Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson: Politics, Trump, AOC, Elon & DOGE | Lex Fridman Podcast #462

Democrats still think the currency of Democrats still think the currency of politics is money and the currency of politics is money and the currency of politics is money and the currency of politics is attention. And that's a huge politics is attention. And that's a huge politics is attention. And that's a huge difference between the two sides right difference between the two sides right difference between the two sides right now. I think the steelman is very easy now. I think the steelman is very easy now. I think the steelman is very easy to make here. Department of government to make here. Department of government to make here. Department of government efficiency. That sounds like an efficiency. That sounds like an efficiency. That sounds like an organization that's needed if government organization that's needed if government organization that's needed if government is inefficient. And one of the themes of is inefficient. And one of the themes of is inefficient. And one of the themes of our book is just how inefficient our book is just how inefficient our book is just how inefficient government can be. Not only at building government can be. Not only at building government can be. Not only at building houses, building energy, often at houses, building energy, often at houses, building energy, often at achieving its own ends. building achieving its own ends. building achieving its own ends. building highspeed rail when it wants to build highspeed rail when it wants to build highspeed rail when it wants to build high-spe speed rail, adding affordable high-spe speed rail, adding affordable high-spe speed rail, adding affordable housing units when it wants to afford housing units when it wants to afford housing units when it wants to afford add affordable housing units. You know, add affordable housing units. You know, add affordable housing units. You know, I love Ezra's line that we don't just I love Ezra's line that we don't just I love Ezra's line that we don't just need to think about, you know, need to think about, you know, need to think about, you know, deregulating the market. We need to deregulating the market. We need to deregulating the market. We need to think about deregulating government think about deregulating government think about deregulating government itself, getting the rules out of the way itself, getting the rules out of the way itself, getting the rules out of the way that keep government from achieving the that keep government from achieving the that keep government from achieving the democratic outcomes that it's trying to democratic outcomes that it's trying to democratic outcomes that it's trying to achieve. This is a world in which a achieve. This is a world in which a achieve. This is a world in which a department of government efficiency is a department of government efficiency is a department of government efficiency is a godsend. We should be absolutely godsend. We should be absolutely godsend. We should be absolutely obsessed with making government work obsessed with making government work obsessed with making government work well, especially if we're going to be well, especially if we're going to be well, especially if we're going to be the kind of liberals who believe that the kind of liberals who believe that the kind of liberals who believe that government is important in the first government is important in the first government is important in the first place. In my lifetime, the Democratic place. In my lifetime, the Democratic place. In my lifetime, the Democratic Party has never been Party has never been Party has never been as internally fragmented and weak, as internally fragmented and weak, as internally fragmented and weak, leaderless, ruerless as it is right now.

leaderless, ruerless as it is right now. leaderless, ruerless as it is right now. Now, it won't stay that way. You cannot Now, it won't stay that way. You cannot Now, it won't stay that way. You cannot change American politics. You can't change American politics. You can't change American politics. You can't change Democratic party if you're not change Democratic party if you're not change Democratic party if you're not willing to upset people. Donald Trump willing to upset people. Donald Trump willing to upset people. Donald Trump reformed the Republican party by willing reformed the Republican party by willing reformed the Republican party by willing people to fight Republicans. He ran people to fight Republicans. He ran people to fight Republicans. He ran against George W. Bush, against Jeb against George W. Bush, against Jeb against George W. Bush, against Jeb Bush, against Mitt Romney, against the Bush, against Mitt Romney, against the Bush, against Mitt Romney, against the trade deals, against a bunch of things trade deals, against a bunch of things trade deals, against a bunch of things that were understood to be sacred cow. that were understood to be sacred cow. that were understood to be sacred cow. Somehow this guy ran like right after Somehow this guy ran like right after Somehow this guy ran like right after Mitt Romney and John McCain while Mitt Romney and John McCain while Mitt Romney and John McCain while attacking Mitt Romney and John McCain, attacking Mitt Romney and John McCain, attacking Mitt Romney and John McCain, right? If you are not like the right? If you are not like the right? If you are not like the Democratic party does need to change. It Democratic party does need to change. It Democratic party does need to change. It needs to attain a different form because needs to attain a different form because needs to attain a different form because the Obama coalition is exhausted. It's the Obama coalition is exhausted. It's the Obama coalition is exhausted. It's done. It's not going to be able to do done. It's not going to be able to do done. It's not going to be able to do that if it doesn't have standard bears that if it doesn't have standard bears that if it doesn't have standard bears who are willing to say we were wrong who are willing to say we were wrong who are willing to say we were wrong about some things. We have to change our about some things. We have to change our about some things. We have to change our views on some things. We have to act views on some things. We have to act views on some things. We have to act differently and speak differently. When differently and speak differently. When differently and speak differently. When Elon takes over Tesla, when Elon is at Elon takes over Tesla, when Elon is at Elon takes over Tesla, when Elon is at SpaceX, when Elon's at X, I would SpaceX, when Elon's at X, I would SpaceX, when Elon's at X, I would imagine, and you know this better than imagine, and you know this better than imagine, and you know this better than me because you know him. And maybe most me because you know him. And maybe most me because you know him. And maybe most importantly for the purposes of this importantly for the purposes of this importantly for the purposes of this part of the conversation, you know the part of the conversation, you know the part of the conversation, you know the people who work for him. I'll bet if you people who work for him. I'll bet if you people who work for him. I'll bet if you ask the people who work under Elon at X, ask the people who work under Elon at X, ask the people who work under Elon at X, Tesla, SpaceX, they say, "I know exactly Tesla, SpaceX, they say, "I know exactly Tesla, SpaceX, they say, "I know exactly what Elon wants. This is his goal for what Elon wants. This is his goal for what Elon wants. This is his goal for the Super Heavy rocket. This is his goal the Super Heavy rocket. This is his goal the Super Heavy rocket. This is his goal in terms of humanoid robots. This is his in terms of humanoid robots. This is his in terms of humanoid robots. This is his goal in terms of profitability of goal in terms of profitability of goal in terms of profitability of Twitter and the growth of our Twitter and the growth of our Twitter and the growth of our subscription business and how we're subscription business and how we're subscription business and how we're going to integrate new features."

going to integrate new features." going to integrate new features." There's a probably a really clear mind There's a probably a really clear mind There's a probably a really clear mind meld right now. I have no sense that meld right now. I have no sense that meld right now. I have no sense that there's a mind meld. And in fact, I have there's a mind meld. And in fact, I have there's a mind meld. And in fact, I have the exact opposite sense that rather the exact opposite sense that rather the exact opposite sense that rather than an example of creative destruction, than an example of creative destruction, than an example of creative destruction, which would be a mitzvah of which would be a mitzvah of which would be a mitzvah of entrepreneurship, we have an act of entrepreneurship, we have an act of entrepreneurship, we have an act of destruction destruction. We have destruction destruction. We have destruction destruction. We have destruction for the sake of destruction. destruction for the sake of destruction. destruction for the sake of destruction. It's much cleaner to me from an It's much cleaner to me from an It's much cleaner to me from an interpretive standpoint to describe Doge interpretive standpoint to describe Doge interpretive standpoint to describe Doge as an ideological purge of as an ideological purge of as an ideological purge of progressivism performing an act of or progressivism performing an act of or progressivism performing an act of or performing the job of efficiency rather performing the job of efficiency rather performing the job of efficiency rather than a department of actual efficiency than a department of actual efficiency than a department of actual efficiency itself. The following is a conversation itself. The following is a conversation itself. The following is a conversation with Ezra Klene and Derek Thompson. Ezra with Ezra Klene and Derek Thompson. Ezra with Ezra Klene and Derek Thompson. Ezra is one of the most influential voices is one of the most influential voices is one of the most influential voices representing the left wing of American representing the left wing of American representing the left wing of American politics. He is a columnist for the New politics. He is a columnist for the New politics. He is a columnist for the New York Times, author of Why We're York Times, author of Why We're York Times, author of Why We're Polarized, and host of the Ezra Klein Polarized, and host of the Ezra Klein Polarized, and host of the Ezra Klein show. Derek is a writer at The Atlantic, show. Derek is a writer at The Atlantic, show. Derek is a writer at The Atlantic, author of Hitmakers and On Work, and author of Hitmakers and On Work, and author of Hitmakers and On Work, and host of the Plain English podcast.

host of the Plain English podcast. host of the Plain English podcast. Together, they've written a new book Together, they've written a new book Together, they've written a new book simply titled Abundance that lays out a simply titled Abundance that lays out a simply titled Abundance that lays out a kind of manifesto for the left. It is kind of manifesto for the left. It is kind of manifesto for the left. It is already a controversial, widely debated already a controversial, widely debated already a controversial, widely debated book, but I think it puts forward a book, but I think it puts forward a book, but I think it puts forward a powerful vision for what the Democratic powerful vision for what the Democratic powerful vision for what the Democratic Party could stand for in the coming Party could stand for in the coming Party could stand for in the coming election. If I may, let me comment on election. If I may, let me comment on election. If I may, let me comment on the fact that sometimes on this podcast, the fact that sometimes on this podcast, the fact that sometimes on this podcast, I delve into the dark realm of politics. I delve into the dark realm of politics. I delve into the dark realm of politics. Indeed, politics often divides us. and Indeed, politics often divides us. and Indeed, politics often divides us. and frankly brings out the worst in some frankly brings out the worst in some frankly brings out the worst in some very smart people. Plus, to me, it is very smart people. Plus, to me, it is very smart people. Plus, to me, it is frustrating how much of the political frustrating how much of the political frustrating how much of the political discourse is drama and how little of it discourse is drama and how little of it discourse is drama and how little of it is rigorous, empathetic discussion of is rigorous, empathetic discussion of is rigorous, empathetic discussion of policy. I hate this, but I guess I policy. I hate this, but I guess I policy. I hate this, but I guess I understand why. If the other side is understand why. If the other side is understand why. If the other side is called either Hitler or Stalin online by called either Hitler or Stalin online by called either Hitler or Stalin online by swarms of chanting mobs, it's hard to swarms of chanting mobs, it's hard to swarms of chanting mobs, it's hard to carry out a nuanced discussion about carry out a nuanced discussion about carry out a nuanced discussion about immigration, healthcare, housing, immigration, healthcare, housing, immigration, healthcare, housing, education, foreign policy, and so on. On education, foreign policy, and so on. On education, foreign policy, and so on. On top of that, anytime I talk about top of that, anytime I talk about top of that, anytime I talk about politics, half the audience is pissed politics, half the audience is pissed politics, half the audience is pissed off at me. And no, there is no audience off at me. And no, there is no audience off at me. And no, there is no audience capture. I get shit on equally by capture. I get shit on equally by capture. I get shit on equally by different groups across the political different groups across the political different groups across the political spectrum, depending on the guest. Why? I spectrum, depending on the guest. Why? I spectrum, depending on the guest. Why? I don't know. But I'm slowly coming to don't know. But I'm slowly coming to don't know. But I'm slowly coming to accept that this is the way of the accept that this is the way of the accept that this is the way of the world. I try to maintain my cool, return world. I try to maintain my cool, return world. I try to maintain my cool, return hate with compassion, and learn from the hate with compassion, and learn from the hate with compassion, and learn from the criticism and the general madness of it criticism and the general madness of it criticism and the general madness of it all. Still, I think it's valuable to

all. Still, I think it's valuable to all. Still, I think it's valuable to sometimes talk about politics. It's an sometimes talk about politics. It's an sometimes talk about politics. It's an important part to the big picture of important part to the big picture of important part to the big picture of human civilization, but indeed, it is human civilization, but indeed, it is human civilization, but indeed, it is only still a small part. only still a small part. only still a small part. My happy place is talking to scientists, My happy place is talking to scientists, My happy place is talking to scientists, engineers, programmers, video game engineers, programmers, video game engineers, programmers, video game designers, historians, philosophers, designers, historians, philosophers, designers, historians, philosophers, musicians, athletes, filmmakers, and so musicians, athletes, filmmakers, and so musicians, athletes, filmmakers, and so on. So, I apologize for the occasional on. So, I apologize for the occasional on. So, I apologize for the occasional detour into politics, especially over detour into politics, especially over detour into politics, especially over the past few months. I did a few the past few months. I did a few the past few months. I did a few conversations with world leaders and I conversations with world leaders and I conversations with world leaders and I have a few more coming up. So there will have a few more coming up. So there will have a few more coming up. So there will be a few more political podcasts coming be a few more political podcasts coming be a few more political podcasts coming out in part so I can be better prepared out in part so I can be better prepared out in part so I can be better prepared to deeply understand the mind, the life, to deeply understand the mind, the life, to deeply understand the mind, the life, and the perspective of each world and the perspective of each world and the perspective of each world leader. I hope you come along with me on leader. I hope you come along with me on leader. I hope you come along with me on this journey into the darkness of this journey into the darkness of this journey into the darkness of politics as I try to shine a light in politics as I try to shine a light in politics as I try to shine a light in the complex human mess of it all, hoping the complex human mess of it all, hoping the complex human mess of it all, hoping to understand us humans better, always to understand us humans better, always to understand us humans better, always backed, of course, by deep, rigorous backed, of course, by deep, rigorous backed, of course, by deep, rigorous research and by empathy. research and by empathy. research and by empathy. Long term, I hope for political Long term, I hope for political Long term, I hope for political discussions to be only a small discussions to be only a small discussions to be only a small percentage of this podcast. If it's not percentage of this podcast. If it's not percentage of this podcast. If it's not your thing, please just skip these your thing, please just skip these your thing, please just skip these episodes or maybe come along anyway episodes or maybe come along anyway episodes or maybe come along anyway since both you and I are reluctant since both you and I are reluctant since both you and I are reluctant travelers on this road trip. But who travelers on this road trip. But who travelers on this road trip. But who knows what we'll learn together about knows what we'll learn together about knows what we'll learn together about the world and about the world and about the world and about ourselves. This is the Lex Ruben ourselves. This is the Lex Ruben ourselves. This is the Lex Ruben podcast. To support it, please check out podcast. To support it, please check out podcast. To support it, please check out our sponsors in the description. And our sponsors in the description. And our sponsors in the description. And now, dear friends, here's Ezra Klene and now, dear friends, here's Ezra Klene and now, dear friends, here's Ezra Klene and Derek Derek Derek Thompson. You are both firmly on the

Thompson. You are both firmly on the Thompson. You are both firmly on the left of the US political spectrum. Ezra, left of the US political spectrum. Ezra, left of the US political spectrum. Ezra, I've been a fan of yours for a long I've been a fan of yours for a long I've been a fan of yours for a long time. Uh, you're often referred to, at time. Uh, you're often referred to, at time. Uh, you're often referred to, at least I think of you as one of the most least I think of you as one of the most least I think of you as one of the most intellectually rigorous voices on the intellectually rigorous voices on the intellectually rigorous voices on the left. Can you try to define Can you left. Can you try to define Can you left. Can you try to define Can you define the ideals and the vision of the define the ideals and the vision of the define the ideals and the vision of the American left? Oh, good. We're starting American left? Oh, good. We're starting American left? Oh, good. We're starting small here. And maybe contrast them with small here. And maybe contrast them with small here. And maybe contrast them with the American right. Sure. Um, so the the American right. Sure. Um, so the the American right. Sure. Um, so the thing I should say here is that you can thing I should say here is that you can thing I should say here is that you can define the left in different ways. I define the left in different ways. I define the left in different ways. I think the left has a couple fundamental think the left has a couple fundamental think the left has a couple fundamental views. One is that life is views. One is that life is views. One is that life is unfair. We are born with different unfair. We are born with different unfair. We are born with different talents. We are born into different talents. We are born into different talents. We are born into different nations, right? The the luck of being nations, right? The the luck of being nations, right? The the luck of being born into America is very different than born into America is very different than born into America is very different than the luck of being born into Venezuela. the luck of being born into Venezuela. the luck of being born into Venezuela. Um, we are born into different families. Um, we are born into different families. Um, we are born into different families. We have luck operating as an ominant We have luck operating as an ominant We have luck operating as an ominant presence across our entire lives. And as presence across our entire lives. And as presence across our entire lives. And as such, the people for whom it works out such, the people for whom it works out such, the people for whom it works out well, we don't deserve all of that. We well, we don't deserve all of that. We well, we don't deserve all of that. We got lucky. I mean, we also worked hard got lucky. I mean, we also worked hard got lucky. I mean, we also worked hard and we also had talent and we also and we also had talent and we also and we also had talent and we also applied that talent. But at a very applied that talent. But at a very applied that talent. But at a very fundamental level that we are sitting fundamental level that we are sitting fundamental level that we are sitting here is unfair and that so many other here is unfair and that so many other here is unfair and that so many other people are in conditions that are much people are in conditions that are much people are in conditions that are much worse, much more precarious, much more worse, much more precarious, much more worse, much more precarious, much more exploited is unfair. And one of the exploited is unfair. And one of the exploited is unfair. And one of the fundamental roles of government should fundamental roles of government should fundamental roles of government should not necessarily be to turn that not necessarily be to turn that not necessarily be to turn that unfairness into perfect equality, but to unfairness into perfect equality, but to unfairness into perfect equality, but to rectify that unfairness into a kind of rectify that unfairness into a kind of rectify that unfairness into a kind of universal dignity, right? So people can universal dignity, right? So people can universal dignity, right? So people can have lives of flourishing. So I'd say have lives of flourishing. So I'd say have lives of flourishing. So I'd say that's one thing. The left is

that's one thing. The left is that's one thing. The left is fundamentally more skeptical of fundamentally more skeptical of fundamentally more skeptical of capitalism and particularly unchecked capitalism and particularly unchecked capitalism and particularly unchecked forms of capitalism than the right. I forms of capitalism than the right. I forms of capitalism than the right. I always think this is hard to talk about always think this is hard to talk about always think this is hard to talk about because what we call unchecked because what we call unchecked because what we call unchecked capitalism is nevertheless very much capitalism is nevertheless very much capitalism is nevertheless very much supported by government. So I think in supported by government. So I think in supported by government. So I think in in a way you have both like markets are in a way you have both like markets are in a way you have both like markets are things that are enforced by government. things that are enforced by government. things that are enforced by government. Whether they are you know how you set Whether they are you know how you set Whether they are you know how you set the rules of them is what ends up the rules of them is what ends up the rules of them is what ends up differing between the left and the differing between the left and the differing between the left and the right. But the left is tends to be more right. But the left is tends to be more right. But the left is tends to be more worried about the fact that you could worried about the fact that you could worried about the fact that you could get rich uh building coal fired power get rich uh building coal fired power get rich uh building coal fired power plants, belching pollution into the air, plants, belching pollution into the air, plants, belching pollution into the air, and you could get rich laying down solar and you could get rich laying down solar and you could get rich laying down solar panels, and the market doesn't know the panels, and the market doesn't know the panels, and the market doesn't know the difference between the two. And so difference between the two. And so difference between the two. And so there's a set of goals about regulating there's a set of goals about regulating there's a set of goals about regulating the the unchecked uh potential of the the unchecked uh potential of the the unchecked uh potential of capitalism that also uh relates to sort capitalism that also uh relates to sort capitalism that also uh relates to sort of exploitation of workers. Um there's of exploitation of workers. Um there's of exploitation of workers. Um there's like very fundamental questions about like very fundamental questions about like very fundamental questions about how much people get paid, how much power how much people get paid, how much power how much people get paid, how much power they have. Again, the rectification of they have. Again, the rectification of they have. Again, the rectification of economic and other forms of power is economic and other forms of power is economic and other forms of power is very fundamental to to the left. When very fundamental to to the left. When very fundamental to to the left. When you think about what the minimum wage you think about what the minimum wage you think about what the minimum wage is, I am a successful podcast host. When is, I am a successful podcast host. When is, I am a successful podcast host. When I go into a negotiation with the New I go into a negotiation with the New I go into a negotiation with the New York Times, I have a certain amount of York Times, I have a certain amount of York Times, I have a certain amount of market power in that negotiation because market power in that negotiation because market power in that negotiation because other firms want to hire me. When you other firms want to hire me. When you other firms want to hire me. When you are a minimum wage worker, um the reason are a minimum wage worker, um the reason are a minimum wage worker, um the reason we have a minimum wage is in part to we have a minimum wage is in part to we have a minimum wage is in part to rectify a power problem. A lot of rectify a power problem. A lot of rectify a power problem. A lot of workers do not have market power. They workers do not have market power. They workers do not have market power. They do not have a bunch of job do not have a bunch of job do not have a bunch of job opportunities. They are not working with opportunities. They are not working with opportunities. They are not working with firms. Um and by the way, without firms. Um and by the way, without firms. Um and by the way, without certain kinds of regulation, those firms certain kinds of regulation, those firms certain kinds of regulation, those firms would cartilize and make it so they can would cartilize and make it so they can would cartilize and make it so they can hold down wages anyway. So trying to hold down wages anyway. So trying to hold down wages anyway. So trying to rectify power imbalances is I think

rectify power imbalances is I think rectify power imbalances is I think another thing folks on the left take another thing folks on the left take another thing folks on the left take more seriously. That would be a start of more seriously. That would be a start of more seriously. That would be a start of things that I think broadly unite the things that I think broadly unite the things that I think broadly unite the maybe let's call it the intuitions. Um, maybe let's call it the intuitions. Um, maybe let's call it the intuitions. Um, I want to say that's a podcast answer, I want to say that's a podcast answer, I want to say that's a podcast answer, not a book. I'm sure I left a million a not a book. I'm sure I left a million a not a book. I'm sure I left a million a million things out here, but but I'll million things out here, but but I'll million things out here, but but I'll start there. I mean, there's a lot of start there. I mean, there's a lot of start there. I mean, there's a lot of fascinating things there on on the fascinating things there on on the fascinating things there on on the unfairness of life. That could be the unfairness of life. That could be the unfairness of life. That could be the interperson unfairness. So, one person interperson unfairness. So, one person interperson unfairness. So, one person getting more money than another person, getting more money than another person, getting more money than another person, more skills or more natural abilities more skills or more natural abilities more skills or more natural abilities than another person. And then there's than another person. And then there's than another person. And then there's the just the general unfairness of the the just the general unfairness of the the just the general unfairness of the environment, the luck of the draw, the environment, the luck of the draw, the environment, the luck of the draw, the things that happen. all of a sudden you things that happen. all of a sudden you things that happen. all of a sudden you cross a street and the car runs a red cross a street and the car runs a red cross a street and the car runs a red light and runs you over and you're in light and runs you over and you're in light and runs you over and you're in the hospital. So that unfairness of life the hospital. So that unfairness of life the hospital. So that unfairness of life and in general I guess the left sees and in general I guess the left sees and in general I guess the left sees there's some role or a lot of role for there's some role or a lot of role for there's some role or a lot of role for government to help you when that government to help you when that government to help you when that unfairness strikes and then maybe unfairness strikes and then maybe unfairness strikes and then maybe there's also a general notion of u the there's also a general notion of u the there's also a general notion of u the size of government. I think the left is size of government. I think the left is size of government. I think the left is more comfortable with a larger more comfortable with a larger more comfortable with a larger government as long as it's effective and government as long as it's effective and government as long as it's effective and efficient at least in its that's efficient at least in its that's efficient at least in its that's certainly true in the last 100 years. Uh certainly true in the last 100 years. Uh certainly true in the last 100 years. Uh it was New Deal liberals who enlarged it was New Deal liberals who enlarged it was New Deal liberals who enlarged the government in the 1930s. It was the government in the 1930s. It was the government in the 1930s. It was Republicans who acquiesced to that Republicans who acquiesced to that Republicans who acquiesced to that larger government in the 1950s and then larger government in the 1950s and then larger government in the 1950s and then starting in the 1970s 1980s it's starting in the 1970s 1980s it's starting in the 1970s 1980s it's typically been conservatives who've typically been conservatives who've typically been conservatives who've tried to constrict governments.

tried to constrict governments. tried to constrict governments. Sometimes they failed um while liberals Sometimes they failed um while liberals Sometimes they failed um while liberals have typically tried to expand certainly have typically tried to expand certainly have typically tried to expand certainly taxing and spending. Well, one thing taxing and spending. Well, one thing taxing and spending. Well, one thing that I was thinking as Ezra was talking that I was thinking as Ezra was talking that I was thinking as Ezra was talking and I was just writing this down because and I was just writing this down because and I was just writing this down because I thought Ezra's answer was really I thought Ezra's answer was really I thought Ezra's answer was really lovely, but like at a really high level, lovely, but like at a really high level, lovely, but like at a really high level, I thought maybe disagree with this. I I thought maybe disagree with this. I I thought maybe disagree with this. I thought about distinguishing between thought about distinguishing between thought about distinguishing between liberals and conservatives based on liberals and conservatives based on liberals and conservatives based on three factors. What each side fears, three factors. What each side fears, three factors. What each side fears, what each side values, and what each what each side values, and what each what each side values, and what each side tolerates. I think liberals fear side tolerates. I think liberals fear side tolerates. I think liberals fear injustice and conservatives often fear injustice and conservatives often fear injustice and conservatives often fear cultural radicalism or the destruction cultural radicalism or the destruction cultural radicalism or the destruction of society and as a result they value of society and as a result they value of society and as a result they value different things. Liberals I think tend different things. Liberals I think tend different things. Liberals I think tend to value change and at the level of to value change and at the level of to value change and at the level of government that can mean change in terms government that can mean change in terms government that can mean change in terms of creating new programs that don't of creating new programs that don't of creating new programs that don't previously exist. It's typically been previously exist. It's typically been previously exist. It's typically been liberals for example who've been trying liberals for example who've been trying liberals for example who've been trying to expand health coverage while to expand health coverage while to expand health coverage while conservatives have tried to cut it back. conservatives have tried to cut it back. conservatives have tried to cut it back. Just in the last few years, it was Biden Just in the last few years, it was Biden Just in the last few years, it was Biden who tried to add a bunch of programs, who tried to add a bunch of programs, who tried to add a bunch of programs, whether it was infrastructure, the chips whether it was infrastructure, the chips whether it was infrastructure, the chips and science act, the IRA, and then Trump and science act, the IRA, and then Trump and science act, the IRA, and then Trump comes into office and is unwinding it.

comes into office and is unwinding it. comes into office and is unwinding it. And then I also think they tolerate And then I also think they tolerate And then I also think they tolerate different things. I think liberals are different things. I think liberals are different things. I think liberals are more likely to tolerate a little bit of more likely to tolerate a little bit of more likely to tolerate a little bit of overreach, a little bit of radicalism in overreach, a little bit of radicalism in overreach, a little bit of radicalism in terms of trying to push society into a terms of trying to push society into a terms of trying to push society into a world where it hasn't been. Well, I world where it hasn't been. Well, I world where it hasn't been. Well, I think conservatives are more likely to think conservatives are more likely to think conservatives are more likely to tolerate injustice. they're more likely tolerate injustice. they're more likely tolerate injustice. they're more likely to say there's a kind of natural to say there's a kind of natural to say there's a kind of natural inequality in the nature of the world inequality in the nature of the world inequality in the nature of the world and we're not going to try to and we're not going to try to and we're not going to try to overcorrect for it with our policies. overcorrect for it with our policies. overcorrect for it with our policies. And so I think that even at a layer And so I think that even at a layer And so I think that even at a layer above what Ezra was articulating with above what Ezra was articulating with above what Ezra was articulating with the um the policy differences between the um the policy differences between the um the policy differences between liberals and conservatives, there's liberals and conservatives, there's liberals and conservatives, there's almost like an an archetypal difference almost like an an archetypal difference almost like an an archetypal difference between what they fear and value and between what they fear and value and between what they fear and value and tolerate. um liberals fearing injustice, tolerate. um liberals fearing injustice, tolerate. um liberals fearing injustice, seeking change, tolerating sometimes a seeking change, tolerating sometimes a seeking change, tolerating sometimes a bit of what people might think of as as bit of what people might think of as as bit of what people might think of as as overreach, while conservatives fear that overreach, while conservatives fear that overreach, while conservatives fear that overreach, value tradition, and often overreach, value tradition, and often overreach, value tradition, and often tolerate injustice. The the only thing I tolerate injustice. The the only thing I tolerate injustice. The the only thing I I I would say is that I do think this I I would say is that I do think this I I would say is that I do think this sort of the left likes big government, sort of the left likes big government, sort of the left likes big government, the right likes small government the right likes small government the right likes small government oversimplifies. The the left is pretty oversimplifies. The the left is pretty oversimplifies. The the left is pretty comfortable with an expansive government comfortable with an expansive government comfortable with an expansive government that is trying to correct for some of that is trying to correct for some of that is trying to correct for some of the the imbalances of power and the the imbalances of power and the the imbalances of power and injustices and imbalances of luck I injustices and imbalances of luck I injustices and imbalances of luck I talked about earlier. The right is very talked about earlier. The right is very talked about earlier. The right is very comfortable with a very powerful police comfortable with a very powerful police comfortable with a very powerful police and surveillance and national security and surveillance and national security and surveillance and national security state. Uh I always think about the uh state. Uh I always think about the uh state. Uh I always think about the uh sort of George W. Bush era although sort of George W. Bush era although sort of George W. Bush era although right now with ICE agents hassling all right now with ICE agents hassling all right now with ICE agents hassling all kinds of green card holders you can use kinds of green card holders you can use kinds of green card holders you can use you can think about this moment too. But you can think about this moment too. But you can think about this moment too. But the rights view that on the one hand the the rights view that on the one hand the the rights view that on the one hand the government is incompetent and on the government is incompetent and on the government is incompetent and on the other hand we could send our army across

other hand we could send our army across other hand we could send our army across oceans invade Afghanistan and Iraq and oceans invade Afghanistan and Iraq and oceans invade Afghanistan and Iraq and then rebuild these societies we don't then rebuild these societies we don't then rebuild these societies we don't understand into fully functioning understand into fully functioning understand into fully functioning liberal democracies that will be our liberal democracies that will be our liberal democracies that will be our allies was an extraordinary level of allies was an extraordinary level of allies was an extraordinary level of trust in a very big government. I mean, trust in a very big government. I mean, trust in a very big government. I mean, that was expensive. That took manpower. that was expensive. That took manpower. that was expensive. That took manpower. That was compared to we're going to set That was compared to we're going to set That was compared to we're going to set up, you know, the Affordable Care Act in up, you know, the Affordable Care Act in up, you know, the Affordable Care Act in America. That took a lot more faith in America. That took a lot more faith in America. That took a lot more faith in the US government being able to do the US government being able to do the US government being able to do something that was extraordinarily something that was extraordinarily something that was extraordinarily difficult. But the left has more difficult. But the left has more difficult. But the left has more confidence in the government of the confidence in the government of the confidence in the government of the check. And the right has more confidence check. And the right has more confidence check. And the right has more confidence in the government of the gun. You're in the government of the gun. You're in the government of the gun. You're right. There's some degree to which what right. There's some degree to which what right. There's some degree to which what the right when the right speaks about the right when the right speaks about the right when the right speaks about the size of government, it's a little the size of government, it's a little the size of government, it's a little bit rhetoric and not actual policy bit rhetoric and not actual policy bit rhetoric and not actual policy because they seem to always grow the because they seem to always grow the because they seem to always grow the size of government anyway. They just size of government anyway. They just size of government anyway. They just kind of say small government, but they kind of say small government, but they kind of say small government, but they don't. It's, you know, in the don't. It's, you know, in the don't. It's, you know, in the surveillance state, in the in the surveillance state, in the in the surveillance state, in the in the foreign policy, in terms of military foreign policy, in terms of military foreign policy, in terms of military involvement abroad, and really in every involvement abroad, and really in every involvement abroad, and really in every every program, they're not very good at every program, they're not very good at every program, they're not very good at cutting either. They just kind of like cutting either. They just kind of like cutting either. They just kind of like to say it. Cutting is really hard. If to say it. Cutting is really hard. If to say it. Cutting is really hard. If you government spends trillions of you government spends trillions of you government spends trillions of dollars and if you cut billions of dollars and if you cut billions of dollars and if you cut billions of dollars, someone is going to feel that dollars, someone is going to feel that dollars, someone is going to feel that pain and they're going to scream. And so pain and they're going to scream. And so pain and they're going to scream. And so you look at defense spending under you look at defense spending under you look at defense spending under Reagan, you look at overall spending Reagan, you look at overall spending Reagan, you look at overall spending under Reagan. Reagan might be one of the under Reagan. Reagan might be one of the under Reagan. Reagan might be one of the most archetypally conservative most archetypally conservative most archetypally conservative presidents of the last 40, 50 years. He presidents of the last 40, 50 years. He presidents of the last 40, 50 years. He utterly failed in his attempt to shrink utterly failed in his attempt to shrink utterly failed in his attempt to shrink government. Government grew under government. Government grew under government. Government grew under Reagan. Defense grew. All sorts of Reagan. Defense grew. All sorts of Reagan. Defense grew. All sorts of programs grew. So I think that one thing

programs grew. So I think that one thing programs grew. So I think that one thing we're sort of scrambling around in our we're sort of scrambling around in our we're sort of scrambling around in our answers is that at a really high level answers is that at a really high level answers is that at a really high level there are differences between liberalism there are differences between liberalism there are differences between liberalism and conservatism in American history. and conservatism in American history. and conservatism in American history. But often at the level of implementation But often at the level of implementation But often at the level of implementation it can be a little bit messy. Even it can be a little bit messy. Even it can be a little bit messy. Even Bush's foreign policy that Ezra was Bush's foreign policy that Ezra was Bush's foreign policy that Ezra was describing sort of from a big sense of describing sort of from a big sense of describing sort of from a big sense of American history is very like Wilsonian, American history is very like Wilsonian, American history is very like Wilsonian, right? This sense of like it's America's right? This sense of like it's America's right? This sense of like it's America's duty to go out and change the world or duty to go out and change the world or duty to go out and change the world or to use a current example McKinley or or to use a current example McKinley or or to use a current example McKinley or or McKinley, right? And a lot of people McKinley, right? And a lot of people McKinley, right? And a lot of people compare um Donald Trump's foreign policy compare um Donald Trump's foreign policy compare um Donald Trump's foreign policy to Andrew Jackson. This sense of we need to Andrew Jackson. This sense of we need to Andrew Jackson. This sense of we need to pull back from the world, America to pull back from the world, America to pull back from the world, America first, we need to care about what's first, we need to care about what's first, we need to care about what's inside of our borders and care much less inside of our borders and care much less inside of our borders and care much less about what's outside of our borders. about what's outside of our borders. about what's outside of our borders. Sometimes the differences between Sometimes the differences between Sometimes the differences between Republican and Democrat administrations Republican and Democrat administrations Republican and Democrat administrations don't fall cleanly into the lines of don't fall cleanly into the lines of don't fall cleanly into the lines of liberal versus conservative. Um because liberal versus conservative. Um because liberal versus conservative. Um because those definitions can be mushy. All those definitions can be mushy. All those definitions can be mushy. All right. So to descend down from the right. So to descend down from the right. So to descend down from the platonic ideals of the left and the platonic ideals of the left and the platonic ideals of the left and the right, who is actually running the show right, who is actually running the show right, who is actually running the show on the right and the left, who are the on the right and the left, who are the on the right and the left, who are the dominant forces? Maybe you could dominant forces? Maybe you could dominant forces? Maybe you could describe and you mentioned democratic describe and you mentioned democratic describe and you mentioned democratic socialists, the progressives, maybe socialists, the progressives, maybe socialists, the progressives, maybe liberals, maybe more sort of mainstream liberals, maybe more sort of mainstream liberals, maybe more sort of mainstream uh left and the same on the right with uh left and the same on the right with uh left and the same on the right with Trump and Trumpism. So on the right, Trump and Trumpism. So on the right, Trump and Trumpism. So on the right, it's pretty straightforward at the it's pretty straightforward at the it's pretty straightforward at the moment. The right is composed moment. The right is composed moment. The right is composed differently than it was 10 years ago.

differently than it was 10 years ago. differently than it was 10 years ago. But the right is run by Donald Trump and But the right is run by Donald Trump and But the right is run by Donald Trump and the people who have been given the nod the people who have been given the nod the people who have been given the nod of power by Donald Trump. So that is of power by Donald Trump. So that is of power by Donald Trump. So that is right now Elon Musk. But Elon Musk's right now Elon Musk. But Elon Musk's right now Elon Musk. But Elon Musk's power is coming from Donald Trump. That power is coming from Donald Trump. That power is coming from Donald Trump. That is, you know, maybe in some degrees JD is, you know, maybe in some degrees JD is, you know, maybe in some degrees JD Vance, maybe in some degrees Russ V, Vance, maybe in some degrees Russ V, Vance, maybe in some degrees Russ V, maybe sometimes um, you know, Homeman's maybe sometimes um, you know, Homeman's maybe sometimes um, you know, Homeman's over at uh, DHS. over at uh, DHS. over at uh, DHS. the right beneath that the Republicans the right beneath that the Republicans the right beneath that the Republicans in Congress are extraordinarily in Congress are extraordinarily in Congress are extraordinarily disempowered compared to in other disempowered compared to in other disempowered compared to in other administrations. They are sort of being administrations. They are sort of being administrations. They are sort of being told what to do and they are doing what told what to do and they are doing what told what to do and they are doing what they are told. Republicans in Congress, they are told. Republicans in Congress, they are told. Republicans in Congress, Senate Republicans, they didn't want Senate Republicans, they didn't want Senate Republicans, they didn't want Pete Haggsf. They didn't want Cash Pete Haggsf. They didn't want Cash Pete Haggsf. They didn't want Cash Patel. They didn't want Tulsi Gabbard. Patel. They didn't want Tulsi Gabbard. Patel. They didn't want Tulsi Gabbard. They didn't want RFK Jr. Nobody got They didn't want RFK Jr. Nobody got They didn't want RFK Jr. Nobody got elected to be a Republican in the Senate elected to be a Republican in the Senate elected to be a Republican in the Senate hoping that they would confirm Robert F. hoping that they would confirm Robert F. hoping that they would confirm Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a member of the Kennedys, a Kennedy Jr., a member of the Kennedys, a Kennedy Jr., a member of the Kennedys, a Democrat who is pro-choice and running Democrat who is pro-choice and running Democrat who is pro-choice and running as a Democrat two years ago for HHS. But as a Democrat two years ago for HHS. But as a Democrat two years ago for HHS. But Donald Trump told him to do it and and Donald Trump told him to do it and and Donald Trump told him to do it and and they did. So the the right has developed they did. So the the right has developed they did. So the the right has developed a very very top- down structure. And one a very very top- down structure. And one a very very top- down structure. And one of Trump's talents, one of the things of Trump's talents, one of the things of Trump's talents, one of the things that makes him a disruptive force in that makes him a disruptive force in that makes him a disruptive force in politics is his ability to upend the politics is his ability to upend the politics is his ability to upend the sort of coalitional structure, the sort of coalitional structure, the sort of coalitional structure, the interest group structure that used to uh interest group structure that used to uh interest group structure that used to uh prevail. Um you know, the Koch brothers prevail. Um you know, the Koch brothers prevail. Um you know, the Koch brothers were the big enemy of the left, you were the big enemy of the left, you were the big enemy of the left, you know, 1015 years ago. The view is that know, 1015 years ago. The view is that know, 1015 years ago. The view is that in many ways they set the agenda of the in many ways they set the agenda of the in many ways they set the agenda of the right. The Koch brother network is much right. The Koch brother network is much right. The Koch brother network is much less powerful under Donald Trump because less powerful under Donald Trump because less powerful under Donald Trump because he just disagrees with them and has he just disagrees with them and has he just disagrees with them and has disempowered them. Not to say none of disempowered them. Not to say none of disempowered them. Not to say none of their people or none of their groups are their people or none of their groups are their people or none of their groups are meaningful at all. They are, but you meaningful at all. They are, but you meaningful at all. They are, but you wouldn't put them at the forefront in wouldn't put them at the forefront in wouldn't put them at the forefront in the way that you might have at another the way that you might have at another the way that you might have at another time. Right this second, uh we're using

time. Right this second, uh we're using time. Right this second, uh we're using the left, but Democrats are in the left, but Democrats are in the left, but Democrats are in fundamental disarray. There is no fundamental disarray. There is no fundamental disarray. There is no leader. Democrats, Senate Democrats, uh, leader. Democrats, Senate Democrats, uh, leader. Democrats, Senate Democrats, uh, decided to vote for the contining decided to vote for the contining decided to vote for the contining resolution avoiding a shutdown, or a resolution avoiding a shutdown, or a resolution avoiding a shutdown, or a critical mass of them critical mass of them critical mass of them did. Uh, Hakee Jeff, the leader of the did. Uh, Hakee Jeff, the leader of the did. Uh, Hakee Jeff, the leader of the House Democrats, and Chuck Schumer, the House Democrats, and Chuck Schumer, the House Democrats, and Chuck Schumer, the leader of Senate Democrats, are in leader of Senate Democrats, are in leader of Senate Democrats, are in bitter disagreement over whether or not bitter disagreement over whether or not bitter disagreement over whether or not they should have done that. Democratic they should have done that. Democratic they should have done that. Democratic leadership, isn't even united on the leadership, isn't even united on the leadership, isn't even united on the single biggest point of leverage they single biggest point of leverage they single biggest point of leverage they might have had. They disagree over might have had. They disagree over might have had. They disagree over whether or not it was even a point of whether or not it was even a point of whether or not it was even a point of leverage. Outside of them, the party is leverage. Outside of them, the party is leverage. Outside of them, the party is no leader, which is fairly normal after no leader, which is fairly normal after no leader, which is fairly normal after a pretty crushing defeat. Uh but there a pretty crushing defeat. Uh but there a pretty crushing defeat. Uh but there isn't the next in line. Uh so you know isn't the next in line. Uh so you know isn't the next in line. Uh so you know you go back right and it was pretty you go back right and it was pretty you go back right and it was pretty clear that you know after Barack Obama clear that you know after Barack Obama clear that you know after Barack Obama it was going to be Hillary Clinton. it was going to be Hillary Clinton. it was going to be Hillary Clinton. After Hillary Clinton it was either After Hillary Clinton it was either After Hillary Clinton it was either going to be uh Joe Biden or Bernie going to be uh Joe Biden or Bernie going to be uh Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders. Bernie Sanders had come in Sanders. Bernie Sanders had come in Sanders. Bernie Sanders had come in second in the primary. Joe Biden had second in the primary. Joe Biden had second in the primary. Joe Biden had been the vice president. You often have been the vice president. You often have been the vice president. You often have a presumptive next nominee who the party a presumptive next nominee who the party a presumptive next nominee who the party can look to for a kind of leadership. can look to for a kind of leadership. can look to for a kind of leadership. Even after 2000 Al Gore was still giving Even after 2000 Al Gore was still giving Even after 2000 Al Gore was still giving big speeches. There was a question about big speeches. There was a question about big speeches. There was a question about Al Gore running again. There is no Al Gore running again. There is no Al Gore running again. There is no presumptive in the Democratic party presumptive in the Democratic party presumptive in the Democratic party right now. You can't turn around and right now. You can't turn around and right now. You can't turn around and say, "Oh, it's going to be Pete say, "Oh, it's going to be Pete say, "Oh, it's going to be Pete Budachedge. It's going to be Josh Budachedge. It's going to be Josh Budachedge. It's going to be Josh Shapiro. It's going to be Gretchen Shapiro. It's going to be Gretchen Shapiro. It's going to be Gretchen Whitmer." Absent parties are given Whitmer." Absent parties are given Whitmer." Absent parties are given force, modern parties, which are are force, modern parties, which are are force, modern parties, which are are quite weak by historical standards.

quite weak by historical standards. quite weak by historical standards. Modern parties tend to be given force by Modern parties tend to be given force by Modern parties tend to be given force by a centralizing personality. Donald Trump a centralizing personality. Donald Trump a centralizing personality. Donald Trump being a very strong example of that on being a very strong example of that on being a very strong example of that on the right, but Barack Obama was the the the right, but Barack Obama was the the the right, but Barack Obama was the the person who held together the Democratic person who held together the Democratic person who held together the Democratic party for a long time. party for a long time. party for a long time. In my lifetime, the Democratic Party has In my lifetime, the Democratic Party has In my lifetime, the Democratic Party has never been never been never been as internally fragmented and weak, as internally fragmented and weak, as internally fragmented and weak, leaderless, ruerless as it is right now. leaderless, ruerless as it is right now. leaderless, ruerless as it is right now. Now, it won't stay that way. There's a Now, it won't stay that way. There's a Now, it won't stay that way. There's a rhythm to these things. There'll be a rhythm to these things. There'll be a rhythm to these things. There'll be a midterm. They're probably going to pick midterm. They're probably going to pick midterm. They're probably going to pick up a bunch of seats in the midterm. Um, up a bunch of seats in the midterm. Um, up a bunch of seats in the midterm. Um, if that means Hakee Jeff becomes speaker if that means Hakee Jeff becomes speaker if that means Hakee Jeff becomes speaker after the midterm, he's going to have a after the midterm, he's going to have a after the midterm, he's going to have a much louder voice because he's going to much louder voice because he's going to much louder voice because he's going to have power. Uh, it's going to be a have power. Uh, it's going to be a have power. Uh, it's going to be a harder road for Schumer to get back to harder road for Schumer to get back to harder road for Schumer to get back to the majority because of the Senate map. the majority because of the Senate map. the majority because of the Senate map. and then we'll start having a primary uh and then we'll start having a primary uh and then we'll start having a primary uh on the left and you'll begin to see on the left and you'll begin to see on the left and you'll begin to see voices emerge out of that. But right now voices emerge out of that. But right now voices emerge out of that. But right now the you know the Democratic party it the you know the Democratic party it the you know the Democratic party it doesn't have points of power. There's doesn't have points of power. There's doesn't have points of power. There's simply outside of you know at the simply outside of you know at the simply outside of you know at the national level there is no Democrat who national level there is no Democrat who national level there is no Democrat who wields control over a branch of wields control over a branch of wields control over a branch of government, right? They don't have the government, right? They don't have the government, right? They don't have the Supreme Court, they don't have the Supreme Court, they don't have the Supreme Court, they don't have the House, they don't have the Senate, they House, they don't have the Senate, they House, they don't have the Senate, they don't have the presidency, and they don't have the presidency, and they don't have the presidency, and they don't have a next in line. So you're don't have a next in line. So you're don't have a next in line. So you're you're looking at a you're looking at an you're looking at a you're looking at an you're looking at a you're looking at an organization without any of the people organization without any of the people organization without any of the people in a position to structure it. And the in a position to structure it. And the in a position to structure it. And the the head of the DNC, the new head Ken the head of the DNC, the new head Ken the head of the DNC, the new head Ken Martin, doesn't have power in that way.

