they'regonna like buy the jerseys again.
So he is just gonna get the money twice.
Um, but now he's talking aboutsending tens of billions of dollars
worth of weapons to Ukraine.
Now he's selling them, so youcan at least make that argument.
But I assume that the MAGA folks and theAmerica first folks, like, what does it

(11:37):
take for you to light your hair on fire?
Because nothing, this is not,this is not Donald Trump.
Like, oh, I'm makingI America great again.
He's like, I'm, I'm arming Ukraine andI'm bombing around and I'm doing all this.
Stuff like this is not like theisolationist president at all.
People were expecting so,

well, I think, I think probably nothing.
But let, let me, let me go back tothe point you said about Russians.
Mm-hmm.
Uh, Russians have a very long historyof com being completely and utterly.
Like naive when it comesto American politics.
Mm-hmm.
They just cannot assessAmerican politics correctly.
This goes back to, you know, Kennedy.
Kennedy comes in, everyone'slike, oh, he's a young womanizer.

(12:11):
We can just like sneak stuff by him.
And then we almost go to WorldWar III and Kennedy's like, you
know, test me, test me, come at me.
And of course that that ends up being,you know, a Soviet back down from Cuba.
So, um.
This, this Russian mentality of thinkingeverything is a conspiracy theory,

(12:31):
this Russian mentality of thinking thatthere's a, there's a sort of a paranoid
delusional conspiracy behind everythingis, is really making them very poor
analysts of American domestic politics.
And I think that, you know, they,they actually bought the liberal
mainstream propaganda in the USthat Trump is pro-Russian, uh,
that he's enamored with Putin andthat he can just string him along.

(12:53):
The problem is that.
Donald Trump has made a promise, youknow, and that promise is we will
have a ceasefire, not necessarily apiece, but a ceasefire in, in Ukraine.
And Putin is now embarrassinghim domestically.
That's, that's the fundamentaland that's the worst place
to be in to embarrass Trump.
And I think that's a problem.
The other thing is that the dealthat's now coming out, which is

(13:15):
actually quite smart, I mean.
A couple of months ago, I made fun ofthat rare earth mineral deal is the
dumbest thing I've ever seen in my life.
I mean, it's completely vacuous,but this drone deal that actually
is going to happen is interesting.
I mean, Ukraine and Russiaare probably the world's.
Greatest innovators ondrone warfare right now.
'cause they have to be it'slife or death situation.
The Ukrainians have developed someabsolutely insane drone technology,

(13:38):
both, uh, aerial and naval.
And so the US is now, you know,getting all this IP out of Ukraine,
that's actually a really good dealfor the us It's really smart deal.
And, uh, yeah, I mean likeTrump is not like really sinking
strategic teeth into Ukraine ina way that should worry Russians.

(13:58):
Because I think that they'regonna have to make a deal.
And these, this 50 daydeadline is no joke.
I actually think it's serious.
Mm-hmm.
I do think they will impose secondarysanctions on Turkish, India and
Chinese, who, whoever's companies.
And so what Russia has to reallyask itself is, what are our
strategic objectives in Ukraine?
You know, what are they?
If it's to delineate thesphere of influence to the

(14:20):
maximum potential that we can.
Get the most we can in termsof delineation then, like
this, this seems to be it guys.
And the second is to ensure that Ukraineremains sort of a, um, you know, uh, a
non-aligned, it's, it, I mean, it willclearly stay aligned with the West, but
at least it's not gonna be part of nato.
But you've accomplished those two things.

(14:41):
And if I think they're, they're gonna haveto realize over the next month and a half,
two months that Trump is not kidding.
He's extremely angry that they'reembarrassing him domestically and
that that sliver of donates can beconquered five, 10 years from now.
Maybe in some sort of a futureexchange, because clearly this is
gonna be a frozen conflict, butthey cannot conquer it right now.

(15:04):
They're gonna have to give that up.
So that's my low conviction view.
I think this actually ends with, uh,Trump victory two, three months from now,
where he basically does manage to bringeveryone to the table and there's at
least a ceasefire because it's just simplyunsustainable for Russia at this point.
And it's gonna cost him a lot.
Like yes, they have more troops.
Yes, they have.
They can bleed Ukraine, uh, that way.

(15:25):
Those secondary sanctions.
Man, those are really serious sanctions.
And if you remember, 20 11, 20 12,that's how Iran was brought to heal.
The US actually imposed those.
China played along and Iranended up negotiating J-C-P-O-A.
So I do think that Russia's goingto have to abandon its gold like
conquering this third of dk.
Then nobody can even find on a map.

Let's say for the sake of argument that this, that Putin doesn't
listen and the secondary sanctions go on.
Doesn't that, don't you thinkthat means higher oil prices?

I mean, uh, marginally speaking, obviously, you know, set their,
all other things being equal world.
Yeah.
Uh, there's demand andsupply and slowing economy.
You know, there's a lot of otherforces, but absolutely it's about 3
million barrels that could be impacted.
Uh, right now it seems that the sanctionswould be a hundred percent of the
price, which suggests given there'salready a discount to Russian crude,

(16:17):
that some buyers may still buy it,
you know?
Yeah.
So like, uh, and just pay the fee.
Uh, but I do think that on themargin it would mean slightly higher.
Uh, oil prices.
Yeah.