Martin, doesn't have power in that way. Martin, doesn't have power in that way. So it's uh they're pretty fractured. You So it's uh they're pretty fractured. You So it's uh they're pretty fractured. You were you got a lot of criticism for were you got a lot of criticism for were you got a lot of criticism for this, but you were one of the people this, but you were one of the people this, but you were one of the people that early on said that Biden should that early on said that Biden should that early on said that Biden should step down. Why is the Democratic Party step down. Why is the Democratic Party step down. Why is the Democratic Party at this stage in its history so bad at at this stage in its history so bad at at this stage in its history so bad at generating the truly inspiring person? generating the truly inspiring person? generating the truly inspiring person? to me personally, you know, to me personally, you know, to me personally, you know, AC is an example of a person that might AC is an example of a person that might AC is an example of a person that might be that person. You should have her on be that person. You should have her on be that person. You should have her on the show. What I would watch that the show. What I would watch that the show. What I would watch that definitely. But, you know, I really try definitely. But, you know, I really try definitely. But, you know, I really try to and we'll talk about this. I try to to and we'll talk about this. I try to to and we'll talk about this. I try to do like 2 three hours and there's a do like 2 three hours and there's a do like 2 three hours and there's a hesitancy uh on the left especially to hesitancy uh on the left especially to hesitancy uh on the left especially to do these kinds of long programs. I think do these kinds of long programs. I think do these kinds of long programs. I think it's a trust issue. I'm not exactly sure it's a trust issue. I'm not exactly sure it's a trust issue. I'm not exactly sure what it is. 80% of the people on the what it is. 80% of the people on the what it is. 80% of the people on the show are leftwing. I'm pretty good faith show are leftwing. I'm pretty good faith show are leftwing. I'm pretty good faith and I try to bring out the best in and I try to bring out the best in and I try to bring out the best in people. Have you invited her? Is that people. Have you invited her? Is that people. Have you invited her? Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Yeah. We'll what you're saying? Yeah. Yeah. We'll what you're saying? Yeah. Yeah. We'll see what happens when when people get see what happens when when people get see what happens when when people get closer to 2028. closer to 2028. closer to 2028. Sure. Maybe people begin taking taking Sure. Maybe people begin taking taking Sure. Maybe people begin taking taking that you know Bernie's up there in age that you know Bernie's up there in age that you know Bernie's up there in age so he can't, you know, he can't do it so he can't, you know, he can't do it so he can't, you know, he can't do it anymore. Why is the Democratic party so anymore. Why is the Democratic party so anymore. Why is the Democratic party so bad at generating I don't think it's so bad at generating I don't think it's so bad at generating I don't think it's so bad at generating them. I think that it bad at generating them. I think that it bad at generating them. I think that it was it turned out to be bad at was it turned out to be bad at was it turned out to be bad at generating them this year. Look, like I generating them this year. Look, like I generating them this year. Look, like I yeah, as you mentioned, you know, back yeah, as you mentioned, you know, back yeah, as you mentioned, you know, back in February 2023, I was somebody who in February 2023, I was somebody who in February 2023, I was somebody who came out and said like Biden can't run came out and said like Biden can't run came out and said like Biden can't run again. This isn't going to work. And my again. This isn't going to work. And my again. This isn't going to work. And my view, and that was really what that set view, and that was really what that set view, and that was really what that set of pieces was about. Um was about the of pieces was about. Um was about the of pieces was about. Um was about the argument that even though Biden was argument that even though Biden was argument that even though Biden was clearly going to win the primary, that clearly going to win the primary, that clearly going to win the primary, that there was still time for Democrats to do there was still time for Democrats to do there was still time for Democrats to do something the parties had done in the

something the parties had done in the something the parties had done in the past and have an open convention. And past and have an open convention. And past and have an open convention. And you could structure the leadup to an you could structure the leadup to an you could structure the leadup to an open convention in a number of different open convention in a number of different open convention in a number of different ways, right? You could have something ways, right? You could have something ways, right? You could have something like a mini primary, but but basically like a mini primary, but but basically like a mini primary, but but basically you'd have Democrats out in the media you'd have Democrats out in the media you'd have Democrats out in the media out giving speeches and their ultimate out giving speeches and their ultimate out giving speeches and their ultimate audience would be the delegates, the audience would be the delegates, the audience would be the delegates, the delegates at the Democratic National delegates at the Democratic National delegates at the Democratic National Convention. And and my hope was through Convention. And and my hope was through Convention. And and my hope was through that you would find the person for this that you would find the person for this that you would find the person for this moment. The thing for Kla Harris that moment. The thing for Kla Harris that moment. The thing for Kla Harris that was really difficult was she was for was really difficult was she was for was really difficult was she was for another moment. She was picked by Joe another moment. She was picked by Joe another moment. She was picked by Joe Biden in 2020 amidst um just a very Biden in 2020 amidst um just a very Biden in 2020 amidst um just a very different political equilibrium, a sense different political equilibrium, a sense different political equilibrium, a sense that you had a a transitionary moment that you had a a transitionary moment that you had a a transitionary moment between two versions of the Democratic between two versions of the Democratic between two versions of the Democratic party. Maybe Joe Biden reaching a little party. Maybe Joe Biden reaching a little party. Maybe Joe Biden reaching a little bit back to the past to these sort of bit back to the past to these sort of bit back to the past to these sort of lunch pale, you know, bluecollar lunch pale, you know, bluecollar lunch pale, you know, bluecollar Democrats. Joe from Scranton was a big a Democrats. Joe from Scranton was a big a Democrats. Joe from Scranton was a big a big part of the Joe Biden appeal. But big part of the Joe Biden appeal. But big part of the Joe Biden appeal. But also Biden never has a chance if he's also Biden never has a chance if he's also Biden never has a chance if he's not Barack Obama's vice president. And not Barack Obama's vice president. And not Barack Obama's vice president. And so you have this sort of weird set of so you have this sort of weird set of so you have this sort of weird set of historical factors like operating at the historical factors like operating at the historical factors like operating at the same time. There's a desire for same time. There's a desire for same time. There's a desire for stability and experience amidst the stability and experience amidst the stability and experience amidst the chaos of Donald Trump and the pandemic.

chaos of Donald Trump and the pandemic. chaos of Donald Trump and the pandemic. There is Biden as Obama's vice president There is Biden as Obama's vice president There is Biden as Obama's vice president who nevertheless did not run in the who nevertheless did not run in the who nevertheless did not run in the election after Obama. Um I think a lot election after Obama. Um I think a lot election after Obama. Um I think a lot of people look back at 2016 and think, of people look back at 2016 and think, of people look back at 2016 and think, you know what, if Biden had been the you know what, if Biden had been the you know what, if Biden had been the candidate, he would have beaten Trump candidate, he would have beaten Trump candidate, he would have beaten Trump and we would live in a different and we would live in a different and we would live in a different reality. And then Biden chose Harris as reality. And then Biden chose Harris as reality. And then Biden chose Harris as an effort to shore up his own uh at an effort to shore up his own uh at an effort to shore up his own uh at least assumed weaknesses, right? He's a least assumed weaknesses, right? He's a least assumed weaknesses, right? He's a white man in the Democratic party at a white man in the Democratic party at a white man in the Democratic party at a time when the Democratic Party is time when the Democratic Party is time when the Democratic Party is diversifying. And when the view of how diversifying. And when the view of how diversifying. And when the view of how you win elections is you put to is you you win elections is you put to is you you win elections is you put to is you put back together the Obama coalition. put back together the Obama coalition. put back together the Obama coalition. And the Obama coalition is young people. And the Obama coalition is young people. And the Obama coalition is young people. It's uh you know voters of color um and It's uh you know voters of color um and It's uh you know voters of color um and it's enough working-class white voters it's enough working-class white voters it's enough working-class white voters and then college educated white voters, and then college educated white voters, and then college educated white voters, right? That's the Obama coalition. And right? That's the Obama coalition. And right? That's the Obama coalition. And so Biden picks Harris, you know, for so Biden picks Harris, you know, for so Biden picks Harris, you know, for different reasons. My view at that time different reasons. My view at that time different reasons. My view at that time was I was sort of a Tammy Duckworth was I was sort of a Tammy Duckworth was I was sort of a Tammy Duckworth person and thought I should have picked person and thought I should have picked person and thought I should have picked Tammy Duckworth. Uh but but there are Tammy Duckworth. Uh but but there are Tammy Duckworth. Uh but but there are different people out there and then the different people out there and then the different people out there and then the kind of moment that Harris was running kind of moment that Harris was running kind of moment that Harris was running in just sort of dissipates. Um first she in just sort of dissipates. Um first she in just sort of dissipates. Um first she has a particular background from has a particular background from has a particular background from California where she's a tough on crime.

California where she's a tough on crime. California where she's a tough on crime. Her book is called Smart on Crime Her book is called Smart on Crime Her book is called Smart on Crime Prosecutor, but she runs in the Prosecutor, but she runs in the Prosecutor, but she runs in the Democratic party at a time when it's Democratic party at a time when it's Democratic party at a time when it's turned on that kind of politics. people turned on that kind of politics. people turned on that kind of politics. people want a lot from her personally, but they want a lot from her personally, but they want a lot from her personally, but they don't want a sort of prosectoratorial don't want a sort of prosectoratorial don't want a sort of prosectoratorial uh character. So, she sort of abandons uh character. So, she sort of abandons uh character. So, she sort of abandons that and never, I think, really finds that and never, I think, really finds that and never, I think, really finds another political identity, certainly another political identity, certainly another political identity, certainly before she begins running, you know, in before she begins running, you know, in before she begins running, you know, in in 2024 that works. But she's a talented in 2024 that works. But she's a talented in 2024 that works. But she's a talented debater. Um she's a very talented debater. Um she's a very talented debater. Um she's a very talented performer on the stump, but she doesn't performer on the stump, but she doesn't performer on the stump, but she doesn't really have a theory of politics and really have a theory of politics and really have a theory of politics and policy that she's identified with. But policy that she's identified with. But policy that she's identified with. But she's a way for Biden to signal that he she's a way for Biden to signal that he she's a way for Biden to signal that he understands that him being, you know, in understands that him being, you know, in understands that him being, you know, in 2020 a 78-year-old white guy, he 2020 a 78-year-old white guy, he 2020 a 78-year-old white guy, he understands the future is not him or at understands the future is not him or at understands the future is not him or at least not just him. And he's sort of least not just him. And he's sort of least not just him. And he's sort of trying to make a coalitional pick that trying to make a coalitional pick that trying to make a coalitional pick that uh speaks to his own, you know, uh speaks to his own, you know, uh speaks to his own, you know, potential weaknesses. I think by 2024, potential weaknesses. I think by 2024, potential weaknesses. I think by 2024, you have two problems, right? Once he you have two problems, right? Once he you have two problems, right? Once he only steps down, what is it June? Like only steps down, what is it June? Like only steps down, what is it June? Like they are weeks from the DNC. They don't they are weeks from the DNC. They don't they are weeks from the DNC. They don't have time anymore for an open have time anymore for an open have time anymore for an open convention. You now have the B convention. You now have the B convention. You now have the B administration is very unpopular for a administration is very unpopular for a administration is very unpopular for a number of reasons, but particularly number of reasons, but particularly number of reasons, but particularly inflation, cost of living. So now you inflation, cost of living. So now you inflation, cost of living. So now you have Kla Harris running with a sort of have Kla Harris running with a sort of have Kla Harris running with a sort of anvil of being associated. It's a Biden anvil of being associated. It's a Biden anvil of being associated. It's a Biden Harris administration. Um she doesn't Harris administration. Um she doesn't Harris administration. Um she doesn't really have a lane on cost of living.

really have a lane on cost of living. really have a lane on cost of living. It's not something she's known for It's not something she's known for It's not something she's known for working on in the Senate. It's not working on in the Senate. It's not working on in the Senate. It's not something she has a bunch of great ideas something she has a bunch of great ideas something she has a bunch of great ideas about. Not something she's great at about. Not something she's great at about. Not something she's great at talking about. It's probably not the talking about. It's probably not the talking about. It's probably not the candidate you would pick for a cost of candidate you would pick for a cost of candidate you would pick for a cost of living election. And she's had no time living election. And she's had no time living election. And she's had no time to build that out, right? Maybe if she to build that out, right? Maybe if she to build that out, right? Maybe if she had been running in a primary for, you had been running in a primary for, you had been running in a primary for, you know, a year and a half, having to fend know, a year and a half, having to fend know, a year and a half, having to fend off Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders off Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders off Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders and Pete Budajedge and whomever else, and Pete Budajedge and whomever else, and Pete Budajedge and whomever else, she either would have figured out how to she either would have figured out how to she either would have figured out how to do it, right? Primaries are periods of do it, right? Primaries are periods of do it, right? Primaries are periods of education and learning for the education and learning for the education and learning for the candidates, too, or they would have candidates, too, or they would have candidates, too, or they would have found somebody else who could do it. Um, found somebody else who could do it. Um, found somebody else who could do it. Um, but she doesn't get any of that, right? but she doesn't get any of that, right? but she doesn't get any of that, right? She's thrown into the game with 3 months She's thrown into the game with 3 months She's thrown into the game with 3 months to go. So, you know, they picked the to go. So, you know, they picked the to go. So, you know, they picked the candidate in 2020 who won. Whether you candidate in 2020 who won. Whether you candidate in 2020 who won. Whether you think Biden's inspiring or not, he was think Biden's inspiring or not, he was think Biden's inspiring or not, he was probably he was a reasonable pick for probably he was a reasonable pick for probably he was a reasonable pick for that moment. He should have never run that moment. He should have never run that moment. He should have never run for a second term. and he sort of for a second term. and he sort of for a second term. and he sort of implied to a lot of people that he implied to a lot of people that he implied to a lot of people that he wouldn't. And then the the handover to wouldn't. And then the the handover to wouldn't. And then the the handover to Harris was a very difficult handover to Harris was a very difficult handover to Harris was a very difficult handover to a candidate who didn't go through any a candidate who didn't go through any a candidate who didn't go through any kind of selection process for the moment kind of selection process for the moment kind of selection process for the moment in which he was running. We'll see what in which he was running. We'll see what in which he was running. We'll see what they do in in 2028, but the the they do in in 2028, but the the they do in in 2028, but the the consequences of of what they did in 2024 consequences of of what they did in 2024 consequences of of what they did in 2024 have been severe. There's two really big have been severe. There's two really big have been severe. There's two really big questions on the table that I think questions on the table that I think questions on the table that I think click together in an interesting way.

click together in an interesting way. click together in an interesting way. You asked one, why did Trump win? and You asked one, why did Trump win? and You asked one, why did Trump win? and two, why do Democrats have this certain two, why do Democrats have this certain two, why do Democrats have this certain communication style that might make them communication style that might make them communication style that might make them less interested in coming onto an less interested in coming onto an less interested in coming onto an unstructured three-hour conversation unstructured three-hour conversation unstructured three-hour conversation with you? Let me try to tell a story with you? Let me try to tell a story with you? Let me try to tell a story that connects them. I think Trump's that connects them. I think Trump's that connects them. I think Trump's victory in 2024 was overdetermined. victory in 2024 was overdetermined. victory in 2024 was overdetermined. There are a lot of factors here. Number There are a lot of factors here. Number There are a lot of factors here. Number one, if you look internationally, one, if you look internationally, one, if you look internationally, incumbents lost all over the world. They incumbents lost all over the world. They incumbents lost all over the world. They lost in the US. They lost in Europe. lost in the US. They lost in Europe. lost in the US. They lost in Europe. They lost in pretty much every developed They lost in pretty much every developed They lost in pretty much every developed country at rates that we really haven't country at rates that we really haven't country at rates that we really haven't seen in 50 years. And that's largely seen in 50 years. And that's largely seen in 50 years. And that's largely because the inflation crisis that came because the inflation crisis that came because the inflation crisis that came after CO created an absolute disaster after CO created an absolute disaster after CO created an absolute disaster for incumbent establishment power. for incumbent establishment power. for incumbent establishment power. People couldn't bring prices down. People couldn't bring prices down. People couldn't bring prices down. Voters were furious and they were Voters were furious and they were Voters were furious and they were destroying establishment orders all over destroying establishment orders all over destroying establishment orders all over the world. Democrats happen to be in the world. Democrats happen to be in the world. Democrats happen to be in power and as a result they got the brunt power and as a result they got the brunt power and as a result they got the brunt of it. That's number one. Number two, if of it. That's number one. Number two, if of it. That's number one. Number two, if you look at elections over the 21st you look at elections over the 21st you look at elections over the 21st century, two things are true. One, century, two things are true. One, century, two things are true. One, almost every election is unbelievably almost every election is unbelievably almost every election is unbelievably close. For reasons that I'm not sure I close. For reasons that I'm not sure I close. For reasons that I'm not sure I entirely understand, the parties have entirely understand, the parties have entirely understand, the parties have gotten really good, historically, gotten really good, historically, gotten really good, historically, bizarrely good at getting each group to bizarrely good at getting each group to bizarrely good at getting each group to come to the polls with about 48% such come to the polls with about 48% such come to the polls with about 48% such that every election is a battle over the that every election is a battle over the that every election is a battle over the next 1.5%. And in a world like that, next 1.5%. And in a world like that, next 1.5%. And in a world like that, little thermostatic swings are very little thermostatic swings are very little thermostatic swings are very important. And what we've seen over the important. And what we've seen over the important. And what we've seen over the last few years, and there's this theory last few years, and there's this theory last few years, and there's this theory about thermostatic public opinion in about thermostatic public opinion in about thermostatic public opinion in American politics that says that what American politics that says that what American politics that says that what often happens in politics is one party often happens in politics is one party often happens in politics is one party has a very compelling message of change.

has a very compelling message of change. has a very compelling message of change. They become the establishment and then They become the establishment and then They become the establishment and then they become the victims of exactly the they become the victims of exactly the they become the victims of exactly the weapon that they marshaled that then the weapon that they marshaled that then the weapon that they marshaled that then the next outroup party says, "We have a next outroup party says, "We have a next outroup party says, "We have a theory of change and we're going to theory of change and we're going to theory of change and we're going to throw out the bums." And the next party throw out the bums." And the next party throw out the bums." And the next party comes in and they overreach and then comes in and they overreach and then comes in and they overreach and then they lose. in a worldview of they lose. in a worldview of they lose. in a worldview of thermostatic change and every election thermostatic change and every election thermostatic change and every election is very close, you tend to have is very close, you tend to have is very close, you tend to have elections swinging back and forth. So, elections swinging back and forth. So, elections swinging back and forth. So, um I think that also explains why um I think that also explains why um I think that also explains why Democrats and Republicans have struggled Democrats and Republicans have struggled Democrats and Republicans have struggled to hold on to power for 6 year, 8year, to hold on to power for 6 year, 8year, to hold on to power for 6 year, 8year, 12-year terms the same way they did say 12-year terms the same way they did say 12-year terms the same way they did say in the 1930s or 1960s. But finally, you in the 1930s or 1960s. But finally, you in the 1930s or 1960s. But finally, you have to look at what kind of character have to look at what kind of character have to look at what kind of character Donald Trump is and what kind of a media Donald Trump is and what kind of a media Donald Trump is and what kind of a media figure he is. We were just talking off figure he is. We were just talking off figure he is. We were just talking off camera about how every age of camera about how every age of camera about how every age of communications technology revolution communications technology revolution communications technology revolution clicks into focus a new skill that is clicks into focus a new skill that is clicks into focus a new skill that is suddenly in critical demand for the suddenly in critical demand for the suddenly in critical demand for the electorate. Right? The world of radio electorate. Right? The world of radio electorate. Right? The world of radio technology is a world in which Franklin technology is a world in which Franklin technology is a world in which Franklin Delano Roosevelt can be powerful in a Delano Roosevelt can be powerful in a Delano Roosevelt can be powerful in a way that he can't be in the 1890s. And way that he can't be in the 1890s. And way that he can't be in the 1890s. And then you have the 1950s. Dwight then you have the 1950s. Dwight then you have the 1950s. Dwight Eisenhower in 1956 I believe was the Eisenhower in 1956 I believe was the Eisenhower in 1956 I believe was the first televised um national convention.

first televised um national convention. first televised um national convention. famously the 1960 presidential debates famously the 1960 presidential debates famously the 1960 presidential debates between JFK and Richard Nixon. Take an between JFK and Richard Nixon. Take an between JFK and Richard Nixon. Take an election that is leaning toward Nixon election that is leaning toward Nixon election that is leaning toward Nixon and make an election that's leaning and make an election that's leaning and make an election that's leaning toward JFK because he's so damn handsome toward JFK because he's so damn handsome toward JFK because he's so damn handsome and also just electrically compelling on and also just electrically compelling on and also just electrically compelling on a screen. We have a new screen a screen. We have a new screen a screen. We have a new screen technology right now which is not just technology right now which is not just technology right now which is not just television on steroids. It's a different television on steroids. It's a different television on steroids. It's a different species entirely. And it seems to favor, species entirely. And it seems to favor, species entirely. And it seems to favor, it seems to provide value for it seems to provide value for it seems to provide value for individuals, influencers, and even individuals, influencers, and even individuals, influencers, and even celebrities and politicians who are good celebrities and politicians who are good celebrities and politicians who are good at something like livewire authenticity. at something like livewire authenticity. at something like livewire authenticity. They're good at performing authenticity. They're good at performing authenticity. They're good at performing authenticity. As paradoxical as that sounds, Trump is As paradoxical as that sounds, Trump is As paradoxical as that sounds, Trump is an absolute marvel at performing an absolute marvel at performing an absolute marvel at performing authenticity even when the audience authenticity even when the audience authenticity even when the audience somehow acknowledges that he might be somehow acknowledges that he might be somehow acknowledges that he might be bullshitting. He's just an amazing bullshitting. He's just an amazing bullshitting. He's just an amazing performer for this age. And it speaks to performer for this age. And it speaks to performer for this age. And it speaks to the fact that he seems to be, to borrow the fact that he seems to be, to borrow the fact that he seems to be, to borrow Ezra's term, remarkably disinhibited in Ezra's term, remarkably disinhibited in Ezra's term, remarkably disinhibited in front of every single audience. There front of every single audience. There front of every single audience. There doesn't seem to be the sort of doesn't seem to be the sort of doesn't seem to be the sort of background algorithm in his head background algorithm in his head background algorithm in his head calculating exactly how to craft his calculating exactly how to craft his calculating exactly how to craft his message to to different audiences. He message to to different audiences. He message to to different audiences. He just seems to be like a livewire animal just seems to be like a livewire animal just seems to be like a livewire animal in front of every audience. And I think in front of every audience. And I think in front of every audience. And I think that compares very distinctly to the that compares very distinctly to the that compares very distinctly to the democratic character of bureaucratic democratic character of bureaucratic democratic character of bureaucratic caution in our age. And there is an a caution in our age. And there is an a caution in our age. And there is an a really important distinction between really important distinction between really important distinction between this vibe of the Trumpian ruler and the this vibe of the Trumpian ruler and the this vibe of the Trumpian ruler and the vibe of the rule follower. And the vibe

vibe of the rule follower. And the vibe vibe of the rule follower. And the vibe of the bureaucratic rule follower is a of the bureaucratic rule follower is a of the bureaucratic rule follower is a little bit afraid of unstructured little bit afraid of unstructured little bit afraid of unstructured conversation is always performing the conversation is always performing the conversation is always performing the background algorithm of how do I background algorithm of how do I background algorithm of how do I communicate in a way that balances all communicate in a way that balances all communicate in a way that balances all of the coalitions on my side because if of the coalitions on my side because if of the coalitions on my side because if you look at the Democratic party right you look at the Democratic party right you look at the Democratic party right now to compare to the Republican party I now to compare to the Republican party I now to compare to the Republican party I mean in 2015 I think there were four mean in 2015 I think there were four mean in 2015 I think there were four political parties in America. There was political parties in America. There was political parties in America. There was MAGA, there was the center right, there MAGA, there was the center right, there MAGA, there was the center right, there was the Bernie wing and there was the was the Bernie wing and there was the was the Bernie wing and there was the Biden Clinton Obama wing. And what Biden Clinton Obama wing. And what Biden Clinton Obama wing. And what happened is that Trump killed and happened is that Trump killed and happened is that Trump killed and skinned the center right and is now skinned the center right and is now skinned the center right and is now wearing it as a hat. The entire wearing it as a hat. The entire wearing it as a hat. The entire Republican party is Donald Trump wearing Republican party is Donald Trump wearing Republican party is Donald Trump wearing the skins of the old center right, the the skins of the old center right, the the skins of the old center right, the Romney wing. And the Republic and the Romney wing. And the Republic and the Romney wing. And the Republic and the Democratic party is still a fight. It's Democratic party is still a fight. It's Democratic party is still a fight. It's exactly what Ezra described. It's a exactly what Ezra described. It's a exactly what Ezra described. It's a jungle. And maybe there's something jungle. And maybe there's something jungle. And maybe there's something about that jungle nature of the about that jungle nature of the about that jungle nature of the Democratic Party that is making some of Democratic Party that is making some of Democratic Party that is making some of its leaders perform the sort of its leaders perform the sort of its leaders perform the sort of coalitional calculation when they're coalitional calculation when they're coalitional calculation when they're communicating such that it makes them communicating such that it makes them communicating such that it makes them less interested in appearing in settings less interested in appearing in settings less interested in appearing in settings that might cost them that might not that might cost them that might not that might cost them that might not benefit them in exactly the sort of benefit them in exactly the sort of benefit them in exactly the sort of pre-calculated way they have to get pre-calculated way they have to get pre-calculated way they have to get their message across. And so there's not their message across. And so there's not their message across. And so there's not necessarily a whole lot of empirics to necessarily a whole lot of empirics to necessarily a whole lot of empirics to that theory. I'm a little bit going on that theory. I'm a little bit going on that theory. I'm a little bit going on vibes here and maybe Ezra sees some vibes here and maybe Ezra sees some vibes here and maybe Ezra sees some flaws to theory. It's an age of the flaws to theory. It's an age of the flaws to theory. It's an age of the vibe. It is the age of the vibe. Yeah, vibe. It is the age of the vibe. Yeah, vibe. It is the age of the vibe. Yeah, exactly. I'm trying to perform the live exactly. I'm trying to perform the live exactly. I'm trying to perform the live wire authenticity that I'm describing, wire authenticity that I'm describing, wire authenticity that I'm describing, but but I I do think that might begin to but but I I do think that might begin to but but I I do think that might begin to explain why you, Lex, might be picking explain why you, Lex, might be picking explain why you, Lex, might be picking up on a difference between the political up on a difference between the political up on a difference between the political vibes, an eagerness and a willingness on vibes, an eagerness and a willingness on vibes, an eagerness and a willingness on the one hand to have kind of the one hand to have kind of the one hand to have kind of unstructured and even chaotic

unstructured and even chaotic unstructured and even chaotic conversations and a care on the other conversations and a care on the other conversations and a care on the other side about not letting conversations side about not letting conversations side about not letting conversations become too unstructured or too careless. become too unstructured or too careless. become too unstructured or too careless. Can I build on that? I know we're Can I build on that? I know we're Can I build on that? I know we're supposed to talk about abundance, but I supposed to talk about abundance, but I supposed to talk about abundance, but I I want to talk about this. I want to talk about this. I want to talk about this. There's an abundance of time. An There's an abundance of time. An There's an abundance of time. An abundance of time. We're on the Lex abundance of time. We're on the Lex abundance of time. We're on the Lex Freedman show. So, uh, two or three Freedman show. So, uh, two or three Freedman show. So, uh, two or three things. One is Democrats still think the things. One is Democrats still think the things. One is Democrats still think the currency of politics is money, and the currency of politics is money, and the currency of politics is money, and the currency of politics is attention. And currency of politics is attention. And currency of politics is attention. And that's a huge difference between the two that's a huge difference between the two that's a huge difference between the two sides right now. So, what did Kla Harris sides right now. So, what did Kla Harris sides right now. So, what did Kla Harris come in and do? She came in and raised a come in and do? She came in and raised a come in and do? She came in and raised a shit ton of money, right? Like a billion shit ton of money, right? Like a billion shit ton of money, right? Like a billion dollars in, you know, record time. dollars in, you know, record time. dollars in, you know, record time. Basically, she had more money than Basically, she had more money than Basically, she had more money than Donald Trump did and used it to try to Donald Trump did and used it to try to Donald Trump did and used it to try to buy attention. What it meant for buy attention. What it meant for buy attention. What it meant for Democrats to be good at social media is Democrats to be good at social media is Democrats to be good at social media is to have a good social media team. People to have a good social media team. People to have a good social media team. People in your office somewhere in your in your office somewhere in your in your office somewhere in your campaign headquarters who put out cool campaign headquarters who put out cool campaign headquarters who put out cool things on social media, good memes and things on social media, good memes and things on social media, good memes and and you know, good advertisements so on. and you know, good advertisements so on. and you know, good advertisements so on. What it means on the right to be good at What it means on the right to be good at What it means on the right to be good at social media is to be you personally social media is to be you personally social media is to be you personally good at social media. You're Vivc good at social media. You're Vivc good at social media. You're Vivc Ramaswami, you're JD Vance, you're Ramaswami, you're JD Vance, you're Ramaswami, you're JD Vance, you're Donald Trump, you're Elon Musk. And what Donald Trump, you're Elon Musk. And what Donald Trump, you're Elon Musk. And what you understand is you are the product.

you understand is you are the product. you understand is you are the product. What it means to be good at attention is What it means to be good at attention is What it means to be good at attention is you are good at attention. Now Harris, I you are good at attention. Now Harris, I you are good at attention. Now Harris, I think was actually better at some think was actually better at some think was actually better at some dimensions of this. They were just dimensions of this. They were just dimensions of this. They were just slightly older dimensions than people slightly older dimensions than people slightly older dimensions than people always gave her credit for. Hell of a always gave her credit for. Hell of a always gave her credit for. Hell of a performer on the stump. She was way performer on the stump. She was way performer on the stump. She was way better on the stump than people realized better on the stump than people realized better on the stump than people realized she would be. And a good debater. She'd she would be. And a good debater. She'd she would be. And a good debater. She'd always been a good debater. She trashed always been a good debater. She trashed always been a good debater. She trashed Donald Trump in that debate. But she Donald Trump in that debate. But she Donald Trump in that debate. But she does not do social media herself at any does not do social media herself at any does not do social media herself at any level, right? Because she's not going to level, right? Because she's not going to level, right? Because she's not going to take risk. Democrats, most Democrats take risk. Democrats, most Democrats take risk. Democrats, most Democrats still live in a world where the thing still live in a world where the thing still live in a world where the thing that they are optimizing for in that they are optimizing for in that they are optimizing for in attention is to not get negative attention is to not get negative attention is to not get negative attention. And what the Trumpist wing of attention. And what the Trumpist wing of attention. And what the Trumpist wing of the Republican party understands, and the Republican party understands, and the Republican party understands, and this is truer for them than it probably this is truer for them than it probably this is truer for them than it probably would be for Democrats, because for them would be for Democrats, because for them would be for Democrats, because for them the media is the enemy, or at least the the media is the enemy, or at least the the media is the enemy, or at least the mainstream media is, etc., but is mainstream media is, etc., but is mainstream media is, etc., but is that attention, a volume of attention is that attention, a volume of attention is that attention, a volume of attention is itself good, and you can only get a itself good, and you can only get a itself good, and you can only get a critical mass of it if you're willing to critical mass of it if you're willing to critical mass of it if you're willing to accept negative attention. Agenda accept negative attention. Agenda accept negative attention. Agenda control doesn't come from positive control doesn't come from positive control doesn't come from positive attention. It comes from conflict. You attention. It comes from conflict. You attention. It comes from conflict. You get agenda control by doing things the get agenda control by doing things the get agenda control by doing things the other side disagrees with. So, they other side disagrees with. So, they other side disagrees with. So, they enter into functioning agreement with enter into functioning agreement with enter into functioning agreement with you to keep the thing you're doing at you to keep the thing you're doing at you to keep the thing you're doing at the front. Now, that doesn't make you the front. Now, that doesn't make you the front. Now, that doesn't make you highly popular. Donald Trump is the most highly popular. Donald Trump is the most highly popular. Donald Trump is the most unpopular modern president at this stage unpopular modern president at this stage unpopular modern president at this stage of his presidency except for Donald of his presidency except for Donald of his presidency except for Donald Trump's first term. It took, I think Trump's first term. It took, I think Trump's first term. It took, I think Nate Silver said it was 221 days for Joe Nate Silver said it was 221 days for Joe Nate Silver said it was 221 days for Joe Biden's net uh favorability to go Biden's net uh favorability to go Biden's net uh favorability to go negative. It's taken something like 55 negative. It's taken something like 55 negative. It's taken something like 55 days for Donald Trump to do the same. So days for Donald Trump to do the same. So days for Donald Trump to do the same. So what Donald Trump is doing does not what Donald Trump is doing does not what Donald Trump is doing does not optimize for favorability. It does not optimize for favorability. It does not optimize for favorability. It does not optimize, by the way, for big wins.

optimize, by the way, for big wins. optimize, by the way, for big wins. Democrats feel like they got trashed in Democrats feel like they got trashed in Democrats feel like they got trashed in in in 2024. And in a way they did. But in in 2024. And in a way they did. But in in 2024. And in a way they did. But Trump's popular vote victory was the Trump's popular vote victory was the Trump's popular vote victory was the smallest popular vote victory since 2000 smallest popular vote victory since 2000 smallest popular vote victory since 2000 when uh Al Gore, you know, beat George when uh Al Gore, you know, beat George when uh Al Gore, you know, beat George W. Bush by 17 dogs and three old men or W. Bush by 17 dogs and three old men or W. Bush by 17 dogs and three old men or whatever it was. And so attention works whatever it was. And so attention works whatever it was. And so attention works really differently. And while I don't I really differently. And while I don't I really differently. And while I don't I think some of the like you know the think some of the like you know the think some of the like you know the Rogan of the left discourse has been Rogan of the left discourse has been Rogan of the left discourse has been frankly overstated because honestly the frankly overstated because honestly the frankly overstated because honestly the the most parsimmonious model of 2024 and the most parsimmonious model of 2024 and the most parsimmonious model of 2024 and 2020 is in 2020 you have a 4848 nation 2020 is in 2020 you have a 4848 nation 2020 is in 2020 you have a 4848 nation something like that or maybe you have something like that or maybe you have something like that or maybe you have something that's more like a 49 Democrat something that's more like a 49 Democrat something that's more like a 49 Democrat 47 Republican nation and in 2020 because 47 Republican nation and in 2020 because 47 Republican nation and in 2020 because of the pandemic uh Donald Trump suffered of the pandemic uh Donald Trump suffered of the pandemic uh Donald Trump suffered a let's call it a 2.5 point incumbent a let's call it a 2.5 point incumbent a let's call it a 2.5 point incumbent penalty. People were mad about the penalty. People were mad about the penalty. People were mad about the pandemic. They're mad about things being pandemic. They're mad about things being pandemic. They're mad about things being chaotic. So, he loses 2.5 points. That chaotic. So, he loses 2.5 points. That chaotic. So, he loses 2.5 points. That gives, given the natural split of the gives, given the natural split of the gives, given the natural split of the electorate, Joe Biden a 4.5 point electorate, Joe Biden a 4.5 point electorate, Joe Biden a 4.5 point popular vote victory. In 2024, people popular vote victory. In 2024, people popular vote victory. In 2024, people are mad about uh inflation. They're are mad about uh inflation. They're are mad about uh inflation. They're somewhat mad about the border. You have somewhat mad about the border. You have somewhat mad about the border. You have a 2.5 point penalty applied to the a 2.5 point penalty applied to the a 2.5 point penalty applied to the incumbent administration. Now, it's incumbent administration. Now, it's incumbent administration. Now, it's Harris. And you get a 1.5 point popular Harris. And you get a 1.5 point popular Harris. And you get a 1.5 point popular vote victory for Donald Trump. I vote victory for Donald Trump. I vote victory for Donald Trump. I genuinely don't think, and this held genuinely don't think, and this held genuinely don't think, and this held internationally too, right? All right. I internationally too, right? All right. I internationally too, right? All right. I generally don't think you need a lot generally don't think you need a lot generally don't think you need a lot more to explain the election right now more to explain the election right now more to explain the election right now than that. But you do need something than that. But you do need something than that. But you do need something more than that to explain Donald Trump's more than that to explain Donald Trump's more than that to explain Donald Trump's now since 2016 almost decadel long now since 2016 almost decadel long now since 2016 almost decadel long dominance of all attention in American dominance of all attention in American dominance of all attention in American politics. Starting when he came down the politics. Starting when he came down the politics. Starting when he came down the golden escalator in 2015. Donald uh

golden escalator in 2015. Donald uh golden escalator in 2015. Donald uh Donald Trump American politics from 2015 Donald Trump American politics from 2015 Donald Trump American politics from 2015 to 2020 when Joe Biden won was about to 2020 when Joe Biden won was about to 2020 when Joe Biden won was about Donald Trump. Then from 2020 to 2024 Donald Trump. Then from 2020 to 2024 Donald Trump. Then from 2020 to 2024 when Joe Biden was president, it was when Joe Biden was president, it was when Joe Biden was president, it was about Donald Trump. And then from 2024 about Donald Trump. And then from 2024 about Donald Trump. And then from 2024 on, it's about Donald Trump. Joe Biden on, it's about Donald Trump. Joe Biden on, it's about Donald Trump. Joe Biden was an intentional was an intentional was an intentional void. Be it his age, be it their void. Be it his age, be it their void. Be it his age, be it their strategy, they agreed that the topic of strategy, they agreed that the topic of strategy, they agreed that the topic of the nation should be Donald Trump, the nation should be Donald Trump, the nation should be Donald Trump, right? When he went back to begin his right? When he went back to begin his right? When he went back to begin his campaign in 2024, he goes to Valley campaign in 2024, he goes to Valley campaign in 2024, he goes to Valley Forge and gives a speech about January 6 Forge and gives a speech about January 6 Forge and gives a speech about January 6 and Donald Trump, right? It wasn't about and Donald Trump, right? It wasn't about and Donald Trump, right? It wasn't about his own achievements. It was about his own achievements. It was about his own achievements. It was about Donald Trump. Joe Biden didn't do the Donald Trump. Joe Biden didn't do the Donald Trump. Joe Biden didn't do the Super Bowl interview, right, in 2023. Super Bowl interview, right, in 2023. Super Bowl interview, right, in 2023. That's when I did my thing about this is That's when I did my thing about this is That's when I did my thing about this is not going to work. like probably because not going to work. like probably because not going to work. like probably because at that point he was not capable of good at that point he was not capable of good at that point he was not capable of good extemporaneous, you know, interviews. I extemporaneous, you know, interviews. I extemporaneous, you know, interviews. I mean, I think that was my view of them, mean, I think that was my view of them, mean, I think that was my view of them, right? That the revealed thing here was right? That the revealed thing here was right? That the revealed thing here was that they didn't trust him to do that they didn't trust him to do that they didn't trust him to do interviews. I didn't have some inside interviews. I didn't have some inside interviews. I didn't have some inside information about anything. I just information about anything. I just information about anything. I just looked at what they were doing and what looked at what they were doing and what looked at what they were doing and what they weren't doing. They're behind in they weren't doing. They're behind in they weren't doing. They're behind in the polls. They weren't doing things the polls. They weren't doing things the polls. They weren't doing things like the Super Bowl interview. If you like the Super Bowl interview. If you like the Super Bowl interview. If you can't turn your candidate into the can't turn your candidate into the can't turn your candidate into the product, if you don't trust your product, if you don't trust your product, if you don't trust your candidate to be the product in an candidate to be the product in an candidate to be the product in an election, you're fucked, right? And so election, you're fucked, right? And so election, you're fucked, right? And so that was that was to me the tell. Um, that was that was to me the tell. Um, that was that was to me the tell. Um, but attention is the coin of the realm.

but attention is the coin of the realm. but attention is the coin of the realm. Now, there are better and worse ways of Now, there are better and worse ways of Now, there are better and worse ways of doing it. I don't think Donald Trump is doing it. I don't think Donald Trump is doing it. I don't think Donald Trump is doing himself huge favors right now. I doing himself huge favors right now. I doing himself huge favors right now. I think they had there's a path they could think they had there's a path they could think they had there's a path they could have walked to be a majority party. I have walked to be a majority party. I have walked to be a majority party. I think that if he was more restrained, think that if he was more restrained, think that if he was more restrained, more inhibited, if he was able to not do more inhibited, if he was able to not do more inhibited, if he was able to not do a bunch of things that are mobilizing a bunch of things that are mobilizing a bunch of things that are mobilizing opposition to opposition to opposition to him, you know, you could talk about what him, you know, you could talk about what him, you know, you could talk about what they would or wouldn't achieve that way, they would or wouldn't achieve that way, they would or wouldn't achieve that way, but I think they could be in a much but I think they could be in a much but I think they could be in a much stronger political position. That would stronger political position. That would stronger political position. That would make them stronger for the midterms. It make them stronger for the midterms. It make them stronger for the midterms. It would eventually make, you know, JD would eventually make, you know, JD would eventually make, you know, JD Vance stronger as a successor. I think Vance stronger as a successor. I think Vance stronger as a successor. I think they're running a very high-risisk they're running a very high-risisk they're running a very high-risisk strategy that has a very reasonable strategy that has a very reasonable strategy that has a very reasonable chance of you know if they don't make a chance of you know if they don't make a chance of you know if they don't make a you know what I would call like an you know what I would call like an you know what I would call like an autocratic breakthrough they might yeah autocratic breakthrough they might yeah autocratic breakthrough they might yeah they might completely blow up their own they might completely blow up their own they might completely blow up their own movement right it's all very high risk movement right it's all very high risk movement right it's all very high risk so for them like for everybody for so for them like for everybody for so for them like for everybody for everything what makes them good at everything what makes them good at everything what makes them good at politics is also what makes them bad at politics is also what makes them bad at politics is also what makes them bad at politics but for democrats the caution politics but for democrats the caution politics but for democrats the caution the sort of bureaucratic culture the the sort of bureaucratic culture the the sort of bureaucratic culture the fear of saying anything that will make fear of saying anything that will make fear of saying anything that will make anybody mad it is optimized for a anybody mad it is optimized for a anybody mad it is optimized for a different attentional error era. And one different attentional error era. And one different attentional error era. And one of the things I am watching when you of the things I am watching when you of the things I am watching when you were saying about leaders, one of the were saying about leaders, one of the were saying about leaders, one of the things I'm watching in in in the people things I'm watching in in in the people things I'm watching in in in the people coming up, the the ones who want to run coming up, the the ones who want to run coming up, the the ones who want to run in 2028 is who seems like they have in 2028 is who seems like they have in 2028 is who seems like they have adapted to this era, not in the way adapted to this era, not in the way adapted to this era, not in the way Trump did or Vance did or Musk did. I Trump did or Vance did or Musk did. I Trump did or Vance did or Musk did. I think they're going to need something think they're going to need something think they're going to need something different. They fully represent the different. They fully represent the different. They fully represent the Twitter era of politics. I mean, Musk Twitter era of politics. I mean, Musk Twitter era of politics. I mean, Musk bought Twitter. Uh they're they're sort bought Twitter. Uh they're they're sort bought Twitter. Uh they're they're sort of allin on what politics right now, of allin on what politics right now, of allin on what politics right now, what online politics feels like. I think what online politics feels like. I think what online politics feels like. I think the thing that will come next is someone the thing that will come next is someone the thing that will come next is someone who's able who's able who's able to synthesize both the lessons of it and to synthesize both the lessons of it and to synthesize both the lessons of it and the feeling that we all have that it's

the feeling that we all have that it's the feeling that we all have that it's kind of sick and poisoned, right? That kind of sick and poisoned, right? That kind of sick and poisoned, right? That Twitter's not a good place. X is not a Twitter's not a good place. X is not a Twitter's not a good place. X is not a good place. Tik Tok politics is not a good place. Tik Tok politics is not a good place. Tik Tok politics is not a good place, that we're all being turned good place, that we're all being turned good place, that we're all being turned on each other. Somehow you need to be on each other. Somehow you need to be on each other. Somehow you need to be authentic and authentically angry at authentic and authentically angry at authentic and authentically angry at what we've all become in the way that what we've all become in the way that what we've all become in the way that Obama ran as a political reformer who Obama ran as a political reformer who Obama ran as a political reformer who hated the red and blue cut of America hated the red and blue cut of America hated the red and blue cut of America who hated what political consultants and who hated what political consultants and who hated what political consultants and pollsters were doing to us. You're not pollsters were doing to us. You're not pollsters were doing to us. You're not going to have somebody who just echoes. going to have somebody who just echoes. going to have somebody who just echoes. There's no not going to be there will be There's no not going to be there will be There's no not going to be there will be no Joe Rogan of the left. There will be no Joe Rogan of the left. There will be no Joe Rogan of the left. There will be no Donald Trump of the left because the no Donald Trump of the left because the no Donald Trump of the left because the left is different than the right. But it left is different than the right. But it left is different than the right. But it will have to be something authentically will have to be something authentically will have to be something authentically of this era, but also authentic to the of this era, but also authentic to the of this era, but also authentic to the backlash to it, which I think as we backlash to it, which I think as we backlash to it, which I think as we enter into this period where the enter into this period where the enter into this period where the president and everybody around him fully president and everybody around him fully president and everybody around him fully embraces this attentional economy, I embraces this attentional economy, I embraces this attentional economy, I think people are going to want something think people are going to want something think people are going to want something different from the from this attentional different from the from this attentional different from the from this attentional economy in four years and be okay with economy in four years and be okay with economy in four years and be okay with the negative attention that comes with the negative attention that comes with the negative attention that comes with being authentic. You're going to have to being authentic. You're going to have to being authentic. You're going to have to have some of it, right? You you you have some of it, right? You you you have some of it, right? You you you cannot change American politics. can't cannot change American politics. can't cannot change American politics. can't change Democratic party if you're not change Democratic party if you're not change Democratic party if you're not willing to upset people. Donald Trump willing to upset people. Donald Trump willing to upset people. Donald Trump reformed the Republican party by willing reformed the Republican party by willing reformed the Republican party by willing people to fight Republicans. He ran people to fight Republicans. He ran people to fight Republicans. He ran against George W. Bush, against Jeb against George W. Bush, against Jeb against George W. Bush, against Jeb Bush, against Mitt Romney, against the Bush, against Mitt Romney, against the Bush, against Mitt Romney, against the trade deals, against a bunch of things trade deals, against a bunch of things trade deals, against a bunch of things that were understood to be sacred cow.