Yeah.
Um, which, which might be the onlything that Russia could count on that.
Okay.
He doesn't want the higher oil prices,so maybe he won't follow through on it.
But see, that's

again, I know that's again dangerous, that they're making,
you know, like, you know, I, you know,I mean, turn the TikTok camera on.
Okay.
Turn it on.
Turn it on.
Turn it

on.
Where's, where's Kyle?
We don't have a Kyle for that.
We're

Kyle.
Yeah.
We don't have a Kyle.
Fortunately, we're, we're asmall operation, but like,
here's what I would say.
Uh, I wanna speak, I wanna speakdirectly to whoever is at the Kremlin.
Engaged in analyzing American politics.
Um, you're fired
and that's it.
That you're fired.
Bye.
I

I love that.
It's, it's the apprentice, but, butMark Marcos taken over while, while
President Trump is busy doing anything.
I mean,

I just think Russians have no idea what's going on in the
US and, and if they think that DonaldTrump gives a shit about all credit
prices going from 65 to 75, like, youknow, somehow America will survive.
By the way.
By the way, look at the chart of gasolineas percent of the consumer basket.
It's absolutely collapsedsince the nineties.
Americas just don't spend thatmuch on gasoline as percent of

(17:37):
their total household expenditure.
So, and it's a transitory, uh, blipin inflation, and it's like 3 million
barrels, you know, you know, I canjust see Trump making a deal with Iran.
Honestly to compensate for a bit.
So Saudis, well and theSaudis are already pumping.
The

Saudis have been pumping for months, probably.
He's been working through them already.
Like go back to pre COVID, like thenews of the decade would've been
the Saudi Russian oil price war thatgot put on hold 'cause of COVID.
So the Saudis are happy to kick himin the teeth while they're there.

And by the way, I know you want to talk about the
CPI, which we can get to right now'cause I think it's a great topic.
What better way to justify why inflationis going up than to blame Vladimir Putin?
You know, so like the Russians,if they think that an increase in
oil price is gonna hurt PresidentTrump, I don't think so at all.
He's gonna blame it on them.
He's going to uh, you know, like saylike, look, we're gonna punish them.

(18:30):
Oil prices will be upfor six to 12 months.
We can take it as aneconomy and we'll move on.
And again, it's notgonna be a hundred bucks.
This isn't like Iranclosing the Strait of MOUs.
This is going to be more likegoing from $65 to like 75, 80.
The world's not gonna end becauseof that, but Russian purse is
going to drain because of that.
And so I do think that Putin has areally, really interesting open window

(18:55):
of opportunity here to make a deal.
Set in stone that sphere of influence.
And if he loses it, then he doesn'tknow, uh, American politics.
Yeah.
And I don't think he does.
I think that he'smisunderstanding it un unless

he has a rabbit in his hat that takes it to a hundred a barrel.
I think you're exactly right.
I don't, I don't think he canget it to a hundred a barrel.
If he can get oil to sustain it ahundred plus a barrel, I think he might
actually like, have a leg to stand on.
I think you're firing theRussian, uh, American political
analyst for the wrong reason.
Huh?
My experience of them when I was,the last time I was in Moscow.
Um.
Was, was it 2018?
2019? It was before the pandemic.

(19:30):
And I remember this Russian Americananalyst came up to me and he was
quizzing me about some congressionalrace in Alabama that I'd never heard of.
And he knew everything about it.
And he wanted to know what I thought aboutthe race and how it was gonna affect the
balance of US politics and the house.
And I was like, my guy like this.
We we're not thinking about like,no self-respecting analyst gives a
shit about this in the United States.
It's very impressive that you're in back.
Woods, Alabama politics, butlike, this does not matter.

(19:52):
So you're, you need to firethem 'cause they know too much.
They are so far down in the weeds.
Yeah.
Like, with all these very, veryspecific things that they're missing.
Um, the forest for the trees.
Yeah.
I also, before we Oh yeah, go ahead.
Good.
Yeah,

yeah.
No, the forest is like,Donald Trump is the president.
Don't piss him off.
Like, yeah, that's like,that's, it's simple.
It's simple.
Why would you do that?
And no, his MAGA supportersare not gonna turn on him.
For this, it's, it's like the noise inUkraine is so much less than even on Iran.
And definitely this Jeffrey Epsteinthing is just like a blob that's

(20:25):
taking over the Maga Civil War, whichis, which I find kind of hilarious.
Mm-hmm.
But whatever, let them, you know,like, let them obsess about that.
Who cares?
The point is, you know, likethere is just, Americans are
not pro-Russian, you know?
I mean, like, let, let, let'sjust start there like, yes.
Yes.
Ameri, uh, many Americanswho voted for Trump.
We're not happy with the blank check.

(20:47):
Give it to Ukraine.
Yes, agreed.
But don't extrapolate that tosome sort of like a nostalgia
for like Slava file, like Doky.
Love.
No guys.
Like,

to your point, this is America.
I'm, I'm in MAGA country right now,and I remember when the war broke
out, like in, in rural Georgia outhere, everybody had Ukrainian flags.
They're not out anymore.
Uh, but I'm sure they'restill in the garage.
Like I'm so all thesepeople could take 'em out.

Yeah, they can take 'em out.
Like, and that's why, that's why Ithink they're just, I think a lot
of these guys are either like nerdsthat you ran into or they just are
like so far down the far right.
Twitter rabbit hole, that they actuallybelieve Americans like love Russia.
You know, they, they all watchthat Tucker Carlson episode where
he's in Moscow on repeat, and theyactually think that that matters.

(21:37):
It doesn't, and it's a very dangerousmoment for Russia because I, I do.
So you are right.
Like my base, like is my baseline here, isthat Putin is not an idiot and he realizes
he needs to, to, uh, to act on this widowof opportunity with Putin, uh, with Trump.