that were understood to be sacred cow. that were understood to be sacred cow. Somehow this guy ran like right after Somehow this guy ran like right after Somehow this guy ran like right after Mitt Romney and John McCain while Mitt Romney and John McCain while Mitt Romney and John McCain while attacking Mitt Romney and John McCain, attacking Mitt Romney and John McCain, attacking Mitt Romney and John McCain, right? If you are not like the right? If you are not like the right? If you are not like the Democratic party does need to change. It Democratic party does need to change. It Democratic party does need to change. It needs to attain a different form because needs to attain a different form because needs to attain a different form because the Obama coalition is exhausted. It's the Obama coalition is exhausted. It's the Obama coalition is exhausted. It's done. It's not going to be able to do done. It's not going to be able to do done. It's not going to be able to do that if it doesn't have standard bears that if it doesn't have standard bears that if it doesn't have standard bears who are willing to say we were wrong who are willing to say we were wrong who are willing to say we were wrong about some things. We have to change our about some things. We have to change our about some things. We have to change our views on some things. We have to act views on some things. We have to act views on some things. We have to act differently and speak differently. Is differently and speak differently. Is differently and speak differently. Is there a degree to which the left there a degree to which the left there a degree to which the left uh uniquely attacks its own more uh uniquely attacks its own more uh uniquely attacks its own more intensely than u maybe uh other parts of intensely than u maybe uh other parts of intensely than u maybe uh other parts of the political spectrum? It's possible. the political spectrum? It's possible. the political spectrum? It's possible. You know, you go back to the model that You know, you go back to the model that You know, you go back to the model that I gave you of 2015 where there used to I gave you of 2015 where there used to I gave you of 2015 where there used to be these four large parties, MAGA, be these four large parties, MAGA, be these four large parties, MAGA, center right, center left, and left. center right, center left, and left. center right, center left, and left. Right now, the Republican party is all Right now, the Republican party is all Right now, the Republican party is all MAGA. So, there is no coalitional fight MAGA. So, there is no coalitional fight MAGA. So, there is no coalitional fight to be had. It's all Donald Trump. And if to be had. It's all Donald Trump. And if to be had. It's all Donald Trump. And if Donald Trump wants to name a former Donald Trump wants to name a former Donald Trump wants to name a former left-wing environmentalist to be be the left-wing environmentalist to be be the left-wing environmentalist to be be the HHS secretary, everyone says, "Okay, HHS secretary, everyone says, "Okay, HHS secretary, everyone says, "Okay, that sounds like a fantastic idea. that sounds like a fantastic idea. that sounds like a fantastic idea. That's exactly who we were going to That's exactly who we were going to That's exactly who we were going to nominate, too." Thank you, Donald.

nominate, too." Thank you, Donald. nominate, too." Thank you, Donald. That's wonderful. tip of my tongue on That's wonderful. tip of my tongue on That's wonderful. tip of my tongue on the on the Democratic side. There is a the on the Democratic side. There is a the on the Democratic side. There is a fight and it's happening right now and fight and it's happening right now and fight and it's happening right now and our book is trying to win a certain our book is trying to win a certain our book is trying to win a certain intral coalitional fight about defining intral coalitional fight about defining intral coalitional fight about defining the future of liberalism in the the future of liberalism in the the future of liberalism in the Democratic Party. So, I'm not of the Democratic Party. So, I'm not of the Democratic Party. So, I'm not of the left. I'm certainly not of the far-left. left. I'm certainly not of the far-left. left. I'm certainly not of the far-left. I have centerleft politics and maybe I have centerleft politics and maybe I have centerleft politics and maybe even like a center-left personality even like a center-left personality even like a center-left personality style, if we can even call it that. But style, if we can even call it that. But style, if we can even call it that. But I do not begrudge the left for fighting I do not begrudge the left for fighting I do not begrudge the left for fighting because there's a fight to be had. In because there's a fight to be had. In because there's a fight to be had. In many ways, I think sometimes they see many ways, I think sometimes they see many ways, I think sometimes they see I'm not endorsing this. I'm I'm I'm not endorsing this. I'm I'm I'm not endorsing this. I'm I'm describing it. I think they see their describing it. I think they see their describing it. I think they see their nearterm nearterm nearterm opposition as not always the Republican opposition as not always the Republican opposition as not always the Republican party but as the forces in the party but as the forces in the party but as the forces in the Democratic party that are in the way for Democratic party that are in the way for Democratic party that are in the way for them controlling one of the two major them controlling one of the two major them controlling one of the two major parties in this country. And so they do parties in this country. And so they do parties in this country. And so they do have an oppositional style and maybe have an oppositional style and maybe have an oppositional style and maybe that's personality based. They are that's personality based. They are that's personality based. They are fighting the center left. They are fighting the center left. They are fighting the center left. They are criticizing the center left consistency criticizing the center left consistency criticizing the center left consistency consistently.

consistently. consistently. But I want to be good faith about this But I want to be good faith about this But I want to be good faith about this even though I don't share their politics even though I don't share their politics even though I don't share their politics and say that they're they're doing it and say that they're they're doing it and say that they're they're doing it because they're trying to win power on because they're trying to win power on because they're trying to win power on the left of center. And so that's why the left of center. And so that's why the left of center. And so that's why they're criticizing the way they are. they're criticizing the way they are. they're criticizing the way they are. Now, our book and much of my writing is Now, our book and much of my writing is Now, our book and much of my writing is an attempt to do a little bit of a of of an attempt to do a little bit of a of of an attempt to do a little bit of a of of a very specific dance. Ezra touched on a very specific dance. Ezra touched on a very specific dance. Ezra touched on this, I think, really beautifully. We're this, I think, really beautifully. We're this, I think, really beautifully. We're in an era right now of in an era right now of in an era right now of anti-institution politics, anti-institution politics, anti-institution politics, anti-establishment politics, and anti-establishment politics, and anti-establishment politics, and Democrats are at risk right now as being Democrats are at risk right now as being Democrats are at risk right now as being seen as the party that always defends seen as the party that always defends seen as the party that always defends institutions, the party that always institutions, the party that always institutions, the party that always defends the establishment status quo. defends the establishment status quo. defends the establishment status quo. And that is an absolute death nail, I And that is an absolute death nail, I And that is an absolute death nail, I think, for this century's angry think, for this century's angry think, for this century's angry anti-establishment politics. So what anti-establishment politics. So what anti-establishment politics. So what we're trying to do is essentially say we're trying to do is essentially say we're trying to do is essentially say here's a way to channel the anger that here's a way to channel the anger that here's a way to channel the anger that people have at the establishment but people have at the establishment but people have at the establishment but toward our own ends. Right? We believe toward our own ends. Right? We believe toward our own ends. Right? We believe that we have answers on housing and that we have answers on housing and that we have answers on housing and energy and highquality governance and energy and highquality governance and energy and highquality governance and science and technology. Really good science and technology. Really good science and technology. Really good answers that are fiercely critical of answers that are fiercely critical of answers that are fiercely critical of the status quo in Democrat-led cities the status quo in Democrat-led cities the status quo in Democrat-led cities and Democrat-led states. Um we're trying and Democrat-led states. Um we're trying and Democrat-led states. Um we're trying to be oppositional in a way that's to be oppositional in a way that's to be oppositional in a way that's that's that's that's constructive rather than just constructive rather than just constructive rather than just destructive. Just to put a nice pretty destructive. Just to put a nice pretty destructive. Just to put a nice pretty bow tie in the whole thing, let me ask bow tie in the whole thing, let me ask bow tie in the whole thing, let me ask for advice. What do I need to do for AOC to advice. What do I need to do for AOC to do a three-hour interview with me, Ezra?

do a three-hour interview with me, Ezra? do a three-hour interview with me, Ezra? From your throne of wisdom. I I that I I From your throne of wisdom. I I that I I From your throne of wisdom. I I that I I don't think I know how you get AOC don't think I know how you get AOC don't think I know how you get AOC herself to do it. Um I I would not I herself to do it. Um I I would not I herself to do it. Um I I would not I would not pretend to know her offices or would not pretend to know her offices or would not pretend to know her offices or her particular views on this. I do think her particular views on this. I do think her particular views on this. I do think though though though that you can see different Democrats that you can see different Democrats that you can see different Democrats taking on different kinds of risks. taking on different kinds of risks. taking on different kinds of risks. Right now we're sort of in the age of Right now we're sort of in the age of Right now we're sort of in the age of Gavin Newsome starting a I mean Gavin Gavin Newsome starting a I mean Gavin Gavin Newsome starting a I mean Gavin Newsome is the governor of California Newsome is the governor of California Newsome is the governor of California and he's spending some percentage of his and he's spending some percentage of his and he's spending some percentage of his time doing a podcast with Charlie Cook time doing a podcast with Charlie Cook time doing a podcast with Charlie Cook and Michael Savage and Steve Bannon. and Michael Savage and Steve Bannon. and Michael Savage and Steve Bannon. Gavin Newsome realizes that one lane for Gavin Newsome realizes that one lane for Gavin Newsome realizes that one lane for a Democrat is to be high risk and a Democrat is to be high risk and a Democrat is to be high risk and talking to virtually everybody. I think talking to virtually everybody. I think talking to virtually everybody. I think Pete Buddhajed in a different way is Pete Buddhajed in a different way is Pete Buddhajed in a different way is somebody who wants to take uh media somebody who wants to take uh media somebody who wants to take uh media risks. Now I think he's going to my gut risks. Now I think he's going to my gut risks. Now I think he's going to my gut on him is he's going to hold his powder on him is he's going to hold his powder on him is he's going to hold his powder a little bit. So he'll probably want to a little bit. So he'll probably want to a little bit. So he'll probably want to do the Lex Friedman podcast assuming he do the Lex Friedman podcast assuming he do the Lex Friedman podcast assuming he runs in 2028. In 2027 runs in 2028. In 2027 runs in 2028. In 2027 Judge, right? I think a lot of them are Judge, right? I think a lot of them are Judge, right? I think a lot of them are trying to figure out what is the lane trying to figure out what is the lane trying to figure out what is the lane for right now and there's a lane for the for right now and there's a lane for the for right now and there's a lane for the next two years and there's a lane for next two years and there's a lane for next two years and there's a lane for the two years after that and you're the two years after that and you're the two years after that and you're going to see a lot of people begin to going to see a lot of people begin to going to see a lot of people begin to blanket media in the two years after blanket media in the two years after blanket media in the two years after that. Now, that'd be interesting. I that. Now, that'd be interesting. I that. Now, that'd be interesting. I would be curious to know, would Hakeem would be curious to know, would Hakeem would be curious to know, would Hakeem Jeff come on and do your show right now?

Jeff come on and do your show right now? Jeff come on and do your show right now? That'd be interesting. I mean, would you That'd be interesting. I mean, would you That'd be interesting. I mean, would you do it for four hours? I don't know. Uh do it for four hours? I don't know. Uh do it for four hours? I don't know. Uh the the 4h hour ask, the 3 to four hour the the 4h hour ask, the 3 to four hour the the 4h hour ask, the 3 to four hour ask somebody who also books politicians ask somebody who also books politicians ask somebody who also books politicians is hard. I have trouble. I like to book is hard. I have trouble. I like to book is hard. I have trouble. I like to book people for 90 minutes to two hours. And people for 90 minutes to two hours. And people for 90 minutes to two hours. And I tend to negot be get negotiated down I tend to negot be get negotiated down I tend to negot be get negotiated down to I try not to go under 75 or to I try not to go under 75 or to I try not to go under 75 or 65. But even as somebody I think well 65. But even as somebody I think well 65. But even as somebody I think well regarded in that world, you know, it's regarded in that world, you know, it's regarded in that world, you know, it's very very very hard for me to get very very very hard for me to get very very very hard for me to get politicians to sit for 2 hours. I don't politicians to sit for 2 hours. I don't politicians to sit for 2 hours. I don't have the sense that the three-hour ask have the sense that the three-hour ask have the sense that the three-hour ask is a big ask because of scheduling. I is a big ask because of scheduling. I is a big ask because of scheduling. I think they it still is grounded in the think they it still is grounded in the think they it still is grounded in the fear of saying the wrong thing. I just fear of saying the wrong thing. I just fear of saying the wrong thing. I just think they're used to something else, think they're used to something else, think they're used to something else, right? I think that when you talk I mean right? I think that when you talk I mean right? I think that when you talk I mean they are scheduled by schedulers, right? they are scheduled by schedulers, right? they are scheduled by schedulers, right? that if you talk to them yourself, if that if you talk to them yourself, if that if you talk to them yourself, if you end up having a personal you end up having a personal you end up having a personal relationship with Wes Moore of Maryland, relationship with Wes Moore of Maryland, relationship with Wes Moore of Maryland, and he wants to do your show, he will and he wants to do your show, he will and he wants to do your show, he will tell his scheduler, I want 3 to four tell his scheduler, I want 3 to four tell his scheduler, I want 3 to four hours to do the show. But the scheduler hours to do the show. But the scheduler hours to do the show. But the scheduler is used to a world, the staff is used to is used to a world, the staff is used to is used to a world, the staff is used to a world where nobody gets 3 to four a world where nobody gets 3 to four a world where nobody gets 3 to four hours for the boss. Reporters don't, hours for the boss. Reporters don't, hours for the boss. Reporters don't, donors don't, policy staffers don't. So donors don't, policy staffers don't. So donors don't, policy staffers don't. So then when some interview comes in and then when some interview comes in and then when some interview comes in and they say, "Hey, I want 3 to four hours."

they say, "Hey, I want 3 to four hours." they say, "Hey, I want 3 to four hours." The answer is no because culturally it's The answer is no because culturally it's The answer is no because culturally it's not done. You need Donald Trump himself, not done. You need Donald Trump himself, not done. You need Donald Trump himself, uh, Pete Booty Judge himself, AOC uh, Pete Booty Judge himself, AOC uh, Pete Booty Judge himself, AOC herself, to say to their staff, "No, no, herself, to say to their staff, "No, no, herself, to say to their staff, "No, no, no. We're making time for this, right? no. We're making time for this, right? no. We're making time for this, right? Because it's not how they make time for Because it's not how they make time for Because it's not how they make time for things normally." I don't know how much things normally." I don't know how much things normally." I don't know how much it is fear. I do think they're unus. But it is fear. I do think they're unus. But it is fear. I do think they're unus. But I suspect a lot of it is simply booking I suspect a lot of it is simply booking I suspect a lot of it is simply booking culture. Uh, like I run into it, too. culture. Uh, like I run into it, too. culture. Uh, like I run into it, too. They're not used to saying yes to 3 to They're not used to saying yes to 3 to They're not used to saying yes to 3 to four hours for anything. It's not that four hours for anything. It's not that four hours for anything. It's not that they don't have it. They have 3 to four they don't have it. They have 3 to four they don't have it. They have 3 to four hours if their kid is having a hours if their kid is having a hours if their kid is having a graduation, right? I mean, they're human graduation, right? I mean, they're human graduation, right? I mean, they're human beings. they can make time, but um but beings. they can make time, but um but beings. they can make time, but um but it would have to come in a way from it would have to come in a way from it would have to come in a way from them. My sense is this is part of the them. My sense is this is part of the them. My sense is this is part of the the Rogan, it's very unclear because the Rogan, it's very unclear because the Rogan, it's very unclear because there are very differing stories on what there are very differing stories on what there are very differing stories on what happened in the Rogan Harris happened in the Rogan Harris happened in the Rogan Harris negotiations, but it does seem that time negotiations, but it does seem that time negotiations, but it does seem that time was one of the the sticking points. It's was one of the the sticking points. It's was one of the the sticking points. It's also possible that you're going to find also possible that you're going to find also possible that you're going to find as you try to interview Democratic as you try to interview Democratic as you try to interview Democratic politicians that the exact same thing politicians that the exact same thing politicians that the exact same thing that happened with tech CEOs is going to that happened with tech CEOs is going to that happened with tech CEOs is going to happen among Democratic politicians. You happen among Democratic politicians. You happen among Democratic politicians. You interviewed some tech CEOs and then they interviewed some tech CEOs and then they interviewed some tech CEOs and then they did a great job and their friends were did a great job and their friends were did a great job and their friends were like, "You were fantastic on the Lex like, "You were fantastic on the Lex like, "You were fantastic on the Lex Freedman podcast. That was such a great Freedman podcast. That was such a great Freedman podcast. That was such a great thing that you said in, you know, minute thing that you said in, you know, minute thing that you said in, you know, minute 97 and then there becomes a bit of a 97 and then there becomes a bit of a 97 and then there becomes a bit of a meme that you can create really high meme that you can create really high meme that you can create really high value moments for yourself if you appear value moments for yourself if you appear value moments for yourself if you appear on Lex's podcast and then it becomes on Lex's podcast and then it becomes on Lex's podcast and then it becomes less risky for the next marginal CEO to less risky for the next marginal CEO to less risky for the next marginal CEO to say yes." And I think right now what say yes." And I think right now what say yes." And I think right now what we're talking about fundamentally is not we're talking about fundamentally is not we're talking about fundamentally is not physics, it's culture, it's just norms.

physics, it's culture, it's just norms. physics, it's culture, it's just norms. I think there's a fear of low expected I think there's a fear of low expected I think there's a fear of low expected value if you're a highranking Democratic value if you're a highranking Democratic value if you're a highranking Democratic politician and maybe you do a podcast politician and maybe you do a podcast politician and maybe you do a podcast like this. What if I say the wrong thing like this. What if I say the wrong thing like this. What if I say the wrong thing and it goes viral and my bookers and my and it goes viral and my bookers and my and it goes viral and my bookers and my agenda people and myself just feel agenda people and myself just feel agenda people and myself just feel terrible for the next few weeks cuz all terrible for the next few weeks cuz all terrible for the next few weeks cuz all we see on Blue Sky and X is just people we see on Blue Sky and X is just people we see on Blue Sky and X is just people hating. But if you get one interview hating. But if you get one interview hating. But if you get one interview that goes well, if you talk to Wes that goes well, if you talk to Wes that goes well, if you talk to Wes Moore, let's say, and there's a 5-minute Moore, let's say, and there's a 5-minute Moore, let's say, and there's a 5-minute segment where he articulates some vision segment where he articulates some vision segment where he articulates some vision of liberalism in the 2020s that everyone of liberalism in the 2020s that everyone of liberalism in the 2020s that everyone says, "My gosh, that is the best says, "My gosh, that is the best says, "My gosh, that is the best possible articulation of what the possible articulation of what the possible articulation of what the Democratic party can stand for the next Democratic party can stand for the next Democratic party can stand for the next four years that I've ever heard." four years that I've ever heard." four years that I've ever heard." Suddenly, what's happened is that Suddenly, what's happened is that Suddenly, what's happened is that appearing on the show becomes massively appearing on the show becomes massively appearing on the show becomes massively derisked. And in fact, the risk veilance derisked. And in fact, the risk veilance derisked. And in fact, the risk veilance entirely switches. We are leaving entirely switches. We are leaving entirely switches. We are leaving dollars on the floor by not appearing on dollars on the floor by not appearing on dollars on the floor by not appearing on this guy's podcast because I'm AOC. I'm this guy's podcast because I'm AOC. I'm this guy's podcast because I'm AOC. I'm a sensational communicator. If Wes Moore a sensational communicator. If Wes Moore a sensational communicator. If Wes Moore can do it, I can do it even better. And can do it, I can do it even better. And can do it, I can do it even better. And so I think to a certain extent there's a so I think to a certain extent there's a so I think to a certain extent there's a little bit like of a of a riot theory little bit like of a of a riot theory little bit like of a of a riot theory phenomenon here. The person who throws phenomenon here. The person who throws phenomenon here. The person who throws the first stone in a riot has to be very the first stone in a riot has to be very the first stone in a riot has to be very courageous. The person who throws the courageous. The person who throws the courageous. The person who throws the hundth and first stone in a riot doesn't hundth and first stone in a riot doesn't hundth and first stone in a riot doesn't need to be courageous at all. And there need to be courageous at all. And there need to be courageous at all. And there might be a little bit of that going on might be a little bit of that going on might be a little bit of that going on that people need to see proof of high that people need to see proof of high that people need to see proof of high expected value before it breaks what expected value before it breaks what expected value before it breaks what we're acknowledging to be a bit of a we're acknowledging to be a bit of a we're acknowledging to be a bit of a communications norm on the left. That's communications norm on the left. That's communications norm on the left. That's a really convincing and powerful theory.

a really convincing and powerful theory. a really convincing and powerful theory. I think I want to push back on it I think I want to push back on it I think I want to push back on it because because because uh so what's what's going to happen for uh so what's what's going to happen for uh so what's what's going to happen for example this very conversation you're example this very conversation you're example this very conversation you're both going to come off brilliant. Well, both going to come off brilliant. Well, both going to come off brilliant. Well, we're we're barely like 50 minutes into we're we're barely like 50 minutes into we're we're barely like 50 minutes into a 4 a 4 a 4 hour material next. It's it's all hour material next. It's it's all hour material next. It's it's all straight downhill. But what people will straight downhill. But what people will straight downhill. But what people will tired, they'll listen to this and tired, they'll listen to this and tired, they'll listen to this and they're like, "Well, that's Ezra. Like, they're like, "Well, that's Ezra. Like, they're like, "Well, that's Ezra. Like, he's brilliant." They're going to be he's brilliant." They're going to be he's brilliant." They're going to be worried about their own candidate. If worried about their own candidate. If worried about their own candidate. If AOC comes off brilliant, they're not AOC comes off brilliant, they're not AOC comes off brilliant, they're not going to be thinking, "Oh, this is a going to be thinking, "Oh, this is a going to be thinking, "Oh, this is a place to be brilliant." They're going to place to be brilliant." They're going to place to be brilliant." They're going to be like, "Well, that's cuz AOC is be like, "Well, that's cuz AOC is be like, "Well, that's cuz AOC is brilliant, but my candidate is not." It brilliant, but my candidate is not." It brilliant, but my candidate is not." It still boils down to the caution. I've still boils down to the caution. I've still boils down to the caution. I've had a lot of Republican high-profile had a lot of Republican high-profile had a lot of Republican high-profile Republican people reach out to me. They Republican people reach out to me. They Republican people reach out to me. They don't give a shit. They're just like, don't give a shit. They're just like, don't give a shit. They're just like, "Whatever, I'll come." People on the "Whatever, I'll come." People on the "Whatever, I'll come." People on the left, I've had two people who I respect left, I've had two people who I respect left, I've had two people who I respect deeply and deeply and deeply and admire express caution about the admire express caution about the admire express caution about the previous people I've interviewed and not previous people I've interviewed and not previous people I've interviewed and not wanting to come on. Well, that's a thing wanting to come on. Well, that's a thing wanting to come on. Well, that's a thing the left has to get over. Yeah. like the left has to get over. Yeah. like the left has to get over. Yeah. like what that that's a very important what that that's a very important what that that's a very important cultural they they began to do a thing cultural they they began to do a thing cultural they they began to do a thing where spaces were verboden because it where spaces were verboden because it where spaces were verboden because it had platformed so and so and I think had platformed so and so and I think had platformed so and so and I think that culture is changing I think they that culture is changing I think they that culture is changing I think they realized I mean that they abandoned huge realized I mean that they abandoned huge realized I mean that they abandoned huge vast swaths of significant culture vast swaths of significant culture vast swaths of significant culture because like they wouldn't go places because like they wouldn't go places because like they wouldn't go places it's crazy like you have to the idea it's crazy like you have to the idea it's crazy like you have to the idea that you only go where people agree with that you only go where people agree with that you only go where people agree with you is genuine lunacy I I don't want to you is genuine lunacy I I don't want to you is genuine lunacy I I don't want to act as your booker here um and 20, you

act as your booker here um and 20, you act as your booker here um and 20, you know, 2020 candidates are what they are know, 2020 candidates are what they are know, 2020 candidates are what they are and they each have their own press and they each have their own press and they each have their own press strategy. But I would say like I'm doing strategy. But I would say like I'm doing strategy. But I would say like I'm doing this myself on my show. I like I don't this myself on my show. I like I don't this myself on my show. I like I don't think the best people to get right now think the best people to get right now think the best people to get right now in the Democratic party are the seven in the Democratic party are the seven in the Democratic party are the seven people who lead the polls. Like I'm people who lead the polls. Like I'm people who lead the polls. Like I'm looking for people who will think out looking for people who will think out looking for people who will think out loud. Like I just had Jake Aenclaws on. loud. Like I just had Jake Aenclaws on. loud. Like I just had Jake Aenclaws on. He's like a not that well-known House He's like a not that well-known House He's like a not that well-known House member from Massachusetts. I just think member from Massachusetts. I just think member from Massachusetts. I just think he's a guy who thinks out loud. Um I am he's a guy who thinks out loud. Um I am he's a guy who thinks out loud. Um I am uh booking someone else right now like uh booking someone else right now like uh booking someone else right now like that. Two more people like that frankly that. Two more people like that frankly that. Two more people like that frankly who are neither of them. They're like who are neither of them. They're like who are neither of them. They're like the net like I could get like a bigger the net like I could get like a bigger the net like I could get like a bigger name. I'm more interested in people who name. I'm more interested in people who name. I'm more interested in people who are thinking like one reason I think are thinking like one reason I think are thinking like one reason I think Bernie Sanders always did everything. Is Bernie Sanders always did everything. Is Bernie Sanders always did everything. Is to him the thing he was really doing was to him the thing he was really doing was to him the thing he was really doing was he had something to say. The point of he had something to say. The point of he had something to say. The point of almost everything for Bernie Sanders is almost everything for Bernie Sanders is almost everything for Bernie Sanders is to be in a place where people can hear to be in a place where people can hear to be in a place where people can hear the thing he has to say. And a lot of the thing he has to say. And a lot of the thing he has to say. And a lot of politicians don't have that. Right. The politicians don't have that. Right. The politicians don't have that. Right. The point of anything is what it does for point of anything is what it does for point of anything is what it does for them in the polls. What it does for them them in the polls. What it does for them them in the polls. What it does for them with the donors, how it repositions with the donors, how it repositions with the donors, how it repositions them. I'm interested right now at this them. I'm interested right now at this them. I'm interested right now at this moment because it's not 2028. It's not moment because it's not 2028. It's not moment because it's not 2028. It's not 2027. There's no Democratic primary 2027. There's no Democratic primary 2027. There's no Democratic primary happening right now. The idea that happening right now. The idea that happening right now. The idea that you're going to like pre-run the you're going to like pre-run the you're going to like pre-run the Democratic party is stu or primary is Democratic party is stu or primary is Democratic party is stu or primary is stupid. We don't even know what the like stupid. We don't even know what the like stupid. We don't even know what the like we might be in World War II, right? We we might be in World War II, right? We we might be in World War II, right? We have no idea what, you know, we might have no idea what, you know, we might have no idea what, you know, we might have g, you know, AGI. Like the things have g, you know, AGI. Like the things have g, you know, AGI. Like the things that the 2027 primary might be about, that the 2027 primary might be about, that the 2027 primary might be about, the kinds of scandals that might have the kinds of scandals that might have the kinds of scandals that might have erupted by them are totally different.

erupted by them are totally different. erupted by them are totally different. Whereas, you know, the reason I have Whereas, you know, the reason I have Whereas, you know, the reason I have people on is because they are saying people on is because they are saying people on is because they are saying something. They're a live mind in the something. They're a live mind in the something. They're a live mind in the moment that has a perspective on this moment that has a perspective on this moment that has a perspective on this that um that that you want to hear. And that um that that you want to hear. And that um that that you want to hear. And so I would look for that. And I think a so I would look for that. And I think a so I would look for that. And I think a lot of people who are not, you know, lot of people who are not, you know, lot of people who are not, you know, there are people who are trying to there are people who are trying to there are people who are trying to protect something, protect a standing in protect something, protect a standing in protect something, protect a standing in the polls, protect a sort of coalitional the polls, protect a sort of coalitional the polls, protect a sort of coalitional set of allies they currently have. And set of allies they currently have. And set of allies they currently have. And then there are people who are, you know, then there are people who are, you know, then there are people who are, you know, trying to just be heard. Um, again, a trying to just be heard. Um, again, a trying to just be heard. Um, again, a lot of Bernie Sanders's culture, the way lot of Bernie Sanders's culture, the way lot of Bernie Sanders's culture, the way he does media is now Bernie Sanders is he does media is now Bernie Sanders is he does media is now Bernie Sanders is Bernie Sanders. He didn't used to be. He Bernie Sanders. He didn't used to be. He Bernie Sanders. He didn't used to be. He wasn't in 2015. Even like when Bernie wasn't in 2015. Even like when Bernie wasn't in 2015. Even like when Bernie Sanders ran for president in 2015, it Sanders ran for president in 2015, it Sanders ran for president in 2015, it wasn't initially a big deal. It was wasn't initially a big deal. It was wasn't initially a big deal. It was like, "Oh, bummer. Elizabeth Warren like, "Oh, bummer. Elizabeth Warren like, "Oh, bummer. Elizabeth Warren didn't run for president." Was a feeling didn't run for president." Was a feeling didn't run for president." Was a feeling of most people on the left. And so of most people on the left. And so of most people on the left. And so Bernie Sanders was a guy who's been Bernie Sanders was a guy who's been Bernie Sanders was a guy who's been saying the same thing for decades, but saying the same thing for decades, but saying the same thing for decades, but in the wilderness, and nobody was in the wilderness, and nobody was in the wilderness, and nobody was listening. Yeah. And now he still has listening. Yeah. And now he still has listening. Yeah. And now he still has the instincts of somebody who understood the instincts of somebody who understood the instincts of somebody who understood that like the most important thing was that like the most important thing was that like the most important thing was to find a place where people were to find a place where people were to find a place where people were listening, where they would let you talk listening, where they would let you talk listening, where they would let you talk and even better let you talk for a and even better let you talk for a and even better let you talk for a while. I think the candidate who's going while. I think the candidate who's going while. I think the candidate who's going to do well in 2028 is going to have an to do well in 2028 is going to have an to do well in 2028 is going to have an instinct like that. But I but even right instinct like that. But I but even right instinct like that. But I but even right now I think the question is one of my now I think the question is one of my now I think the question is one of my big questions as I'm booking for my show big questions as I'm booking for my show big questions as I'm booking for my show is is is just I want someone who has a just I want someone who has a just I want someone who has a perspective on this moment who feels perspective on this moment who feels perspective on this moment who feels like they have had a thought that is like they have had a thought that is like they have had a thought that is about right now and who we are right now about right now and who we are right now about right now and who we are right now and what the story of America is right and what the story of America is right and what the story of America is right now. I think what's really important is

now. I think what's really important is now. I think what's really important is what Ezra said. It's about having what Ezra said. It's about having what Ezra said. It's about having something to say. I we wanted to talk to something to say. I we wanted to talk to something to say. I we wanted to talk to you and talk together about how much we you and talk together about how much we you and talk together about how much we wanted to talk to you cuz we got wanted to talk to you cuz we got wanted to talk to you cuz we got something to say. You know, we we wrote something to say. You know, we we wrote something to say. You know, we we wrote a 300page book about how much we have to a 300page book about how much we have to a 300page book about how much we have to say. We love going on podcasts and say. We love going on podcasts and say. We love going on podcasts and television shows and radio and then television shows and radio and then television shows and radio and then doing live events to tell people what we doing live events to tell people what we doing live events to tell people what we have to say. We think this idea of have to say. We think this idea of have to say. We think this idea of abundance isn't just important for abundance isn't just important for abundance isn't just important for redefining what the American left means. redefining what the American left means. redefining what the American left means. We think that the outcome of thinking We think that the outcome of thinking We think that the outcome of thinking abundantly about housing and energy and abundantly about housing and energy and abundantly about housing and energy and science and technology is what politics science and technology is what politics science and technology is what politics is all about. It's about giving people is all about. It's about giving people is all about. It's about giving people the good life and we think this is the the good life and we think this is the the good life and we think this is the path toward it. So certainly one thing path toward it. So certainly one thing path toward it. So certainly one thing that's profoundly motivated us is having that's profoundly motivated us is having that's profoundly motivated us is having something very concrete that we just something very concrete that we just something very concrete that we just want to get out there in the world. Like want to get out there in the world. Like want to get out there in the world. Like my sense as a writer, as a thinker, is I my sense as a writer, as a thinker, is I my sense as a writer, as a thinker, is I want my software running on as many want my software running on as many want my software running on as many pieces of hardware as possible. I want pieces of hardware as possible. I want pieces of hardware as possible. I want to get my ideas out there as much as to get my ideas out there as much as to get my ideas out there as much as possible. And who gets credit for them possible. And who gets credit for them possible. And who gets credit for them and where the idea goes and that's and where the idea goes and that's and where the idea goes and that's that's all secondary. I believe in ideas that's all secondary. I believe in ideas that's all secondary. I believe in ideas because they're important. And so I want because they're important. And so I want because they're important. And so I want to talk to people who have large to talk to people who have large to talk to people who have large platforms about those ideas because how platforms about those ideas because how platforms about those ideas because how else is the idea getting into the else is the idea getting into the else is the idea getting into the mainstream except through those large mainstream except through those large mainstream except through those large large platforms. Um that's how broadcast large platforms. Um that's how broadcast large platforms. Um that's how broadcast technology works in the first place. So technology works in the first place. So technology works in the first place. So maybe one thing that you're touching on maybe one thing that you're touching on maybe one thing that you're touching on is a little bit of ideological is a little bit of ideological is a little bit of ideological ambiguity. Maybe a part of this is this ambiguity. Maybe a part of this is this ambiguity. Maybe a part of this is this sense that people don't know exactly sense that people don't know exactly sense that people don't know exactly what it is they have to say for 3 hours.

what it is they have to say for 3 hours. what it is they have to say for 3 hours. All all I all I can say for sure is that All all I all I can say for sure is that All all I all I can say for sure is that we know there's also a reality and I we know there's also a reality and I we know there's also a reality and I mean the book is trying to enter into mean the book is trying to enter into mean the book is trying to enter into this reality. I think one thing you're this reality. I think one thing you're this reality. I think one thing you're saying is that people have coded you saying is that people have coded you saying is that people have coded you and so Donald Trump is really excited to and so Donald Trump is really excited to and so Donald Trump is really excited to do it and maybe loving politicians are do it and maybe loving politicians are do it and maybe loving politicians are not. Uh one thing that we think is that not. Uh one thing that we think is that not. Uh one thing that we think is that we're in a period of realignment. Uh the we're in a period of realignment. Uh the we're in a period of realignment. Uh the last chapter of the book we talk about last chapter of the book we talk about last chapter of the book we talk about an idea that is picked up from a an idea that is picked up from a an idea that is picked up from a historian named Gary Gartol which is historian named Gary Gartol which is historian named Gary Gartol which is idea of political orders. And political idea of political orders. And political idea of political orders. And political orders are periods that have a sort of orders are periods that have a sort of orders are periods that have a sort of structure of consensus and a structure structure of consensus and a structure structure of consensus and a structure of a zone of conflict, but it's more or of a zone of conflict, but it's more or of a zone of conflict, but it's more or less agreed on by the two sides, even if less agreed on by the two sides, even if less agreed on by the two sides, even if only tacitly. So you have a new deal only tacitly. So you have a new deal only tacitly. So you have a new deal order. New deal order is founded by FDR. order. New deal order is founded by FDR. order. New deal order is founded by FDR. It is entrenched when Dwight Eisenhower It is entrenched when Dwight Eisenhower It is entrenched when Dwight Eisenhower accepts the New Deal as part of the the accepts the New Deal as part of the the accepts the New Deal as part of the the US proving that it can treat workers US proving that it can treat workers US proving that it can treat workers better than the Soviet Union. So those better than the Soviet Union. So those better than the Soviet Union. So those are sort of right there the three uh the are sort of right there the three uh the are sort of right there the three uh the three ingredients typically of an order.

three ingredients typically of an order. three ingredients typically of an order. You have a party that starts it a You have a party that starts it a You have a party that starts it a opposition party that accepts key opposition party that accepts key opposition party that accepts key premises right now doesn't come in and premises right now doesn't come in and premises right now doesn't come in and say we're going to roll back the whole say we're going to roll back the whole say we're going to roll back the whole new deal and it's often held in place by new deal and it's often held in place by new deal and it's often held in place by an external antagonist in that case the an external antagonist in that case the an external antagonist in that case the Soviet Union. You have then you have the Soviet Union. You have then you have the Soviet Union. You have then you have the in the 70s stagflation the Vietnam war a in the 70s stagflation the Vietnam war a in the 70s stagflation the Vietnam war a series of problems that the New Deal series of problems that the New Deal series of problems that the New Deal order no longer seems able to handle. So order no longer seems able to handle. So order no longer seems able to handle. So you have the rise of what he calls the you have the rise of what he calls the you have the rise of what he calls the the neoliberal order. And the neoliberal the neoliberal order. And the neoliberal the neoliberal order. And the neoliberal order is if you're going to choose a order is if you're going to choose a order is if you're going to choose a founder, it's going to be Reagan on that founder, it's going to be Reagan on that founder, it's going to be Reagan on that one, right? It's much more about one, right? It's much more about one, right? It's much more about markets. It is very concerned with markets. It is very concerned with markets. It is very concerned with things like inflation. And it really is things like inflation. And it really is things like inflation. And it really is entrenched by Bill Clinton. You know, entrenched by Bill Clinton. You know, entrenched by Bill Clinton. You know, the era of big government is over. And the era of big government is over. And the era of big government is over. And partially, it's entrenched also by the partially, it's entrenched also by the partially, it's entrenched also by the fall of the Soviet Union, right? The fall of the Soviet Union, right? The fall of the Soviet Union, right? The fall of the Soviet Union is like this fall of the Soviet Union is like this fall of the Soviet Union is like this proof point that every that the the the proof point that every that the the the proof point that every that the the the sort of capitalists were right, that sort of capitalists were right, that sort of capitalists were right, that markets are the way of the future. markets are the way of the future. markets are the way of the future. Government does not know what it's Government does not know what it's Government does not know what it's doing. and and that becomes like the doing. and and that becomes like the doing. and and that becomes like the governing set of assumptions. And so governing set of assumptions. And so governing set of assumptions. And so there are arguments about what the there are arguments about what the there are arguments about what the markets should be doing, right? You markets should be doing, right? You markets should be doing, right? You know, Obamacare is about creating sort know, Obamacare is about creating sort know, Obamacare is about creating sort of markets in health insurance, right? of markets in health insurance, right? of markets in health insurance, right? You can use markets for very progressive You can use markets for very progressive You can use markets for very progressive ends. Um we want to use markets for lots ends. Um we want to use markets for lots ends. Um we want to use markets for lots of progressive ends. But the neoliberal of progressive ends. But the neoliberal of progressive ends. But the neoliberal order basically collapses amidst a order basically collapses amidst a order basically collapses amidst a financial crisis and climate change and financial crisis and climate change and financial crisis and climate change and China. And those are the three things China. And those are the three things China. And those are the three things that that that sort of gel but but also that that that sort of gel but but also that that that sort of gel but but also separately we think kill it which is the separately we think kill it which is the separately we think kill it which is the neoliberal order does not have an answer neoliberal order does not have an answer neoliberal order does not have an answer to the financial crisis and it botches to the financial crisis and it botches to the financial crisis and it botches in many ways the answer to the financial in many ways the answer to the financial in many ways the answer to the financial crisis puts too little demand into the crisis puts too little demand into the crisis puts too little demand into the economy lets um a sort of recession economy lets um a sort of recession economy lets um a sort of recession linger and a very slow recovery linger linger and a very slow recovery linger linger and a very slow recovery linger for too long. It doesn't know what to

for too long. It doesn't know what to for too long. It doesn't know what to say really about climate change. Markets say really about climate change. Markets say really about climate change. Markets have made a lot of people rich by you have made a lot of people rich by you have made a lot of people rich by you know doing a lot of things that are very know doing a lot of things that are very know doing a lot of things that are very very damaging for the environment very very damaging for the environment very very damaging for the environment very damaging for the future of the human damaging for the future of the human damaging for the future of the human race potentially. And you have the rise race potentially. And you have the rise race potentially. And you have the rise of China and the neoliberal order said of China and the neoliberal order said of China and the neoliberal order said you integrate China into the global you integrate China into the global you integrate China into the global economy. You bring them into the WTO. economy. You bring them into the WTO. economy. You bring them into the WTO. You trade with them. You help them build You trade with them. You help them build You trade with them. You help them build their industrial base. You help them their industrial base. You help them their industrial base. You help them pull their people out of poverty. Which pull their people out of poverty. Which pull their people out of poverty. Which that part is good. And they will become that part is good. And they will become that part is good. And they will become more like the West. They will more like the West. They will more like the West. They will liberalize. They will have a free press. liberalize. They will have a free press. liberalize. They will have a free press. They will the the richer we make China, They will the the richer we make China, They will the the richer we make China, the more China is going to become like the more China is going to become like the more China is going to become like us. And that proves totally wrong. us. And that proves totally wrong. us. And that proves totally wrong. Right? China becomes more authoritarian Right? China becomes more authoritarian Right? China becomes more authoritarian over time. But it also sort of develops over time. But it also sort of develops over time. But it also sort of develops an industrial base. It becomes uh as it an industrial base. It becomes uh as it an industrial base. It becomes uh as it does not become more like us becomes does not become more like us becomes does not become more like us becomes dangerous. You know, at least in our dangerous. You know, at least in our dangerous. You know, at least in our view, right? You don't want to ever have view, right? You don't want to ever have view, right? You don't want to ever have a conflict with a another country who a conflict with a another country who a conflict with a another country who you've outsourced your key industrial you've outsourced your key industrial you've outsourced your key industrial base to. And so you have to sort of base to. And so you have to sort of base to. And so you have to sort of follow that order. And and then again follow that order. And and then again follow that order. And and then again here things that would have been here things that would have been here things that would have been ridiculous at one point in American ridiculous at one point in American ridiculous at one point in American politics become possible. Bernie Sanders politics become possible. Bernie Sanders politics become possible. Bernie Sanders is one of them, right? The idea that is one of them, right? The idea that is one of them, right? The idea that you'd have somebody a self-described you'd have somebody a self-described you'd have somebody a self-described socialist running for president and socialist running for president and socialist running for president and coming anywhere near the Democratic coming anywhere near the Democratic coming anywhere near the Democratic nomination that was unthinkable in 2004 nomination that was unthinkable in 2004 nomination that was unthinkable in 2004 and by 2016 it almost happened. And and by 2016 it almost happened. And and by 2016 it almost happened. And Donald Trump is another thing. Donald Donald Trump is another thing. Donald Donald Trump is another thing. Donald Trump runs like headlong into the Trump runs like headlong into the Trump runs like headlong into the failures of neoliberalism in the failures of neoliberalism in the failures of neoliberalism in the Republican party. He runs against trade.