He, he's, he's high on his own supply.
Like, going back, back tolike the trade value column.
Like if we were going let, let's likebring in a wire reference to really
bring this like full Bill Simmons.
Like, it's like as if Stringer Bellstarted shooting up his own product.
Like that's where Putin is.
And since 2020 he's been highon his own supply thinking.
He was, you know, everything fromthe pandemic to the long table to the
invasion of uh, Kyiv and a Blitz Greek.

(22:16):
That didn't work.
'cause he didn't even tell his generalslike he's high on his own supply.
It's not gonna work.

So how do we, so how do we conclude this?
Uh, the rational, let,let's conclude it this way.
So if you're watching the newsand you don't know what the hell
is going on, it's that simple.
Putin just wants to conquer one lastbit of territory that he really needs
before he can maybe put this war onpause for five to 10 years, whatever.
Yeah.
The rational, the rational thing to dois just to give up and say, okay, fine.

(22:41):
You know what, let's just take itwhile we can take a deal from the us.
But as you said.
Putin has made a lot of bad,uh, decisions over the past,
uh, over the past five years.
Yeah.
And so this is a risk, it's a riskof direct US Russia confrontation,
not military, I'm not talking nuclearwar, but actual return even under

(23:02):
Trump of a very aggressive us.
Counts Russia.
So I do think that's a risk over thenext six months that we need to watch.
Yeah.

Before we pivot to CT CPI, I wanna say something that is separate
but sort of related to this, which is,I dunno if you saw the Pentagon's new
changes to, um, is it doctrine policy?
I don't know the correct word aboutthe use of small drones in the field.
Um, so rather than treating them as, um.
Basically as aircraft, they're treatingthem as consumables, so something like a

(23:31):
hand grenade or other types of ammunition.
Mm-hmm.
And they're talking about trainingpeople and training, like authorizing
people on the battlefield to beable to call these in, to use them
themselves in any kind of conflict.
So I think you're right about Russia.
Ukraine, like being thislaboratory for drone usage.
We've seen this with the Houthis,we've seen this with us and Iran, and
now you've got the US military likefinally taking notice and saying, okay,

(23:53):
we're gonna be a drone superpower too.
There's also tons of moneygoing at Antione defense.
Like I think this is a whole areathat's like changing very, very quickly.
And it starts with this,with this Rush Ukraine war.
I don't know where it ends, butlike it definitely starts well,

and I think it starts, look, uh, I referenced, uh, some.
YouTube videos that our viewers canwatch on Ukrainian and Russian drone
technology and how it's advanced.
And I think it also starts with theUS recognizing that there's a lot
of IP floating in Ukraine right now.
A lot of ip, this is the, thisis the battleground where drones
are being deployed, uh, inan incredibly fast evolution.

(24:28):
Uh, so it was a very, I think that'sa very smart move by the Trump
administration to say, okay, cool.
How can you pay us for these weapons?
Well.
We don't need Ukraine to like sell off.
Its like Grandma Silverto pay for the weapons.
But you know what you can't do Givethose drone, uh, the drone IP and
that, that was a good move, likeastute move by somebody at the Pentagon

coming to you all soon.
Uh, tickers on the stock exchangethat, uh, referenced Lord of the
Rings that are drones or dronedefense companies all sourced from
the battlefield, uh, in Ukraine.
A hundred percent.

A hundred percent.

Although they've taken most of the good ones.
We're gonna have to reallystart digging in the bag of Lord
of the Rings if we're gonna.
Uh, start finding othernames for these things.

Paul Baba Bombadil is out there.
Guys.

Tom Bombadil.
Oh, there we go.
I, I I need to, I needto trademark that one.
Um, okay, let's talk CPI for a bit.
This will probably be a shorterconversation, but, um, core
CPI was roughly in line 2.9%,uh, two point year on year.
Headline.
CPI was 2.6%, but there wasa big jump in core goods.

(25:30):
Um, core services was hot,medical care services was hot.
I would describe it as amoderately warm CPI print.
And I know you're probably gonna take theother side of this, but I just wanna say
that I think people thought that afterLiberation Day there was gonna be an.
Immediate increase in prices due totariffs, and that was never the way it
was gonna work because there was stuffgetting shipped via other countries

(25:51):
that wasn't China like look at theimports from places like Vietnam or
Indonesia or Thailand from China andtrans shipments and things like that.
Like those things weren't closed off.
Lots of companies had inventory on handthat they were gonna burn through, and
they had been stocking up in preparationfor something like Liberation Day.
Um, it, it just takes time.
It's sort of like a snake eatingsomething too big for itself and

(26:11):
it takes time for it to digest.
But I have been thinking since liberationDay that if Trump stuck to the guns and
he looks like he's trying to stick tothe guns, we'll get to tariffs and trade.
Maybe as part of this, 'cause I thinkwe need to talk about, um, Trump and the
50% tariffs on Brazil and the ongoingfree trade agreements with India.
Does he or does he nothave a deal with Vietnam?
What's going on with China?

(26:32):
We're gonna send them, you know, shipsfrom Nvidia, but we're also gonna
like crack down on the other things.
Like I think all that ispart of the conversation.
Um.
But I was never one of these people thatwas expecting inflation to go to the moon.
But I do maybe think that what wecould say is like, when is the, like
maybe we're at the lowest point ofinflation for the last 12 months.
Like I think we're really headingtowards like also this conflict

(26:52):
with Jerome Powell and the Fed, andare you gonna raise rates or not?
If inflation is starting to slowly tickup from here because the tariffs are
starting to have some sort of impact.
So I mean, it's not the be all, end all.
Maybe we get a couple more CPIsand they're not working that way.
But this is the first CPIwhere I was like, okay.
Like a little tiny signs thatmaybe we're gonna start seeing
like the long-term impact ofthese things and prices moving up.