Republican party. He runs against trade. Republican party. He runs against trade. He runs against a sort of Paul Ryan more He runs against a sort of Paul Ryan more He runs against a sort of Paul Ryan more open immigration. George W. Bush and open immigration. George W. Bush and open immigration. George W. Bush and John McCain were both very big on John McCain were both very big on John McCain were both very big on liberalizing immigration policy. um he liberalizing immigration policy. um he liberalizing immigration policy. um he runs against the Iraq war and you know runs against the Iraq war and you know runs against the Iraq war and you know sort of foreign adventurism and there's sort of foreign adventurism and there's sort of foreign adventurism and there's a sort of isolationist instinct that a sort of isolationist instinct that a sort of isolationist instinct that coexists very awkwardly now within a coexists very awkwardly now within a coexists very awkwardly now within a territorial expansionist instinct but at territorial expansionist instinct but at territorial expansionist instinct but at least in 2016 it was more isolationist least in 2016 it was more isolationist least in 2016 it was more isolationist and so Donald Trump and his sort of and so Donald Trump and his sort of and so Donald Trump and his sort of re-imagining of the Republican party as re-imagining of the Republican party as re-imagining of the Republican party as a right-wing populist uh more like sort a right-wing populist uh more like sort a right-wing populist uh more like sort of some uh Christian Democratic parties of some uh Christian Democratic parties of some uh Christian Democratic parties in other countries you know up in that in other countries you know up in that in other countries you know up in that quadrant of socially conservative um quadrant of socially conservative um quadrant of socially conservative um economically populist uh that that economically populist uh that that economically populist uh that that becomes something that's possible, but becomes something that's possible, but becomes something that's possible, but nothing has found an equilibrium, right? nothing has found an equilibrium, right? nothing has found an equilibrium, right? Nobody's agreed to the other side's Nobody's agreed to the other side's Nobody's agreed to the other side's premises. There are certain ones that premises. There are certain ones that premises. There are certain ones that people are agreeing on. Both the people are agreeing on. Both the people are agreeing on. Both the Republican and Democratic parties have a Republican and Democratic parties have a Republican and Democratic parties have a very different view on China now. Uh very different view on China now. Uh very different view on China now. Uh right, like Biden kept a lot of Trump's right, like Biden kept a lot of Trump's right, like Biden kept a lot of Trump's uh policies on China and actually uh policies on China and actually uh policies on China and actually strengthened them. And now Trump is strengthened them. And now Trump is strengthened them. And now Trump is building on that aggressively again. Uh building on that aggressively again. Uh building on that aggressively again. Uh but in terms of the other things, there but in terms of the other things, there but in terms of the other things, there isn't agreement about what the next isn't agreement about what the next isn't agreement about what the next period in American politics should look period in American politics should look period in American politics should look like. And that's one reason I think it's like. And that's one reason I think it's like. And that's one reason I think it's very dangerous both as a a question of very dangerous both as a a question of very dangerous both as a a question of media strategy but also as a question of media strategy but also as a question of media strategy but also as a question of politics to code people, places, politics to code people, places, politics to code people, places, platforms too tightly. Republicans and platforms too tightly. Republicans and platforms too tightly. Republicans and Democrats aren't going to get along in Democrats aren't going to get along in Democrats aren't going to get along in Congress. That that has to do with I Congress. That that has to do with I Congress. That that has to do with I think the incentives of Congress. My think the incentives of Congress. My think the incentives of Congress. My first book is called Why We're first book is called Why We're first book is called Why We're Polarized. It's about those almost Polarized. It's about those almost Polarized. It's about those almost hydraulic incentives for partisanship.

hydraulic incentives for partisanship. hydraulic incentives for partisanship. But in terms of what is the meaning of But in terms of what is the meaning of But in terms of what is the meaning of my podcast, of Derek's, of yours, of Joe my podcast, of Derek's, of yours, of Joe my podcast, of Derek's, of yours, of Joe Rogan, of Theo Vaughn, of Call Your Call Rogan, of Theo Vaughn, of Call Your Call Rogan, of Theo Vaughn, of Call Your Call Her Daddy, um, of a million different Her Daddy, um, of a million different Her Daddy, um, of a million different places that, uh, are not well coded. It places that, uh, are not well coded. It places that, uh, are not well coded. It that's, I think, very up for grabs. I that's, I think, very up for grabs. I that's, I think, very up for grabs. I mean, Elon Musk was an Obama era liberal mean, Elon Musk was an Obama era liberal mean, Elon Musk was an Obama era liberal in 2012. I mean, I think his his in 2012. I mean, I think his his in 2012. I mean, I think his his personal process of radicalization is personal process of radicalization is personal process of radicalization is not going to unwind itself, but a lot of not going to unwind itself, but a lot of not going to unwind itself, but a lot of the people who Democrats are like, "All the people who Democrats are like, "All the people who Democrats are like, "All these billionaires are rightwing now." these billionaires are rightwing now." these billionaires are rightwing now." No, people are just uncertain. I mean, No, people are just uncertain. I mean, No, people are just uncertain. I mean, some of them are a little bit afraid, some of them are a little bit afraid, some of them are a little bit afraid, but people are uncertain. They're moving but people are uncertain. They're moving but people are uncertain. They're moving back and forth. The sort of texture of back and forth. The sort of texture of back and forth. The sort of texture of it is unsettled and it's going to take it is unsettled and it's going to take it is unsettled and it's going to take time. These transitionary periods, I time. These transitionary periods, I time. These transitionary periods, I mean, they can go very badly, too, but mean, they can go very badly, too, but mean, they can go very badly, too, but they take time. And I think people who they take time. And I think people who they take time. And I think people who are clinging to old certainties about are clinging to old certainties about are clinging to old certainties about what tells you which side folks are on. what tells you which side folks are on. what tells you which side folks are on. My sense is a lot of people who are very My sense is a lot of people who are very My sense is a lot of people who are very open to MAGA in 2025 are going to feel open to MAGA in 2025 are going to feel open to MAGA in 2025 are going to feel very differently about it in 2028 very differently about it in 2028 very differently about it in 2028 depending on how they do right if they depending on how they do right if they depending on how they do right if they do great then they're going to entrench do great then they're going to entrench do great then they're going to entrench but if they don't then a lot of people but if they don't then a lot of people but if they don't then a lot of people became maga curious uh are not going to became maga curious uh are not going to became maga curious uh are not going to be magic curious anymore but they're not be magic curious anymore but they're not be magic curious anymore but they're not going to want the last Democratic party going to want the last Democratic party going to want the last Democratic party either. I was making this point to either. I was making this point to either. I was making this point to someone the other day about uh why the someone the other day about uh why the someone the other day about uh why the Democratic party's embrace of the Liz Democratic party's embrace of the Liz Democratic party's embrace of the Liz Cheney style independent didn't work. Um Cheney style independent didn't work. Um Cheney style independent didn't work. Um Liz Cheney of course being a you know Liz Cheney of course being a you know Liz Cheney of course being a you know Dick Cheny's daughter Republican but but Dick Cheny's daughter Republican but but Dick Cheny's daughter Republican but but what what Liz Cheney the never Trumpers what what Liz Cheney the never Trumpers what what Liz Cheney the never Trumpers were were a way of reaching out to who were were a way of reaching out to who were were a way of reaching out to who the Democratic party thought the

the Democratic party thought the the Democratic party thought the independents were. But the key thing independents were. But the key thing independents were. But the key thing about an independent to a political about an independent to a political about an independent to a political party is not that they don't like the party is not that they don't like the party is not that they don't like the other party. it's that they're an other party. it's that they're an other party. it's that they're an independent because they also don't like independent because they also don't like independent because they also don't like your party. And so finding a bunch of your party. And so finding a bunch of your party. And so finding a bunch of people who are meant to be messengers to people who are meant to be messengers to people who are meant to be messengers to them about why they shouldn't like the them about why they shouldn't like the them about why they shouldn't like the other party, it's fine. But what you other party, it's fine. But what you other party, it's fine. But what you need to do is explain why they should need to do is explain why they should need to do is explain why they should like your party. You need to have some like your party. You need to have some like your party. You need to have some message. You need to accept some fault. message. You need to accept some fault. message. You need to accept some fault. You need to think about what it was You need to think about what it was You need to think about what it was about you that drove them away. One of about you that drove them away. One of about you that drove them away. One of our like deep views about politics right our like deep views about politics right our like deep views about politics right now and and not politics policy the the now and and not politics policy the the now and and not politics policy the the the texture of the economy of the the texture of the economy of the the texture of the economy of the country is that the last period in country is that the last period in country is that the last period in American politics in the economy was American politics in the economy was American politics in the economy was about demand. The fundamental problem about demand. The fundamental problem about demand. The fundamental problem coming out of the financial crisis was coming out of the financial crisis was coming out of the financial crisis was demand. We had too little demand in the demand. We had too little demand in the demand. We had too little demand in the economy. Behind that too little demand economy. Behind that too little demand economy. Behind that too little demand in the economy was this other thing that in the economy was this other thing that in the economy was this other thing that was building up which was a cost of was building up which was a cost of was building up which was a cost of living crisis. Housing was getting super living crisis. Housing was getting super living crisis. Housing was getting super expensive. health care uh uh in certain expensive. health care uh uh in certain expensive. health care uh uh in certain ways energy but energy is more ways energy but energy is more ways energy but energy is more complicated in ways we can talk about complicated in ways we can talk about complicated in ways we can talk about elder elder elder care higher education right this is a care higher education right this is a care higher education right this is a point my wife is a journalist at the point my wife is a journalist at the point my wife is a journalist at the Atlantic Annie Lowry with Derek and she Atlantic Annie Lowry with Derek and she Atlantic Annie Lowry with Derek and she wrote this piece on in 2020 early 2020 wrote this piece on in 2020 early 2020 wrote this piece on in 2020 early 2020 right before the pandemic that went very right before the pandemic that went very right before the pandemic that went very viral called the affordability crisis viral called the affordability crisis viral called the affordability crisis and it sticks in my head because she's and it sticks in my head because she's and it sticks in my head because she's writing at a time when people were writing at a time when people were writing at a time when people were saying the economy is great everything's saying the economy is great everything's saying the economy is great everything's great like you looked at measures of great like you looked at measures of great like you looked at measures of consumer confidence in 2020 February of consumer confidence in 2020 February of consumer confidence in 2020 February of 2020 terrific 2020 terrific 2020 terrific She's like, "So, how come if the economy She's like, "So, how come if the economy She's like, "So, how come if the economy is so great, everybody I talk to is so is so great, everybody I talk to is so is so great, everybody I talk to is so upset?" And she's like, "Look, like upset?" And she's like, "Look, like upset?" And she's like, "Look, like people are making more money than ever,

people are making more money than ever, people are making more money than ever, but it's getting eaten up and eaten up but it's getting eaten up and eaten up but it's getting eaten up and eaten up and eaten up by these things they really and eaten up by these things they really and eaten up by these things they really need that keep getting more expensive need that keep getting more expensive need that keep getting more expensive even as consumer goods get cheaper. Then even as consumer goods get cheaper. Then even as consumer goods get cheaper. Then the pandemic hits, the problem becomes the pandemic hits, the problem becomes the pandemic hits, the problem becomes CO. But then you have inflation and CO. But then you have inflation and CO. But then you have inflation and inflation moves a problem of the inflation moves a problem of the inflation moves a problem of the economy, the fundamental problem economy, the fundamental problem economy, the fundamental problem everybody's paying attention to from the everybody's paying attention to from the everybody's paying attention to from the demand side. How do we get more people demand side. How do we get more people demand side. How do we get more people at work? How do we get them to spend at work? How do we get them to spend at work? How do we get them to spend more money to the supply side? We don't more money to the supply side? We don't more money to the supply side? We don't have enough, right? We have a have enough, right? We have a have enough, right? We have a constriction of semiconductors of used constriction of semiconductors of used constriction of semiconductors of used cars and then eventually everything, cars and then eventually everything, cars and then eventually everything, right? Everything is getting more right? Everything is getting more right? Everything is getting more expensive and we do get I mean, we'll expensive and we do get I mean, we'll expensive and we do get I mean, we'll see what happens with tariffs. We do see what happens with tariffs. We do see what happens with tariffs. We do get, you know, by 2024 the rate of get, you know, by 2024 the rate of get, you know, by 2024 the rate of inflation under control, but prices are inflation under control, but prices are inflation under control, but prices are still much higher. And now people are still much higher. And now people are still much higher. And now people are paying real attention to prices. And the paying real attention to prices. And the paying real attention to prices. And the affordability crisis, which again is a affordability crisis, which again is a affordability crisis, which again is a cost of living crisis, which have been cost of living crisis, which have been cost of living crisis, which have been growing for a very long time, is now at growing for a very long time, is now at growing for a very long time, is now at crisis levels. And it becomes the crisis levels. And it becomes the crisis levels. And it becomes the substance of politics. People, you know, substance of politics. People, you know, substance of politics. People, you know, you had all these Democrats saying, I you had all these Democrats saying, I you had all these Democrats saying, I don't know what the problem is. Like don't know what the problem is. Like don't know what the problem is. Like inflation has come down to whatever it inflation has come down to whatever it inflation has come down to whatever it was, 3 to 4% in 2024. And they're right was, 3 to 4% in 2024. And they're right was, 3 to 4% in 2024. And they're right about that. But one, the price level of about that. But one, the price level of about that. But one, the price level of everything remained high, but two, everything remained high, but two, everything remained high, but two, people were now like, "The fuck is people were now like, "The fuck is people were now like, "The fuck is housing so expensive for like I'm never housing so expensive for like I'm never housing so expensive for like I'm never going to be able to afford a home. Like going to be able to afford a home. Like going to be able to afford a home. Like my parents went to public university my parents went to public university my parents went to public university debtree. I could never do that.

debtree. I could never do that. debtree. I could never do that. And what we've done is fail. I mean, And what we've done is fail. I mean, And what we've done is fail. I mean, Democrats in this case, Republicans Democrats in this case, Republicans Democrats in this case, Republicans haven't done that great on it either. haven't done that great on it either. haven't done that great on it either. But in blue states, Democrats have But in blue states, Democrats have But in blue states, Democrats have failed on cost of living. The reason failed on cost of living. The reason failed on cost of living. The reason California, Illinois, New York are California, Illinois, New York are California, Illinois, New York are losing hundreds of thousands of people losing hundreds of thousands of people losing hundreds of thousands of people to Florida, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, is to Florida, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, is to Florida, Texas, Arizona, Colorado, is that they've failed on cost of living. that they've failed on cost of living. that they've failed on cost of living. It is too expensive to live there. And It is too expensive to live there. And It is too expensive to live there. And the reason they failed on cost of living the reason they failed on cost of living the reason they failed on cost of living is supply. We They did not make enough. is supply. We They did not make enough. is supply. We They did not make enough. They actually made it too hard in many They actually made it too hard in many They actually made it too hard in many cases to make enough of the things cases to make enough of the things cases to make enough of the things people needed. Some of those are people needed. Some of those are people needed. Some of those are straightforward like we didn't let straightforward like we didn't let straightforward like we didn't let people build enough homes. Some of them people build enough homes. Some of them people build enough homes. Some of them are more like we've made it too are more like we've made it too are more like we've made it too expensive to build public infrastructure expensive to build public infrastructure expensive to build public infrastructure like highspeed rail or the second avenue like highspeed rail or the second avenue like highspeed rail or the second avenue subway. Some of it has to do I think in subway. Some of it has to do I think in subway. Some of it has to do I think in the long run with with innovation and the long run with with innovation and the long run with with innovation and and the relationship between Democrats and the relationship between Democrats and the relationship between Democrats and technology. But one of our views is and technology. But one of our views is and technology. But one of our views is that there are other things in politics that there are other things in politics that there are other things in politics that will matter too. But we are in a that will matter too. But we are in a that will matter too. But we are in a period where the cost of living, supply, period where the cost of living, supply, period where the cost of living, supply, affordability is the fundamental affordability is the fundamental affordability is the fundamental economic question. Donald Trump himself economic question. Donald Trump himself economic question. Donald Trump himself has said he won because of the price of has said he won because of the price of has said he won because of the price of groceries. He's got this very funny groceries. He's got this very funny groceries. He's got this very funny quote where he's like, "Nobody said I quote where he's like, "Nobody said I quote where he's like, "Nobody said I don't have a Donald Trump impression, don't have a Donald Trump impression, don't have a Donald Trump impression, but he's like nobody ever used the word but he's like nobody ever used the word but he's like nobody ever used the word groceries in politics before I I did."

groceries in politics before I I did." groceries in politics before I I did." Well, it'd be good if he then wasn't Well, it'd be good if he then wasn't Well, it'd be good if he then wasn't making it more expensive, but Democrats making it more expensive, but Democrats making it more expensive, but Democrats believe his weakness is cost of living. believe his weakness is cost of living. believe his weakness is cost of living. They're probably right, but they don't They're probably right, but they don't They're probably right, but they don't have a strength on it. And the key have a strength on it. And the key have a strength on it. And the key question our book is trying to refocus question our book is trying to refocus question our book is trying to refocus politics on is how do we make more of politics on is how do we make more of politics on is how do we make more of what we need? How does government either what we need? How does government either what we need? How does government either organize itself or organize markets to organize itself or organize markets to organize itself or organize markets to create more of what we need? And how do create more of what we need? And how do create more of what we need? And how do we admit as liberals times when we've we admit as liberals times when we've we admit as liberals times when we've put the we've made it so the government put the we've made it so the government put the we've made it so the government makes it too hard to make more of what makes it too hard to make more of what makes it too hard to make more of what we need? I'll say one last thing in this we need? I'll say one last thing in this we need? I'll say one last thing in this pretty long answer. I thought one of the pretty long answer. I thought one of the pretty long answer. I thought one of the most important things that has come out most important things that has come out most important things that has come out recently is a piece in foreign affairs recently is a piece in foreign affairs recently is a piece in foreign affairs by Brian De who's a former uh head of by Brian De who's a former uh head of by Brian De who's a former uh head of Joe Biden's National Economics Council Joe Biden's National Economics Council Joe Biden's National Economics Council and De helped negotiate every major bill and De helped negotiate every major bill and De helped negotiate every major bill Biden passed. It's a very Biden passed. It's a very Biden passed. It's a very straightforward piece about what it is straightforward piece about what it is straightforward piece about what it is Democrats have not done to make it Democrats have not done to make it Democrats have not done to make it possible to build at the level of their possible to build at the level of their possible to build at the level of their goals. And he says things like we should goals. And he says things like we should goals. And he says things like we should just remove federal funding from cities just remove federal funding from cities just remove federal funding from cities that have highly restrictive home zoning that have highly restrictive home zoning that have highly restrictive home zoning codes. He says we should have a goal for codes. He says we should have a goal for codes. He says we should have a goal for how much nuclear we build in the next 10 how much nuclear we build in the next 10 how much nuclear we build in the next 10 years. We should be trying to reach a years. We should be trying to reach a years. We should be trying to reach a goal of new nuclear capacity. It's a goal of new nuclear capacity. It's a goal of new nuclear capacity. It's a very very important piece because de is very very important piece because de is very very important piece because de is right at the center of democratic right at the center of democratic right at the center of democratic policy. Instead of retrenching he's like policy. Instead of retrenching he's like policy. Instead of retrenching he's like okay we didn't get there. What do we do okay we didn't get there. What do we do okay we didn't get there. What do we do now to make it possible to get to the now to make it possible to get to the now to make it possible to get to the place we promised you we can go?

place we promised you we can go? place we promised you we can go? And uh we should say that the book And uh we should say that the book And uh we should say that the book you've mentioned which I've gotten a you've mentioned which I've gotten a you've mentioned which I've gotten a chance to read and I think it's chance to read and I think it's chance to read and I think it's incredible. Highly recommend. It's incredible. Highly recommend. It's incredible. Highly recommend. It's called Abundance. I uh think of it as a called Abundance. I uh think of it as a called Abundance. I uh think of it as a kind of kind of kind of manifesto for what the left would manifesto for what the left would manifesto for what the left would represent in the coming years. So I represent in the coming years. So I represent in the coming years. So I think people should read it uh from that think people should read it uh from that think people should read it uh from that angle. And both of you have been writing angle. And both of you have been writing angle. And both of you have been writing about this topic sort of from different about this topic sort of from different about this topic sort of from different angles for a while. I think in uh 22 angles for a while. I think in uh 22 angles for a while. I think in uh 22 Derek, you wrote an article Derek, you wrote an article Derek, you wrote an article uh on this topic of abundance titled the uh on this topic of abundance titled the uh on this topic of abundance titled the simple plan to solve all of America's simple plan to solve all of America's simple plan to solve all of America's problems. And Ezra, you wrote an article problems. And Ezra, you wrote an article problems. And Ezra, you wrote an article in 21 supply side progressivism titled in 21 supply side progressivism titled in 21 supply side progressivism titled the economic mistake the leftists uh the economic mistake the leftists uh the economic mistake the leftists uh finally confronting. and you've just finally confronting. and you've just finally confronting. and you've just described laid out this more progressive described laid out this more progressive described laid out this more progressive perspective on supply side economics perspective on supply side economics perspective on supply side economics that you're presenting in that you're presenting in that you're presenting in abundance. I was wondering if you could abundance. I was wondering if you could abundance. I was wondering if you could kind of give the the broad kind of give the the broad kind of give the the broad highlevel explanation of this idea of highlevel explanation of this idea of highlevel explanation of this idea of supply side uh progressivism. Well, my supply side uh progressivism. Well, my supply side uh progressivism. Well, my piece about the abundance agenda which I piece about the abundance agenda which I piece about the abundance agenda which I wrote in 2022 uh started with me wrote in 2022 uh started with me wrote in 2022 uh started with me standing outside waiting for a COVID standing outside waiting for a COVID standing outside waiting for a COVID test. And this was a period where 2 test. And this was a period where 2 test. And this was a period where 2 years after the pandemic started, CO years after the pandemic started, CO years after the pandemic started, CO tests were still being rationed. And it tests were still being rationed. And it tests were still being rationed. And it was like 21 degrees outside and I was was like 21 degrees outside and I was was like 21 degrees outside and I was getting very very frustrated about the getting very very frustrated about the getting very very frustrated about the fact that still we seem to have a fact that still we seem to have a fact that still we seem to have a scarcity of COVID tests. And as I'm scarcity of COVID tests. And as I'm scarcity of COVID tests. And as I'm sitting outside just, you know, freezing sitting outside just, you know, freezing sitting outside just, you know, freezing my ass off and just getting really mad.

my ass off and just getting really mad. my ass off and just getting really mad. I'm thinking, you know, it's not just CO I'm thinking, you know, it's not just CO I'm thinking, you know, it's not just CO tests. We've had scarcity. Uh we also tests. We've had scarcity. Uh we also tests. We've had scarcity. Uh we also had a scarcity of co vaccines early on had a scarcity of co vaccines early on had a scarcity of co vaccines early on in the roll out which created this in the roll out which created this in the roll out which created this really discombobulated scheme for really discombobulated scheme for really discombobulated scheme for distributing the early co vaccines. And distributing the early co vaccines. And distributing the early co vaccines. And then also you go earlier into March and then also you go earlier into March and then also you go earlier into March and May of 2020 and we had a shortage of PPE May of 2020 and we had a shortage of PPE May of 2020 and we had a shortage of PPE equipment for our doctors to remain safe equipment for our doctors to remain safe equipment for our doctors to remain safe as they were taking care of a pandemic. as they were taking care of a pandemic. as they were taking care of a pandemic. And I thought, you know, it's And I thought, you know, it's And I thought, you know, it's interesting that this entire experience interesting that this entire experience interesting that this entire experience of the pandemic has essentially been of the pandemic has essentially been of the pandemic has essentially been defined by this concept of scarcity. And defined by this concept of scarcity. And defined by this concept of scarcity. And as I zoomed out a little bit, I thought, as I zoomed out a little bit, I thought, as I zoomed out a little bit, I thought, you know, it's not just the pandemic. you know, it's not just the pandemic. you know, it's not just the pandemic. It's really so much the 21st century It's really so much the 21st century It's really so much the 21st century economy that's been defined by scarcity. economy that's been defined by scarcity. economy that's been defined by scarcity. Ezra beautifully described the degree to Ezra beautifully described the degree to Ezra beautifully described the degree to which housing unaffordability has become which housing unaffordability has become which housing unaffordability has become the economic problem of our time. You the economic problem of our time. You the economic problem of our time. You know, in the history of political know, in the history of political know, in the history of political orders, each political order is in part orders, each political order is in part orders, each political order is in part defined by the internal crisis. The defined by the internal crisis. The defined by the internal crisis. The Great Depression springs new Great Depression springs new Great Depression springs new neoliberalism. Stagflation springs neoliberalism. Stagflation springs neoliberalism. Stagflation springs neoliberalism. Now, we're in this molten neoliberalism. Now, we're in this molten neoliberalism. Now, we're in this molten moment where we're waiting for the new moment where we're waiting for the new moment where we're waiting for the new political order to emerge. And it's political order to emerge. And it's political order to emerge. And it's going to emerge because of the lever, going to emerge because of the lever, going to emerge because of the lever, because of the power of housing because of the power of housing because of the power of housing affordability. You have to solve that affordability. You have to solve that affordability. You have to solve that problem. If you want to solve the problem. If you want to solve the problem. If you want to solve the problem of American anger about prices, problem of American anger about prices, problem of American anger about prices, and part of this is just pure and part of this is just pure and part of this is just pure arithmetic. If you look at any family's arithmetic. If you look at any family's arithmetic. If you look at any family's budget, the biggest part of their budget budget, the biggest part of their budget budget, the biggest part of their budget in any given year is the part that goes in any given year is the part that goes in any given year is the part that goes to rent or mortgage. It's housing, to rent or mortgage. It's housing, to rent or mortgage. It's housing, housing, housing. And housing connects housing, housing. And housing connects housing, housing. And housing connects to everything else. It connects to

to everything else. It connects to to everything else. It connects to innovation. You want cities to elomerate innovation. You want cities to elomerate innovation. You want cities to elomerate to bring smart people together. Housing to bring smart people together. Housing to bring smart people together. Housing relates to all sorts of other relates to all sorts of other relates to all sorts of other affordability. Like if you care about affordability. Like if you care about affordability. Like if you care about the cost of child care or elder care, the cost of child care or elder care, the cost of child care or elder care, you want to make it cheaper to house you want to make it cheaper to house you want to make it cheaper to house institutions, buildings that can care institutions, buildings that can care institutions, buildings that can care for children, which means you want to for children, which means you want to for children, which means you want to bring those rents down. And so I thought bring those rents down. And so I thought bring those rents down. And so I thought as I'm zooming out on this concept of as I'm zooming out on this concept of as I'm zooming out on this concept of scarcity in the 21st century, we have scarcity in the 21st century, we have scarcity in the 21st century, we have chosen to make housing scarce in some of chosen to make housing scarce in some of chosen to make housing scarce in some of the most productive cities and states the most productive cities and states the most productive cities and states often run by Democrats. We have rules, often run by Democrats. We have rules, often run by Democrats. We have rules, zoning rules, historic preservation zoning rules, historic preservation zoning rules, historic preservation rules, permitting processes, rules, permitting processes, rules, permitting processes, environmental reviews, laws that we environmental reviews, laws that we environmental reviews, laws that we created that have gotten in the way of created that have gotten in the way of created that have gotten in the way of making abundant the most important making abundant the most important making abundant the most important material good there is, which is material good there is, which is material good there is, which is housing. And as I kept sort of working housing. And as I kept sort of working housing. And as I kept sort of working myself into a lather and getting mad myself into a lather and getting mad myself into a lather and getting mad about the world, I thought, you know, about the world, I thought, you know, about the world, I thought, you know, it's actually not just housing. It's it's actually not just housing. It's it's actually not just housing. It's it's clean energy, too. You know, it's clean energy, too. You know, it's clean energy, too. You know, there's lots of environmentalists who there's lots of environmentalists who there's lots of environmentalists who are on my side and believing very are on my side and believing very are on my side and believing very fervently in climate change who've made fervently in climate change who've made fervently in climate change who've made it very difficult to site solar panels it very difficult to site solar panels it very difficult to site solar panels or site solar farms or to raise wind or site solar farms or to raise wind or site solar farms or to raise wind turbines or to advance geothermal or to turbines or to advance geothermal or to turbines or to advance geothermal or to accept nuclear power. We have chosen to accept nuclear power. We have chosen to accept nuclear power. We have chosen to make clean energy scarce as well. And make clean energy scarce as well. And make clean energy scarce as well. And then finally, the ultimate boss of then finally, the ultimate boss of then finally, the ultimate boss of scarcity was the pandemic itself, which scarcity was the pandemic itself, which scarcity was the pandemic itself, which constricted the the supply of all sorts constricted the the supply of all sorts constricted the the supply of all sorts of goods around the world, setting the of goods around the world, setting the of goods around the world, setting the price of everything to the moon. And price of everything to the moon. And price of everything to the moon. And that's why inflation wasn't just an that's why inflation wasn't just an that's why inflation wasn't just an American phenomenon, not just a North American phenomenon, not just a North American phenomenon, not just a North American phenomenon, it was a global American phenomenon, it was a global American phenomenon, it was a global phenomenon. And I thought, what we need phenomenon. And I thought, what we need phenomenon. And I thought, what we need to solve for this crisis of penumbal

to solve for this crisis of penumbal to solve for this crisis of penumbal scarcity is an abundance agenda, an scarcity is an abundance agenda, an scarcity is an abundance agenda, an approach towards solving America's approach towards solving America's approach towards solving America's problems that puts abundance first. And problems that puts abundance first. And problems that puts abundance first. And Ezra and I have a very focused Ezra and I have a very focused Ezra and I have a very focused definition of abundance. We believe we definition of abundance. We believe we definition of abundance. We believe we say in the first page of the book um uh say in the first page of the book um uh say in the first page of the book um uh America needs to build and invent more America needs to build and invent more America needs to build and invent more of the things it needs. Um we believe of the things it needs. Um we believe of the things it needs. Um we believe that housing is critical. We believe that housing is critical. We believe that housing is critical. We believe energy is critical. We talk a lot about energy is critical. We talk a lot about energy is critical. We talk a lot about science and technology. But we really science and technology. But we really science and technology. But we really put government effectiveness at the put government effectiveness at the put government effectiveness at the heart of this because one really deep heart of this because one really deep heart of this because one really deep vein of our book is a criticism of where vein of our book is a criticism of where vein of our book is a criticism of where liberalism has gone wrong in the last 50 liberalism has gone wrong in the last 50 liberalism has gone wrong in the last 50 years where liberalism has gone from in years where liberalism has gone from in years where liberalism has gone from in the New Deal era a politics of building the New Deal era a politics of building the New Deal era a politics of building things. I mean FDR and the progressives things. I mean FDR and the progressives things. I mean FDR and the progressives transformed the physical world not just transformed the physical world not just transformed the physical world not just with infrastructure projects but with with infrastructure projects but with with infrastructure projects but with building roads, the highway system under building roads, the highway system under building roads, the highway system under Dwight Eisenhower. He changed the Dwight Eisenhower. He changed the Dwight Eisenhower. He changed the physical world during the decades the physical world during the decades the physical world during the decades the 1930s to the 1950s. But in the last half 1930s to the 1950s. But in the last half 1930s to the 1950s. But in the last half century, liberalism has become very good century, liberalism has become very good century, liberalism has become very good at the politics of blocking rather than at the politics of blocking rather than at the politics of blocking rather than the politics of building. And if you the politics of building. And if you the politics of building. And if you look at the way that liberals define look at the way that liberals define look at the way that liberals define success in the last few decades, it's success in the last few decades, it's success in the last few decades, it's often about success defined by how much often about success defined by how much often about success defined by how much money you can spend rather than how much money you can spend rather than how much money you can spend rather than how much money rather than how many things you money rather than how many things you money rather than how many things you can actually build. I mean, you look at can actually build. I mean, you look at can actually build. I mean, you look at the fact that, for example, in the book, the fact that, for example, in the book, the fact that, for example, in the book, we have so many examples. California we have so many examples. California we have so many examples. California authorizes more than $30 billion to authorizes more than $30 billion to authorizes more than $30 billion to build a highspeed rail system, which build a highspeed rail system, which build a highspeed rail system, which basically doesn't exist. I mean, just

basically doesn't exist. I mean, just basically doesn't exist. I mean, just last week, the mayor of Chicago bragged last week, the mayor of Chicago bragged last week, the mayor of Chicago bragged that they spent 11 billion building that they spent 11 billion building that they spent 11 billion building 10,000 affordable housing units. That's 10,000 affordable housing units. That's 10,000 affordable housing units. That's $1.1 million per affordable housing $1.1 million per affordable housing $1.1 million per affordable housing unit. That's absolutely pathetic. We unit. That's absolutely pathetic. We unit. That's absolutely pathetic. We have a story in the book about a $1.7 have a story in the book about a $1.7 have a story in the book about a $1.7 million public toilet built in San million public toilet built in San million public toilet built in San Francisco. $1.7 million for a toilet Francisco. $1.7 million for a toilet Francisco. $1.7 million for a toilet because of all of the rules that get in because of all of the rules that get in because of all of the rules that get in the way and raise the price of building the way and raise the price of building the way and raise the price of building public infrastructure like public public infrastructure like public public infrastructure like public bathrooms in San Francisco and bathrooms in San Francisco and bathrooms in San Francisco and California. So, liberalism, I I'm I'm California. So, liberalism, I I'm I'm California. So, liberalism, I I'm I'm worried over the last 50 years, has worried over the last 50 years, has worried over the last 50 years, has become so good at the politics of become so good at the politics of become so good at the politics of blocking and the politics of associating blocking and the politics of associating blocking and the politics of associating the money authorized as success rather the money authorized as success rather the money authorized as success rather than what you build in the physical than what you build in the physical than what you build in the physical world that we've lost sense of material world that we've lost sense of material world that we've lost sense of material abundance of how importance how abundance of how importance how abundance of how importance how important outcomes are and not just important outcomes are and not just important outcomes are and not just processes. And so this is a book that's processes. And so this is a book that's processes. And so this is a book that's trying to nudge the Democratic party trying to nudge the Democratic party trying to nudge the Democratic party back to what we think are in a way back to what we think are in a way back to what we think are in a way historically its roots, thinking about historically its roots, thinking about historically its roots, thinking about what Americans need and making it easier what Americans need and making it easier what Americans need and making it easier for government to act efficiently to for government to act efficiently to for government to act efficiently to provide them. And that really does I provide them. And that really does I provide them. And that really does I think begin with housing and energy. Is think begin with housing and energy. Is think begin with housing and energy. Is there a tension there a tension there a tension between kind of uh the left the between kind of uh the left the between kind of uh the left the progressive wealth redistribution kind progressive wealth redistribution kind progressive wealth redistribution kind of ideas with the idea of building of ideas with the idea of building of ideas with the idea of building that's primarily uh sort of getting out that's primarily uh sort of getting out that's primarily uh sort of getting out of the way and letting the market get of the way and letting the market get of the way and letting the market get the job done. Let's say two things on the job done. Let's say two things on the job done. Let's say two things on that. So one, we think there's a real that. So one, we think there's a real that. So one, we think there's a real tension between equality,

tension between equality, tension between equality, redistribution, and constricting the redistribution, and constricting the redistribution, and constricting the supply, specifically housing. So supply, specifically housing. So supply, specifically housing. So housing, by the way, I I would love to housing, by the way, I I would love to housing, by the way, I I would love to understand this. That's that's the big understand this. That's that's the big understand this. That's that's the big problem. Housing housing and energy, I problem. Housing housing and energy, I problem. Housing housing and energy, I think, are the two most significant that think, are the two most significant that think, are the two most significant that we focus on in the book, right? Housing we focus on in the book, right? Housing we focus on in the book, right? Housing and clean energy. We don't have housing. and clean energy. We don't have housing. and clean energy. We don't have housing. We don't have enough clean energy. I We don't have enough clean energy. I We don't have enough clean energy. I would added things to that. uh public would added things to that. uh public would added things to that. uh public infrastructure. We don't really focus infrastructure. We don't really focus infrastructure. We don't really focus that much on education, but we could uh that much on education, but we could uh that much on education, but we could uh and we could talk about that. Um and we could talk about that. Um and we could talk about that. Um immigration is probably there for me, immigration is probably there for me, immigration is probably there for me, too, and we talk about that a little bit too, and we talk about that a little bit too, and we talk about that a little bit in the book. And we do talk a lot about in the book. And we do talk a lot about in the book. And we do talk a lot about how to pull innovation forward from the how to pull innovation forward from the how to pull innovation forward from the future. But when you ask about sort of future. But when you ask about sort of future. But when you ask about sort of redistribution, I really think this is redistribution, I really think this is redistribution, I really think this is an important point because there's a an important point because there's a an important point because there's a great new paper by David Schliker and great new paper by David Schliker and great new paper by David Schliker and I'm so sorry cuz I'm forgetting his I'm so sorry cuz I'm forgetting his I'm so sorry cuz I'm forgetting his co-author. They're law professor. So co-author. They're law professor. So co-author. They're law professor. So when they talk about the victory of when they talk about the victory of when they talk about the victory of gentry law, we used to have a law that gentry law, we used to have a law that gentry law, we used to have a law that was very dynamic when it came to was very dynamic when it came to was very dynamic when it came to property and land was very different property and land was very different property and land was very different than how things were in Britain. And than how things were in Britain. And than how things were in Britain. And over time, you know, sort of back half over time, you know, sort of back half over time, you know, sort of back half of the 20th century, we moved American of the 20th century, we moved American of the 20th century, we moved American law to be much more for what they call law to be much more for what they call law to be much more for what they call the gentry. We moved it much more the gentry. We moved it much more the gentry. We moved it much more towards protecting those who currently towards protecting those who currently towards protecting those who currently have things, right? And we do that have things, right? And we do that have things, right? And we do that through a million things, covenants and through a million things, covenants and through a million things, covenants and HOAs and all these sort of contracts who HOAs and all these sort of contracts who HOAs and all these sort of contracts who make people enter into so they can't make people enter into so they can't make people enter into so they can't even build on their own land. But one of even build on their own land. But one of even build on their own land. But one of the things that just happens when you the things that just happens when you the things that just happens when you constrict the supply of housing is that constrict the supply of housing is that constrict the supply of housing is that people who got in when the getting was people who got in when the getting was people who got in when the getting was good, you know, I mean, it's a classic good, you know, I mean, it's a classic good, you know, I mean, it's a classic story in New York, in LA, and in SF, you story in New York, in LA, and in SF, you story in New York, in LA, and in SF, you know, you bought a place in 1977 for know, you bought a place in 1977 for know, you bought a place in 1977 for $220,000 and now it's worth $2.7 million $220,000 and now it's worth $2.7 million $220,000 and now it's worth $2.7 million and maybe you'll pass it on to your kids and maybe you'll pass it on to your kids and maybe you'll pass it on to your kids or you sell it, but the working-class

or you sell it, but the working-class or you sell it, but the working-class families can't afford to live there families can't afford to live there families can't afford to live there anymore, right? So, that's not even a anymore, right? So, that's not even a anymore, right? So, that's not even a question of redistribution. Sometimes question of redistribution. Sometimes question of redistribution. Sometimes what you need in order to create the what you need in order to create the what you need in order to create the possibilities for opportunity and possibilities for opportunity and possibilities for opportunity and mobility is enough supply of the thing. mobility is enough supply of the thing. mobility is enough supply of the thing. At the same time, we don't think like At the same time, we don't think like At the same time, we don't think like that redistribution is the problem here. that redistribution is the problem here. that redistribution is the problem here. I'm pro redistribution. I'm pro more I'm pro redistribution. I'm pro more I'm pro redistribution. I'm pro more redistribution than we currently do. But redistribution than we currently do. But redistribution than we currently do. But to give one example the way these can be to give one example the way these can be to give one example the way these can be great great great tastes in the book at some great length tastes in the book at some great length tastes in the book at some great length um the story of operation warp speed. um the story of operation warp speed. um the story of operation warp speed. And here you have in the mRNA vaccines And here you have in the mRNA vaccines And here you have in the mRNA vaccines uh technology that was critically funded uh technology that was critically funded uh technology that was critically funded by public money specifically DARPA at by public money specifically DARPA at by public money specifically DARPA at different points. Then um hastened you different points. Then um hastened you different points. Then um hastened you know after co government through know after co government through know after co government through operation warp speed under Donald Trump operation warp speed under Donald Trump operation warp speed under Donald Trump you know really tried to clear out you know really tried to clear out you know really tried to clear out regulatory croft move these things regulatory croft move these things regulatory croft move these things really fast but the demand on the side really fast but the demand on the side really fast but the demand on the side of the public for having funded so much of the public for having funded so much of the public for having funded so much of this having made so much possible was of this having made so much possible was of this having made so much possible was that when these vaccines hit they were that when these vaccines hit they were that when these vaccines hit they were going to be free. maybe the most going to be free. maybe the most going to be free. maybe the most important medical advance of that entire important medical advance of that entire important medical advance of that entire era. And it wasn't going to be like era. And it wasn't going to be like era. And it wasn't going to be like OAMPic say where it's, you know, $15,000 OAMPic say where it's, you know, $15,000 OAMPic say where it's, you know, $15,000 for a year of doses, right? It wasn't for a year of doses, right? It wasn't for a year of doses, right? It wasn't going to be only available to the going to be only available to the going to be only available to the richest people at the beginning. We were richest people at the beginning. We were richest people at the beginning. We were going to try to give it to everybody going to try to give it to everybody going to try to give it to everybody sorted by need to the best that we could sorted by need to the best that we could sorted by need to the best that we could and it would be free. Now, you're not and it would be free. Now, you're not and it would be free. Now, you're not going to do that with everything, right?

going to do that with everything, right? going to do that with everything, right? There are places for the price signal to There are places for the price signal to There are places for the price signal to to actually function and where it can to actually function and where it can to actually function and where it can function to then bring on more supply function to then bring on more supply function to then bring on more supply later. And you know, there's all the later. And you know, there's all the later. And you know, there's all the econ 101 stuff that we all know. But econ 101 stuff that we all know. But econ 101 stuff that we all know. But there are a lot of places where uh there are a lot of places where uh there are a lot of places where uh redistribution and supply increases go redistribution and supply increases go redistribution and supply increases go hand inand another good example I've hand inand another good example I've hand inand another good example I've done over the course of my career a huge done over the course of my career a huge done over the course of my career a huge amount of work on health insurance amount of work on health insurance amount of work on health insurance reform and universal healthcare and reform and universal healthcare and reform and universal healthcare and let's say you got you know Bernie let's say you got you know Bernie let's say you got you know Bernie Sanders had become president in 2016 and Sanders had become president in 2016 and Sanders had become president in 2016 and had swept in a huge democratic majority had swept in a huge democratic majority had swept in a huge democratic majority and they passed Bernie's singlepayer for and they passed Bernie's singlepayer for and they passed Bernie's singlepayer for all plan which was by the way much more all plan which was by the way much more all plan which was by the way much more expansive than any existing singlepayer expansive than any existing singlepayer expansive than any existing singlepayer plan in the world right it covered much plan in the world right it covered much plan in the world right it covered much more than Canada's or the UK's or more than Canada's or the UK's or more than Canada's or the UK's or anybody else if If you had done that, anybody else if If you had done that, anybody else if If you had done that, what you would have needed immediately what you would have needed immediately what you would have needed immediately was a huge supply increase in healthcare was a huge supply increase in healthcare was a huge supply increase in healthcare because you would have had a huge demand because you would have had a huge demand because you would have had a huge demand increase. What happens if you make increase. What happens if you make increase. What happens if you make healthcare free, people are going to use healthcare free, people are going to use healthcare free, people are going to use more of it. Um, if you make insurance more of it. Um, if you make insurance more of it. Um, if you make insurance much more widespread, people are going much more widespread, people are going much more widespread, people are going to go to the doctor more often. Well, if to go to the doctor more often. Well, if to go to the doctor more often. Well, if you don't have enough doctors, you don't you don't have enough doctors, you don't you don't have enough doctors, you don't have enough nurses, you don't have have enough nurses, you don't have have enough nurses, you don't have enough surgeons, you need more. We enough surgeons, you need more. We enough surgeons, you need more. We constrict the supply of all those things constrict the supply of all those things constrict the supply of all those things using residency rules, using um, you using residency rules, using um, you using residency rules, using um, you know, nursing rules, immigration rules, know, nursing rules, immigration rules, know, nursing rules, immigration rules, who can practice as a nurse who can practice as a nurse who can practice as a nurse practitioner, what can a nurse practitioner, what can a nurse practitioner, what can a nurse practitioner actually do? you have to be practitioner actually do? you have to be practitioner actually do? you have to be attentive to the supply side even if attentive to the supply side even if attentive to the supply side even if what you're doing is aggressive what you're doing is aggressive what you're doing is aggressive redistribution. Now, there are places redistribution. Now, there are places redistribution. Now, there are places where these things don't conflict. Like, where these things don't conflict. Like, where these things don't conflict. Like, I'd like to see a much expanded child I'd like to see a much expanded child I'd like to see a much expanded child tax credit. And I don't think that has tax credit. And I don't think that has tax credit. And I don't think that has like I don't think that has a big supply like I don't think that has a big supply like I don't think that has a big supply side implication one way or the other.