(27:14):
And I think that will be, that'll bechallenging for President Trump if it
keeps up, because you can do the slideof hand with Iran and Israel and Russia
and it all works for those things.
But when people's, when the price of eggslike starts going up, when the price of
all these other things starts going up,like we've seen, uh, what people do.
So tell me why I'm wrong.
Tell me why you thinkthat's not the right thing.

No, I think politically you are right, right.
I think from a political perspective,uh, inflation is clearly the number
one concern of Americans, and theintensity of that concern has actually
increased over the past six months.
Even though CPI has come down fromalmost double digit levels, and
that's because, you know, prices are.

(27:54):
CPIs slowing down, butprices are still rising,

Jacob Smu (27:57):
right?

Uh, so there's no disinflation.
And that's just where we're gonna be forthe next 10 years, that like the price
increase we got is where we're gonna stay.
So people are gonna staymad for a very long time.
Um, so from a political perspective,you're a hundred percent right And
everything I'm about to say doesn'tmatter from a political human perspective.
And a lot of people wholisten to this, listen to our

(28:18):
podcast for that perspective.
Like, what?
So you're correct.
From a market perspective, however,um, I do think it's gonna be
difficult for CPI to rise a lotbecause shelter is 40% of core CP.
Mm-hmm.
And it's tanking.
It's tanking.
And, and the second issue Iwould say is that widgets, you

(28:39):
know, things like goods, right?
This is the stuff that weget from China and abroad.
They're gonna go up in prices.
For all of you who are listening to this,there's a very important concept, which
is that when a price of a item goes up,it's actually in a way disinflationary,
unless it's supported by wage growthor some sort of demand stimulus.

(29:04):
So, and that's where I would saythat it's absolutely criminally
insane that Jay Powell thoughtinflation was transitory in 2021.
This is something thathe should be fired for.
Like this is, it's insanity.
The Central Bank of Mexicois raising rates, bro.
And you are sitting there and you'resaying like it's, it's transitory.

(29:26):
Yeah.
Because the argument is like,well, these supply chain issues
are gonna resolve themselves.
No, no, no.
It doesn't matter because there wasso much fiscal stimulus in 21 and 22
that supported the increase in prices.
So the price increaseended up being sustainable.
Just kept feeding on itself.
The difference this time, Jacob, isthat we don't have fiscal stimulus.

(29:48):
The one big beautifulbill is not stimulative.
Uh, it's very, very small increasein, uh, fiscal thrust for 2026,
and that actually becomes negative.
So there, and I mean this, thisis not a disputable point that
we're so far away from the fiscalstimulus of the 2020s or 2021.
We don't have cash handouts topeople where they can afford

(30:09):
to buy ever increased goods.
So because of that from a marketperspective, the CPI increase
that we're getting right nowis actually quite transitory.
And it's quite funny that Jay Powellthis time around is not saying, not using
the word transitory, but he should be.
Everything that's gonna comefrom the tariffs will be
transitory because it's not beingsupported by any fiscal stimulus.

(30:33):
And because of that, I actuallydon't think that this increase
will have market implications.
I hear you on the politics though.
On the politics.
Absolutely.
And I would say the two actuallyfeed on each other in that it's
very, very painful and difficultfor him to impose extreme tariffs.
And that's why I think you will get deals.

(30:53):
So I think we're gonna end upwith a 10 to 15% increase in
goods prices across the board.
That's like the level we should beexpecting, and that's a one-off hit.
A lot of that corporates whomanufacture the retailers will have
to take on in their profit margins.
Some of it will be passedon to the consumer.
Uh, and I think it will betransitory this time around.

(31:14):
So this time around thisincrease is transitory.
'cause there's just no fiscal backstop.

Yeah.
Um, you know.
We've come so far that adding threeto 4 trillion to the deficit is not
considered stimulative or that you canmake that argument and that it's not.
And this is, you know, one placewhere you and I differ, like to
me, the one big beautiful bill.
Yes, it's not direct cash handouts,but it's still adding 4 trillion,
uh, to the deficit and the cutsdon't really kick in until 2028.
I also, I think this is a goodtime also to bring up, um, the MP

(31:41):
material deals, which is somethingI think is super interesting.
So the Pentagon has basically become, um,the largest shareholder in MP materials.
They refine.
Rare Earths and other things like that.
Um, the, the Pentagon is alsobasically agreeing to purchase
commitments and a floor price.
Um, a 10 year agreement establishinga price floor commitment of, for

(32:01):
instance, $110 per kilogram of oneof the things that MP material sells.
This is sort of.
Similar to what the United Statesdid with the semiconductor industry
in the 1950s and sixties when theywere going up against the Soviets and
they wanted to put chips on missilesto create precision guided munitions
like the semiconductor companies existbecause the US Comp, the US government
came in and said, we will buy all ofthese chips and we will buy them at

(32:23):
a certain price and you will survive.
And then we get chips on our phonesand our laptops and the thing
that we're recording on right now.
But if that's true, like ifthis is what the Pentagon is
doing and they're, you know, uh.
Gearing up this capacity, you'regonna pay more for these things if,
if you're one of these other companiesin general that's been importing
this stuff cheaply from China.
And this is one of the asymmetriclevers that China has been threatening,

(32:44):
that if you go after us on all thesedifferent things when it comes to
trade, like yes, you're gonna win.
You're bigger than us, but wewill make it painful for you.
And we can make it especiallypainful for us companies that
need to source these things.
So I think it's actually the USgovernment signaling, hey, like this
stuff is gonna cost more becauseit's gonna be made and refined.
In the United States.
And so, and, and I think there's alsolike an interesting thing happening

(33:05):
here where you can hear the ambivalencein my voice and in my take because
you have this sort of thing on the onehand and then on the other it's, oh,
Nvidia, you can send the chips to China.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Which that's awesome.
Like these, these things don't make sense.
Like, are you Trump the globalist who justwants to make a deal with China and trade
more, or are you Trump that we are gonnaget all of our rare earth sourced from
the United States and pay more for it, butwe're gonna be secure as a result of it?

(33:26):
Like these are not, this is theright hand and the left hand not
knowing what they're doing to me.
But no, no.
Take it though.
Maybe you think it can make sense.

I can defend it.
I can defend it.
I can defend it.
Because look, there are certaintechnologies, there are certain
technologies that like, so first of all.
What is the foundation of geopoliticalpower and it's material wealth?

Material wealth.
I thought it was rivers.
Hashtag peters eye.

Absolutely, absolutely not.
Okay.
So, uh, it's the source, like thefoundation of wealth is material power,
you know, and all obviously, you know,access to technology, but you're not gonna
access technology unless you have money.
So money is very important.

(34:14):
Now, I, I love the scene in the houseof cards that you have before quoted
myself, I mean, it's in my book.
You may have all the money, Raymond,but I have all the men with guns,
you know, which Kevin Spacey deliversin his extremely like great act
like I'd agree with that Jacob.
But men with with guns is expensive.
And so the reason I say this is becauseI do think it's a simplistic view.

(34:38):
That one can just stop trading with China.
No, you just have to be smart about it.
So, uh, is Nvidia going to give Chinathe most cutting edge chips that it has?
It's in Arsenal.
I actually don't know, but I'massuming the deal with the US
government is that No, we'll givethem some generation older chip.
Same with, uh, Airbus or Boeing.

(35:00):
Should Boeing stopselling aircraft to China?
That's the most idioticthing I've ever heard.
First of all, Boeing airplanes suck.
So like, there you go, China,like gorge yourself on planes
that are gonna fall outta the sky.
But, but the more, the more serious,the more serious point is that this
is 1980s and 1990s technology thatyou're selling to China, the buy

(35:20):
airplane that allows Boeing to theend r and d on latest technology.
Like that's, that's thewhole point of the video.
You cannot cut off the video.
And you cannot cut off.
This isn't pro globalist.
This isn't like, oh, Marcoworks for finance bros. He
just wants Nvidia start, go up.
No, this is likelegitimately obvious point.

(35:42):
China's second largesteconomy in the world.
Huge consumer market, you aregoing to hurt NVIDIA's efforts to
use its revenue to funnel into rand d to develop new chips unless
you let them trade with China.
So that's the first point, I would say.
The second point is then, okay, thenyou can identify certain things in your
supply chain that are critical to youand you just invest a lot into those

(36:06):
to make sure that you can, that youcan actually have that domestically.
So I think you can both be a globalistand put 50% tariffs in steel.
I think you can do both things.
If you, if you decide steel is reallyimportant at the 21st century, if you de
decide, decide that you need rare earthmineral refining in your country, fine.
Like whatever it is that youdecide, you can have like a backstop

(36:30):
domestically while still trading withessentially your rival, and here's
where you have to trade with China.
The reason you have to tradewith China, the reason that you
have to let Nvidia trade withChina is because I guarantee you.
Tokyo Electron and Samsung, and youknow, all these other allies of the US

(36:50):
are gonna continue to trade with China.
And so you're gonna fall behind, you'regonna seed marketplace to somebody else.
And then 10, 15 years from now, you'rewondering why the, I don't know, the
Dutch or the South Korea under theJapanese, or at the forefront of.
Because you decided not to makethe money off of the Chinese
with second or third generationgoods that you were selling them.

(37:12):
So I think it, it requires nuance.

It does.
And I, and I, I take your point, butit can be done over a period of years.
If the federal government is gonna supportthe strategic sectors that you're talking
about, and that's not what's happening.
Like if you wanna do what you are talkingabout, then you need, sorry, MAGA folks.
You need Biden's IndustrialPolicy Blueprint.
You need to go in and actually supportand train and set a floor, not just

(37:39):
for these materials, but for allthe things that are strategic, what
is not happening, they're giving.
The, the size of Italy's military budgetto ice and they're cutting Medicaid
and they're doing things like that.
They're not there.
They're not, they're not out theresaying, in five years we wanna be making
X, y, and Z things in the United States,and here's how we're gonna retrain the
workforce and here's how we're gonnabring the factories back and here's the
countries that we're gonna near shore,some of the other components that we need.

(38:00):
Like, that's not what they're doing.
They're doing some of these one-offs.
So I think they're gonnareach a point where.
You're gonna get all these inputs wherethe price is gonna go up significantly
because the things that you're talkingabout haven't kicked in yet, and China's
just gonna take advantage of those things.
And I think the other thing that's inwhat you said is that, uh, the eu, Japan,
South Korea, uh, they were being morereticent with China until the last.