side implication one way or the other. side implication one way or the other. But on a lot of the things we're talking But on a lot of the things we're talking But on a lot of the things we're talking about, even if what you want to do, and about, even if what you want to do, and about, even if what you want to do, and it is often what we want to do to do it is often what we want to do to do it is often what we want to do to do more redistribution, if you're more redistribution, if you're more redistribution, if you're redistributing some kind of thing that redistributing some kind of thing that redistributing some kind of thing that gives you access to a good or a service, gives you access to a good or a service, gives you access to a good or a service, you need to expand the good or the you need to expand the good or the you need to expand the good or the service. We do rental vouchers. Giving service. We do rental vouchers. Giving service. We do rental vouchers. Giving people rental vouchers in the San people rental vouchers in the San people rental vouchers in the San Francisco housing market, unless you Francisco housing market, unless you Francisco housing market, unless you build more housing, just creates build more housing, just creates build more housing, just creates something that our friends at the Niscan something that our friends at the Niscan something that our friends at the Niscan Center call disease socialism, where you Center call disease socialism, where you Center call disease socialism, where you are increasing demand for good at which are increasing demand for good at which are increasing demand for good at which you've constricted supply. If you do you've constricted supply. If you do you've constricted supply. If you do that, you're just going to drive the that, you're just going to drive the that, you're just going to drive the price up. To some degree, that's at price up. To some degree, that's at price up. To some degree, that's at least part of the story of higher least part of the story of higher least part of the story of higher education. We give people Pell grants. education. We give people Pell grants. education. We give people Pell grants. We give people all kinds of subsidies We give people all kinds of subsidies We give people all kinds of subsidies for higher ed, but we have not done for higher ed, but we have not done for higher ed, but we have not done nearly enough to increase supply or nearly enough to increase supply or nearly enough to increase supply or regulate um the way in which colleges regulate um the way in which colleges regulate um the way in which colleges just then pocket part of that money. And just then pocket part of that money. And just then pocket part of that money. And so they're building these fancy gyms and so they're building these fancy gyms and so they're building these fancy gyms and they're competing with each other, but they're competing with each other, but they're competing with each other, but they're not actually increasing uh the they're not actually increasing uh the they're not actually increasing uh the supply of slots. It's certainly not the supply of slots. It's certainly not the supply of slots. It's certainly not the level we want them to. So there's a lot level we want them to. So there's a lot level we want them to. So there's a lot here where I think it scramles here where I think it scramles here where I think it scramles traditional categories. Uh you cannot do traditional categories. Uh you cannot do traditional categories. Uh you cannot do effective redistribution in ways that we effective redistribution in ways that we effective redistribution in ways that we would like to see them done and many would like to see them done and many would like to see them done and many people on the left would like to see people on the left would like to see people on the left would like to see them done if you're not taking supply of them done if you're not taking supply of them done if you're not taking supply of the thing that you're subsidizing the thing that you're subsidizing the thing that you're subsidizing seriously. If you think about it from a seriously. If you think about it from a seriously. If you think about it from a first principal first principal first principal standpoint, you know what? If what if standpoint, you know what? If what if standpoint, you know what? If what if what you wanted to do was to bring what you wanted to do was to bring what you wanted to do was to bring American poverty as close to American poverty as close to American poverty as close to 0.0% as you possibly could. You got a 0.0% as you possibly could. You got a 0.0% as you possibly could. You got a bunch of smart people into a room. You bunch of smart people into a room. You bunch of smart people into a room. You said, "What can we possibly said, "What can we possibly said, "What can we possibly do?" In my opinion, the answer would do?" In my opinion, the answer would do?" In my opinion, the answer would include a lot of what's are sometimes include a lot of what's are sometimes include a lot of what's are sometimes called demand side policies, a lot of

called demand side policies, a lot of called demand side policies, a lot of redistribution of income. The child tax redistribution of income. The child tax redistribution of income. The child tax credit, I think, would be essential. credit, I think, would be essential. credit, I think, would be essential. Expanding the earned income tax credit Expanding the earned income tax credit Expanding the earned income tax credit would be essential. Expanding cash would be essential. Expanding cash would be essential. Expanding cash welfare might be essential. Certainly welfare might be essential. Certainly welfare might be essential. Certainly redistributing income from the rich to redistributing income from the rich to redistributing income from the rich to the poor would be essential. These are the poor would be essential. These are the poor would be essential. These are demand side policies. They're tax and demand side policies. They're tax and demand side policies. They're tax and spending policies. But if you only spending policies. But if you only spending policies. But if you only approach this subject through the demand approach this subject through the demand approach this subject through the demand side, you will utterly and categorically side, you will utterly and categorically side, you will utterly and categorically fail. Because like we said, housing is fail. Because like we said, housing is fail. Because like we said, housing is the biggest part of a typical family's the biggest part of a typical family's the biggest part of a typical family's budget. And if your only policy on budget. And if your only policy on budget. And if your only policy on housing is to increase housing vouchers housing is to increase housing vouchers housing is to increase housing vouchers without increasing the supply of without increasing the supply of without increasing the supply of housing, macroeconomically speaking, housing, macroeconomically speaking, housing, macroeconomically speaking, there's only one direction for housing there's only one direction for housing there's only one direction for housing prices to go and it's straight up to the prices to go and it's straight up to the prices to go and it's straight up to the moon. You're not actually bringing moon. You're not actually bringing moon. You're not actually bringing housing prices down. You're just housing prices down. You're just housing prices down. You're just subsidizing a constricted market and subsidizing a constricted market and subsidizing a constricted market and therefore creating enormous inflation. therefore creating enormous inflation. therefore creating enormous inflation. You have to solve some of these problems You have to solve some of these problems You have to solve some of these problems on the supply side. And one of the on the supply side. And one of the on the supply side. And one of the conceptual scoops that Ezra and I are conceptual scoops that Ezra and I are conceptual scoops that Ezra and I are trying to work out for the left, for trying to work out for the left, for trying to work out for the left, for liberals in America, is to get people to liberals in America, is to get people to liberals in America, is to get people to ask the question, how do we solve this ask the question, how do we solve this ask the question, how do we solve this problem with supply? Housing is a problem with supply? Housing is a problem with supply? Housing is a crisis. How do we solve it with supply?

crisis. How do we solve it with supply? crisis. How do we solve it with supply? Energy is a crisis. How do we solve it Energy is a crisis. How do we solve it Energy is a crisis. How do we solve it with supply? Medical innovation, with supply? Medical innovation, with supply? Medical innovation, scientific discovery is a massively scientific discovery is a massively scientific discovery is a massively interesting phenomenon. We don't even interesting phenomenon. We don't even interesting phenomenon. We don't even understand how it how it exists really. understand how it how it exists really. understand how it how it exists really. like how do great discoveries actually like how do great discoveries actually like how do great discoveries actually happen? Is there a supply side policy happen? Is there a supply side policy happen? Is there a supply side policy for that as well? That's the question for that as well? That's the question for that as well? That's the question we're asking over and over in the book. we're asking over and over in the book. we're asking over and over in the book. So, at the end of the day, demand side So, at the end of the day, demand side So, at the end of the day, demand side progressivism and and what Ezra calls progressivism and and what Ezra calls progressivism and and what Ezra calls supply side progressivism really are supply side progressivism really are supply side progressivism really are peanut butter and chocolate. They are peanut butter and chocolate. They are peanut butter and chocolate. They are two flavors that go beautifully well two flavors that go beautifully well two flavors that go beautifully well together. But here's the problem that I together. But here's the problem that I together. But here's the problem that I think your question was putting your think your question was putting your think your question was putting your finger on. I think a lot of Americans finger on. I think a lot of Americans finger on. I think a lot of Americans don't believe that these things work don't believe that these things work don't believe that these things work together because what they see is a together because what they see is a together because what they see is a liberalism that just taxes and spends liberalism that just taxes and spends liberalism that just taxes and spends and Americans don't see the benefits of and Americans don't see the benefits of and Americans don't see the benefits of that spending. The Biden administration that spending. The Biden administration that spending. The Biden administration authorized $42 billion to build rural authorized $42 billion to build rural authorized $42 billion to build rural broadband in America. Practically none broadband in America. Practically none broadband in America. Practically none of it was built. Authorized $7.5 billion of it was built. Authorized $7.5 billion of it was built. Authorized $7.5 billion to build EV charger stations in America. to build EV charger stations in America. to build EV charger stations in America. Practically none of it was built. How Practically none of it was built. How Practically none of it was built. How many tens of billions of dollars have many tens of billions of dollars have many tens of billions of dollars have been authorized to build highspeed rail been authorized to build highspeed rail been authorized to build highspeed rail in California? practically none of it in California? practically none of it in California? practically none of it exists. You you can't write it. So the exists. You you can't write it. So the exists. You you can't write it. So the problem is when the the reputation of a problem is when the the reputation of a problem is when the the reputation of a tax and spend liberal makes contact with tax and spend liberal makes contact with tax and spend liberal makes contact with the fact that people don't see the the fact that people don't see the the fact that people don't see the results in the physical world. Like results in the physical world. Like results in the physical world. Like where where's my money going? I have in where where's my money going? I have in where where's my money going? I have in my head something like this idea of what my head something like this idea of what my head something like this idea of what I call equinox liberalism, which is to I call equinox liberalism, which is to I call equinox liberalism, which is to say there's some forms of liberalism say there's some forms of liberalism say there's some forms of liberalism where it's very expensive, but you see where it's very expensive, but you see where it's very expensive, but you see what you're getting. Like when you spend what you're getting. Like when you spend what you're getting. Like when you spend $270 to go to Equinox for for the month, $270 to go to Equinox for for the month, $270 to go to Equinox for for the month, right? It's a really expensive gym bill,

right? It's a really expensive gym bill, right? It's a really expensive gym bill, but people who go there seem to love it. but people who go there seem to love it. but people who go there seem to love it. They're like, "The the equipment is They're like, "The the equipment is They're like, "The the equipment is always free. Everything is clean. I go always free. Everything is clean. I go always free. Everything is clean. I go into the locker room, there's a bunch of into the locker room, there's a bunch of into the locker room, there's a bunch of KE's lotions to like put on my face KE's lotions to like put on my face KE's lotions to like put on my face after I shower. I am getting exactly after I shower. I am getting exactly after I shower. I am getting exactly what I'm paying for. Yes, I'll pay out what I'm paying for. Yes, I'll pay out what I'm paying for. Yes, I'll pay out the nose for a gym because I love seeing the nose for a gym because I love seeing the nose for a gym because I love seeing that money going to work." And in places that money going to work." And in places that money going to work." And in places like Sweden, Denmark, citizens seem very like Sweden, Denmark, citizens seem very like Sweden, Denmark, citizens seem very happy. They're paying much higher taxes happy. They're paying much higher taxes happy. They're paying much higher taxes than people are in America, but they're than people are in America, but they're than people are in America, but they're seeing where the money is going to work. seeing where the money is going to work. seeing where the money is going to work. The problem with a liberalism that The problem with a liberalism that The problem with a liberalism that blocks rather than builds is that people blocks rather than builds is that people blocks rather than builds is that people don't see the money going to work. All don't see the money going to work. All don't see the money going to work. All they see are the dollar signs being they see are the dollar signs being they see are the dollar signs being spent by government and then they walk spent by government and then they walk spent by government and then they walk out of their house and they see out of their house and they see out of their house and they see collapsing infrastructure and they see collapsing infrastructure and they see collapsing infrastructure and they see crime and they see housing prices going crime and they see housing prices going crime and they see housing prices going to the moon. And so they think, "Wait, to the moon. And so they think, "Wait, to the moon. And so they think, "Wait, this social contract is broken down. this social contract is broken down. this social contract is broken down. You're asking for equinox prices, but You're asking for equinox prices, but You're asking for equinox prices, but you're giving me a shit ass gym, and you're giving me a shit ass gym, and you're giving me a shit ass gym, and that's unfair." And so what we're trying that's unfair." And so what we're trying that's unfair." And so what we're trying to say is, I mean, in a very serious to say is, I mean, in a very serious to say is, I mean, in a very serious way, because I'm not trying to be way, because I'm not trying to be way, because I'm not trying to be flippant about about gyms, in a very flippant about about gyms, in a very flippant about about gyms, in a very serious way, what we're trying to say is serious way, what we're trying to say is serious way, what we're trying to say is a part of this problem is that you a part of this problem is that you a part of this problem is that you Democrats have looked so hard at the Democrats have looked so hard at the Democrats have looked so hard at the demand side of the ledger, that you've demand side of the ledger, that you've demand side of the ledger, that you've forgotten how powerful the levers are on forgotten how powerful the levers are on forgotten how powerful the levers are on the supply side. And if we can just pull the supply side. And if we can just pull the supply side. And if we can just pull those levers on housing in particular, those levers on housing in particular, those levers on housing in particular, we can bring down the cost of living and we can bring down the cost of living and we can bring down the cost of living and people might even support the tax and people might even support the tax and people might even support the tax and spend model more because they'll feel spend model more because they'll feel spend model more because they'll feel like they're participating in equinox like they're participating in equinox like they're participating in equinox liberalism and not its opposite. Can we liberalism and not its opposite. Can we liberalism and not its opposite. Can we zoom in on the housing problem? Can you zoom in on the housing problem? Can you zoom in on the housing problem? Can you explain the housing problem and what's explain the housing problem and what's explain the housing problem and what's the importance of housing in

the importance of housing in the importance of housing in uh in in in the quality of life in the uh in in in the quality of life in the uh in in in the quality of life in the flourishing of the nation of the United flourishing of the nation of the United flourishing of the nation of the United States in general? And what is broken States in general? And what is broken States in general? And what is broken about it? Let's say the second part of about it? Let's say the second part of about it? Let's say the second part of the question first. What's so important the question first. What's so important the question first. What's so important about about about housing? We're talking about life. And housing? We're talking about life. And housing? We're talking about life. And even at a higher level, we're kind of even at a higher level, we're kind of even at a higher level, we're kind of talking about freedom. Like the freedom talking about freedom. Like the freedom talking about freedom. Like the freedom to live where you want to live, the to live where you want to live, the to live where you want to live, the freedom to feel like the good and freedom to feel like the good and freedom to feel like the good and achievable life is actually good and achievable life is actually good and achievable life is actually good and achievable. This is profoundly a achievable. This is profoundly a achievable. This is profoundly a question of housing. Um, there's this question of housing. Um, there's this question of housing. Um, there's this great paper that was written several great paper that was written several great paper that was written several years ago called the housing theory of years ago called the housing theory of years ago called the housing theory of everything by Bowman Southwood and I everything by Bowman Southwood and I everything by Bowman Southwood and I forget the other guy's name, but they forget the other guy's name, but they forget the other guy's name, but they made this really beautiful point that no made this really beautiful point that no made this really beautiful point that no matter what you care about in terms of matter what you care about in terms of matter what you care about in terms of public policy or politics, housing public policy or politics, housing public policy or politics, housing probably makes contact with it. If you probably makes contact with it. If you probably makes contact with it. If you care about innovation, innovation, as I care about innovation, innovation, as I care about innovation, innovation, as I said, it's about getting people together said, it's about getting people together said, it's about getting people together in a city where they can work together. in a city where they can work together. in a city where they can work together. That's about housing density. If you That's about housing density. If you That's about housing density. If you care about child care costs, that's care about child care costs, that's care about child care costs, that's about bringing down the cost of about bringing down the cost of about bringing down the cost of buildings. That's also about housing. If buildings. That's also about housing. If buildings. That's also about housing. If you care about being able to live near you care about being able to live near you care about being able to live near your friends and family, this is also your friends and family, this is also your friends and family, this is also profoundly a question of housing. So, profoundly a question of housing. So, profoundly a question of housing. So, when we talk about housing over and when we talk about housing over and when we talk about housing over and over, we're not just talking about the over, we're not just talking about the over, we're not just talking about the four walls and roof and and and uh and four walls and roof and and and uh and four walls and roof and and and uh and floor. We're talking about what housing floor. We're talking about what housing floor. We're talking about what housing means to people because housing is life.

means to people because housing is life. means to people because housing is life. And right now, what we very clearly see And right now, what we very clearly see And right now, what we very clearly see in the data is that Americans are in the data is that Americans are in the data is that Americans are leaving expensive cities and states that leaving expensive cities and states that leaving expensive cities and states that tend to be run by Democrats and they're tend to be run by Democrats and they're tend to be run by Democrats and they're moving to areas that are sunnier, that moving to areas that are sunnier, that moving to areas that are sunnier, that are cheaper, and are often more likely are cheaper, and are often more likely are cheaper, and are often more likely to be run by Republicans. And this is, I to be run by Republicans. And this is, I to be run by Republicans. And this is, I think, because starting in the 1960s, think, because starting in the 1960s, think, because starting in the 1960s, 1970s, you had this era of blockage 1970s, you had this era of blockage 1970s, you had this era of blockage points in housing. We started seeing points in housing. We started seeing points in housing. We started seeing zoning regulations. We started seeing zoning regulations. We started seeing zoning regulations. We started seeing historic preservation rules. We started historic preservation rules. We started historic preservation rules. We started seeing laws that made it easier for seeing laws that made it easier for seeing laws that made it easier for citizens to sue to stop a new citizens to sue to stop a new citizens to sue to stop a new development from going up. Essentially, development from going up. Essentially, development from going up. Essentially, new tools were invented to empower new tools were invented to empower new tools were invented to empower people's natural conservatism. You know, people's natural conservatism. You know, people's natural conservatism. You know, for hundreds of years, people might have for hundreds of years, people might have for hundreds of years, people might have always felt like I kind of want my always felt like I kind of want my always felt like I kind of want my neighborhood to stay the same. Like that neighborhood to stay the same. Like that neighborhood to stay the same. Like that might have been something that like the might have been something that like the might have been something that like the Neanderthalss were feeling. But only in Neanderthalss were feeling. But only in Neanderthalss were feeling. But only in the last 50 years have we really the last 50 years have we really the last 50 years have we really outfitted human beings with a weapon to outfitted human beings with a weapon to outfitted human beings with a weapon to go along with their biological go along with their biological go along with their biological preference for the familiar such that preference for the familiar such that preference for the familiar such that they can utilize it to stop the change they can utilize it to stop the change they can utilize it to stop the change of the physical world around them. And of the physical world around them. And of the physical world around them. And so we've seen the rise of what is so we've seen the rise of what is so we've seen the rise of what is commonly called nimiism not in my commonly called nimiism not in my commonly called nimiism not in my backyard the rise of a movement to stop backyard the rise of a movement to stop backyard the rise of a movement to stop the development of new housing around the development of new housing around the development of new housing around where they live. And so what you see in where they live. And so what you see in where they live. And so what you see in the data is according to one study that the data is according to one study that the data is according to one study that was reported on by Yonyi Apple, my was reported on by Yonyi Apple, my was reported on by Yonyi Apple, my colleague at the Atlantic, if there's a colleague at the Atlantic, if there's a colleague at the Atlantic, if there's a city with a 10% increase in the city with a 10% increase in the city with a 10% increase in the progressive vote share, there's a 30% progressive vote share, there's a 30% progressive vote share, there's a 30% decline in the number of houses that are decline in the number of houses that are decline in the number of houses that are permitted. For some reason, it does tend permitted. For some reason, it does tend permitted. For some reason, it does tend to be these areas that are more

to be these areas that are more to be these areas that are more populated by progressives that have more populated by progressives that have more populated by progressives that have more of these choke points. Some of this is of these choke points. Some of this is of these choke points. Some of this is just historical quirk, but some of it just historical quirk, but some of it just historical quirk, but some of it is, I think, maybe the character of a is, I think, maybe the character of a is, I think, maybe the character of a certain kind of liberal, maybe often an certain kind of liberal, maybe often an certain kind of liberal, maybe often an older older older liberal who believes that preserving the liberal who believes that preserving the liberal who believes that preserving the physical environment is the good. That physical environment is the good. That physical environment is the good. That the best thing you can do for the planet the best thing you can do for the planet the best thing you can do for the planet is to stop things from changing around is to stop things from changing around is to stop things from changing around you, stop things from being built. And you, stop things from being built. And you, stop things from being built. And that's an old-fashioned version of that's an old-fashioned version of that's an old-fashioned version of environmentalism that we're trying to environmentalism that we're trying to environmentalism that we're trying to turn the liberals against because really turn the liberals against because really turn the liberals against because really we see the challenge with climate change we see the challenge with climate change we see the challenge with climate change is not how do we get everybody to stop is not how do we get everybody to stop is not how do we get everybody to stop using electricity electricity. How do we using electricity electricity. How do we using electricity electricity. How do we get people to stop using any power or get people to stop using any power or get people to stop using any power or jewels or electrons that come from n jewels or electrons that come from n jewels or electrons that come from n from natural gas and oil. We want people from natural gas and oil. We want people from natural gas and oil. We want people to recognize that if the people want to to recognize that if the people want to to recognize that if the people want to lead modern lives and they're going to lead modern lives and they're going to lead modern lives and they're going to continue to demand modern lives and so continue to demand modern lives and so continue to demand modern lives and so we have to use clean energy technology we have to use clean energy technology we have to use clean energy technology to allow them to live those lives. That to allow them to live those lives. That to allow them to live those lives. That means you have to build an absolute shit means you have to build an absolute shit means you have to build an absolute shit ton of nuclear energy, solar and wind ton of nuclear energy, solar and wind ton of nuclear energy, solar and wind and geothermal and nuclear and maybe in and geothermal and nuclear and maybe in and geothermal and nuclear and maybe in the near future even fusion. It requires the near future even fusion. It requires the near future even fusion. It requires an attitude of being excited about an attitude of being excited about an attitude of being excited about building new things rather than a building new things rather than a building new things rather than a liberalism that seeks always to block liberalism that seeks always to block liberalism that seeks always to block changes to the physical environment changes to the physical environment changes to the physical environment around them. So I think that what we're around them. So I think that what we're around them. So I think that what we're trying to do is to allow people in a way trying to do is to allow people in a way trying to do is to allow people in a way to meet processes and outcomes. I think to meet processes and outcomes. I think to meet processes and outcomes. I think liberals want housing abundance at some liberals want housing abundance at some liberals want housing abundance at some in in in in some part of their brains,

in in in in some part of their brains, in in in in some part of their brains, in some part of their hearts. I think in some part of their hearts. I think in some part of their hearts. I think they want the price of housing to go they want the price of housing to go they want the price of housing to go down. But there hasn't quite been a down. But there hasn't quite been a down. But there hasn't quite been a really clean articulation of a a a really clean articulation of a a a really clean articulation of a a a mindset or paradigm shifting argument mindset or paradigm shifting argument mindset or paradigm shifting argument that gets them to see how the processes that gets them to see how the processes that gets them to see how the processes that we've created go so dramatically that we've created go so dramatically that we've created go so dramatically against the outcomes that liberals want. against the outcomes that liberals want. against the outcomes that liberals want. And we're trying to say here's a new And we're trying to say here's a new And we're trying to say here's a new process. Here's a new question you can process. Here's a new question you can process. Here's a new question you can ask yourself. How can we solve the ask yourself. How can we solve the ask yourself. How can we solve the housing problem on the supply side? And housing problem on the supply side? And housing problem on the supply side? And also uh solving the housing problem is also uh solving the housing problem is also uh solving the housing problem is one of the mechanisms to lift people out one of the mechanisms to lift people out one of the mechanisms to lift people out of poverty. So there's a lot of goals of poverty. So there's a lot of goals of poverty. So there's a lot of goals that align well with the liberals. You that align well with the liberals. You that align well with the liberals. You write about cities. Cities are where write about cities. Cities are where write about cities. Cities are where wealth is created, not just where it is wealth is created, not just where it is wealth is created, not just where it is displayed. They are meant to be displayed. They are meant to be displayed. They are meant to be escalators into the middle class, not escalators into the middle class, not escalators into the middle class, not pen houses for the upper class. So the pen houses for the upper class. So the pen houses for the upper class. So the housing problem we're talking about housing problem we're talking about housing problem we're talking about specifically or most importantly is in specifically or most importantly is in specifically or most importantly is in urban areas. Yeah, this is something urban areas. Yeah, this is something urban areas. Yeah, this is something that you spend a lot of time thinking that you spend a lot of time thinking that you spend a lot of time thinking about for the book. There's a lot of about for the book. There's a lot of about for the book. There's a lot of land in the United States. And sometimes land in the United States. And sometimes land in the United States. And sometimes you'll hear people say something like, you'll hear people say something like, you'll hear people say something like, I've heard this a lot. Well, not I've heard this a lot. Well, not I've heard this a lot. Well, not everybody can live in San Francisco or everybody can live in San Francisco or everybody can live in San Francisco or Venice in Los Angeles or, you know, Venice in Los Angeles or, you know, Venice in Los Angeles or, you know, Manhattan or Brooklyn or Manhattan or Brooklyn or Manhattan or Brooklyn or whatever. And fine, right? Not everybody whatever. And fine, right? Not everybody whatever. And fine, right? Not everybody can. That's can. That's can. That's true. The problem is true. The problem is true. The problem is that cities are engines of opportunity that cities are engines of opportunity that cities are engines of opportunity and economic dynamism.

and economic dynamism. and economic dynamism. I mean, as you know, you know, better I mean, as you know, you know, better I mean, as you know, you know, better than we do, the frontier AI labs in the than we do, the frontier AI labs in the than we do, the frontier AI labs in the US, basically all of them outside of US, basically all of them outside of US, basically all of them outside of China exist in 50 square miles in the China exist in 50 square miles in the China exist in 50 square miles in the Bay Area. There's not one in New York. Bay Area. There's not one in New York. Bay Area. There's not one in New York. There's not one in Dallas. There's not There's not one in Dallas. There's not There's not one in Dallas. There's not one in Chicago. There's not one in one in Chicago. There's not one in one in Chicago. There's not one in Austin. There's not one anywhere but in Austin. There's not one anywhere but in Austin. There's not one anywhere but in the Bay Area. But the the key thing is the Bay Area. But the the key thing is the Bay Area. But the the key thing is that there is huge spillover from these that there is huge spillover from these that there is huge spillover from these hyperdynamic industries. Be it finance hyperdynamic industries. Be it finance hyperdynamic industries. Be it finance in New York, be it tech in San in New York, be it tech in San in New York, be it tech in San Francisco, be it uh culture in Los Francisco, be it uh culture in Los Francisco, be it uh culture in Los Angeles, you make a lot more money being Angeles, you make a lot more money being Angeles, you make a lot more money being a barber near Google than you do being a a barber near Google than you do being a a barber near Google than you do being a barber in, you know, rural Arkansas. And barber in, you know, rural Arkansas. And barber in, you know, rural Arkansas. And this is the ancient pathway to mobility. this is the ancient pathway to mobility. this is the ancient pathway to mobility. people who are poorer and work in the people who are poorer and work in the people who are poorer and work in the service sector, they move to richer service sector, they move to richer service sector, they move to richer areas where they're part where the areas where they're part where the areas where they're part where the productivity is higher and thus the the productivity is higher and thus the the productivity is higher and thus the the the sort of money spreads around. And if the sort of money spreads around. And if the sort of money spreads around. And if you look at American mobility and you look at American mobility and you look at American mobility and opportunity over the 20th century, about opportunity over the 20th century, about opportunity over the 20th century, about a third roughly on on on some a third roughly on on on some a third roughly on on on some calculations just comes from this people calculations just comes from this people calculations just comes from this people moving to richer areas. And if you look moving to richer areas. And if you look moving to richer areas. And if you look in like the last 20-ish years, 30-ish in like the last 20-ish years, 30-ish in like the last 20-ish years, 30-ish years, you see this extremely steady years, you see this extremely steady years, you see this extremely steady process of income convergence as people process of income convergence as people process of income convergence as people move towards richer areas begin to throw move towards richer areas begin to throw move towards richer areas begin to throw itself into reverse because it used to itself into reverse because it used to itself into reverse because it used to make sense for the janitor and the make sense for the janitor and the make sense for the janitor and the lawyer to move to New York City. But now lawyer to move to New York City. But now lawyer to move to New York City. But now it only makes sense for the lawyer too it only makes sense for the lawyer too it only makes sense for the lawyer too and the janitor leaves because you can't

and the janitor leaves because you can't and the janitor leaves because you can't support yourself and your family and support yourself and your family and support yourself and your family and live in a home and have a reasonable live in a home and have a reasonable live in a home and have a reasonable commute being a you know a janitor commute being a you know a janitor commute being a you know a janitor working in Manhattan. Now, obviously, working in Manhattan. Now, obviously, working in Manhattan. Now, obviously, some people do it and it's often very some people do it and it's often very some people do it and it's often very tough and they live very far. Uh, it's tough and they live very far. Uh, it's tough and they live very far. Uh, it's very hard in San very hard in San very hard in San Francisco. You can't look at cities Francisco. You can't look at cities Francisco. You can't look at cities as well, that's just where the rich as well, that's just where the rich as well, that's just where the rich people are. And that's a problem that people are. And that's a problem that people are. And that's a problem that many Democrats now have. I mean, Michael many Democrats now have. I mean, Michael many Democrats now have. I mean, Michael Bloomberg famously described New York Bloomberg famously described New York Bloomberg famously described New York City as a luxury good and luxury goods City as a luxury good and luxury goods City as a luxury good and luxury goods cost luxury prices. And that's true in cost luxury prices. And that's true in cost luxury prices. And that's true in the sense that New York became a luxury the sense that New York became a luxury the sense that New York became a luxury good, but that's a problem. Like that is good, but that's a problem. Like that is good, but that's a problem. Like that is a terrible prominent inversion of what a terrible prominent inversion of what a terrible prominent inversion of what the city is. You know there's this the city is. You know there's this the city is. You know there's this famous advice possibly apocryphily from famous advice possibly apocryphily from famous advice possibly apocryphily from Horus Greley who's a kind of you know Horus Greley who's a kind of you know Horus Greley who's a kind of you know early American newspaper publisher and early American newspaper publisher and early American newspaper publisher and political candidate but he says like go political candidate but he says like go political candidate but he says like go west young man go west right that the west young man go west right that the west young man go west right that the opportunity is out in in the west where opportunity is out in in the west where opportunity is out in in the west where the lands are open. It's never been true the lands are open. It's never been true the lands are open. It's never been true including for him. That guy moved from a including for him. That guy moved from a including for him. That guy moved from a rural area to New York City and that's rural area to New York City and that's rural area to New York City and that's how he became famous and he ran a how he became famous and he ran a how he became famous and he ran a newspaper and he ran against Ulyses newspaper and he ran against Ulyses newspaper and he ran against Ulyses Srant in a presidential election. The Srant in a presidential election. The Srant in a presidential election. The cities are the frontier. The cities have cities are the frontier. The cities have cities are the frontier. The cities have always been the frontier. Not of the always been the frontier. Not of the always been the frontier. Not of the land, but of the economy. Because the land, but of the economy. Because the land, but of the economy. Because the frontier of the economy is where ideas frontier of the economy is where ideas frontier of the economy is where ideas are produced. And ideas even now, even are produced. And ideas even now, even are produced. And ideas even now, even the age of remote work, are produced in the age of remote work, are produced in the age of remote work, are produced in the big cities where people live the big cities where people live the big cities where people live together and they compete with each together and they compete with each together and they compete with each other and they cooperate with each other and they cooperate with each other and they cooperate with each other. And so if you gate the cities, if other. And so if you gate the cities, if other. And so if you gate the cities, if you make it impossible for someone you make it impossible for someone you make it impossible for someone making 50,000 bucks with two kids to making 50,000 bucks with two kids to making 50,000 bucks with two kids to live in the city, then what you've done live in the city, then what you've done live in the city, then what you've done is you've actually closed the American is you've actually closed the American is you've actually closed the American frontier. You've forced them into lower

frontier. You've forced them into lower frontier. You've forced them into lower productivity places. their children are productivity places. their children are productivity places. their children are less likely to grow up around, you know, less likely to grow up around, you know, less likely to grow up around, you know, the the sort of inventors in the cities. the the sort of inventors in the cities. the the sort of inventors in the cities. There's really amazing research from Raj There's really amazing research from Raj There's really amazing research from Raj Cheddy and others. Basically showing Cheddy and others. Basically showing Cheddy and others. Basically showing that kids, no matter what they are, no that kids, no matter what they are, no that kids, no matter what they are, no matter what income class they're in, matter what income class they're in, matter what income class they're in, they are likelier to grow up innovating they are likelier to grow up innovating they are likelier to grow up innovating and patenting in the innovations of the and patenting in the innovations of the and patenting in the innovations of the place around them, right? Smart kids place around them, right? Smart kids place around them, right? Smart kids don't just grow up and innovate in don't just grow up and innovate in don't just grow up and innovate in anything. You know, if they grow up in anything. You know, if they grow up in anything. You know, if they grow up in the Bay Area, they innovate in the Bay Area, they innovate in the Bay Area, they innovate in technology as Steve Jobs did and Wnjak technology as Steve Jobs did and Wnjak technology as Steve Jobs did and Wnjak did, right? Because they just like lived did, right? Because they just like lived did, right? Because they just like lived around those people. And that is true in around those people. And that is true in around those people. And that is true in many many many different things. And so many many many different things. And so many many many different things. And so when you gate the cities, it's not when you gate the cities, it's not when you gate the cities, it's not housing is almost too small of a thing housing is almost too small of a thing housing is almost too small of a thing for what we're talking about. We are for what we're talking about. We are for what we're talking about. We are talking about if you can live next to talking about if you can live next to talking about if you can live next to economic opportunity. We are talking economic opportunity. We are talking economic opportunity. We are talking also about if you can put the people also about if you can put the people also about if you can put the people together who will create the next era of together who will create the next era of together who will create the next era of economic opportunity. You know, right economic opportunity. You know, right economic opportunity. You know, right now the Bay Area is still in some ways now the Bay Area is still in some ways now the Bay Area is still in some ways drafting off of back when it was cheap. drafting off of back when it was cheap. drafting off of back when it was cheap. Uh a lot of the people we're talking Uh a lot of the people we're talking Uh a lot of the people we're talking about who have made amazing things about who have made amazing things about who have made amazing things there, they started in the Bay Area when there, they started in the Bay Area when there, they started in the Bay Area when you could afford to live there. It you could afford to live there. It you could afford to live there. It wasn't always like this and it wasn't wasn't always like this and it wasn't wasn't always like this and it wasn't that long ago that it wasn't like this.

that long ago that it wasn't like this. that long ago that it wasn't like this. And now fine, you can go there if you And now fine, you can go there if you And now fine, you can go there if you have money or you have a great job offer have money or you have a great job offer have money or you have a great job offer from Google or Apple or from Google or Apple or from Google or Apple or whomever. But over time, you need the whomever. But over time, you need the whomever. But over time, you need the ferment. I have like a personal interest ferment. I have like a personal interest ferment. I have like a personal interest in reading memoirs and noticing if the in reading memoirs and noticing if the in reading memoirs and noticing if the memoir is really a housing story. One of memoir is really a housing story. One of memoir is really a housing story. One of the ones I like about this Moby his the the ones I like about this Moby his the the ones I like about this Moby his the electronic uh musician, his first electronic uh musician, his first electronic uh musician, his first memoir, which is great. It's a memoir of memoir, which is great. It's a memoir of memoir, which is great. It's a memoir of a certain era in New York. It's a a certain era in New York. It's a a certain era in New York. It's a housing story. He was just living next housing story. He was just living next housing story. He was just living next to a bunch of other musicians in cheap to a bunch of other musicians in cheap to a bunch of other musicians in cheap ass housing. I just read uh Meet Me in ass housing. I just read uh Meet Me in ass housing. I just read uh Meet Me in the Bathroom by Lizzie Goodman, a sort the Bathroom by Lizzie Goodman, a sort the Bathroom by Lizzie Goodman, a sort of oral history of of the as rock of oral history of of the as rock of oral history of of the as rock revival in New York City. A housing revival in New York City. A housing revival in New York City. A housing story. They could afford to live here, story. They could afford to live here, story. They could afford to live here, right? I I read I've read a bunch of right? I I read I've read a bunch of right? I I read I've read a bunch of these in San Francisco, too, where these in San Francisco, too, where these in San Francisco, too, where people just like they're functionally people just like they're functionally people just like they're functionally squatting, right? Like like the the ess squatting, right? Like like the the ess squatting, right? Like like the the ess the San Francisco ferment, its the San Francisco ferment, its the San Francisco ferment, its queerness, its openness and tolerance of queerness, its openness and tolerance of queerness, its openness and tolerance of new ideas. It's sort of like it's home new ideas. It's sort of like it's home new ideas. It's sort of like it's home of the psychedelic counterculture that of the psychedelic counterculture that of the psychedelic counterculture that intermixed with the defense culture that intermixed with the defense culture that intermixed with the defense culture that created Silicon Valley, right? You've created Silicon Valley, right? You've created Silicon Valley, right? You've read probably is it Frederick Turner's read probably is it Frederick Turner's read probably is it Frederick Turner's um from cyber cult from counterculture um from cyber cult from counterculture um from cyber cult from counterculture to cyber culture. That was a story of to cyber culture. That was a story of to cyber culture. That was a story of cheap housing. These you need to allow cheap housing. These you need to allow cheap housing. These you need to allow people to be around each other to mix people to be around each other to mix people to be around each other to mix each other. If it if only one type of each other. If it if only one type of each other. If it if only one type of person can afford to be there, it person can afford to be there, it person can afford to be there, it becomes a monoculture over time. And so becomes a monoculture over time. And so becomes a monoculture over time. And so it's not just housing. This is about the it's not just housing. This is about the it's not just housing. This is about the geography of economic innovation and geography of economic innovation and geography of economic innovation and opportunity. That's why it's so fucking opportunity. That's why it's so fucking opportunity. That's why it's so fucking important. Yeah. I mean, that's so important. Yeah. I mean, that's so important. Yeah. I mean, that's so brilliantly put that, you know, the the brilliantly put that, you know, the the brilliantly put that, you know, the the economic dynamism and the intellectual economic dynamism and the intellectual economic dynamism and the intellectual dynamism that makes America, I think,

dynamism that makes America, I think, dynamism that makes America, I think, the greatest nation on earth, uh, is at the greatest nation on earth, uh, is at the greatest nation on earth, uh, is at the core housing story. It's like you the core housing story. It's like you the core housing story. It's like you have to live near the the place where have to live near the the place where have to live near the the place where there is turmoil and turbulence there is turmoil and turbulence there is turmoil and turbulence intellectually and economically intellectually and economically intellectually and economically speaking. And so like you want to be speaking. And so like you want to be speaking. And so like you want to be able to move there and like be part of able to move there and like be part of able to move there and like be part of that culture, part of that economy and that culture, part of that economy and that culture, part of that economy and part of that like how you raise your part of that like how you raise your part of that like how you raise your kids and culturally what you want them kids and culturally what you want them kids and culturally what you want them to study, what that you want them to do. to study, what that you want them to do. to study, what that you want them to do. Yeah, that's fascinating. So what uh how Yeah, that's fascinating. So what uh how Yeah, that's fascinating. So what uh how we solve the housing problem? Is it just we solve the housing problem? Is it just we solve the housing problem? Is it just remove as much regulation as possible? remove as much regulation as possible? remove as much regulation as possible? Like get out of the way? There's Like get out of the way? There's Like get out of the way? There's certainly a lot of regulation that you certainly a lot of regulation that you certainly a lot of regulation that you want to get out of the way. I mean, you want to get out of the way. I mean, you want to get out of the way. I mean, you look at California, for example, you look at California, for example, you look at California, for example, you were just giving a a beautiful summary were just giving a a beautiful summary were just giving a a beautiful summary of just how important it is for people of just how important it is for people of just how important it is for people to be able to move next to economic to be able to move next to economic to be able to move next to economic opportunity. If you look at the number opportunity. If you look at the number opportunity. If you look at the number of houses that have been permitted in of houses that have been permitted in of houses that have been permitted in the state of California over the last 40 the state of California over the last 40 the state of California over the last 40 years, it's basically just a squiggle years, it's basically just a squiggle years, it's basically just a squiggle line down. Like the tragedy here, just line down. Like the tragedy here, just line down. Like the tragedy here, just to put a really fine point on it, is to put a really fine point on it, is to put a really fine point on it, is that the city wasn't gated by geography that the city wasn't gated by geography that the city wasn't gated by geography or by destiny. We or by technology. We or by destiny. We or by technology. We or by destiny. We or by technology. We know how to build apartment buildings.

know how to build apartment buildings. know how to build apartment buildings. Yeah. Yeah. Elijah Otis invented the Yeah. Yeah. Elijah Otis invented the Yeah. Yeah. Elijah Otis invented the elevator in like the 1850s. This is not elevator in like the 1850s. This is not elevator in like the 1850s. This is not exactly a breaking technology. We chose exactly a breaking technology. We chose exactly a breaking technology. We chose to do this. We wrote these laws. We are to do this. We wrote these laws. We are to do this. We wrote these laws. We are we people are filing these lawsuits. We we people are filing these lawsuits. We we people are filing these lawsuits. We judges are accepting these lawsuits and judges are accepting these lawsuits and judges are accepting these lawsuits and determining that this building can't be determining that this building can't be determining that this building can't be built. This is entirely self-inflicted. built. This is entirely self-inflicted. built. This is entirely self-inflicted. And it's why over and over again in this And it's why over and over again in this And it's why over and over again in this book. We call it a manufactured book. We call it a manufactured book. We call it a manufactured scarcity, which is like a little bit of scarcity, which is like a little bit of scarcity, which is like a little bit of a funny term. How do you manufacture the a funny term. How do you manufacture the a funny term. How do you manufacture the absence of something? No, a manufactured absence of something? No, a manufactured absence of something? No, a manufactured scarcity means you didn't have to do scarcity means you didn't have to do scarcity means you didn't have to do this. A this is a humanmmade rule whose this. A this is a humanmmade rule whose this. A this is a humanmmade rule whose purposeful goal was to make it harder to purposeful goal was to make it harder to purposeful goal was to make it harder to add to the supply of something. And in add to the supply of something. And in add to the supply of something. And in this case, especially since the 1960s, this case, especially since the 1960s, this case, especially since the 1960s, we have made it purposefully difficult we have made it purposefully difficult we have made it purposefully difficult to add housing supply and the outcome to add housing supply and the outcome to add housing supply and the outcome just follow the process. You see housing just follow the process. You see housing just follow the process. You see housing supply decline often in the richest supply decline often in the richest supply decline often in the richest cities and these states that are cities and these states that are cities and these states that are governed too often by progressives. How governed too often by progressives. How governed too often by progressives. How do we undo it? Yes, a huge part of it do we undo it? Yes, a huge part of it do we undo it? Yes, a huge part of it exists at the layer of law, right?

exists at the layer of law, right? exists at the layer of law, right? California is already trying to change California is already trying to change California is already trying to change its laws, right? End single family its laws, right? End single family its laws, right? End single family zoning, make it easier to add accessory zoning, make it easier to add accessory zoning, make it easier to add accessory dwelling units called ADUs. We're dwelling units called ADUs. We're dwelling units called ADUs. We're changing this at the at the level of changing this at the at the level of changing this at the at the level of law. But one thing I'm very fixated on law. But one thing I'm very fixated on law. But one thing I'm very fixated on is making sure that we also communicate is making sure that we also communicate is making sure that we also communicate to people that it has to be changed at to people that it has to be changed at to people that it has to be changed at the level of mindset and even at the the level of mindset and even at the the level of mindset and even at the level of political courage. Because level of political courage. Because level of political courage. Because here's like a model of what often here's like a model of what often here's like a model of what often happens. You're the mayor of some city happens. You're the mayor of some city happens. You're the mayor of some city and you want to add a housing and you want to add a housing and you want to add a housing development of let's say 500 units, development of let's say 500 units, development of let's say 500 units, right? 500 apartment unit building is right? 500 apartment unit building is right? 500 apartment unit building is going to be set up by some developer and going to be set up by some developer and going to be set up by some developer and there's a city council meeting to there's a city council meeting to there's a city council meeting to determine whether or not this apartment determine whether or not this apartment determine whether or not this apartment building is going to be built because of building is going to be built because of building is going to be built because of loss aversion and because the people who loss aversion and because the people who loss aversion and because the people who tend to go to city council meetings are tend to go to city council meetings are tend to go to city council meetings are older and richer and homeowners. Guess older and richer and homeowners. Guess older and richer and homeowners. Guess what the overwhelming volume of reaction what the overwhelming volume of reaction what the overwhelming volume of reaction is in those city council meetings? It's is in those city council meetings? It's is in those city council meetings? It's a lot of people who feel like they have a lot of people who feel like they have a lot of people who feel like they have something to lose saying, "You cannot something to lose saying, "You cannot something to lose saying, "You cannot put up this building. You cannot add put up this building. You cannot add put up this building. You cannot add these apartments. It's going to ruin the these apartments. It's going to ruin the these apartments. It's going to ruin the character of the neighborhood. It's character of the neighborhood. It's character of the neighborhood. It's going to create traffic. It's going to going to create traffic. It's going to going to create traffic. It's going to be like a head an eyesore because I be like a head an eyesore because I be like a head an eyesore because I don't like buildings that are that don't like buildings that are that don't like buildings that are that tall." Any number of excuses can come tall." Any number of excuses can come tall." Any number of excuses can come out of like the Pez dispenser of out of like the Pez dispenser of out of like the Pez dispenser of excuses. You take care of one, there's excuses. You take care of one, there's excuses. You take care of one, there's going to be another that comes to the going to be another that comes to the going to be another that comes to the surface. And so what often happens is surface. And so what often happens is surface. And so what often happens is that these mayors or these people that these mayors or these people that these mayors or these people sitting on the city council will look sitting on the city council will look sitting on the city council will look out into this room of 50 people saying out into this room of 50 people saying out into this room of 50 people saying no, no, no. And they'll say, I'm going no, no, no. And they'll say, I'm going no, no, no. And they'll say, I'm going to represent the feedback that I see and to represent the feedback that I see and to represent the feedback that I see and I'm going to vote no on the addition of