(38:22):
Three or four months.
Now Japan is going like, screw y'all.
We're going all in on China now.
Now South Korea is saying, fuck this.
Like, you wanna treat us like this?
We will punch back a little bit.
We are not Canada, my friend.
Like, you wanna see what this looks like?
No.
Go cook.

So, so, no, no.
So, so, so let me, let me put what you'resaying and I think like, kind of rapid,
you know, I think that you're correct.
And that's where the, that'swhere the strategy for like
creating critical infrastructure.
Should be not just American.
And that's where I think theTrump administration's treatment

(38:57):
of allies really will hurt theUS over the 10 20 year horizon.
Like why not set up some of thisrare earth refining, you know, it's
very difficult to build a refinerfor rare earth because the, uh,
basically what's left after your.
Refine.
Rare earth is toxic, extremelytoxic material, and toxic waste.

(39:20):
So how are you gonna set this upin the United States of America?
Like it may make sense to moveit out of China to an ally.
And your point is like, well,you've kind of, uh, you're not
really thinking about that.
Seriously.
You want to put everything intothe us You want us to produce steel
and you treat Canadian steel assomehow a national security threat.

(39:40):
That will significantly increase costdomestically, whereas just spreading
it around, quote unquote the West writlarge would've been a cheaper strategy.
And I think a strategy that would'veensured that those allies, you know,
see America as a reliable partner.
So I think, I think your criticism ofthe Trump administration is very valid,

(40:00):
you know, and uh, and I think that theyare going to have to explain themselves.
For that attitude that they had both inthe first term and this term, which is
what it's, uh, you know, this thing thatJerry Kushner said in the first term,
it's, what have you done for me lately?
World Use that term.

(40:21):
Similarly, you know, it's thiswhole idea that the rest of the
world owes something to the US andso the US is gonna cash in on it.
I think that that was, that was a mistake.
And you identified why?
Because if you have to onshoreall of this stuff domestically,
it is gonna increase prices.
It also ensures that those alliesare no longer reliable partners.
So no counter for me on that one.

And you know, Jared's not around anymore.
We can't even go to Jared nowbecause Jared's busy making
money off the first term.
'cause he realizes that thesecond term is kind of crazy.
But this, I think it's, it's a perfectbookend of what we were talking about
earlier because I think that Trump.
Instinctual nature.
His non-strategic point of view helpshim with Russia, Ukraine, because he
has a real instinct for where is power,where is weakness for getting what

(41:03):
I want for pushing my finger on theplace that is gonna get me what I want.
Heran in Israel

too.
Sorry to interrupt you, Jacob.
Yeah.
But like, why are we nottalking about Iran and Israel?
Because it was actually handledextremely well by Donald Trump.
And here we are, like amonth later, nobody cares.
Where's the instabilityin the Middle East?
Where is it like, youknow, I'm looking at,

well, well, it's, it, it's, it's in southern Syria because
Israel is now bombing southern Syria.
'cause the Jews are in theSyrian sectarian issues.
And that's all we're gonna talk aboutbecause it's not that important.
But like, it's there.
It's not like.
Israel is acting like a great power.
Now, by the way, in the Middle East, Isaid this on Twitter, Kurds, if you're
listening, watch what's happeningwith the Drews in southern Syria.
Like if you have any hopefor an independent state in
your lifetime, like what?

(41:41):
Like you should be taking notes.
Um, but that's the only thing I'mgonna say about the Middle East.
But I was, I, you know, I saidsomething nice about President Trump.
Now I'm gonna say something not so niceabout President Trump because the way,
all the things that made him good atRussia, Ukraine, and make him good at
this Iran Israel thing are making him yes.
Yeah.
Extremely incompetentwhen it comes to trade.
This idea that they're, you're gonnathrow 50% tariffs on Brazil because

(42:03):
you're mad that that's the bestBoro's getting it kicked in the teeth.
That's the best one.
Like, it's asinine.
Let's, lets cook that.
Let's cook with that.
You've just, you'veturned Brazil against you.
Like go look at oh h social media.
They're furious.
Like it's a center right leaning country.
And you're like giving Lula support.
Like what do you do?
Sorry, go ahead.

Listen.
No, no, no.
Don't, don't apologize.
I just, I just, I justwanna build on this.
This is, uh, uh, uh, Brazil has a tradedeficit with the United States of America.
Let me, lemme break this down.
Really simple for people inthe administration who don't
know a math Peter Novarro.
So basically you have a country thatimports a lot of stuff from America

(42:44):
and doesn't send anything back.
That's Brazil.
It's one of the few.
It's one of the few countries onthe planet that actually finds
Americans goods, American goods useful
and it doesn't sendanything back to America.
Americans don't buy anything from Brazil.
It's like there's nothing to buy.
It's perfectly fine.

(43:06):
It's the one country that actually.
Has a negative trade balance for theUnited States of America where the
US is winning according to PresidentTrump's like heuristics, which
obviously I don't, don't matter withmatter because trade balance is not
a be all, end all, uh, in the world.
My point is like, this is fascinating.
Like Brazil, you cannottariff Brazil at 50%.

(43:29):
You cannot, because first of all,whatever Brazil buys from America,
you can buy from someone else.
Let's just be very clear.
There's absolutely nothing critical.
United States of America send to Brazil.
Nothing.
It can all be replaced by othercountries, Europe, China, whatever.
And on top of that, it's a bigcountry on a continent where
US power is kind of relevant.
It's the Western hemisphere, andas you say, Jacob, you're pushing

(43:52):
it into the arms of China forno real good strategic reason.
And I agree with you, Todd.
Uh, president Trump's.
President Trump is likea hedge fund manager.
You know, in in finance we'vegot hedge fund managers.
You have sovereign wealth funds andpension funds on the other side, in
terms of time horizons, hedge fundhas a total of time horizon from
zero to like three months maybe.

(44:13):
You know, an institutionalinvestors is gonna have time
horizon of five to 10 years.
President Trump is treating his jobas if he's a hedge fund manager and,
and in many ways that's a good thing.
As you pointed out when itcomes to Israel, Iran, he
handled it I think very well.
He understands game theory andnegotiations really, really well.
What he doesn't, I think, care aboutis how the consequences of those

(44:34):
negotiations and those mini gametheoretical moments where he crushes
everybody really, really well becausehe negotiates better than everyone
because his counterparts have neverfreaking bought a car at a used car lot.
You know where he is, he.
He's been dealing with contractors allhis life actually lived in the real world.
Nine out of 10 American policy makershave basically gone from an Ivy League
college to a job in the State Department.

(44:57):
So they, they have no idea how thereal world works and it's fine.
Like that's his specialty.
The problem is that those negotiatingmoments, yeah, they ignore the long
term and Brazil is a great example,but you can really make many others.
Canada is also a good example.

Yeah.
Well, I, I wanna make a few others.
So, I mean, let's talk about a few.
Like, I mean, Mexico is theone that is the top of my mind.
We're talking about tariffsagain on Mexico and some
demerits maybe for Shane Baum.
If both thing, if those things getthrough, Mexico's your era in the hole.
And what you really need to do withMexico, and I think Mexico would be
open to this based on what I've readand learned over the past, you know,
eight to 10 months is they've got acartel problem and a security problem.

(45:32):
So.
Light 'em up, like go in there andmake Mexico secure and like make
Mexico a manufacturing center thatis completely dependent on the United
States and make that like a cheaplabor workforce that's going for that.
That's what you want and there's somethingthat you can do hand in hand there, and
it will affect all these other things.
There's, um, India, they just wrappedup their fifth round of talks.
They're trying to get some kind of interimdeal or some deal in before August.

(45:55):
You know what the sticking point is?
The United States is insisting that wesell milk or dairy products into India.
Than other farm goods.
And it's like everybody who, all thefarmers who listen to this, who have
seen me at events, especially those atdairy events, you know, I love y'all
and you know, I'm rooting for y'all.
Like I, but like this idea that we'regonna use India so that we can sell
dairy products into the Indian market.

(46:15):
India is what gave the BritishEmpire a second lease on life.
If you can get a real free tradeagreement with India and all these
other different concessions from them ontrade, you're gonna hold it up because
you want to sell them dairy products.
Like that's not gonna help you.
Like India's gonna surge dairy productionand in 10 years they're not gonna buy
from the United States anymore and thedeal's gonna be done and you're just
gonna piss the Indians off just likeyou did with the India Pakistan stuff.
One place in which his gametheory stuff was not so wrong.

(46:38):
Think about Vietnam,thought they had a deal.
It's a different dealthan they negotiated.
And now they're like, well, we can't eventrust this guy 'cause we thought we had
a deal, so maybe we should look to China.
Maybe we should look tosome of these others.
And that's before we get intoJapan and South Korea and others.
So it's just.
It's this really short termthinking, and he's pushing away
all these allies otherwise wouldwant to be part of this system.

(46:58):
And I think in 3, 5, 7 years,like I, the, the, the metaphor
I've used is radiation sickness.
Like, I think you'll get atime horizon where things look
like the patient has improved.
That's what happens when you'reexposed to a lethal dose of radiation.
But the cellular structure has beenso damaged that you can't like,
replicate yourself again, and thenyou die a terrible, horrible death.
I don't think we're gonnadie a terrible oral death.

(47:18):
But like you're setting up thesame pattern here where, okay,
you did the shock, now thingsare gonna look okay for a minute.
And then, but inside the cellularstructure, the patient is damaged
in Japan and South Korea on evenCanada who just sent their first
LNG shipment to South Korea.
Mazeltov to the Canadians.
Like, they're all like turning on youwhile saying nice things to your face
and you're just running around declaringvictory and going to Jared rant over.

No, I think I, I, I really like that analogy because, uh,
you know, one counter to your rant.
Is Europe, right?
Mm-hmm.
It looks like Europe has found,uh, a way to deal with Trump and,
uh, you know, you like Mertz.
Friedrich Mertz came out, gave aninterview, uh, recently, I think,
uh, in the UK where he basically saidlike, look, president Trump was right.

(48:05):
We were free riding and you know,like, I have no problem with JD
Vance's speech at uni conference.
This is an example.
I mean, look it up if you don'tknow what I'm referring to.
For our listeners.
You know, but, but it underpinsexactly how you defined it.
It may just be that all thesecountries have figured out how to

(48:25):
deal with Trump, send him basicallylove letters through text messages.
Mark Ruta did.
Mm-hmm.
The NATO Secretary General, likeso effectively just go on TV and
say, president Trump is awesome.
He's right, but then work on.
Divesting yourself from your securitytrade and economic links with America,

(48:45):
which is obviously not good for the us.
So I really like the radiation analogy,and I think that, um, a lot of people
listening to this would say, we'rebeing unfair to President Trump because
your appeals have fallen in line.
I would raise the question, but arethey falling in line by increasing
defense, uh, spending, or are theysimply becoming geopolitically mature?