I'm going to vote no on the addition of I'm going to vote no on the addition of this housing build on on the addition of this housing build on on the addition of this housing build on on the addition of these housing units, the addition of these housing units, the addition of these housing units, the addition of this apartment building. Where political this apartment building. Where political this apartment building. Where political courage comes into play is the ability courage comes into play is the ability courage comes into play is the ability to say, you know what, I want everyone to say, you know what, I want everyone to say, you know what, I want everyone here to know that I hear you. I'm here to know that I hear you. I'm here to know that I hear you. I'm listening to you and I represent you and listening to you and I represent you and listening to you and I represent you and so I'm grateful that you showed up to so I'm grateful that you showed up to so I'm grateful that you showed up to the city council meeting. But for every the city council meeting. But for every the city council meeting. But for every one person here who says they see a one person here who says they see a one person here who says they see a benefit to adding a new apartment benefit to adding a new apartment benefit to adding a new apartment building, I know that there are 10,000 building, I know that there are 10,000 building, I know that there are 10,000 people in the city that didn't have the people in the city that didn't have the people in the city that didn't have the wealth or the knowledge to be here at wealth or the knowledge to be here at wealth or the knowledge to be here at this meeting and they're going to this meeting and they're going to this meeting and they're going to benefit from more housing because that's benefit from more housing because that's benefit from more housing because that's going to bring down their housing costs. going to bring down their housing costs. going to bring down their housing costs. And I represent them as well. I don't And I represent them as well. I don't And I represent them as well. I don't just represent, you could say, the just represent, you could say, the just represent, you could say, the circle of care that I can see right now. circle of care that I can see right now. circle of care that I can see right now. I also represent the circle of voters I also represent the circle of voters I also represent the circle of voters that we can't see right now who are in that we can't see right now who are in that we can't see right now who are in the city or who are in the state or the city or who are in the state or the city or who are in the state or might even want to move to the state but might even want to move to the state but might even want to move to the state but currently can't because housing prices currently can't because housing prices currently can't because housing prices are too high on account of housing are too high on account of housing are too high on account of housing supply being restricted. And so one supply being restricted. And so one supply being restricted. And so one thing we're trying to get liberals to thing we're trying to get liberals to thing we're trying to get liberals to have is a sense of political courage to have is a sense of political courage to have is a sense of political courage to stand up against this very visible stand up against this very visible stand up against this very visible nimism and say we represent interests nimism and say we represent interests nimism and say we represent interests that aren't necessarily visible at this that aren't necessarily visible at this that aren't necessarily visible at this city council meeting. We represent the city council meeting. We represent the city council meeting. We represent the larger interest of housing abundance. So larger interest of housing abundance. So larger interest of housing abundance. So we're going to always default to saying we're going to always default to saying we're going to always default to saying yes rather than default to saying no yes rather than default to saying no yes rather than default to saying no just because the people who happen to just because the people who happen to just because the people who happen to come to these meetings are nimbies. Want come to these meetings are nimbies. Want come to these meetings are nimbies. Want to add a wrinkle on regulation and to add a wrinkle on regulation and to add a wrinkle on regulation and deregulation. So, we were talking about deregulation. So, we were talking about deregulation. So, we were talking about coding earlier. Who gets coded as coding earlier. Who gets coded as coding earlier. Who gets coded as rightwing, who gets coded as leftwing.

rightwing, who gets coded as leftwing. rightwing, who gets coded as leftwing. Deregulation is a word that is highly Deregulation is a word that is highly Deregulation is a word that is highly coded as rightwing. The rightwing wants coded as rightwing. The rightwing wants coded as rightwing. The rightwing wants to deregulate, right? They want the the to deregulate, right? They want the the to deregulate, right? They want the the government to stop regulating the government to stop regulating the government to stop regulating the market. It's fine. Um, in many cases, market. It's fine. Um, in many cases, market. It's fine. Um, in many cases, the government should deregulate parts the government should deregulate parts the government should deregulate parts of the market. In many cases, it should of the market. In many cases, it should of the market. In many cases, it should regulate parts of the market more. What regulate parts of the market more. What regulate parts of the market more. What we don't talk about enough is how much we don't talk about enough is how much we don't talk about enough is how much the government regulates the government the government regulates the government the government regulates the government and how badly it needs to deregulate the and how badly it needs to deregulate the and how badly it needs to deregulate the government. So I have many uh more left government. So I have many uh more left government. So I have many uh more left friends and they'll come to me or friends and they'll come to me or friends and they'll come to me or they'll critique me and they'll say this they'll critique me and they'll say this they'll critique me and they'll say this all is fine but what we really need in all is fine but what we really need in all is fine but what we really need in this country is public housing or it's this country is public housing or it's this country is public housing or it's been rebranded social housing. It's been rebranded social housing. It's been rebranded social housing. It's fine. Singapore huge amount of social fine. Singapore huge amount of social fine. Singapore huge amount of social housing, right? They do a great job with housing, right? They do a great job with housing, right? They do a great job with it. One of the things we go into and and it. One of the things we go into and and it. One of the things we go into and and and this book is a manifesto on some and this book is a manifesto on some and this book is a manifesto on some level but something we really try to do level but something we really try to do level but something we really try to do is take you into the gritty, grimy, is take you into the gritty, grimy, is take you into the gritty, grimy, frustrating details of how policy plays frustrating details of how policy plays frustrating details of how policy plays out on the ground. what actually happens out on the ground. what actually happens out on the ground. what actually happens after a bill passes and why we get the after a bill passes and why we get the after a bill passes and why we get the outcomes we do because often it's like a outcomes we do because often it's like a outcomes we do because often it's like a bunch of decisions made after everybody bunch of decisions made after everybody bunch of decisions made after everybody stopped paying attention. So, one of the stopped paying attention. So, one of the stopped paying attention. So, one of the things we we pay some real attention to things we we pay some real attention to things we we pay some real attention to is the part of the kind of housing that is the part of the kind of housing that is the part of the kind of housing that people on the left all agree on is people on the left all agree on is people on the left all agree on is affordable housing through government affordable housing through government affordable housing through government grants, right? The government says, "Oh, grants, right? The government says, "Oh, grants, right? The government says, "Oh, we're not just going to have market rate we're not just going to have market rate we're not just going to have market rate developers coming in building more developers coming in building more developers coming in building more luxury condos for the children of the luxury condos for the children of the luxury condos for the children of the upper class. We're going to build upper class. We're going to build upper class. We're going to build affordable housing for, you know, people affordable housing for, you know, people affordable housing for, you know, people who should be in this city, um, but who should be in this city, um, but who should be in this city, um, but otherwise couldn't couldn't pay enough otherwise couldn't couldn't pay enough otherwise couldn't couldn't pay enough to be here. California, uh, I could give to be here. California, uh, I could give to be here. California, uh, I could give you two different examples, but let's you two different examples, but let's you two different examples, but let's look at Los Angeles. I'm from outside look at Los Angeles. I'm from outside look at Los Angeles. I'm from outside LA. Uh, and they have something I always

LA. Uh, and they have something I always LA. Uh, and they have something I always forget if it's measure H or measure HH, forget if it's measure H or measure HH, forget if it's measure H or measure HH, but, uh, but California LA voters pass a but, uh, but California LA voters pass a but, uh, but California LA voters pass a bond measure, uh, about a billion bond measure, uh, about a billion bond measure, uh, about a billion dollars, a little bit more, I think it dollars, a little bit more, I think it dollars, a little bit more, I think it was, to build affordable housing. Six was, to build affordable housing. Six was, to build affordable housing. Six years later, when I'm writing about years later, when I'm writing about years later, when I'm writing about this, they have built a couple thousand this, they have built a couple thousand this, they have built a couple thousand units at an average cost of six to units at an average cost of six to units at an average cost of six to $700,000 a unit. So, it's like it's $700,000 a unit. So, it's like it's $700,000 a unit. So, it's like it's costing more to build housing under this costing more to build housing under this costing more to build housing under this affordable housing bond measure, which affordable housing bond measure, which affordable housing bond measure, which they have agreed to pay for um than it they have agreed to pay for um than it they have agreed to pay for um than it is to buy a home market rate in Denver. is to buy a home market rate in Denver. is to buy a home market rate in Denver. Denver's a nice Denver is a nice place Denver's a nice Denver is a nice place Denver's a nice Denver is a nice place to live. So, why what had happened? to live. So, why what had happened? to live. So, why what had happened? Well, it turns out that when you trigger Well, it turns out that when you trigger Well, it turns out that when you trigger the public money in Cal in in various the public money in Cal in in various the public money in Cal in in various cities, these are city ordinances often, cities, these are city ordinances often, cities, these are city ordinances often, but not always, and you use these public but not always, and you use these public but not always, and you use these public grants and you cobble together the grants and you cobble together the grants and you cobble together the different grants you need to build an different grants you need to build an different grants you need to build an affordable housing complex, what you've affordable housing complex, what you've affordable housing complex, what you've done is layer onto yourself a huge done is layer onto yourself a huge done is layer onto yourself a huge number of rules that the market rate number of rules that the market rate number of rules that the market rate developers don't have to follow. You're developers don't have to follow. You're developers don't have to follow. You're either using union labor or paying either using union labor or paying either using union labor or paying prevailing wage. You're building to prevailing wage. You're building to prevailing wage. You're building to higher green building codes. Um, higher green building codes. Um, higher green building codes. Um, oftentimes, by the way, to get through oftentimes, by the way, to get through oftentimes, by the way, to get through the kind of planning board meetings that the kind of planning board meetings that the kind of planning board meetings that Derek is talking about, you've made a Derek is talking about, you've made a Derek is talking about, you've made a bunch of concessions on the design, you bunch of concessions on the design, you bunch of concessions on the design, you know, is there going to be parking in know, is there going to be parking in know, is there going to be parking in it, you know, security, things like it, you know, security, things like it, you know, security, things like that, um, you have to often agree to that, um, you have to often agree to that, um, you have to often agree to who's going to be in the home. So, who's going to be in the home. So, who's going to be in the home. So, you're you're getting, you know, there's you're you're getting, you know, there's you're you're getting, you know, there's a thing in the Measure H stuff where, a thing in the Measure H stuff where, a thing in the Measure H stuff where, well, they wanted it to not just be the well, they wanted it to not just be the well, they wanted it to not just be the taxpayer money. They also wanted taxpayer money. They also wanted taxpayer money. They also wanted nonprofit grants so the money would go nonprofit grants so the money would go nonprofit grants so the money would go further. So, you're trying to get these further. So, you're trying to get these further. So, you're trying to get these other grants, but these grants are to other grants, but these grants are to other grants, but these grants are to house homeless veterans. So, now to open house homeless veterans. So, now to open house homeless veterans. So, now to open the thing, you need to find these the thing, you need to find these the thing, you need to find these homeless veterans. you need to go homeless veterans. you need to go homeless veterans. you need to go through extra disability accessibility through extra disability accessibility through extra disability accessibility reviews. And of course, we all want

reviews. And of course, we all want reviews. And of course, we all want these things to be accessible, but they these things to be accessible, but they these things to be accessible, but they already had to comply with the American already had to comply with the American already had to comply with the American Disability Act, but now you're doing Disability Act, but now you're doing Disability Act, but now you're doing another disability act review in the another disability act review in the another disability act review in the city. And they come in, they say, well, city. And they come in, they say, well, city. And they come in, they say, well, you know, your doors are a little bit you know, your doors are a little bit you know, your doors are a little bit not as wide as we think. So, you got to not as wide as we think. So, you got to not as wide as we think. So, you got to make all your doors 3 in wider before make all your doors 3 in wider before make all your doors 3 in wider before you can open up. And that adds time and you can open up. And that adds time and you can open up. And that adds time and that adds cost. You have these that adds cost. You have these that adds cost. You have these subcontractor rules, right? This is now subcontractor rules, right? This is now subcontractor rules, right? This is now I'm using an example from San Francisco, I'm using an example from San Francisco, I'm using an example from San Francisco, but you had a preference initially for but you had a preference initially for but you had a preference initially for minority based sub subcontractors that minority based sub subcontractors that minority based sub subcontractors that became illegal. became small businesses, became illegal. became small businesses, became illegal. became small businesses, but that meant it had a preference but that meant it had a preference but that meant it had a preference against the bigger contractors who were against the bigger contractors who were against the bigger contractors who were more efficient at building more efficient at building more efficient at building housing. In order to use public money housing. In order to use public money housing. In order to use public money and then very much in in order to build and then very much in in order to build and then very much in in order to build public housing directly, it ends up public housing directly, it ends up public housing directly, it ends up being more expensive and slower than being more expensive and slower than being more expensive and slower than market rate. And that is a choice. We do market rate. And that is a choice. We do market rate. And that is a choice. We do not have to try to solve every problem not have to try to solve every problem not have to try to solve every problem in society through an individual housing in society through an individual housing in society through an individual housing project. Building affordable housing is project. Building affordable housing is project. Building affordable housing is hard enough. It's not impossible, but hard enough. It's not impossible, but hard enough. It's not impossible, but it's difficult to do. You do have to it's difficult to do. You do have to it's difficult to do. You do have to talk with the neighbors, right? It's talk with the neighbors, right? It's talk with the neighbors, right? It's never it's never going to be trivial to never it's never going to be trivial to never it's never going to be trivial to build 500, you know, 500 unit apartment build 500, you know, 500 unit apartment build 500, you know, 500 unit apartment building, but instead we layer on all building, but instead we layer on all building, but instead we layer on all these external and and additional agenda these external and and additional agenda these external and and additional agenda items. I call this everything bagel items. I call this everything bagel items. I call this everything bagel liberalism cuz like, you know, you liberalism cuz like, you know, you liberalism cuz like, you know, you sprinkle just enough on the bagel and sprinkle just enough on the bagel and sprinkle just enough on the bagel and it's great, but if you saw everything it's great, but if you saw everything it's great, but if you saw everything everywhere all at once, you put everywhere all at once, you put everywhere all at once, you put everything on the everything bagel and everything on the everything bagel and everything on the everything bagel and it becomes a black hole from which it becomes a black hole from which it becomes a black hole from which nothing can escape. And so the the need nothing can escape. And so the the need nothing can escape. And so the the need to deregulate government, right? Why? I to deregulate government, right? Why? I to deregulate government, right? Why? I I I saw um some of Elon Musk's uh I I saw um some of Elon Musk's uh I I saw um some of Elon Musk's uh marathon appearance on your show and he marathon appearance on your show and he marathon appearance on your show and he talks about highspeed rail in California talks about highspeed rail in California talks about highspeed rail in California and the thing he says there that it's and the thing he says there that it's and the thing he says there that it's functionally illegal to build highspeed

functionally illegal to build highspeed functionally illegal to build highspeed rail in California. I got 100 rail in California. I got 100 rail in California. I got 100 disagreements with Elon Musk right now. disagreements with Elon Musk right now. disagreements with Elon Musk right now. That's not one of them. It's That's not one of them. It's That's not one of them. It's functionally illegal to build highspeed functionally illegal to build highspeed functionally illegal to build highspeed rail in California. Like I went out I rail in California. Like I went out I rail in California. Like I went out I tooured the highspeed rail. I've done a tooured the highspeed rail. I've done a tooured the highspeed rail. I've done a lot of reporting on that. You can't lot of reporting on that. You can't lot of reporting on that. You can't build it affordably. You just can't on build it affordably. You just can't on build it affordably. You just can't on time. Like they they have no way to get time. Like they they have no way to get time. Like they they have no way to get the money to build the rest of it. It's the money to build the rest of it. It's the money to build the rest of it. It's not going to happen. And it's not going not going to happen. And it's not going not going to happen. And it's not going to happen not because you can't build to happen not because you can't build to happen not because you can't build highspeed rail. Europe builds highspeed highspeed rail. Europe builds highspeed highspeed rail. Europe builds highspeed rail. Japan builds highspeed rail. China rail. Japan builds highspeed rail. China rail. Japan builds highspeed rail. China builds highspeed rail. And it's not builds highspeed rail. And it's not builds highspeed rail. And it's not because of the private market like we'll because of the private market like we'll because of the private market like we'll only build luxury highspeed rail. It's only build luxury highspeed rail. It's only build luxury highspeed rail. It's because we have so heavily regulated a because we have so heavily regulated a because we have so heavily regulated a public project that you can't finish it public project that you can't finish it public project that you can't finish it and you definitely can't bring it in on and you definitely can't bring it in on and you definitely can't bring it in on time and affordably. And so I I really time and affordably. And so I I really time and affordably. And so I I really would like to de like uncode would like to de like uncode would like to de like uncode deregulation because yeah, there's deregulation because yeah, there's deregulation because yeah, there's places where I would like to regulate places where I would like to regulate places where I would like to regulate more. I don't want you to be able to more. I don't want you to be able to more. I don't want you to be able to build a coal fired power plant in build a coal fired power plant in build a coal fired power plant in America. I just don't want it to be America. I just don't want it to be America. I just don't want it to be possible. I think it's bad. But I do possible. I think it's bad. But I do possible. I think it's bad. But I do want it to be possible to build want it to be possible to build want it to be possible to build high-speed rail and affordable housing, high-speed rail and affordable housing, high-speed rail and affordable housing, including through the public market. And including through the public market. And including through the public market. And one thing my friends on the left, I one thing my friends on the left, I one thing my friends on the left, I think, really underrate is how hard think, really underrate is how hard think, really underrate is how hard they've made it for the government to they've made it for the government to they've made it for the government to act. They believe in government, but if act. They believe in government, but if act. They believe in government, but if you believe in government, then you have you believe in government, then you have you believe in government, then you have to make it possible for government to to make it possible for government to to make it possible for government to complete projects. You have to make it complete projects. You have to make it complete projects. You have to make it possible for um the people who work for possible for um the people who work for possible for um the people who work for government to apply their own genius and government to apply their own genius and government to apply their own genius and initiative. They have to have agency. Uh initiative. They have to have agency. Uh initiative. They have to have agency. Uh I always say that like we're sort of I always say that like we're sort of I always say that like we're sort of trapped right now between a government trapped right now between a government trapped right now between a government between a party that wants government to between a party that wants government to between a party that wants government to fail and a party that won't make fail and a party that won't make fail and a party that won't make government work. And like we would like government work. And like we would like government work. And like we would like like we are like we are trying to push like we are like we are trying to push like we are like we are trying to push this idea that the thing we want is a this idea that the thing we want is a this idea that the thing we want is a capable government, a strong government.

capable government, a strong government. capable government, a strong government. A government that when it promises it A government that when it promises it A government that when it promises it will do something, it actually does and will do something, it actually does and will do something, it actually does and gets it done. And that requires not just gets it done. And that requires not just gets it done. And that requires not just deregulation of the private sector, deregulation of the private sector, deregulation of the private sector, though sometimes it does require that. though sometimes it does require that. though sometimes it does require that. It requires deregulation of the It requires deregulation of the It requires deregulation of the government itself. I love this question government itself. I love this question government itself. I love this question of deregulation. Um, but I also of deregulation. Um, but I also of deregulation. Um, but I also sometimes find it very frustrating sometimes find it very frustrating sometimes find it very frustrating because sometimes I find that people's because sometimes I find that people's because sometimes I find that people's sense of regulation is so specifically sense of regulation is so specifically sense of regulation is so specifically coded. Regulation is just rules. If you coded. Regulation is just rules. If you coded. Regulation is just rules. If you change the word from regulation to change the word from regulation to change the word from regulation to rules, I think it'd be easier for people rules, I think it'd be easier for people rules, I think it'd be easier for people to see some rules are good and some to see some rules are good and some to see some rules are good and some rules are stupid. We all understand that rules are stupid. We all understand that rules are stupid. We all understand that in life. That's what regulations are. in life. That's what regulations are. in life. That's what regulations are. They're just rules. And sometimes they They're just rules. And sometimes they They're just rules. And sometimes they give us exactly the outcomes we want. give us exactly the outcomes we want. give us exactly the outcomes we want. And sometimes they give us the outcomes And sometimes they give us the outcomes And sometimes they give us the outcomes we would never hope for. And here's a we would never hope for. And here's a we would never hope for. And here's a good example. You go back to the 1940s, good example. You go back to the 1940s, good example. You go back to the 1940s, 1950s. America was fucking 1950s. America was fucking 1950s. America was fucking disgusting. Disgusting. The air and the disgusting. Disgusting. The air and the disgusting. Disgusting. The air and the water was horrifying. In 1943, residents water was horrifying. In 1943, residents water was horrifying. In 1943, residents of Los Angeles woke up to a smog that of Los Angeles woke up to a smog that of Los Angeles woke up to a smog that was so black they thought the Japanese was so black they thought the Japanese was so black they thought the Japanese had launched a chemical attack against had launched a chemical attack against had launched a chemical attack against America. In New Hampshire, ne in the America. In New Hampshire, ne in the America. In New Hampshire, ne in the rivers next to textile mills, sometimes rivers next to textile mills, sometimes rivers next to textile mills, sometimes the rivers themselves would run green the rivers themselves would run green the rivers themselves would run green and purple and red depending on what and purple and red depending on what and purple and red depending on what textile colors were being dumped into textile colors were being dumped into textile colors were being dumped into the river. You had the Ohio River on the river. You had the Ohio River on the river. You had the Ohio River on fire in the 1960s, 1970s. The world of fire in the 1960s, 1970s. The world of fire in the 1960s, 1970s. The world of mid 1900s America was truly sickening mid 1900s America was truly sickening mid 1900s America was truly sickening and it made people sick. And so we and it made people sick. And so we and it made people sick. And so we passed a raft of environmental rules and passed a raft of environmental rules and passed a raft of environmental rules and some of them achieved exactly what we some of them achieved exactly what we some of them achieved exactly what we wanted. the air we breathe and the water wanted. the air we breathe and the water wanted. the air we breathe and the water we drink is cleaner because of the Clean

we drink is cleaner because of the Clean we drink is cleaner because of the Clean Air and Water Acts. We did extraordinary Air and Water Acts. We did extraordinary Air and Water Acts. We did extraordinary things with this era of regulation. Some things with this era of regulation. Some things with this era of regulation. Some of these regulations were about outcomes of these regulations were about outcomes of these regulations were about outcomes that the Clean Air and Water Act that the Clean Air and Water Act that the Clean Air and Water Act regulates specific pollution levels in regulates specific pollution levels in regulates specific pollution levels in the air and the water or the emissions the air and the water or the emissions the air and the water or the emissions coming out of tailpipes. Some of the coming out of tailpipes. Some of the coming out of tailpipes. Some of the regulations though were about process. regulations though were about process. regulations though were about process. NEPA is the National Environmental NEPA is the National Environmental NEPA is the National Environmental Protection Act and it among many other Protection Act and it among many other Protection Act and it among many other things empowered individuals and things empowered individuals and things empowered individuals and citizens to sue the government and citizens to sue the government and citizens to sue the government and organizations, businesses to stop organizations, businesses to stop organizations, businesses to stop construction or fill out environmental construction or fill out environmental construction or fill out environmental reviews to prove that their construction reviews to prove that their construction reviews to prove that their construction wouldn't would meet muster, wouldn't wouldn't would meet muster, wouldn't wouldn't would meet muster, wouldn't degrade the the the environment um too degrade the the the environment um too degrade the the the environment um too severely. This opened the door to an severely. This opened the door to an severely. This opened the door to an infinitude of lawsuits to wrap up any infinitude of lawsuits to wrap up any infinitude of lawsuits to wrap up any effort to build anything in red tape effort to build anything in red tape effort to build anything in red tape forever. So, fast forward to forever. So, fast forward to forever. So, fast forward to 2021, the year or sorry, the month after 2021, the year or sorry, the month after 2021, the year or sorry, the month after Nuome signs Gavin Newsome, Governor of Nuome signs Gavin Newsome, Governor of Nuome signs Gavin Newsome, Governor of California, signs the law to end single California, signs the law to end single California, signs the law to end single family zoning in California. Seems like family zoning in California. Seems like family zoning in California. Seems like a massive win for the pro-ousing yimies a massive win for the pro-ousing yimies a massive win for the pro-ousing yimies of California. The month after that law of California. The month after that law of California. The month after that law was passed, the board of supervisors in was passed, the board of supervisors in was passed, the board of supervisors in San San San Francisco decided to rule against an Francisco decided to rule against an Francisco decided to rule against an apartment building that would have added apartment building that would have added apartment building that would have added 500 total units and 100 below market 500 total units and 100 below market 500 total units and 100 below market rent units. So something like public or rent units. So something like public or rent units. So something like public or social housing that was going to be social housing that was going to be social housing that was going to be built on a Nordstrom parking lot, just built on a Nordstrom parking lot, just built on a Nordstrom parking lot, just about the best possible place you could about the best possible place you could about the best possible place you could add housing in the world, a Nordstrom add housing in the world, a Nordstrom add housing in the world, a Nordstrom parking lot. because the builders, the parking lot. because the builders, the parking lot. because the builders, the developers didn't file the appropriate

developers didn't file the appropriate developers didn't file the appropriate paperwork under environmental review. So paperwork under environmental review. So paperwork under environmental review. So this is a world in which the most this is a world in which the most this is a world in which the most housing starved city in America is being housing starved city in America is being housing starved city in America is being starved even more of housing because of starved even more of housing because of starved even more of housing because of the expression of or the power of the the expression of or the power of the the expression of or the power of the instrumentalization of a rule passed the instrumentalization of a rule passed the instrumentalization of a rule passed the 1970s that has allowed people to sue to 1970s that has allowed people to sue to 1970s that has allowed people to sue to stop the physical world from being stop the physical world from being stop the physical world from being changed. And I think it goes back to changed. And I think it goes back to changed. And I think it goes back to this idea that like sometimes the this idea that like sometimes the this idea that like sometimes the solutions of one era can become the solutions of one era can become the solutions of one era can become the problems of the next generation, right? problems of the next generation, right? problems of the next generation, right? It was really good to pass the set of It was really good to pass the set of It was really good to pass the set of environmental bills that we did in the environmental bills that we did in the environmental bills that we did in the 1960s and 1970s because it addressed the 1960s and 1970s because it addressed the 1960s and 1970s because it addressed the extremely real problem of air and water extremely real problem of air and water extremely real problem of air and water and land being degraded by industry. But and land being degraded by industry. But and land being degraded by industry. But we're in a new world and the problem we're in a new world and the problem we're in a new world and the problem environmentalism today is in part a environmentalism today is in part a environmentalism today is in part a problem of global warming. And we have problem of global warming. And we have problem of global warming. And we have to build not only dense housing but also to build not only dense housing but also to build not only dense housing but also clean energy. And the same rules that clean energy. And the same rules that clean energy. And the same rules that were designed to help the environment in were designed to help the environment in were designed to help the environment in the 1960s and 1970s are sometimes the 1960s and 1970s are sometimes the 1960s and 1970s are sometimes ironically used in a way that hurt the ironically used in a way that hurt the ironically used in a way that hurt the environment in the 2020s. And that's one environment in the 2020s. And that's one environment in the 2020s. And that's one reason why we as liberals need a reason why we as liberals need a reason why we as liberals need a paradigm shift. Okay. You said a lot of paradigm shift. Okay. You said a lot of paradigm shift. Okay. You said a lot of really interesting insights there. So really interesting insights there. So really interesting insights there. So one, if I understood correctly, that one, if I understood correctly, that one, if I understood correctly, that regulation of regulation of regulation of outcomes is it more a good idea than outcomes is it more a good idea than outcomes is it more a good idea than regulation of process cuz regulation of regulation of process cuz regulation of regulation of process cuz regulation of process is where you can breed a lot of process is where you can breed a lot of process is where you can breed a lot of basically the lawyers show up. The other basically the lawyers show up. The other basically the lawyers show up. The other insight is if we get rid of 99% of insight is if we get rid of 99% of insight is if we get rid of 99% of lawyers, the world would be a better lawyers, the world would be a better lawyers, the world would be a better place. There's a lot of jokes around place. There's a lot of jokes around place. There's a lot of jokes around that. I don't know. I don't know if you

that. I don't know. I don't know if you that. I don't know. I don't know if you agree, but that I definitely wouldn't agree, but that I definitely wouldn't agree, but that I definitely wouldn't say 99%. say 99%. say 99%. 982.3 in the 80s. Okay. Majority of 982.3 in the 80s. Okay. Majority of 982.3 in the 80s. Okay. Majority of them. No. Uh they're they're simply them. No. Uh they're they're simply them. No. Uh they're they're simply there to take advantage of the the there to take advantage of the the there to take advantage of the the rules. We talk a lot about a book. Um I rules. We talk a lot about a book. Um I rules. We talk a lot about a book. Um I don't know if you've run into this one, don't know if you've run into this one, don't know if you've run into this one, but it's by Manser Olsen, who's sort of but it's by Manser Olsen, who's sort of but it's by Manser Olsen, who's sort of a founder of public interest economics, a founder of public interest economics, a founder of public interest economics, and it's called The Rise and Decline of and it's called The Rise and Decline of and it's called The Rise and Decline of Nations. This is a like a very famous Nations. This is a like a very famous Nations. This is a like a very famous book. Libertarians love this book. Um book. Libertarians love this book. Um book. Libertarians love this book. Um and I love this book. It's not right and I love this book. It's not right and I love this book. It's not right about everything, but its fundamental about everything, but its fundamental about everything, but its fundamental question is how come after World War II question is how come after World War II question is how come after World War II did the completely destroyed, bombed out did the completely destroyed, bombed out did the completely destroyed, bombed out countries of Germany and Japan. You countries of Germany and Japan. You countries of Germany and Japan. You would have thought they would be just would have thought they would be just would have thought they would be just screwed. And instead, they both become screwed. And instead, they both become screwed. And instead, they both become growth miracles. They both do much growth miracles. They both do much growth miracles. They both do much better than the UK, which you know was better than the UK, which you know was better than the UK, which you know was on the winning side of the war. Why? and on the winning side of the war. Why? and on the winning side of the war. Why? and and also stable societies over long periods also stable societies over long periods of time develop something that is very of time develop something that is very of time develop something that is very difficult to develop and very important difficult to develop and very important difficult to develop and very important to to develop which is bargaining to to develop which is bargaining to to develop which is bargaining organizations right collective action is organizations right collective action is organizations right collective action is hard it is hard to form an organization hard it is hard to form an organization hard it is hard to form an organization it is hard to make that organization it is hard to make that organization it is hard to make that organization persist but if you can do that in an persist but if you can do that in an persist but if you can do that in an atmosphere of stability then over time atmosphere of stability then over time atmosphere of stability then over time that organization will tend to entrench that organization will tend to entrench that organization will tend to entrench its power right think about ARP or the its power right think about ARP or the its power right think about ARP or the chamber of commerce or um certain unions chamber of commerce or um certain unions chamber of commerce or um certain unions or you know uh uh so you know the or you know uh uh so you know the or you know uh uh so you know the national manufacturing council etc the national manufacturing council etc the national manufacturing council etc the business roundt you know they're not business roundt you know they're not business roundt you know they're not that powerful when they start but over a that powerful when they start but over a that powerful when they start but over a long period of time they become really long period of time they become really long period of time they become really powerful and they start to pass laws and powerful and they start to pass laws and powerful and they start to pass laws and make themselves more powerful and so on make themselves more powerful and so on make themselves more powerful and so on there's a lot you can say about this

there's a lot you can say about this there's a lot you can say about this insight but my favorite part of Olson's insight but my favorite part of Olson's insight but my favorite part of Olson's book and one that I I don't think people book and one that I I don't think people book and one that I I don't think people emphasize enough is this insight he has emphasize enough is this insight he has emphasize enough is this insight he has which is that over time countries will which is that over time countries will which is that over time countries will begin every country has a kind of form begin every country has a kind of form begin every country has a kind of form of natural selection within it and that of natural selection within it and that of natural selection within it and that form of natural selection will select form of natural selection will select form of natural selection will select for people with the skill to navigate for people with the skill to navigate for people with the skill to navigate best navigate the kind of economy that best navigate the kind of economy that best navigate the kind of economy that country has. So if you're in China right country has. So if you're in China right country has. So if you're in China right now and China is in its developmentalism now and China is in its developmentalism now and China is in its developmentalism phase, you really want to be in civil phase, you really want to be in civil phase, you really want to be in civil infrastructure, right? It is great to be infrastructure, right? It is great to be infrastructure, right? It is great to be a civil engineer in China, great to be a civil engineer in China, great to be a civil engineer in China, great to be working on semiconductors in China, working on semiconductors in China, working on semiconductors in China, great to be doing all this stuff in the great to be doing all this stuff in the great to be doing all this stuff in the physical world. But America, you know, physical world. But America, you know, physical world. But America, you know, as a as a a kind of price of our as a as a a kind of price of our as a as a a kind of price of our affluence and our success, we've become affluence and our success, we've become affluence and our success, we've become a country, and this happens to a lot of a country, and this happens to a lot of a country, and this happens to a lot of countries where negotiation is really countries where negotiation is really countries where negotiation is really important. And a country in which important. And a country in which important. And a country in which negotiation is really important is going negotiation is really important is going negotiation is really important is going to over time start developing a to over time start developing a to over time start developing a preference for lots of lawyers, people preference for lots of lawyers, people preference for lots of lawyers, people in finance, management, consultants in finance, management, consultants in finance, management, consultants because it is society that requires because it is society that requires because it is society that requires continuous what he calls complex continuous what he calls complex continuous what he calls complex bargaining. And I think this actually bargaining. And I think this actually bargaining. And I think this actually explains a lot. Patrick Collison, we explains a lot. Patrick Collison, we explains a lot. Patrick Collison, we quote him in the who's a found the CEO quote him in the who's a found the CEO quote him in the who's a found the CEO of Stripe, you know, brilliant tech guy.

of Stripe, you know, brilliant tech guy. of Stripe, you know, brilliant tech guy. Here's this point that he made in an Here's this point that he made in an Here's this point that he made in an interview with Noah Smith, who's a a interview with Noah Smith, who's a a interview with Noah Smith, who's a a blogger and economist where they were blogger and economist where they were blogger and economist where they were talking about highspeed rail and and talking about highspeed rail and and talking about highspeed rail and and sort of Patrick makes this point. He's sort of Patrick makes this point. He's sort of Patrick makes this point. He's like, it's just tough to be a highspeed like, it's just tough to be a highspeed like, it's just tough to be a highspeed rail engineer in America. You're going rail engineer in America. You're going rail engineer in America. You're going to have a much easier time working in to have a much easier time working in to have a much easier time working in the digital space. And so the digital the digital space. And so the digital the digital space. And so the digital space becomes a kind of frontier of last space becomes a kind of frontier of last space becomes a kind of frontier of last resort. And so people want to build resort. And so people want to build resort. And so people want to build things go into into bits and bites, not things go into into bits and bites, not things go into into bits and bites, not into atoms, right? To to use the old into atoms, right? To to use the old into atoms, right? To to use the old kind of Peter Teal cut. And I think kind of Peter Teal cut. And I think kind of Peter Teal cut. And I think there's something to that. It's not that there's something to that. It's not that there's something to that. It's not that lawyers are bad. Um some of the people I lawyers are bad. Um some of the people I lawyers are bad. Um some of the people I love in most in this world are lawyers love in most in this world are lawyers love in most in this world are lawyers and many lawyers do amazing amazing and many lawyers do amazing amazing and many lawyers do amazing amazing work. But one reason we've selected for work. But one reason we've selected for work. But one reason we've selected for so many lawyers and America has a lot of so many lawyers and America has a lot of so many lawyers and America has a lot of lawyers is we became a society that lawyers is we became a society that lawyers is we became a society that needs a lot of lawyers because we are a needs a lot of lawyers because we are a needs a lot of lawyers because we are a society that is stable, affluent, and society that is stable, affluent, and society that is stable, affluent, and we've become like very into bargaining. we've become like very into bargaining. we've become like very into bargaining. You know, Donald Trump is a real estate You know, Donald Trump is a real estate You know, Donald Trump is a real estate developer. That's a relational business. developer. That's a relational business. developer. That's a relational business. The way real estate development works in The way real estate development works in The way real estate development works in this country, the reason you don't have this country, the reason you don't have this country, the reason you don't have all that many huge firms building all that many huge firms building all that many huge firms building housing in many many states housing in many many states housing in many many states simultaneously is it requires a lot of simultaneously is it requires a lot of simultaneously is it requires a lot of relationships in the individual city relationships in the individual city relationships in the individual city you're in. And so, you know, if you read you're in. And so, you know, if you read you're in. And so, you know, if you read say Maggie Haberman's great biography of say Maggie Haberman's great biography of say Maggie Haberman's great biography of Don of Donald Trump, Confidence Man, Don of Donald Trump, Confidence Man, Don of Donald Trump, Confidence Man, which focuses a lot on his time as a which focuses a lot on his time as a which focuses a lot on his time as a real estate magnet in in New York, you real estate magnet in in New York, you real estate magnet in in New York, you see like Donald Trump doesn't build a see like Donald Trump doesn't build a see like Donald Trump doesn't build a ton of stuff in other states. He ton of stuff in other states. He ton of stuff in other states. He actually builds in other countries actually builds in other countries actually builds in other countries sometimes or more to the point he puts sometimes or more to the point he puts sometimes or more to the point he puts his name on things built in other his name on things built in other his name on things built in other countries, but really what he did was countries, but really what he did was countries, but really what he did was built here. And he built here through built here. And he built here through built here. And he built here through his relationships with the New York his relationships with the New York his relationships with the New York political system. And so over time, political system. And so over time, political system. And so over time, societies that make building and societies that make building and societies that make building and construction and creation, something

construction and creation, something construction and creation, something that is the output of that is the output of that is the output of negotiations rather than like very clear negotiations rather than like very clear negotiations rather than like very clear standards and rules where if you've done standards and rules where if you've done standards and rules where if you've done it, you can just do it. You get a lot of it, you can just do it. You get a lot of it, you can just do it. You get a lot of lawyers. You get a lot of management lawyers. You get a lot of management lawyers. You get a lot of management consultants. You get a lot of finance consultants. You get a lot of finance consultants. You get a lot of finance people because that's what society is people because that's what society is people because that's what society is selecting for. That's what you've made selecting for. That's what you've made selecting for. That's what you've made it possible to have agency and freedom it possible to have agency and freedom it possible to have agency and freedom in. That's what you need to do to to to in. That's what you need to do to to to in. That's what you need to do to to to do big things. Um, this is coming from do big things. Um, this is coming from do big things. Um, this is coming from Nick Bagley who's a a University of Nick Bagley who's a a University of Nick Bagley who's a a University of Michigan law professor. But between Michigan law professor. But between Michigan law professor. But between Walter Manddale and Tim Walls, there's Walter Manddale and Tim Walls, there's Walter Manddale and Tim Walls, there's not a single person on a Democratic not a single person on a Democratic not a single person on a Democratic presidential ticket who didn't go to law presidential ticket who didn't go to law presidential ticket who didn't go to law school. Not one. Like the Democratic school. Not one. Like the Democratic school. Not one. Like the Democratic Party in particular is a party of Party in particular is a party of Party in particular is a party of lawyers. And lawyers look at things lawyers. And lawyers look at things lawyers. And lawyers look at things through the legal perspective. And the through the legal perspective. And the through the legal perspective. And the legal perspective is that government is legal perspective is that government is legal perspective is that government is legitimate by following process. And legitimate by following process. And legitimate by following process. And Bagley's point is that government Bagley's point is that government Bagley's point is that government attains legitimacy at least in part attains legitimacy at least in part attains legitimacy at least in part through outcomes. And when you prize through outcomes. And when you prize through outcomes. And when you prize process so high over outcomes, you think process so high over outcomes, you think process so high over outcomes, you think you're acting legitimately, but actually you're acting legitimately, but actually you're acting legitimately, but actually what would have made you legitimate in what would have made you legitimate in what would have made you legitimate in the view of the people is that you built the view of the people is that you built the view of the people is that you built the thing you told them you were going the thing you told them you were going the thing you told them you were going to build. You made it possible to live to build. You made it possible to live to build. You made it possible to live affordably in the city. And so you have affordably in the city. And so you have affordably in the city. And so you have this sort of movement then over time to this sort of movement then over time to this sort of movement then over time to populist strong men who say I alone can populist strong men who say I alone can populist strong men who say I alone can fix it because they've kind of given up fix it because they've kind of given up fix it because they've kind of given up on this procedural liberalism like that on this procedural liberalism like that on this procedural liberalism like that didn't deliver for them. So you keep didn't deliver for them. So you keep didn't deliver for them. So you keep telling them you know we're the ones who telling them you know we're the ones who telling them you know we're the ones who know how to run government and they know how to run government and they know how to run government and they don't see it and eventually somebody don't see it and eventually somebody don't see it and eventually somebody else comes and says I'm going to bust else comes and says I'm going to bust else comes and says I'm going to bust through the walls of this thing like the through the walls of this thing like the through the walls of this thing like the Kool-Aid Man and they win. So speaking Kool-Aid Man and they win. So speaking Kool-Aid Man and they win. So speaking of the Kool-Aid Man of the Kool-Aid Man of the Kool-Aid Man I see what you're about to do.