(49:06):
Exiting the geopolitical adolescencethat actually served American
interests for the past 70 years.
And so they've just learned how tomassage this rhetorically like, oh,
president Trump, you're awesome.
You're our daddy.
Meanwhile, hey guys, let'sbuild up our own capacity.
'cause Americans are unreliable.
Um, so yeah.

(49:26):
I think you're right.
I think that's the, and about Europe.
Like

I, I've been reading this quote from Emmanuel Macron, uh,
who, who was fairly down on our tradevalue leader list, but because he is
a lame duck 'cause he can't run again.
And I know that like he's got lotsof problems as a politician, but he's
still one of the smarter ones out therein terms of diagnosing geopolitics.
He said this in a speech last week whenhe was celebrating, uh, a c day quote.
To be free in this world,you must be feared.

(49:48):
To be feared.
You have to be powerful.
The whole nation must be stronger.
End quote.
You could put that in the 1930s leaderand you wouldn't know that it was
Emmanuel Macron speaking in 2025.
So sure.
That's why Mark Red is saying, great.
I got the $10 billion worth ofweapons from the United States for
NATO and Ukraine and everythingelse I sent in my life letter.
Everything's fine.
Meanwhile, France is like, eh, like wewere gonna increase spending and build

(50:09):
French products out to, you know, 20, 30.
Now we're gonna do it in two years,and now here's 10 billion euros more.
And by the way, Boeing,we've got Airbus over here.
We can sell that shit to China too.
We're gonna have a newrelationship with China as well.
So like it's.
Yeah, Europe is right there.
Like he's created a poll, like both.
It's funny, like Russia and theUnited States for generations have
been fighting over Europe basically.

(50:30):
Um, and now like Russia by invadingUkraine and Trump, by prosecuting a
trade war, have created the strongEurope that both sides didn't want.
They both wanted them, like in between.
It's just like totally self-defeating.
Um, last word to you, Marco, andthen we gotta get outta here.

Uh, no.
I think, uh, I've compared Donald Trumpto, uh, cod liver oil in the past.
So cod liver oil is what?
Was fed to children, uh,all across the world.
Uh, I grew up inbasically the third world.
So we used to, uh, we used tohave this even in the seventies
and eighties, you know, so, uh,basically you, you swallow it.
It's extremely stinkyand it tastes terrible.

(51:05):
So Donald Trump, if you are aforeign country, he's stinky
and he tastes terrible.
But the truth is he's very good for you.
Like the truth is that Donald Trump isreally good for the rest of the world.
Because he basically takes awaythis American benevolence to

(51:25):
allies and, and forces everybody tobasically take stock of their own
capabilities and their own failuresand fix them and start fixing them.
And so there's two ways to look at this.
Jacob, you've taken the approachthat this is not good for America.
Like he's caught liver oilfor the rest of the world.
Mm-hmm.
But not for the us.
This is, this is bad.

(51:46):
I see that and I agree with it.
From a purely kind of political science,international relations perspective.
Yes, you're correct.
Uh, America's effectively kind of losingsome of these alliance relationships.
Allies are just being sy of fansand saying nice things to President
Trump or sending him sexts asrooted it, you know, but they're,

(52:06):
but they're really like, moving on.
On the other hand, Iwill just say one thing.
Maybe this all doesn't end ina radiation sickness death.
Maybe what it producesis a more balanced world.
You know, where like, is it reallya, a risk to the United States of
America that Canada solves some ofits idiotic domestic economic issues

(52:28):
that Mark Carney's trying to do, likeGod bless him first time in 250 years,
provinces can trade with one another.
Is it really a problem that Europecan stand on its own two feet?
Is, are Canada and Europe trulyever going to be enemies of the
United States relative to Russiaor China or some other country?
And so in a way, maybe there is amore hopeful vision where the world

(52:49):
just becomes a little bit morebalanced and the US retrenches by
building up some of these countries.
And yes, it's not direct positive for theus you are correct, but maybe a, maybe a
vasal vasal relationship was not reallyin anybody's interest to begin with.
So I'm just gonna leave you there.
I don't have an answer.
Because instinctively I agree withyou, but maybe you and I are looking

(53:10):
at this from too much of a game ofrisk perspective from a Machiavellian
purely realist political science view,and not from a different view, which
is that, hey, maybe this will lead to amore balanced world where, yeah, Europe
may have the capacity to say no toAmerica, but maybe that's not such a bad
thing, you know, at the end of the day.

I think it's certainly not a bad thing for markets and investing.
That's why I'm so bullish, like ingeneral on the next decade or two.
I think there's a monster waitingat the end of this period.
Just like in the 1890s therewas a monster called World War
I waiting at the end of it.
So I worry about sort of that,but the, exactly what you just
said is why you should be likeskeptical and risk, uh, aware.
If you're into geopolitics and ifyou're in investing, you should be like.

(53:51):
The party is, is just getting started.
Like,

no, Jacob, I love that you are completely right.
And I kind of feel the same way.
That's why like, I'm not bearishright now on, on markets at all.
Uh, not this year, not like Idon't think the world is ending,
but you're right, you're right.
A multipolar world isnot a bad place to be.
We can be in it for 20, 50, ahundred years or when it ends.

Usually doesn't end well.
Oh

boy.
Yeah.
So,

all right, on that note.
Good to see you, cousin.
I'll see you next week.

Same.
Thank you.

All Episodes

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

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

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Putin’s Out of Time, Not Troops

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

.css-r6mb8g{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:1;overflow:hidden;}24/7 News: The Latest

Dateline NBC

The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show

All Episodes

Putin’s Out of Time, Not Troops

24/7 News: The Latest