Yeah. I'm so transparent. It makes me Yeah. I'm so transparent. It makes me think I'm uh a robot built in a lab think I'm uh a robot built in a lab think I'm uh a robot built in a lab somewhere. Sam Alman once said to me, he somewhere. Sam Alman once said to me, he somewhere. Sam Alman once said to me, he said, "Well, aren't you just a said, "Well, aren't you just a said, "Well, aren't you just a reinforcement learning system with reinforcement learning system with reinforcement learning system with energy running through it?" Yeah. It's energy running through it?" Yeah. It's energy running through it?" Yeah. It's like, I'd like to think not, but like, I'd like to think not, but like, I'd like to think not, but maybe. Uh so on the Kool-Aid man uh I maybe. Uh so on the Kool-Aid man uh I maybe. Uh so on the Kool-Aid man uh I was wondering if you could maybe steal was wondering if you could maybe steal was wondering if you could maybe steal man man man uh the case for and against Elon Musk uh the case for and against Elon Musk uh the case for and against Elon Musk and Doge because you mentioned all of and Doge because you mentioned all of and Doge because you mentioned all of these regulations, all of this these regulations, all of this these regulations, all of this complexities that get in the way of complexities that get in the way of complexities that get in the way of building. It seems like a uh bold human building. It seems like a uh bold human building. It seems like a uh bold human like Elon is required to break through like Elon is required to break through like Elon is required to break through the regulation. put that on one side and the regulation. put that on one side and the regulation. put that on one side and the other side I read somewhere that the other side I read somewhere that the other side I read somewhere that abundance is kind of the anti-d doge abundance is kind of the anti-d doge abundance is kind of the anti-d doge uh so which to me it seems like there is uh so which to me it seems like there is uh so which to me it seems like there is conflicting ideas but there's also conflicting ideas but there's also conflicting ideas but there's also alignment so maybe can we break all that alignment so maybe can we break all that alignment so maybe can we break all that I think the steel man is very easy to I think the steel man is very easy to I think the steel man is very easy to make here department of government make here department of government make here department of government efficiency that sounds like an efficiency that sounds like an efficiency that sounds like an organization that's needed if government organization that's needed if government organization that's needed if government is inefficient and one of the themes of is inefficient and one of the themes of is inefficient and one of the themes of our book is just how inefficient our book is just how inefficient our book is just how inefficient government can be not only at building government can be not only at building government can be not only at building houses, building energy, often at houses, building energy, often at houses, building energy, often at achieving its own ends. Building achieving its own ends. Building achieving its own ends. Building highspeed rail when it wants to build highspeed rail when it wants to build highspeed rail when it wants to build highspeed rail, adding affordable highspeed rail, adding affordable highspeed rail, adding affordable housing units when it wants to afford housing units when it wants to afford housing units when it wants to afford add affordable housing units. You know, add affordable housing units. You know, add affordable housing units. You know, I love Ezra's line that we don't just I love Ezra's line that we don't just I love Ezra's line that we don't just need to think about, you know, need to think about, you know, need to think about, you know, deregulating the market. We need to deregulating the market. We need to deregulating the market. We need to think about deregulating government

think about deregulating government think about deregulating government itself, getting the rules out of the way itself, getting the rules out of the way itself, getting the rules out of the way that keep government from achieving the that keep government from achieving the that keep government from achieving the democratic outcomes that it's trying to democratic outcomes that it's trying to democratic outcomes that it's trying to achieve. This is a world in which a achieve. This is a world in which a achieve. This is a world in which a department of government efficiency is a department of government efficiency is a department of government efficiency is a godsend. We should be absolutely godsend. We should be absolutely godsend. We should be absolutely obsessed with making government work obsessed with making government work obsessed with making government work well, especially if we're going to be well, especially if we're going to be well, especially if we're going to be the kind of liberals who believe that the kind of liberals who believe that the kind of liberals who believe that government is important in the first government is important in the first government is important in the first place. So that to me is the sort of place. So that to me is the sort of place. So that to me is the sort of pillbox version of a steel case for a pillbox version of a steel case for a pillbox version of a steel case for a department of government efficiency. department of government efficiency. department of government efficiency. Wait, before you do the anti- case, can Wait, before you do the anti- case, can Wait, before you do the anti- case, can I offer a different steelman, please? I I offer a different steelman, please? I I offer a different steelman, please? I think the Steelman case for what Doge think the Steelman case for what Doge think the Steelman case for what Doge is, right? Rather than what it pretended is, right? Rather than what it pretended is, right? Rather than what it pretended to be, is to be, is to be, is that the government is an interest. The that the government is an interest. The that the government is an interest. The the the bureaucracy, the deep state, the the the bureaucracy, the deep state, the the the bureaucracy, the deep state, the rules, the regulations, and it's not rules, the regulations, and it's not rules, the regulations, and it's not about efficiency. Never was. You about efficiency. Never was. You about efficiency. Never was. You wouldn't do this if it was about wouldn't do this if it was about wouldn't do this if it was about efficiency. That it's zerobased efficiency. That it's zerobased efficiency. That it's zerobased budgeting. That you're breaking the budgeting. That you're breaking the budgeting. That you're breaking the thing. You're turning it on and off. thing. You're turning it on and off. thing. You're turning it on and off. you're firing massive parts of it you're firing massive parts of it you're firing massive parts of it because the only way to make change because the only way to make change because the only way to make change within it possible is to delete what within it possible is to delete what within it possible is to delete what currently exists whether it was currently exists whether it was currently exists whether it was efficient or not. You would never efficient or not. You would never efficient or not. You would never actually know that if you had it all actually know that if you had it all actually know that if you had it all come and present its case for efficiency come and present its case for efficiency come and present its case for efficiency or something. You never know. You get or something. You never know. You get or something. You never know. You get turned around whatever that the the only turned around whatever that the the only turned around whatever that the the only way like the problem with the government way like the problem with the government way like the problem with the government is there is no actual competition. the is there is no actual competition. the is there is no actual competition. the department of education doesn't get out department of education doesn't get out department of education doesn't get out competed by the um you know the agency competed by the um you know the agency competed by the um you know the agency of education which is started up you of education which is started up you of education which is started up you know three years ago or something and know three years ago or something and know three years ago or something and because of that the only way to make

because of that the only way to make because of that the only way to make possible radical change is to bulldoze possible radical change is to bulldoze possible radical change is to bulldoze the thing that currently exists and then the thing that currently exists and then the thing that currently exists and then once that is done you can begin to once that is done you can begin to once that is done you can begin to rebuild you can you know if you've fired rebuild you can you know if you've fired rebuild you can you know if you've fired half the department of education then half the department of education then half the department of education then you can start rehiring your people and you can start rehiring your people and you can start rehiring your people and they will actually do what you want if they will actually do what you want if they will actually do what you want if you have shown that you can delete every you have shown that you can delete every you have shown that you can delete every regulation or just not follow it, then regulation or just not follow it, then regulation or just not follow it, then you can begin deciding which ones to you can begin deciding which ones to you can begin deciding which ones to actually follow. If there is no actually follow. If there is no actually follow. If there is no department of USAD and you've moved back department of USAD and you've moved back department of USAD and you've moved back under state, then you can tell state under state, then you can tell state under state, then you can tell state what really to fund in terms of foreign what really to fund in terms of foreign what really to fund in terms of foreign aid. Right? There's a a theory here, I aid. Right? There's a a theory here, I aid. Right? There's a a theory here, I think, that was never about efficiency. think, that was never about efficiency. think, that was never about efficiency. It was about deletion. Um he's not It was about deletion. Um he's not It was about deletion. Um he's not trying to make things run a little bit trying to make things run a little bit trying to make things run a little bit better. He's not trying to lower the better. He's not trying to lower the better. He's not trying to lower the overhead cost of government. That the overhead cost of government. That the overhead cost of government. That the theory is that in the first term, the theory is that in the first term, the theory is that in the first term, the bureaucracy impeded Donald Trump. It bureaucracy impeded Donald Trump. It bureaucracy impeded Donald Trump. It didn't listen to him. Bureaucracy is didn't listen to him. Bureaucracy is didn't listen to him. Bureaucracy is supposed to be limbs of the president. supposed to be limbs of the president. supposed to be limbs of the president. The only way to make the federal The only way to make the federal The only way to make the federal government a neural link of Donald Trump government a neural link of Donald Trump government a neural link of Donald Trump himself is to destroy the federal himself is to destroy the federal himself is to destroy the federal government and then rebuild it as that government and then rebuild it as that government and then rebuild it as that thing. I think if you talk to people at thing. I think if you talk to people at thing. I think if you talk to people at Doge or talk to people who are authors Doge or talk to people who are authors Doge or talk to people who are authors of the project of project 2025, who are of the project of project 2025, who are of the project of project 2025, who are at Heritage, who are chiefs of staff of at Heritage, who are chiefs of staff of at Heritage, who are chiefs of staff of the people working for Heritage, if you the people working for Heritage, if you the people working for Heritage, if you have a truth serum conversation with have a truth serum conversation with have a truth serum conversation with these folks and you say defended this is what they're saying.

defended this is what they're saying. You're saying something metastatic has You're saying something metastatic has You're saying something metastatic has grown inside of the government. Not just grown inside of the government. Not just grown inside of the government. Not just over the last few years under Joe Biden, over the last few years under Joe Biden, over the last few years under Joe Biden, but over the last few decades, maybe but over the last few decades, maybe but over the last few decades, maybe going all the way back to FDR and even going all the way back to FDR and even going all the way back to FDR and even Woodro Wilson. We have allowed an Woodro Wilson. We have allowed an Woodro Wilson. We have allowed an administrative state to accumulate like administrative state to accumulate like administrative state to accumulate like barnacles on a ship around the executive barnacles on a ship around the executive barnacles on a ship around the executive branch. And it's keeping the executive branch. And it's keeping the executive branch. And it's keeping the executive branch from being able to translate the branch from being able to translate the branch from being able to translate the democratic will into policy because democratic will into policy because democratic will into policy because there's never any president who is there's never any president who is there's never any president who is purely elected by the people. they're purely elected by the people. they're purely elected by the people. they're elected into an office that is already elected into an office that is already elected into an office that is already pre-contaminated by the bureaucracy pre-contaminated by the bureaucracy pre-contaminated by the bureaucracy itself. And we're trying to take all of itself. And we're trying to take all of itself. And we're trying to take all of that away. We're trying to I mean, this that away. We're trying to I mean, this that away. We're trying to I mean, this is this is very just explicitly the case is this is very just explicitly the case is this is very just explicitly the case they're going to make trying to make they're going to make trying to make they're going to make trying to make government more democratic, not less, by government more democratic, not less, by government more democratic, not less, by allowing the democratic the elected allowing the democratic the elected allowing the democratic the elected president guide in a or lead in a pure president guide in a or lead in a pure president guide in a or lead in a pure way. Okay. So, as you said, two things. way. Okay. So, as you said, two things. way. Okay. So, as you said, two things. One is the steel man and then at the end One is the steel man and then at the end One is the steel man and then at the end there there was a non-steelman. So the there there was a non-steelman. So the there there was a non-steelman. So the the first part is cutting removing as the first part is cutting removing as the first part is cutting removing as much as possible to see what's actually much as possible to see what's actually much as possible to see what's actually needed. That's seems like one of the needed. That's seems like one of the needed. That's seems like one of the ways to figure out what's actually ways to figure out what's actually ways to figure out what's actually needed is by removing it. And then needed is by removing it. And then needed is by removing it. And then there's the second thing is that you there's the second thing is that you there's the second thing is that you mentioned so that you can install the mentioned so that you can install the mentioned so that you can install the people that follow your policy. What I people that follow your policy. What I people that follow your policy. What I disagree with you that that wasn't the disagree with you that that wasn't the disagree with you that that wasn't the steelman. I mean I think you have to steelman. I mean I think you have to steelman. I mean I think you have to listen to them to do the steelman, listen to them to do the steelman, listen to them to do the steelman, right? I don't think the steelman is right? I don't think the steelman is right? I don't think the steelman is imaginary. If you read the um the OM imaginary. If you read the um the OM imaginary. If you read the um the OM regulation that froze funding, it said

regulation that froze funding, it said regulation that froze funding, it said explicitly that the government has to explicitly that the government has to explicitly that the government has to reflect the will of the people as reflect the will of the people as reflect the will of the people as expressed through their choice of expressed through their choice of expressed through their choice of president. If you read anything Russ has president. If you read anything Russ has president. If you read anything Russ has ever said, they have the unitary ever said, they have the unitary ever said, they have the unitary executive theory. I'm not saying it's executive theory. I'm not saying it's executive theory. I'm not saying it's right or wrong. I I if you ask me to do right or wrong. I I if you ask me to do right or wrong. I I if you ask me to do the non-steelman, which I would love to the non-steelman, which I would love to the non-steelman, which I would love to do too, it is not my view that the do too, it is not my view that the do too, it is not my view that the steelman case of this is to make the steelman case of this is to make the steelman case of this is to make the federal government fully responsive to federal government fully responsive to federal government fully responsive to Donald Trump, but the steelman case for Donald Trump, but the steelman case for Donald Trump, but the steelman case for what they are doing as expressed by what they are doing as expressed by what they are doing as expressed by them. And I think like a steelman them. And I think like a steelman them. And I think like a steelman reflects like I mean I have talked to reflects like I mean I have talked to reflects like I mean I have talked to these people, right? Like I'm telling these people, right? Like I'm telling these people, right? Like I'm telling you what they tell me on some level. Um you what they tell me on some level. Um you what they tell me on some level. Um the Sealman cases they believe like as the Sealman cases they believe like as the Sealman cases they believe like as Derek said a minute ago this has become Derek said a minute ago this has become Derek said a minute ago this has become non-democratically responsive like and non-democratically responsive like and non-democratically responsive like and the way it becomes democratically the way it becomes democratically the way it becomes democratically responsive is deeply responsive to the responsive is deeply responsive to the responsive is deeply responsive to the president. The president represents a president. The president represents a president. The president represents a different politics than Joe Biden's different politics than Joe Biden's different politics than Joe Biden's politics. And so if you have a state politics. And so if you have a state politics. And so if you have a state filled with liberal civil servants who filled with liberal civil servants who filled with liberal civil servants who don't want to do what he says that is a don't want to do what he says that is a don't want to do what he says that is a violation of small D democratic violation of small D democratic violation of small D democratic principles of how the government should principles of how the government should principles of how the government should be run. I I think if you don't like it be run. I I think if you don't like it be run. I I think if you don't like it that's fine. But I do want to say like I that's fine. But I do want to say like I that's fine. But I do want to say like I actually think that is that is the actually think that is that is the actually think that is that is the steelman. He's not they're not doing steelman. He's not they're not doing steelman. He's not they're not doing this for no reason. They have an this for no reason. They have an this for no reason. They have an intention here and I think you know the intention here and I think you know the intention here and I think you know the whether you like it or not sort of whether you like it or not sort of whether you like it or not sort of depends on whether or not you like their depends on whether or not you like their depends on whether or not you like their view. Okay. Well, I don't like it view. Okay. Well, I don't like it view. Okay. Well, I don't like it because it cuts my ear in a certain way because it cuts my ear in a certain way because it cuts my ear in a certain way that one of the criticisms I have for that one of the criticisms I have for that one of the criticisms I have for Donald Trump and and the Trump Donald Trump and and the Trump Donald Trump and and the Trump administration is there's a natural administration is there's a natural administration is there's a natural circles of sycopanty that forms and circles of sycopanty that forms and circles of sycopanty that forms and favor you know every president has their favor you know every president has their favor you know every president has their personality and psychological quirks and

personality and psychological quirks and personality and psychological quirks and and I think he is one of the people and I think he is one of the people and I think he is one of the people where favoritism is more likely to where favoritism is more likely to where favoritism is more likely to develop. So when you choose who to develop. So when you choose who to develop. So when you choose who to install as the head of whatever install as the head of whatever install as the head of whatever organization, organization, organization, uh so if you fire everybody and rehire, uh so if you fire everybody and rehire, uh so if you fire everybody and rehire, the rehiring process is more likely uh the rehiring process is more likely uh the rehiring process is more likely uh to have people that just said nice to have people that just said nice to have people that just said nice things about about Donald Trump in the things about about Donald Trump in the things about about Donald Trump in the past versus a meritocracy based system past versus a meritocracy based system past versus a meritocracy based system that these people are really good. Lex that these people are really good. Lex that these people are really good. Lex AOC should definitely come on this show. AOC should definitely come on this show. AOC should definitely come on this show. Well, she she has her own, but the ideal Well, she she has her own, but the ideal Well, she she has her own, but the ideal the steelman to me about not maybe what the steelman to me about not maybe what the steelman to me about not maybe what Elon is is doing is in order to have the Elon is is doing is in order to have the Elon is is doing is in order to have the best people in the world doing a great best people in the world doing a great best people in the world doing a great job at every part of government, you job at every part of government, you job at every part of government, you have to figure out I mean his first have to figure out I mean his first have to figure out I mean his first email of like what have you done this email of like what have you done this email of like what have you done this week? There's the if we just steal man week? There's the if we just steal man week? There's the if we just steal man everything he's been doing which is like everything he's been doing which is like everything he's been doing which is like let's find the productive people that let's find the productive people that let's find the productive people that show up to work that love what they're show up to work that love what they're show up to work that love what they're doing that are actually sort of amazing doing that are actually sort of amazing doing that are actually sort of amazing of what they're doing. I mean how would of what they're doing. I mean how would of what they're doing. I mean how would you solve that problem? From his you solve that problem? From his you solve that problem? From his experience in business it's painful but experience in business it's painful but experience in business it's painful but effective to just fire almost everybody effective to just fire almost everybody effective to just fire almost everybody and then rebuild from there and and then rebuild from there and and then rebuild from there and continuously do that. And as a the continuously do that. And as a the continuously do that. And as a the result, as long as everybody's aligned result, as long as everybody's aligned result, as long as everybody's aligned on a mission is you're simplifying over on a mission is you're simplifying over on a mission is you're simplifying over and over the system. So it's more and and over the system. So it's more and and over the system. So it's more and more and more effective. Now like how more and more effective. Now like how more and more effective. Now like how would how else would you approach um we would how else would you approach um we would how else would you approach um we could start now criticizing how how

could start now criticizing how how could start now criticizing how how would you make government more efficient would you make government more efficient would you make government more efficient if not by the way that they're doing it? if not by the way that they're doing it? if not by the way that they're doing it? Yeah. Can I steal man to the other side Yeah. Can I steal man to the other side Yeah. Can I steal man to the other side now? Sure. Um okay. now? Sure. Um okay. now? Sure. Um okay. You wouldn't do this. You wouldn't do You wouldn't do this. You wouldn't do You wouldn't do this. You wouldn't do this. So, let me say a couple things. this. So, let me say a couple things. this. So, let me say a couple things. One is that efficiency only makes sense One is that efficiency only makes sense One is that efficiency only makes sense when yolked to a when yolked to a when yolked to a goal. So, when if Elon Musk came in and goal. So, when if Elon Musk came in and goal. So, when if Elon Musk came in and did this at Tesla, Musk had a goal for did this at Tesla, Musk had a goal for did this at Tesla, Musk had a goal for Tesla. It was to build the electric Tesla. It was to build the electric Tesla. It was to build the electric vehicle of the future. SpaceX, he had a vehicle of the future. SpaceX, he had a vehicle of the future. SpaceX, he had a goal for SpaceX. We know what the goal goal for SpaceX. We know what the goal goal for SpaceX. We know what the goal for SpaceX is. in some long-term way go for SpaceX is. in some long-term way go for SpaceX is. in some long-term way go to Mars, but in some short-term way, you to Mars, but in some short-term way, you to Mars, but in some short-term way, you know, cheaper orbital travel, you know, know, cheaper orbital travel, you know, know, cheaper orbital travel, you know, a cheaper orable orbital shipping, a cheaper orable orbital shipping, a cheaper orable orbital shipping, reusable rockets, etc. We know what the reusable rockets, etc. We know what the reusable rockets, etc. We know what the goal for Solar City was. In a way, and I goal for Solar City was. In a way, and I goal for Solar City was. In a way, and I do think sort of the purchase of Twitter do think sort of the purchase of Twitter do think sort of the purchase of Twitter is late Elon, which becomes a much more is late Elon, which becomes a much more is late Elon, which becomes a much more political set of goals, but but political set of goals, but but political set of goals, but but nevertheless, um, in a way, at least nevertheless, um, in a way, at least nevertheless, um, in a way, at least there's an expressed idea Twitter, there's an expressed idea Twitter, there's an expressed idea Twitter, right, which is the the return of free right, which is the the return of free right, which is the the return of free expression. I think it's really expression. I think it's really expression. I think it's really important if you are steel manning or important if you are steel manning or important if you are steel manning or any kind of manning is is being is any kind of manning is is being is any kind of manning is is being is really asking and like listening to what really asking and like listening to what really asking and like listening to what people are saying their goal is because people are saying their goal is because people are saying their goal is because efficiency does not exist in a vacuum, efficiency does not exist in a vacuum, efficiency does not exist in a vacuum, right? The a state that is efficient at right? The a state that is efficient at right? The a state that is efficient at building dirty energy and a state that building dirty energy and a state that building dirty energy and a state that are is efficient at burning clean are is efficient at burning clean are is efficient at burning clean energy. They're they're sort of they energy. They're they're sort of they energy. They're they're sort of they could be opposite versions of each could be opposite versions of each could be opposite versions of each other, right? You have to be you have to other, right? You have to be you have to other, right? You have to be you have to be optimizing towards something. You're be optimizing towards something. You're be optimizing towards something. You're an AI guy. You have to optimize towards an AI guy. You have to optimize towards an AI guy. You have to optimize towards something. And the goal I I I find something. And the goal I I I find something. And the goal I I I find myself really consistently frustrated by

myself really consistently frustrated by myself really consistently frustrated by conversations about Doge that treat conversations about Doge that treat conversations about Doge that treat efficiency as some free floating thing. efficiency as some free floating thing. efficiency as some free floating thing. Or I sometimes will hear people say to Or I sometimes will hear people say to Or I sometimes will hear people say to me, very smart people have said to me, me, very smart people have said to me, me, very smart people have said to me, "Oh, what Doge is really doing is "Oh, what Doge is really doing is "Oh, what Doge is really doing is stripping the government down to studs stripping the government down to studs stripping the government down to studs so it can put AI into it because Elon so it can put AI into it because Elon so it can put AI into it because Elon believes in AGI is coming soon and you believes in AGI is coming soon and you believes in AGI is coming soon and you need to make a government capable of need to make a government capable of need to make a government capable of using AGI." And I always say to them, using AGI." And I always say to them, using AGI." And I always say to them, okay, AI towards what? towards what okay, AI towards what? towards what okay, AI towards what? towards what value function towards what prompt are value function towards what prompt are value function towards what prompt are you inserting at the at the base level. you inserting at the at the base level. you inserting at the at the base level. Sorry about that. Sorry about that. Sorry about that. Um and I think a few things become very Um and I think a few things become very Um and I think a few things become very clear. One is that it is towards Donald clear. One is that it is towards Donald clear. One is that it is towards Donald Trump. It is his movement. Elon Musk Trump. It is his movement. Elon Musk Trump. It is his movement. Elon Musk serves at his pleasure. Elon Musk has serves at his pleasure. Elon Musk has serves at his pleasure. Elon Musk has said that he would like to himself said that he would like to himself said that he would like to himself chisel Donald Trump's uh face into Mount chisel Donald Trump's uh face into Mount chisel Donald Trump's uh face into Mount Rushmore. He said he loves Donald Trump Rushmore. He said he loves Donald Trump Rushmore. He said he loves Donald Trump as much as a man can love any other man. as much as a man can love any other man. as much as a man can love any other man. He believes in Trump, right? I think you He believes in Trump, right? I think you He believes in Trump, right? I think you have to take him at his word. Or maybe have to take him at his word. Or maybe have to take him at his word. Or maybe you think he's very cynical and he's you think he's very cynical and he's you think he's very cynical and he's saying all that to curry favor in a saying all that to curry favor in a saying all that to curry favor in a sickopantic way with Trump. But at some sickopantic way with Trump. But at some sickopantic way with Trump. But at some point Elon Musk does not serve with any point Elon Musk does not serve with any point Elon Musk does not serve with any kind of independence. If Trump says your kind of independence. If Trump says your kind of independence. If Trump says your power is gone, his power is gone. He's power is gone, his power is gone. He's power is gone, his power is gone. He's an outside he's functionally an outside an outside he's functionally an outside an outside he's functionally an outside adviser to the government. So then you adviser to the government. So then you adviser to the government. So then you you really do I think have to listen to you really do I think have to listen to you really do I think have to listen to what Donald Trump has said, what Russ what Donald Trump has said, what Russ what Donald Trump has said, what Russ has said. And they believe that Trump has said. And they believe that Trump has said. And they believe that Trump represents something fundamental. His represents something fundamental. His represents something fundamental. His movement represents something movement represents something movement represents something fundamental that has been suppressed in fundamental that has been suppressed in fundamental that has been suppressed in American life. Okay. I think if you were American life. Okay. I think if you were American life. Okay. I think if you were doing something the the best cases I've doing something the the best cases I've doing something the the best cases I've seen for Elon are a zerobased budgeting seen for Elon are a zerobased budgeting seen for Elon are a zerobased budgeting case. You're trying to break everything case. You're trying to break everything case. You're trying to break everything down to studs and then it needs to down to studs and then it needs to down to studs and then it needs to rejustify itself. He did this at rejustify itself. He did this at rejustify itself. He did this at Twitter. The engineers had to come in Twitter. The engineers had to come in Twitter. The engineers had to come in and justify to that to his people what and justify to that to his people what and justify to that to his people what they were actually doing. But that they were actually doing. But that they were actually doing. But that wasn't how those emails worked. We all

wasn't how those emails worked. We all wasn't how those emails worked. We all know this, right? He doesn't have a know this, right? He doesn't have a know this, right? He doesn't have a staff capable of seriously working staff capable of seriously working staff capable of seriously working through and then following up on emails through and then following up on emails through and then following up on emails from two million government employees from two million government employees from two million government employees about what they did that week and then about what they did that week and then about what they did that week and then really checking, well, did they do it really checking, well, did they do it really checking, well, did they do it well? Like was the thing accomplished? well? Like was the thing accomplished? well? Like was the thing accomplished? Right? Like that's not how you do that. Right? Like that's not how you do that. Right? Like that's not how you do that. Like what he's got 50 people a do Like what he's got 50 people a do Like what he's got 50 people a do nothing. Um if you want to do zerobased nothing. Um if you want to do zerobased nothing. Um if you want to do zerobased budgeting it has to be against a budgeting it has to be against a budgeting it has to be against a criteria. So coming in and gutting USID criteria. So coming in and gutting USID criteria. So coming in and gutting USID some things USA ID does are just some things USA ID does are just some things USA ID does are just extraordinary. Right. PEPAR nobody extraordinary. Right. PEPAR nobody extraordinary. Right. PEPAR nobody anywhere thought PEPAR was not a an anywhere thought PEPAR was not a an anywhere thought PEPAR was not a an efficient program. PEPFAR is maybe the efficient program. PEPFAR is maybe the efficient program. PEPFAR is maybe the highest value thing that we have ever highest value thing that we have ever highest value thing that we have ever done in the US government to save human done in the US government to save human done in the US government to save human life through foreign aid. I mean just life through foreign aid. I mean just life through foreign aid. I mean just bluntly it's a George W. Bush program. bluntly it's a George W. Bush program. bluntly it's a George W. Bush program. It saved a generation of people from It saved a generation of people from It saved a generation of people from dying of HIV AIDS. They just turned it dying of HIV AIDS. They just turned it dying of HIV AIDS. They just turned it off and they didn't have somebody come off and they didn't have somebody come off and they didn't have somebody come in and justify the PEPAR funding. They in and justify the PEPAR funding. They in and justify the PEPAR funding. They just turned it off as they turned all just turned it off as they turned all just turned it off as they turned all these different things off and have these different things off and have these different things off and have never given people a serious effort to never given people a serious effort to never given people a serious effort to come back in and say, "This is what we come back in and say, "This is what we come back in and say, "This is what we do." They just fired half of the people do." They just fired half of the people do." They just fired half of the people at DOE. DOE is, if you look at it, DOE at DOE. DOE is, if you look at it, DOE at DOE. DOE is, if you look at it, DOE has the lowest staffing level of any has the lowest staffing level of any has the lowest staffing level of any agency, but the fourth highest agency, but the fourth highest agency, but the fourth highest appropriation, and it administers the appropriation, and it administers the appropriation, and it administers the more than $1 trillion um higher ed. It more than $1 trillion um higher ed. It more than $1 trillion um higher ed. It is in overhead terms one of the leanest is in overhead terms one of the leanest is in overhead terms one of the leanest of all the agencies alongside Social of all the agencies alongside Social of all the agencies alongside Social Security agency. They didn't tell those Security agency. They didn't tell those Security agency. They didn't tell those people like what they wanted out of a people like what they wanted out of a people like what they wanted out of a DOE of half the size. They didn't let DOE of half the size. They didn't let DOE of half the size. They didn't let those people come in and argue for their those people come in and argue for their those people come in and argue for their jobs. They're just cutting things and jobs. They're just cutting things and jobs. They're just cutting things and they're not explaining at any point at

they're not explaining at any point at they're not explaining at any point at any level what they want to do with any level what they want to do with any level what they want to do with them. I'm And then I will also say what them. I'm And then I will also say what them. I'm And then I will also say what they're doing is probably illegal. they're doing is probably illegal. they're doing is probably illegal. Right. Just this week or last week, a Right. Just this week or last week, a Right. Just this week or last week, a judge said that um about 26,000 people judge said that um about 26,000 people judge said that um about 26,000 people need to be rehired by the federal need to be rehired by the federal need to be rehired by the federal government because their firings were government because their firings were government because their firings were illegal. And now that's going to go up illegal. And now that's going to go up illegal. And now that's going to go up to the Supreme Court and we'll see what to the Supreme Court and we'll see what to the Supreme Court and we'll see what John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett say, John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett say, John Roberts and Amy Coney Barrett say, right? That that that that game is not right? That that that that game is not right? That that that that game is not done yet. But they have Congress. I am a done yet. But they have Congress. I am a done yet. But they have Congress. I am a person who believes we needed civil person who believes we needed civil person who believes we needed civil service reform. Too hard to hire, too service reform. Too hard to hire, too service reform. Too hard to hire, too hard to fire, too hard to manage. and hard to fire, too hard to manage. and hard to fire, too hard to manage. and they could have gone to Congress and they could have gone to Congress and they could have gone to Congress and frankly at the beginning Roana and a frankly at the beginning Roana and a frankly at the beginning Roana and a bunch of Democrats that they wanted to bunch of Democrats that they wanted to bunch of Democrats that they wanted to work with Doge. Democrats were defeated. work with Doge. Democrats were defeated. work with Doge. Democrats were defeated. If you had wanted to build some amount If you had wanted to build some amount If you had wanted to build some amount of like political, you know, of like political, you know, of like political, you know, bipartisanship, it was there to do, bipartisanship, it was there to do, bipartisanship, it was there to do, right? Like the Democrats voted for the right? Like the Democrats voted for the right? Like the Democrats voted for the Lake and Riley bill, the hardcore Lake and Riley bill, the hardcore Lake and Riley bill, the hardcore immigration bill, they were ready to immigration bill, they were ready to immigration bill, they were ready to deal, but they didn't want to do that deal, but they didn't want to do that deal, but they didn't want to do that because it is fundamentally for them because it is fundamentally for them because it is fundamentally for them about political control. And this is my about political control. And this is my about political control. And this is my stalemate case for the action. This is a stalemate case for the action. This is a stalemate case for the action. This is a case. I believe what Elon did at Twitter case. I believe what Elon did at Twitter case. I believe what Elon did at Twitter was not make Twitter more efficient.

was not make Twitter more efficient. was not make Twitter more efficient. It's not like a better product now. It's It's not like a better product now. It's It's not like a better product now. It's a different product. What he did was he a different product. What he did was he a different product. What he did was he made it controllable. What he did at made it controllable. What he did at made it controllable. What he did at Twitter was he went into something that Twitter was he went into something that Twitter was he went into something that he where he thought the people disagreed he where he thought the people disagreed he where he thought the people disagreed with him and he broke it until he had with him and he broke it until he had with him and he broke it until he had actual operational control of the thing actual operational control of the thing actual operational control of the thing and they would do what he wanted them to and they would do what he wanted them to and they would do what he wanted them to do and then he can move it in his do and then he can move it in his do and then he can move it in his direction. What they're doing in the direction. What they're doing in the direction. What they're doing in the federal government and this is what federal government and this is what federal government and this is what Chris Rufo wanted to do. It's what Russ Chris Rufo wanted to do. It's what Russ Chris Rufo wanted to do. It's what Russ wanted to do is make the thing wanted to do is make the thing wanted to do is make the thing controllable. And what they want to do controllable. And what they want to do controllable. And what they want to do with that control, I don't even think with that control, I don't even think with that control, I don't even think they fully know. But their view is that they fully know. But their view is that they fully know. But their view is that the federal government is like a um it the federal government is like a um it the federal government is like a um it is the capital city that they have is the capital city that they have is the capital city that they have conquered and now they need to turn it conquered and now they need to turn it conquered and now they need to turn it into something that they can actually into something that they can actually into something that they can actually use. And the in order to do that, I mean use. And the in order to do that, I mean use. And the in order to do that, I mean Russ said you need to traumatize the Russ said you need to traumatize the Russ said you need to traumatize the civil servants, right? That was his civil servants, right? That was his civil servants, right? That was his word, traumatize the civil servants. word, traumatize the civil servants. word, traumatize the civil servants. When you know Elon Musk talked about When you know Elon Musk talked about When you know Elon Musk talked about USA, he said it's all worms, no apple. USA, he said it's all worms, no apple. USA, he said it's all worms, no apple. We're going to feed it to the wood We're going to feed it to the wood We're going to feed it to the wood chipper. This isn't the language of chipper. This isn't the language of chipper. This isn't the language of let's see who's really doing a good job let's see who's really doing a good job let's see who's really doing a good job here and who's not. This is a language here and who's not. This is a language here and who's not. This is a language of conquering. This is the language of of conquering. This is the language of of conquering. This is the language of destruction. And they have not destruction. And they have not destruction. And they have not articulated new better goals for it. And articulated new better goals for it. And articulated new better goals for it. And nor are they starting with the parts of nor are they starting with the parts of nor are they starting with the parts of the government where I think you would the government where I think you would the government where I think you would start with like what do they want the start with like what do they want the start with like what do they want the education department to do? Like I'm a education department to do? Like I'm a education department to do? Like I'm a professional political journalist. I professional political journalist. I professional political journalist. I talk to people in the Trump talk to people in the Trump talk to people in the Trump administration. I can't tell you what administration. I can't tell you what administration. I can't tell you what they want out of it. Aside from the fact they want out of it. Aside from the fact they want out of it. Aside from the fact that they don't like it and they think that they don't like it and they think that they don't like it and they think it's like a hot bed of of other people's it's like a hot bed of of other people's it's like a hot bed of of other people's power, I can tell you what some power, I can tell you what some power, I can tell you what some conservatives have written about it, but conservatives have written about it, but conservatives have written about it, but the administration itself has not the administration itself has not the administration itself has not articulated goals. So like what I think articulated goals. So like what I think articulated goals. So like what I think their their view is right now is they're their their view is right now is they're their their view is right now is they're breaking the thing and trying to make breaking the thing and trying to make breaking the thing and trying to make the people who would be oppositional the people who would be oppositional the people who would be oppositional either like leave or go into hiding and

either like leave or go into hiding and either like leave or go into hiding and then they're going to figure out what then they're going to figure out what then they're going to figure out what they want to do with it. But like right they want to do with it. But like right they want to do with it. But like right now they're in the period where you have now they're in the period where you have now they're in the period where you have to sack and then like later on you can to sack and then like later on you can to sack and then like later on you can build yourself your monument monuments build yourself your monument monuments build yourself your monument monuments and turn the civil service to your to and turn the civil service to your to and turn the civil service to your to your own ends. That is my like I don't your own ends. That is my like I don't your own ends. That is my like I don't think it's still I just that is what I think it's still I just that is what I think it's still I just that is what I think is going on. I I think that's an think is going on. I I think that's an think is going on. I I think that's an uh from a certain perspective accurate uh from a certain perspective accurate uh from a certain perspective accurate and insightful description. If we just and insightful description. If we just and insightful description. If we just look at look at look at Twitter you said that he didn't make Twitter you said that he didn't make Twitter you said that he didn't make it more efficient. He made it more it more efficient. He made it more it more efficient. He made it more controllable. Let me just describe just controllable. Let me just describe just controllable. Let me just describe just because I I know the engineers inside because I I know the engineers inside because I I know the engineers inside Twitter well which which we could argue Twitter well which which we could argue Twitter well which which we could argue that the government is very different that the government is very different that the government is very different than a company. That's an important than a company. That's an important than a company. That's an important argument there. With Twitter, the argument there. With Twitter, the argument there. With Twitter, the culture that's there culture that's there culture that's there now. People are really excited to work now. People are really excited to work now. People are really excited to work there and to be productive there. there and to be productive there. there and to be productive there. Engineers. Elon is really good at Engineers. Elon is really good at Engineers. Elon is really good at finding people that are there extremely finding people that are there extremely finding people that are there extremely good at what they do and are there to good at what they do and are there to good at what they do and are there to give everything and the resulting thing give everything and the resulting thing give everything and the resulting thing this machine that is created all this machine that is created all this machine that is created all barriers removed you create beautiful barriers removed you create beautiful barriers removed you create beautiful stuff it's not like uh move fast and stuff it's not like uh move fast and stuff it's not like uh move fast and break things this very cynical break things this very cynical break things this very cynical perspective on it no you everybody loves perspective on it no you everybody loves perspective on it no you everybody loves what they do are good at it and are what they do are good at it and are what they do are good at it and are really rapidly figuring out all the really rapidly figuring out all the really rapidly figuring out all the multitude of problems that arise in that multitude of problems that arise in that multitude of problems that arise in that and so it just creates It's a c it's a and so it just creates It's a c it's a and so it just creates It's a c it's a different culture, a culture of different culture, a culture of different culture, a culture of productivity and it's not like some productivity and it's not like some productivity and it's not like some negative uh boys club or there's all

negative uh boys club or there's all negative uh boys club or there's all kinds of negative perspectives you can kinds of negative perspectives you can kinds of negative perspectives you can take on those things. No, it's it's a take on those things. No, it's it's a take on those things. No, it's it's a positive culture of productivity. positive culture of productivity. positive culture of productivity. Controllable side also really important Controllable side also really important Controllable side also really important to understand and that could be taken to understand and that could be taken to understand and that could be taken advantage of in a really negative way advantage of in a really negative way advantage of in a really negative way especially in government. But you should especially in government. But you should especially in government. But you should say on some of the most successful say on some of the most successful say on some of the most successful software software software projects there is a level of control projects there is a level of control projects there is a level of control required to like open source projects uh required to like open source projects uh required to like open source projects uh Linus Tovald the head of the uh that Linus Tovald the head of the uh that Linus Tovald the head of the uh that heads up the Linux kernel there has to heads up the Linux kernel there has to heads up the Linux kernel there has to be what's often called the the be what's often called the the be what's often called the the benevolent dictator for life there there benevolent dictator for life there there benevolent dictator for life there there has to be a has to be a has to be a controllability to the machine of this controllability to the machine of this controllability to the machine of this extremely productive efficient team to extremely productive efficient team to extremely productive efficient team to work together. Now, those are work together. Now, those are work together. Now, those are engineering projects. And the problem engineering projects. And the problem engineering projects. And the problem with government is you get elected new with government is you get elected new with government is you get elected new dict benevolent dictators for life that dict benevolent dictators for life that dict benevolent dictators for life that come. They're often not benevolent. And come. They're often not benevolent. And come. They're often not benevolent. And they're often not benevolent. And they they're often not benevolent. And they they're often not benevolent. And they all convince themselves they're all convince themselves they're all convince themselves they're benevolent. You know, I'm sure Hitler benevolent. You know, I'm sure Hitler benevolent. You know, I'm sure Hitler thought he's doing the right thing, the thought he's doing the right thing, the thought he's doing the right thing, the good thing, the benevolent thing in his good thing, the benevolent thing in his good thing, the benevolent thing in his worldview. Every single dictator does worldview. Every single dictator does worldview. Every single dictator does that. Yes. So, that's a problem. But in that. Yes. So, that's a problem. But in that. Yes. So, that's a problem. But in order to be efficient, there has to be order to be efficient, there has to be order to be efficient, there has to be some level of controllability and there some level of controllability and there some level of controllability and there has to be I think to to back to go back has to be I think to to back to go back has to be I think to to back to go back to the steel man, you have to have a to the steel man, you have to have a to the steel man, you have to have a culture of productivity that I'm not culture of productivity that I'm not culture of productivity that I'm not sure I've had um quite a bit of sure I've had um quite a bit of sure I've had um quite a bit of experience with DoD and DARPA through experience with DoD and DARPA through experience with DoD and DARPA through from the academic side just everything from the academic side just everything from the academic side just everything is so bureaucratic and slow. That's a

is so bureaucratic and slow. That's a is so bureaucratic and slow. That's a different culture. So you know part of different culture. So you know part of different culture. So you know part of the destruction is in reestablishing a the destruction is in reestablishing a the destruction is in reestablishing a culture and yes make it more culture and yes make it more culture and yes make it more controllable so you can be efficient. We controllable so you can be efficient. We controllable so you can be efficient. We still need to define what the outcome still need to define what the outcome still need to define what the outcome is. Productivity and service of what? is. Productivity and service of what? is. Productivity and service of what? Efficiency and service of what? And I Efficiency and service of what? And I Efficiency and service of what? And I think the justosition of the private and think the justosition of the private and think the justosition of the private and public sectors is really useful here. public sectors is really useful here. public sectors is really useful here. Private companies, publicly traded Private companies, publicly traded Private companies, publicly traded companies have the benefit of tight and companies have the benefit of tight and companies have the benefit of tight and quantifiable feedback loops. Are you quantifiable feedback loops. Are you quantifiable feedback loops. Are you making more money this quarter than you making more money this quarter than you making more money this quarter than you were last quarter or less? How's were last quarter or less? How's were last quarter or less? How's consumer feedback? Do people say they consumer feedback? Do people say they consumer feedback? Do people say they like the product more? Are you getting like the product more? Are you getting like the product more? Are you getting 4.8 on your reviews or 4.6? The feedback 4.8 on your reviews or 4.6? The feedback 4.8 on your reviews or 4.6? The feedback loops are very quantifiable and they're loops are very quantifiable and they're loops are very quantifiable and they're also very, very quick. You know exactly also very, very quick. You know exactly also very, very quick. You know exactly when you're doing a good and bad job. when you're doing a good and bad job. when you're doing a good and bad job. And so the KPIs are so cleanly drawn And so the KPIs are so cleanly drawn And so the KPIs are so cleanly drawn that people are aligned in their sense that people are aligned in their sense that people are aligned in their sense of we are moving forward or moving back. of we are moving forward or moving back. of we are moving forward or moving back. Right? I don't think government has done Right? I don't think government has done Right? I don't think government has done this at all under doge. In fact, I think this at all under doge. In fact, I think this at all under doge. In fact, I think some in some ways goals that you could some in some ways goals that you could some in some ways goals that you could clearly identify as being good are being clearly identify as being good are being clearly identify as being good are being torn down. And this is why again it's so torn down. And this is why again it's so torn down. And this is why again it's so useful to be able to articulate goals in useful to be able to articulate goals in useful to be able to articulate goals in politics because without an articulation politics because without an articulation politics because without an articulation of goals, you don't know whether the job of goals, you don't know whether the job of goals, you don't know whether the job to be done is to take something away or to be done is to take something away or to be done is to take something away or to add something. And right now the to add something. And right now the to add something. And right now the answer from Doge is to take away, take answer from Doge is to take away, take answer from Doge is to take away, take away, subtract everything, break down to away, subtract everything, break down to away, subtract everything, break down to studs, as Ezra said. But let's take a studs, as Ezra said. But let's take a studs, as Ezra said. But let's take a really really concrete example here. The really really concrete example here. The really really concrete example here. The FDA, right? Doge just laid off dozens of FDA, right? Doge just laid off dozens of FDA, right? Doge just laid off dozens of probationary employees, so upwardly probationary employees, so upwardly probationary employees, so upwardly mobile, recently hired, often very

mobile, recently hired, often very mobile, recently hired, often very young, nicely credentialed employees at young, nicely credentialed employees at young, nicely credentialed employees at the FDA as a part of its slashing of the the FDA as a part of its slashing of the the FDA as a part of its slashing of the federal workforce. One of the big federal workforce. One of the big federal workforce. One of the big problems of the FDA is slow approval of problems of the FDA is slow approval of problems of the FDA is slow approval of phase three clinical trial drugs. Right? phase three clinical trial drugs. Right? phase three clinical trial drugs. Right? Everyone in this country who believes in Everyone in this country who believes in Everyone in this country who believes in science and technology wants the most science and technology wants the most science and technology wants the most lifesaving drugs to be brought into the lifesaving drugs to be brought into the lifesaving drugs to be brought into the public marketplace as soon as possible public marketplace as soon as possible public marketplace as soon as possible and competed against with other drugs so and competed against with other drugs so and competed against with other drugs so the price comes down and helps to extend the price comes down and helps to extend the price comes down and helps to extend people's lives and health spans. I think people's lives and health spans. I think people's lives and health spans. I think everyone agrees that is an outcome worth everyone agrees that is an outcome worth everyone agrees that is an outcome worth fighting for and if they don't certainly fighting for and if they don't certainly fighting for and if they don't certainly Ezra and I are willing to say that's an Ezra and I are willing to say that's an Ezra and I are willing to say that's an outcome that we want that is that's what outcome that we want that is that's what outcome that we want that is that's what we want from our science policy. What we want from our science policy. What we want from our science policy. What happens if you cut probationary happens if you cut probationary happens if you cut probationary employees at the FDA? The FDA doesn't employees at the FDA? The FDA doesn't employees at the FDA? The FDA doesn't become more efficient, it becomes less become more efficient, it becomes less become more efficient, it becomes less efficient because the same amount of efficient because the same amount of efficient because the same amount of work spread over fewer people means work spread over fewer people means work spread over fewer people means longer delays in terms of approving longer delays in terms of approving longer delays in terms of approving phase 3 clinical trial drugs and phase 3 clinical trial drugs and phase 3 clinical trial drugs and deciding whether or not to approve them deciding whether or not to approve them deciding whether or not to approve them for public consumption. So in this for public consumption. So in this for public consumption. So in this really really clear and very specific really really clear and very specific really really clear and very specific example, I think we can see the problem example, I think we can see the problem example, I think we can see the problem with not having articulated goals. You with not having articulated goals. You with not having articulated goals. You don't know whether the job to be done is don't know whether the job to be done is don't know whether the job to be done is to take away employees or to add them. I to take away employees or to add them. I to take away employees or to add them. I think if instead what Doge had done is think if instead what Doge had done is think if instead what Doge had done is come in and say, you know what, Elon come in and say, you know what, Elon come in and say, you know what, Elon Musk and a bunch of other people from Musk and a bunch of other people from Musk and a bunch of other people from Silicon Valley, one thing we take very Silicon Valley, one thing we take very Silicon Valley, one thing we take very seriously is the importance of seriously is the importance of seriously is the importance of scientific and technological progress.

scientific and technological progress. scientific and technological progress. Because if you look back over decades Because if you look back over decades Because if you look back over decades and centuries, what distinguishes our and centuries, what distinguishes our and centuries, what distinguishes our generation from every other generation generation from every other generation generation from every other generation in terms of its health and its power is in terms of its health and its power is in terms of its health and its power is science and technology. And we want to science and technology. And we want to science and technology. And we want to infuse government with a sense of infuse government with a sense of infuse government with a sense of science and technological progress. And science and technological progress. And science and technological progress. And to that end, one thing we want to do is to that end, one thing we want to do is to that end, one thing we want to do is to have a smarter and more efficient FDA to have a smarter and more efficient FDA to have a smarter and more efficient FDA so that people can experience so that people can experience so that people can experience life-saving medicines. I think what you life-saving medicines. I think what you life-saving medicines. I think what you would do is research the bottlenecks would do is research the bottlenecks would do is research the bottlenecks that exist to American science and that exist to American science and that exist to American science and pharmaceutical policy and say we should pharmaceutical policy and say we should pharmaceutical policy and say we should hire more people at the FDA to hire more people at the FDA to hire more people at the FDA to accelerate drug approval, decide which accelerate drug approval, decide which accelerate drug approval, decide which which drugs are to be rejected and which which drugs are to be rejected and which which drugs are to be rejected and which drugs are to get the FDA label. That is drugs are to get the FDA label. That is drugs are to get the FDA label. That is the opposite of the Doge approach. And the opposite of the Doge approach. And the opposite of the Doge approach. And this really, I think, puts a fine point this really, I think, puts a fine point this really, I think, puts a fine point to the problem of a Doge without goals. to the problem of a Doge without goals. to the problem of a Doge without goals. When Elon takes over Tesla, when Elon is When Elon takes over Tesla, when Elon is When Elon takes over Tesla, when Elon is at SpaceX, when Elon's at X, I would at SpaceX, when Elon's at X, I would at SpaceX, when Elon's at X, I would imagine, and you know this better than imagine, and you know this better than imagine, and you know this better than me because you know him. And maybe most me because you know him. And maybe most me because you know him. And maybe most importantly, for the purposes of this importantly, for the purposes of this importantly, for the purposes of this part of the conversation, you know the part of the conversation, you know the part of the conversation, you know the people who work for him. I'll bet if you people who work for him. I'll bet if you people who work for him. I'll bet if you ask the people who work under Elon, Ed, ask the people who work under Elon, Ed, ask the people who work under Elon, Ed, Tesla, SpaceX, they say, "I know exactly Tesla, SpaceX, they say, "I know exactly Tesla, SpaceX, they say, "I know exactly what Elon wants. This is his goal for what Elon wants. This is his goal for what Elon wants. This is his goal for the Superheavy rocket. This is his goal the Superheavy rocket. This is his goal the Superheavy rocket. This is his goal in terms of humanoid robots. This is his in terms of humanoid robots. This is his in terms of humanoid robots. This is his goal in terms of profitability of goal in terms of profitability of goal in terms of profitability of Twitter and the growth of our Twitter and the growth of our Twitter and the growth of our subscription business and how we're subscription business and how we're subscription business and how we're going to integrate new features. There's going to integrate new features. There's going to integrate new features. There's a probably a really clear mind meld a probably a really clear mind meld a probably a really clear mind meld right now. I have no sense that there's right now. I have no sense that there's right now. I have no sense that there's a mind meld. And in fact, I have the a mind meld. And in fact, I have the a mind meld. And in fact, I have the exact opposite sense that rather than an exact opposite sense that rather than an exact opposite sense that rather than an example of creative destruction, which

example of creative destruction, which example of creative destruction, which would be a mitzvah of entrepreneurship, would be a mitzvah of entrepreneurship, would be a mitzvah of entrepreneurship, we have an act of destruction we have an act of destruction we have an act of destruction destruction. We have destruction for the destruction. We have destruction for the destruction. We have destruction for the sake of destruction. It's much cleaner sake of destruction. It's much cleaner sake of destruction. It's much cleaner to me from an interpretive standpoint to to me from an interpretive standpoint to to me from an interpretive standpoint to describe Doge as an ideological purge of describe Doge as an ideological purge of describe Doge as an ideological purge of progressivism performing an act of or progressivism performing an act of or progressivism performing an act of or performing the job of efficiency rather performing the job of efficiency rather performing the job of efficiency rather than a department of actual efficiency than a department of actual efficiency than a department of actual efficiency itself. I want to say because I really itself. I want to say because I really itself. I want to say because I really want to emphasize that it has goals. The want to emphasize that it has goals. The want to emphasize that it has goals. The goals are clear on some level and they goals are clear on some level and they goals are clear on some level and they have to do with centralizing power. So have to do with centralizing power. So have to do with centralizing power. So let me take out something that's not let me take out something that's not let me take out something that's not Doge because this is I think an Doge because this is I think an Doge because this is I think an important place where you see what the important place where you see what the important place where you see what the the effort is. One of what is Congress the effort is. One of what is Congress the effort is. One of what is Congress for? Not just Democrats in Congress who for? Not just Democrats in Congress who for? Not just Democrats in Congress who are in theory right now the opposition are in theory right now the opposition are in theory right now the opposition party but but Republicans in Congress. party but but Republicans in Congress. party but but Republicans in Congress. Congress is this aggregation of Congress is this aggregation of Congress is this aggregation of information from different places in the information from different places in the information from different places in the country who have chosen representatives country who have chosen representatives country who have chosen representatives to represent them in Washington. Right? to represent them in Washington. Right? to represent them in Washington. Right? That's how the system works. That's how the system works. That's how the system works. One of the things that has really cowed One of the things that has really cowed One of the things that has really cowed congressional Republicans, it is a huge congressional Republicans, it is a huge congressional Republicans, it is a huge gra like sunlight gravitational force gra like sunlight gravitational force gra like sunlight gravitational force now on Capitol Hill is that Elon has now on Capitol Hill is that Elon has now on Capitol Hill is that Elon has made it known that any House or Senate made it known that any House or Senate made it known that any House or Senate Republican who defies Trump on a key Republican who defies Trump on a key Republican who defies Trump on a key vote, cabinet nominees, the CR, that vote, cabinet nominees, the CR, that vote, cabinet nominees, the CR, that kind of thing. He will dump 50 to$100 kind of thing. He will dump 50 to$100 kind of thing. He will dump 50 to$100 million into a primary. It's no money at million into a primary. It's no money at million into a primary. It's no money at all for him. It's lethal for them.

all for him. It's lethal for them. all for him. It's lethal for them. Right? This is well known. He has said Right? This is well known. He has said Right? This is well known. He has said this like personally to some of them, this like personally to some of them, this like personally to some of them, right? It's been well reported. This is right? It's been well reported. This is right? It's been well reported. This is probably why Jody Ernst vot voted for probably why Jody Ernst vot voted for probably why Jody Ernst vot voted for Pete Hegsth. Well, what's achieved by Pete Hegsth. Well, what's achieved by Pete Hegsth. Well, what's achieved by this? I think it's like an interesting this? I think it's like an interesting this? I think it's like an interesting question because Republicans in theory question because Republicans in theory question because Republicans in theory are allied to Donald Trump, right? He's are allied to Donald Trump, right? He's are allied to Donald Trump, right? He's the the nominee of their party and they the the nominee of their party and they the the nominee of their party and they don't all have like literally the same don't all have like literally the same don't all have like literally the same view of him. But I think you might say view of him. But I think you might say view of him. But I think you might say from one perspective, there is a value from one perspective, there is a value from one perspective, there is a value in the system in there being checks and in the system in there being checks and in the system in there being checks and balances. There's a value in the system balances. There's a value in the system balances. There's a value in the system in the system having to absorb other in the system having to absorb other in the system having to absorb other kinds of information. Now, we already kinds of information. Now, we already kinds of information. Now, we already don't have the checks and balances we don't have the checks and balances we don't have the checks and balances we once had or thought we would have in once had or thought we would have in once had or thought we would have in this country because we have this country because we have this country because we have nationalized political parties instead nationalized political parties instead nationalized political parties instead of, you know, uh, branches of government of, you know, uh, branches of government of, you know, uh, branches of government that that sort of compete, you know, that that sort of compete, you know, that that sort of compete, you know, with ambition checking ambition. And with ambition checking ambition. And with ambition checking ambition. And I've done whole shows on this and we can I've done whole shows on this and we can I've done whole shows on this and we can talk about that if we want, but we we do talk about that if we want, but we we do talk about that if we want, but we we do have political parties and political have political parties and political have political parties and political parties are themselves institutions that parties are themselves institutions that parties are themselves institutions that aggregate different kinds of aggregate different kinds of aggregate different kinds of information. in order to try to come to information. in order to try to come to information. in order to try to come to some outcome that is a better outcome some outcome that is a better outcome some outcome that is a better outcome because more information is surfaced. I because more information is surfaced. I because more information is surfaced. I think Donald Trump would be in a think Donald Trump would be in a think Donald Trump would be in a stronger position for him if Senate stronger position for him if Senate stronger position for him if Senate Republicans could have done what they Republicans could have done what they Republicans could have done what they actually wanted to do and not confirm actually wanted to do and not confirm actually wanted to do and not confirm RFK Jr. not confirm Tulsi Gabard, not RFK Jr. not confirm Tulsi Gabard, not RFK Jr. not confirm Tulsi Gabard, not confirm Pete Haggath, not confirm Cash confirm Pete Haggath, not confirm Cash confirm Pete Haggath, not confirm Cash Patel and Don Mino, right? That's Patel and Don Mino, right? That's Patel and Don Mino, right? That's actually a huge amount of risk the Trump actually a huge amount of risk the Trump actually a huge amount of risk the Trump administration has taken on. If they had administration has taken on. If they had administration has taken on. If they had named a sort of normal figure to HHS and named a sort of normal figure to HHS and named a sort of normal figure to HHS and then there's a measles outbreak. Well, then there's a measles outbreak. Well, then there's a measles outbreak. Well, measles outbreaks are tough. Like, measles outbreaks are tough. Like, measles outbreaks are tough. Like, that's a hard thing. If you name RFK Jr.

that's a hard thing. If you name RFK Jr. that's a hard thing. If you name RFK Jr. and there's a huge measles outbreak, and there's a huge measles outbreak, and there's a huge measles outbreak, you're really going to get blamed for you're really going to get blamed for you're really going to get blamed for that because people are ready to blame that because people are ready to blame that because people are ready to blame you. If there is a domestic terror you. If there is a domestic terror you. If there is a domestic terror attack after you've put Cash Patel, attack after you've put Cash Patel, attack after you've put Cash Patel, who's quite unqualified, in charge of who's quite unqualified, in charge of who's quite unqualified, in charge of the FBI, and they've sort of launched a the FBI, and they've sort of launched a the FBI, and they've sort of launched a war internally against the FBI, which war internally against the FBI, which war internally against the FBI, which they see as a hot bed of anti-Trump they see as a hot bed of anti-Trump they see as a hot bed of anti-Trump sentiment, and the FBI in the sort of sentiment, and the FBI in the sort of sentiment, and the FBI in the sort of internal chaos misses some things, and internal chaos misses some things, and internal chaos misses some things, and you have deaths on American soil, that's you have deaths on American soil, that's you have deaths on American soil, that's a huge amount of risk you've taken on. I a huge amount of risk you've taken on. I a huge amount of risk you've taken on. I mean, the guy they fired, Chris Ray, he mean, the guy they fired, Chris Ray, he mean, the guy they fired, Chris Ray, he was Trump's appointee. It wasn't some was Trump's appointee. It wasn't some was Trump's appointee. It wasn't some Democrat. Trump named him in his first Democrat. Trump named him in his first Democrat. Trump named him in his first term. But Elon, right, what he did here term. But Elon, right, what he did here term. But Elon, right, what he did here was he created a kind of death star of was he created a kind of death star of was he created a kind of death star of primary money. And he has said that like primary money. And he has said that like primary money. And he has said that like if you cross Trump in Congress, even as if you cross Trump in Congress, even as if you cross Trump in Congress, even as a Republican, you're done. Like between a Republican, you're done. Like between a Republican, you're done. Like between Trump's control of attention and loyalty Trump's control of attention and loyalty Trump's control of attention and loyalty and my ability to outspend you, like and my ability to outspend you, like and my ability to outspend you, like you're you're you're toast. I think what that reveals is that toast. I think what that reveals is that toast. I think what that reveals is that what he wants is for power to be what he wants is for power to be what he wants is for power to be centralized under Trump. We've been centralized under Trump. We've been centralized under Trump. We've been talking about through bureaucracy, but talking about through bureaucracy, but talking about through bureaucracy, but he also wants it to be true in Congress. he also wants it to be true in Congress. he also wants it to be true in Congress. I am not a Donald Trump fan, but I am not a Donald Trump fan, but I am not a Donald Trump fan, but obviously other people are Donald Trump obviously other people are Donald Trump obviously other people are Donald Trump fans, right? Obviously, I think at this fans, right? Obviously, I think at this fans, right? Obviously, I think at this point Elon Musk is a Donald Trump fan, point Elon Musk is a Donald Trump fan, point Elon Musk is a Donald Trump fan, but much of the country thinks this guy but much of the country thinks this guy but much of the country thinks this guy is great. And I think we should take is great. And I think we should take is great. And I think we should take what they are doing at word and deed.

what they are doing at word and deed. what they are doing at word and deed. The point of Donald Trump is that Donald The point of Donald Trump is that Donald The point of Donald Trump is that Donald Trump is right about things. We should Trump is right about things. We should Trump is right about things. We should give him power and he should use that give him power and he should use that give him power and he should use that power. My sense is you have some mixed power. My sense is you have some mixed power. My sense is you have some mixed feelings about him, but not everybody feelings about him, but not everybody feelings about him, but not everybody does. and the this sort of very does. and the this sort of very does. and the this sort of very consistent application of authority consistent application of authority consistent application of authority across the people he's named JD Vance across the people he's named JD Vance across the people he's named JD Vance the difference between Mike Pence and JD the difference between Mike Pence and JD the difference between Mike Pence and JD Vance is JD Vance said explicitly in the Vance is JD Vance said explicitly in the Vance is JD Vance said explicitly in the whole runup to the vice presidential whole runup to the vice presidential whole runup to the vice presidential sweep stakes that his view of what went sweep stakes that his view of what went sweep stakes that his view of what went wrong in the first administration is wrong in the first administration is wrong in the first administration is between the bureaucracy and the staff between the bureaucracy and the staff between the bureaucracy and the staff too many people were trying to inhibit too many people were trying to inhibit too many people were trying to inhibit Donald Trump and that what he would do Donald Trump and that what he would do Donald Trump and that what he would do is tell Trump that like he's got to get is tell Trump that like he's got to get is tell Trump that like he's got to get rid of these generals and he's got to rid of these generals and he's got to rid of these generals and he's got to get people who will do what Trump get people who will do what Trump get people who will do what Trump actually said. The view of Trump's fans, actually said. The view of Trump's fans, actually said. The view of Trump's fans, the view of his allies, is that the the view of his allies, is that the the view of his allies, is that the first term didn't go well enough because first term didn't go well enough because first term didn't go well enough because they had too much opposition from they had too much opposition from they had too much opposition from Republicans in Congress who talked Trump Republicans in Congress who talked Trump Republicans in Congress who talked Trump into things they should have talked him into things they should have talked him into things they should have talked him into and too much opposition from the into and too much opposition from the into and too much opposition from the civil service and even from Trump's own civil service and even from Trump's own civil service and even from Trump's own staff. I think a very simple heristic of staff. I think a very simple heristic of staff. I think a very simple heristic of why these terms are so different is that why these terms are so different is that why these terms are so different is that the most important member of the Trump the most important member of the Trump the most important member of the Trump family, Trump aside, in the first term family, Trump aside, in the first term family, Trump aside, in the first term was Jared Kushner and maybe Ivanka and was Jared Kushner and maybe Ivanka and was Jared Kushner and maybe Ivanka and the most important member of the family the most important member of the family the most important member of the family in the second is Don Trump Jr., Right.

in the second is Don Trump Jr., Right. in the second is Don Trump Jr., Right. Kushner brought in a bunch of Kushner brought in a bunch of Kushner brought in a bunch of inhibitors. He brought in mainstream inhibitors. He brought in mainstream inhibitors. He brought in mainstream figures like Gary Conn and and and you figures like Gary Conn and and and you figures like Gary Conn and and and you know Kushner represented other parts of know Kushner represented other parts of know Kushner represented other parts of society that you know were sort of mixed society that you know were sort of mixed society that you know were sort of mixed on Trump and they wanted him to do on Trump and they wanted him to do on Trump and they wanted him to do certain things and not others and there certain things and not others and there certain things and not others and there was a maybe a productive tension. Um was a maybe a productive tension. Um was a maybe a productive tension. Um McConnell you know was majority leader. McConnell you know was majority leader. McConnell you know was majority leader. He was more powerful than th is. Paul He was more powerful than th is. Paul He was more powerful than th is. Paul Ryan was speaker. He's more powerful Ryan was speaker. He's more powerful Ryan was speaker. He's more powerful than Mike Johnson is. In the second term than Mike Johnson is. In the second term than Mike Johnson is. In the second term you have Donald Trump Jr. who brings in you have Donald Trump Jr. who brings in you have Donald Trump Jr. who brings in much more right-wing figures. Who's much much more right-wing figures. Who's much much more right-wing figures. Who's much they're accelerators not inhibitors. they're accelerators not inhibitors. they're accelerators not inhibitors. accelerationists in many cases accelerationists in many cases accelerationists in many cases explicitly. You have Elon Musk who explicitly. You have Elon Musk who explicitly. You have Elon Musk who believes like the likeliest problem is believes like the likeliest problem is believes like the likeliest problem is Trump doesn't go far enough fast enough. Trump doesn't go far enough fast enough. Trump doesn't go far enough fast enough. And you have a weak Republican Congress And you have a weak Republican Congress And you have a weak Republican Congress that is further cowed by Musk's money. that is further cowed by Musk's money. that is further cowed by Musk's money. The it could be good or it could be bad. The it could be good or it could be bad. The it could be good or it could be bad. But the Curtis Yarvin take that we need But the Curtis Yarvin take that we need But the Curtis Yarvin take that we need a more monarch-like figure is clearly a more monarch-like figure is clearly a more monarch-like figure is clearly being tested out. Like the view just as being tested out. Like the view just as being tested out. Like the view just as you said about software engineering you said about software engineering you said about software engineering things is that you often need a things is that you often need a things is that you often need a benevolent dictator. Now I don't think benevolent dictator. Now I don't think benevolent dictator. Now I don't think Trump is benevolent. Other people do. Trump is benevolent. Other people do. Trump is benevolent. Other people do. But the view that what is being But the view that what is being But the view that what is being attempted here is something much more attempted here is something much more attempted here is something much more centralized in its power, I think is centralized in its power, I think is centralized in its power, I think is actually a shared view of what's going actually a shared view of what's going actually a shared view of what's going on. It's like a consensus reality we on. It's like a consensus reality we on. It's like a consensus reality we have, not like an argument over reality have, not like an argument over reality have, not like an argument over reality we're having. Do you think there's some we're having. Do you think there's some we're having. Do you think there's some degree to where if you trust in the degree to where if you trust in the degree to where if you trust in the system of democracy, which I do, and system of democracy, which I do, and system of democracy, which I do, and there's some people and we'll talk about there's some people and we'll talk about there's some people and we'll talk about them who one of the main criticisms and them who one of the main criticisms and them who one of the main criticisms and concerns of Donald Trump was he's going concerns of Donald Trump was he's going concerns of Donald Trump was he's going to break democracy. But if you trust to break democracy. But if you trust to break democracy. But if you trust that democracy holds, isn't this an that democracy holds, isn't this an that democracy holds, isn't this an interesting interesting interesting experiment of how when everybody's experiment of how when everybody's experiment of how when everybody's aligned, aggressive cutting of

aligned, aggressive cutting of aligned, aggressive cutting of regulation and the number of people is regulation and the number of people is regulation and the number of people is an experiment of like, okay, let's see an experiment of like, okay, let's see an experiment of like, okay, let's see what this does to a really overbloated what this does to a really overbloated what this does to a really overbloated bureaucracy that's become extremely bureaucracy that's become extremely bureaucracy that's become extremely inefficient. And by the way, so I have inefficient. And by the way, so I have inefficient. And by the way, so I have an optimism about it that matches the an optimism about it that matches the an optimism about it that matches the the vision of abundance in the book that the vision of abundance in the book that the vision of abundance in the book that once you do the creative destruction, once you do the creative destruction, once you do the creative destruction, then you start to really be able to step then you start to really be able to step then you start to really be able to step in and have a clear vision of like, in and have a clear vision of like, in and have a clear vision of like, okay, housing, how do we what are the okay, housing, how do we what are the okay, housing, how do we what are the policies to solve housing? But I do policies to solve housing? But I do policies to solve housing? But I do think the first step that's needed is think the first step that's needed is think the first step that's needed is the destruction. Asra said, we're sort the destruction. Asra said, we're sort the destruction. Asra said, we're sort of speedr running a particular of speedr running a particular of speedr running a particular experiment here. Yeah. Of what does experiment here. Yeah. Of what does experiment here. Yeah. Of what does executive power look like if we do away executive power look like if we do away executive power look like if we do away as much as possible with checks and as much as possible with checks and as much as possible with checks and balances. And I would submit that we're balances. And I would submit that we're balances. And I would submit that we're already starting to get some feedback already starting to get some feedback already starting to get some feedback loops from the market. The stock market loops from the market. The stock market loops from the market. The stock market is not the economy, but it is a very is not the economy, but it is a very is not the economy, but it is a very clear voting mechanism. And what's clear clear voting mechanism. And what's clear clear voting mechanism. And what's clear is that many institutional and retail is that many institutional and retail is that many institutional and retail investors think that the current investors think that the current investors think that the current economic regime is pushing us toward a economic regime is pushing us toward a economic regime is pushing us toward a recession that we don't have to have.

recession that we don't have to have. recession that we don't have to have. Right? Donald Trump has insulated Right? Donald Trump has insulated Right? Donald Trump has insulated himself from any feedback loop or any himself from any feedback loop or any himself from any feedback loop or any sense of criticism that his tariff sense of criticism that his tariff sense of criticism that his tariff policy might not be the best course of policy might not be the best course of policy might not be the best course of strategy for American industry or global strategy for American industry or global strategy for American industry or global relations. And as a result, what we have relations. And as a result, what we have relations. And as a result, what we have is, I think, fairly described as a kind is, I think, fairly described as a kind is, I think, fairly described as a kind of purposeful chaos. I mean, what other of purposeful chaos. I mean, what other of purposeful chaos. I mean, what other term can you use if a tariff is being term can you use if a tariff is being term can you use if a tariff is being announced at 9:00 a.m. and then taken announced at 9:00 a.m. and then taken announced at 9:00 a.m. and then taken away at 3:30 p.m. and then 10 days later away at 3:30 p.m. and then 10 days later away at 3:30 p.m. and then 10 days later announced at 9:37 and then renegotiated announced at 9:37 and then renegotiated announced at 9:37 and then renegotiated at 2:45? This is not a principled theory at 2:45? This is not a principled theory at 2:45? This is not a principled theory of the perfect tariff level on of the perfect tariff level on of the perfect tariff level on international trade. This is, I think, international trade. This is, I think, international trade. This is, I think, much more parsimmoniously explained by much more parsimmoniously explained by much more parsimmoniously explained by just an expression of Donald Trump's just an expression of Donald Trump's just an expression of Donald Trump's personality. This is a New York re real personality. This is a New York re real personality. This is a New York re real estate guy. He loves making big awesome estate guy. He loves making big awesome estate guy. He loves making big awesome pronouncements and then using those big pronouncements and then using those big pronouncements and then using those big awesome pronouncements in order to awesome pronouncements in order to awesome pronouncements in order to negotiate little one-on-one dealings negotiate little one-on-one dealings negotiate little one-on-one dealings where he can rest for himself a personal where he can rest for himself a personal where he can rest for himself a personal sense of power or money or pride. Right?

sense of power or money or pride. Right? sense of power or money or pride. Right? Announcing these tariffs in a in a in a Announcing these tariffs in a in a in a Announcing these tariffs in a in a in a sort of chaotic way forces world leaders sort of chaotic way forces world leaders sort of chaotic way forces world leaders to get on the phone with him and say, to get on the phone with him and say, to get on the phone with him and say, "Donald, what can I give you to bring "Donald, what can I give you to bring "Donald, what can I give you to bring down the tariff?" Right? This is down the tariff?" Right? This is down the tariff?" Right? This is personality standing in for politics in personality standing in for politics in personality standing in for politics in a way that's totally unmolested by a way that's totally unmolested by a way that's totally unmolested by anybody else's sense of, hey, that'll anybody else's sense of, hey, that'll anybody else's sense of, hey, that'll maybe chill it on the tariff policy. maybe chill it on the tariff policy. maybe chill it on the tariff policy. Hey, let's maybe slow down on the Hey, let's maybe slow down on the Hey, let's maybe slow down on the deportations. I'm not so sure about this deportations. I'm not so sure about this deportations. I'm not so sure about this particular move over here. Instead, you particular move over here. Instead, you particular move over here. Instead, you have an executive branch that's just a have an executive branch that's just a have an executive branch that's just a full manifestation of Donald Trump's full manifestation of Donald Trump's full manifestation of Donald Trump's mind. and and and I and I do think that mind. and and and I and I do think that mind. and and and I and I do think that the early returns, if you look at the early returns, if you look at the early returns, if you look at consumer sentiment, if you look at the consumer sentiment, if you look at the consumer sentiment, if you look at the stock market, if you look at the 10-year stock market, if you look at the 10-year stock market, if you look at the 10-year yield, you have a range of, let's call yield, you have a range of, let's call yield, you have a range of, let's call them, aggregated economic information them, aggregated economic information them, aggregated economic information telling us that the economy, consumers, telling us that the economy, consumers, telling us that the economy, consumers, employers, investors do not like what's employers, investors do not like what's employers, investors do not like what's happening now, which is going to be a happening now, which is going to be a happening now, which is going to be a really interesting test case. Donald really interesting test case. Donald really interesting test case. Donald Trump's first four years in office, Trump's first four years in office, Trump's first four years in office, right? Love him or hate him, were four right? Love him or hate him, were four right? Love him or hate him, were four rather successful years of economic rather successful years of economic rather successful years of economic growth. Low unemployment, steady growth, growth. Low unemployment, steady growth, growth. Low unemployment, steady growth, low inflation, pretty much every low inflation, pretty much every low inflation, pretty much every economic indicator in the green. We're economic indicator in the green. We're economic indicator in the green. We're already in the red in many of the already in the red in many of the already in the red in many of the economic indicators that never even economic indicators that never even economic indicators that never even blinked yellow under his first blinked yellow under his first blinked yellow under his first administration. And I personally don't administration. And I personally don't administration. And I personally don't think it's a coincidence that you're think it's a coincidence that you're think it's a coincidence that you're getting these red indicators at a time getting these red indicators at a time getting these red indicators at a time when Donald Trump is having an entirely when Donald Trump is having an entirely when Donald Trump is having an entirely different experience of being president different experience of being president different experience of being president where there is no minut, hey, maybe where there is no minut, hey, maybe where there is no minut, hey, maybe let's cool it off in the tariffs. The let's cool it off in the tariffs. The let's cool it off in the tariffs. The one more thing I would add here is you one more thing I would add here is you one more thing I would add here is you said, you know, maybe maybe Trump's said, you know, maybe maybe Trump's said, you know, maybe maybe Trump's presidency is a kind of right-wing

presidency is a kind of right-wing presidency is a kind of right-wing abundance, right? I think that's that's abundance, right? I think that's that's abundance, right? I think that's that's it's a worthy question, right? Is Donald it's a worthy question, right? Is Donald it's a worthy question, right? Is Donald Trump just doing his own version of Trump just doing his own version of Trump just doing his own version of abundance and we should even if we abundance and we should even if we abundance and we should even if we disagree with his process ideologically disagree with his process ideologically disagree with his process ideologically sort of root for the outcomes that are sort of root for the outcomes that are sort of root for the outcomes that are that are likely under it? Here's why I that are likely under it? Here's why I that are likely under it? Here's why I don't think don't think don't think so. Let's say that you or just someone so. Let's say that you or just someone so. Let's say that you or just someone as a as a conservative shares our view as a as a conservative shares our view as a as a conservative shares our view that they want housing to be abundant. I that they want housing to be abundant. I that they want housing to be abundant. I think what they should really root for think what they should really root for think what they should really root for is to reduce the tax of forb building is to reduce the tax of forb building is to reduce the tax of forb building and make it easier to add housing units and make it easier to add housing units and make it easier to add housing units cheaply. Well, houses are made out of cheaply. Well, houses are made out of cheaply. Well, houses are made out of materials. Two of the most important materials. Two of the most important materials. Two of the most important materials in home building are soft materials in home building are soft materials in home building are soft lumber and drywall. Soft lumber we lumber and drywall. Soft lumber we lumber and drywall. Soft lumber we import from Canada. Drywall, one of the import from Canada. Drywall, one of the import from Canada. Drywall, one of the key ingredients we import from Mexico. key ingredients we import from Mexico. key ingredients we import from Mexico. One of the first things that's going to One of the first things that's going to One of the first things that's going to happen if you raise 25% tariff on lumber happen if you raise 25% tariff on lumber happen if you raise 25% tariff on lumber from Canada and drywall from Mexico is from Canada and drywall from Mexico is from Canada and drywall from Mexico is that the cost of housing is going to go that the cost of housing is going to go that the cost of housing is going to go straight up. And this isn't my personal straight up. And this isn't my personal straight up. And this isn't my personal opinion. This was a March 7th memo sent opinion. This was a March 7th memo sent opinion. This was a March 7th memo sent by the National Association of by the National Association of by the National Association of Homebuilders essentially in a kind of Homebuilders essentially in a kind of Homebuilders essentially in a kind of controlled panic saying, "Please don't controlled panic saying, "Please don't controlled panic saying, "Please don't do a tariff policy like this. You're do a tariff policy like this. You're do a tariff policy like this. You're going to screw over homebuilders." Even going to screw over homebuilders." Even going to screw over homebuilders." Even though, ironically, you Donald Trump though, ironically, you Donald Trump though, ironically, you Donald Trump were elected by Biden to Trump voters were elected by Biden to Trump voters were elected by Biden to Trump voters who were mad about the price of housing.

who were mad about the price of housing. who were mad about the price of housing. So, I am not in the moment optimistic So, I am not in the moment optimistic So, I am not in the moment optimistic that his centralizing style is going to that his centralizing style is going to that his centralizing style is going to be economically useful for Americans, be economically useful for Americans, be economically useful for Americans, whatever their interests. My sense of whatever their interests. My sense of whatever their interests. My sense of the early feedback and of the early the early feedback and of the early the early feedback and of the early returns is that he in fact does not have returns is that he in fact does not have returns is that he in fact does not have a very clear and beneficial economic a very clear and beneficial economic a very clear and beneficial economic agenda. He has a personal agenda. He agenda. He has a personal agenda. He agenda. He has a personal agenda. He likes taking phone calls from likes taking phone calls from likes taking phone calls from international leaders and working out international leaders and working out international leaders and working out little deals with them. I don't think little deals with them. I don't think little deals with them. I don't think that's in the larger interest of that's in the larger interest of that's in the larger interest of economic growth and certainly I don't economic growth and certainly I don't economic growth and certainly I don't think it's in the specific interest of think it's in the specific interest of think it's in the specific interest of reducing housing prices. Okay, there's a reducing housing prices. Okay, there's a reducing housing prices. Okay, there's a lot to say there. So uh first of all can lot to say there. So uh first of all can lot to say there. So uh first of all can we separate the uh sort of abundance and we separate the uh sort of abundance and we separate the uh sort of abundance and doge those efforts from tariffs doge those efforts from tariffs doge those efforts from tariffs uh I don't know who agrees with uh I don't know who agrees with uh I don't know who agrees with terrorists tariffs don't make sense to terrorists tariffs don't make sense to terrorists tariffs don't make sense to me economically I maybe you can explain me economically I maybe you can explain me economically I maybe you can explain who agrees or likes the terrorists on who agrees or likes the terrorists on who agrees or likes the terrorists on the right or the left you see my point the right or the left you see my point the right or the left you see my point that well that point also to comment on that well that point also to comment on that well that point also to comment on it I mean the one of the mechanisms by it I mean the one of the mechanisms by it I mean the one of the mechanisms by which bureaucracy forms is a kind of which bureaucracy forms is a kind of which bureaucracy forms is a kind of polite civility and a structure and a polite civility and a structure and a polite civility and a structure and a process. There is a argument to be made process. There is a argument to be made process. There is a argument to be made and I'm not saying Donald Trump is that and I'm not saying Donald Trump is that and I'm not saying Donald Trump is that person, but there's some qualities there person, but there's some qualities there person, but there's some qualities there of picking up the phone and calling of picking up the phone and calling of picking up the phone and calling Putin. Uh that goes against all the Putin. Uh that goes against all the Putin. Uh that goes against all the process. Uh some of the most successful process. Uh some of the most successful process. Uh some of the most successful peace negotiations peace negotiations peace negotiations uh throughout history broke process.

uh throughout history broke process. uh throughout history broke process. It's uh just spoken to Modi. You know, It's uh just spoken to Modi. You know, It's uh just spoken to Modi. You know, there's a process. You're not supposed there's a process. You're not supposed there's a process. You're not supposed to meet with Pakistan or whatever for to meet with Pakistan or whatever for to meet with Pakistan or whatever for India. You just screw it. I'm going to India. You just screw it. I'm going to India. You just screw it. I'm going to go to a wedding, a Pakistan wedding of a go to a wedding, a Pakistan wedding of a go to a wedding, a Pakistan wedding of a high up official. I'm going to do do high up official. I'm going to do do high up official. I'm going to do do these things that are very Trumpian. these things that are very Trumpian. these things that are very Trumpian. Break the rules. Okay. Now, that, you Break the rules. Okay. Now, that, you Break the rules. Okay. Now, that, you know, in a perfect world, some of that know, in a perfect world, some of that know, in a perfect world, some of that is good matched with principled policy is good matched with principled policy is good matched with principled policy that's uh surrounded by a large number that's uh surrounded by a large number that's uh surrounded by a large number of experts that actually understand that of experts that actually understand that of experts that actually understand that policy. Okay, I can criticize Trump all policy. Okay, I can criticize Trump all policy. Okay, I can criticize Trump all day, but I'm just saying that there is day, but I'm just saying that there is day, but I'm just saying that there is some degree to the picking up the phone some degree to the picking up the phone some degree to the picking up the phone and talking to leaders and playing the and talking to leaders and playing the and talking to leaders and playing the in the morning say one thing, in the in the morning say one thing, in the in the morning say one thing, in the evening another. That could be part of a evening another. That could be part of a evening another. That could be part of a principled chaos. I think the important principled chaos. I think the important principled chaos. I think the important part of madman theory is that you're not part of madman theory is that you're not part of madman theory is that you're not actually a madman. You just got to actually a madman. You just got to actually a madman. You just got to convince people you are. Yes. Yes. Look, convince people you are. Yes. Yes. Look, convince people you are. Yes. Yes. Look, I don't think I am in agreement that we I don't think I am in agreement that we I don't think I am in agreement that we should talk to everybody. People I don't should talk to everybody. People I don't should talk to everybody. People I don't know how many Yeah. I don't know how know how many Yeah. I don't know how know how many Yeah. I don't know how many people followed the 2008 election many people followed the 2008 election many people followed the 2008 election closely who are watching this. There's a closely who are watching this. There's a closely who are watching this. There's a big fight in that election between big fight in that election between big fight in that election between Clinton and Obama about should you Clinton and Obama about should you Clinton and Obama about should you negotiate with your enemies and Obama's negotiate with your enemies and Obama's negotiate with your enemies and Obama's view is we should we should talk to view is we should we should talk to view is we should we should talk to anybody and Clinton's view was more anybody and Clinton's view was more anybody and Clinton's view was more nuanced than that right certainly we nuanced than that right certainly we nuanced than that right certainly we shouldn't at this juncture and during shouldn't at this juncture and during shouldn't at this juncture and during his presidency Obama did a deal with his presidency Obama did a deal with his presidency Obama did a deal with Iran on on the the nuclear question he Iran on on the the nuclear question he Iran on on the the nuclear question he negotiated with Cuba right he had very negotiated with Cuba right he had very negotiated with Cuba right he had very direct negotiations with Russia um he direct negotiations with Russia um he direct negotiations with Russia um he did it importantly unlike Donald Trump did it importantly unlike Donald Trump did it importantly unlike Donald Trump without alienating all of our without alienating all of our without alienating all of our traditional allies. One of the things traditional allies. One of the things traditional allies. One of the things that I think is important to say about

that I think is important to say about that I think is important to say about Trump is that the the difference between Trump is that the the difference between Trump is that the the difference between Trump and say Biden or Trump and Obama Trump and say Biden or Trump and Obama Trump and say Biden or Trump and Obama is not that Trump will negotiate with is not that Trump will negotiate with is not that Trump will negotiate with Putin and Obama wouldn't. It's that Putin and Obama wouldn't. It's that Putin and Obama wouldn't. It's that Trump is realigning our alliances. He Trump is realigning our alliances. He Trump is realigning our alliances. He doesn't really seem to want to negotiate doesn't really seem to want to negotiate doesn't really seem to want to negotiate with the Europeans or at least he wants with the Europeans or at least he wants with the Europeans or at least he wants to do it from a more hostile position. to do it from a more hostile position. to do it from a more hostile position. He wants to make Canada the 51st state, He wants to make Canada the 51st state, He wants to make Canada the 51st state, not treat it as a longtime ally. The the not treat it as a longtime ally. The the not treat it as a longtime ally. The the thing here is not that Trump is thing here is not that Trump is thing here is not that Trump is negotiating with our perceived enemies. negotiating with our perceived enemies. negotiating with our perceived enemies. These are his perceived allies and he's These are his perceived allies and he's These are his perceived allies and he's turning our traditional allies into turning our traditional allies into turning our traditional allies into perceived enemies. So with him I think perceived enemies. So with him I think perceived enemies. So with him I think it's important like I am very much on it's important like I am very much on it's important like I am very much on the view of you talk to everybody and it the view of you talk to everybody and it the view of you talk to everybody and it was my view going back you know for some was my view going back you know for some was my view going back you know for some years that like that it was clear that years that like that it was clear that years that like that it was clear that the B administration needed to be the B administration needed to be the B administration needed to be pushing for negotiations over Ukraine. pushing for negotiations over Ukraine. pushing for negotiations over Ukraine. There was not going to be some endgame There was not going to be some endgame There was not going to be some endgame here where Ukraine got all of its here where Ukraine got all of its here where Ukraine got all of its territory back. territory back. territory back. But but but But but but But but but but I don't think it is reasonable to but I don't think it is reasonable to but I don't think it is reasonable to look at what he is doing and say that is look at what he is doing and say that is look at what he is doing and say that is the norm that he has broken. The idea the norm that he has broken. The idea the norm that he has broken. The idea that we should have negotiations. I mean that we should have negotiations. I mean that we should have negotiations. I mean many different presidents have done many many different presidents have done many many different presidents have done many surprising things and he's rolled back a surprising things and he's rolled back a surprising things and he's rolled back a bunch of those things. You know bunch of those things. You know bunch of those things. You know Republicans have been very unfriendly to Republicans have been very unfriendly to Republicans have been very unfriendly to the opening that began with Cuba, right?

the opening that began with Cuba, right? the opening that began with Cuba, right? And that was like a big deal in American And that was like a big deal in American And that was like a big deal in American foreign policy. Something Obama did foreign policy. Something Obama did foreign policy. Something Obama did against very heavy criticism. something against very heavy criticism. something against very heavy criticism. something that cost him and cost Democrats in that cost him and cost Democrats in that cost him and cost Democrats in Florida and and and among Cuban voters Florida and and and among Cuban voters Florida and and and among Cuban voters in the following election. So one I I in the following election. So one I I in the following election. So one I I just don't think that that's that just don't think that that's that just don't think that that's that unusual of a thing with Trump. I also unusual of a thing with Trump. I also unusual of a thing with Trump. I also just want to say with the tariffs, you just want to say with the tariffs, you just want to say with the tariffs, you sort of wanted to cut the tariffs off sort of wanted to cut the tariffs off sort of wanted to cut the tariffs off from Doge and cut the tariffs off from from Doge and cut the tariffs off from from Doge and cut the tariffs off from this broader agenda. And one reason I this broader agenda. And one reason I this broader agenda. And one reason I don't is that I think the way to don't is that I think the way to don't is that I think the way to understand tariffs, look, you can be understand tariffs, look, you can be understand tariffs, look, you can be accomplishing many different things with accomplishing many different things with accomplishing many different things with tariffs. one thing which was a theory tariffs. one thing which was a theory tariffs. one thing which was a theory that that you heard from some people that that you heard from some people that that you heard from some people around Trump and and and sort of fit around Trump and and and sort of fit around Trump and and and sort of fit what he said on the campaign trail which what he said on the campaign trail which what he said on the campaign trail which was Trump's position on the campaign was Trump's position on the campaign was Trump's position on the campaign trail was that he was going to lay down trail was that he was going to lay down trail was that he was going to lay down 10 to 20% tariffs on all imported goods 10 to 20% tariffs on all imported goods 10 to 20% tariffs on all imported goods and 65% tariffs on imported goods from and 65% tariffs on imported goods from and 65% tariffs on imported goods from China. So, I think that's a bad idea for China. So, I think that's a bad idea for China. So, I think that's a bad idea for a bunch of different reasons, but what a bunch of different reasons, but what a bunch of different reasons, but what that is is a stable change in the cost that is is a stable change in the cost that is is a stable change in the cost structure for all corporations and all structure for all corporations and all structure for all corporations and all trade. And then different players can trade. And then different players can trade. And then different players can make different investment decisions in make different investment decisions in make different investment decisions in the long term based on this new cost the long term based on this new cost the long term based on this new cost structure. What he's doing, as Derek structure. What he's doing, as Derek structure. What he's doing, as Derek said, and I've had these funny said, and I've had these funny said, and I've had these funny experiences where I'm literally doing a experiences where I'm literally doing a experiences where I'm literally doing a podcast with a tariffs expert and I'll podcast with a tariffs expert and I'll podcast with a tariffs expert and I'll be talking about like the auto parts be talking about like the auto parts be talking about like the auto parts problem and then my producer be like, problem and then my producer be like, problem and then my producer be like, uh, he just, you know, delayed the uh, he just, you know, delayed the uh, he just, you know, delayed the tariff on the auto parts. what he's tariff on the auto parts. what he's tariff on the auto parts. what he's doing with these tariffs that you move doing with these tariffs that you move doing with these tariffs that you move on and you move off and you negotiate on and you move off and you negotiate on and you move off and you negotiate over endlessly. And I've been told this over endlessly. And I've been told this over endlessly. And I've been told this again by people around him is their view again by people around him is their view again by people around him is their view is that America had leverage it wasn't is that America had leverage it wasn't is that America had leverage it wasn't using and tariffs in particular are a using and tariffs in particular are a using and tariffs in particular are a form of executive control. Trade deals

form of executive control. Trade deals form of executive control. Trade deals need to be negotiated and uh ratified need to be negotiated and uh ratified need to be negotiated and uh ratified with Congress. Trade deals are are are with Congress. Trade deals are are are with Congress. Trade deals are are are something you have to do with the rest something you have to do with the rest something you have to do with the rest of the system. But tariffs are something of the system. But tariffs are something of the system. But tariffs are something Trump can do unilaterally. And one thing Trump can do unilaterally. And one thing Trump can do unilaterally. And one thing Trump wants is control. That is the Trump wants is control. That is the Trump wants is control. That is the through line of virtually everything in through line of virtually everything in through line of virtually everything in his politics. Tariffs are a his politics. Tariffs are a his politics. Tariffs are a leverage-based form of foreign policy. leverage-based form of foreign policy. leverage-based form of foreign policy. They are America has the biggest economy They are America has the biggest economy They are America has the biggest economy in the world. That anybody who's going in the world. That anybody who's going in the world. That anybody who's going to get into a trade war with us is going to get into a trade war with us is going to get into a trade war with us is going to suffer worse than we will. And to suffer worse than we will. And to suffer worse than we will. And there's something where the president there's something where the president there's something where the president can use the tariffs because of authority can use the tariffs because of authority can use the tariffs because of authority granted by Congress some time ago for granted by Congress some time ago for granted by Congress some time ago for other purposes. He can use them with a other purposes. He can use them with a other purposes. He can use them with a huge amount of discretion. And so you huge amount of discretion. And so you huge amount of discretion. And so you can use them on the one hand to say well can use them on the one hand to say well can use them on the one hand to say well I think that we've lost too much I think that we've lost too much I think that we've lost too much manufacturing and the dollar is manufacturing and the dollar is manufacturing and the dollar is undervalued in other places and so or undervalued in other places and so or undervalued in other places and so or overvalued rather and so we want to use overvalued rather and so we want to use overvalued rather and so we want to use tariffs to to to make the cost structure tariffs to to to make the cost structure tariffs to to to make the cost structure differently so that people have to differently so that people have to differently so that people have to locate more of the supply chains and the locate more of the supply chains and the locate more of the supply chains and the intermediate manufacturing in the United intermediate manufacturing in the United intermediate manufacturing in the United States. But you can also use a tariff to States. But you can also use a tariff to States. But you can also use a tariff to say Colombia has to take the people say Colombia has to take the people say Colombia has to take the people we're deporting and they have to take we're deporting and they have to take we're deporting and they have to take them in chains, right? And Donald Trump them in chains, right? And Donald Trump them in chains, right? And Donald Trump is doing both things. And the reason I is doing both things. And the reason I is doing both things. And the reason I think it's important to keep those in think it's important to keep those in think it's important to keep those in mind is that what Donald Trump wants, mind is that what Donald Trump wants, mind is that what Donald Trump wants, what connects a lot of different things what connects a lot of different things what connects a lot of different things is that he wants leverage over things.

is that he wants leverage over things. is that he wants leverage over things. He wants I think it connects to Eric He wants I think it connects to Eric He wants I think it connects to Eric Adams. And you were sitting here talking Adams. And you were sitting here talking Adams. And you were sitting here talking in New York City. Eric Adams is a in New York City. Eric Adams is a in New York City. Eric Adams is a Democratic mayor, right? Donald Trump is Democratic mayor, right? Donald Trump is Democratic mayor, right? Donald Trump is no truck with Eric Eric Adams, right? He no truck with Eric Eric Adams, right? He no truck with Eric Eric Adams, right? He did not support Eric Adams. Eric Adams did not support Eric Adams. Eric Adams did not support Eric Adams. Eric Adams is not his natural ally. But what he had is not his natural ally. But what he had is not his natural ally. But what he had over Eric Adams, he realized, was a over Eric Adams, he realized, was a over Eric Adams, he realized, was a leverage that he could get the the cases leverage that he could get the the cases leverage that he could get the the cases off of Eric Adams and then get Eric off of Eric Adams and then get Eric off of Eric Adams and then get Eric Adams in his pocket. So Donald Trump Adams in his pocket. So Donald Trump Adams in his pocket. So Donald Trump stepped in to save like the like the stepped in to save like the like the stepped in to save like the like the Democratic the corrupt Democratic mayor Democratic the corrupt Democratic mayor Democratic the corrupt Democratic mayor of New York City because not because of New York City because not because of New York City because not because they have a a deep ideological alliance they have a a deep ideological alliance they have a a deep ideological alliance but because then Donald Trump would have but because then Donald Trump would have but because then Donald Trump would have power over New York City and its policy power over New York City and its policy power over New York City and its policy that he wouldn't otherwise have. The that he wouldn't otherwise have. The that he wouldn't otherwise have. The thing that connects Trump is a very old thing that connects Trump is a very old thing that connects Trump is a very old school politician. He's very relational. school politician. He's very relational. school politician. He's very relational. He's very 19th century. He's looking for He's very 19th century. He's looking for He's very 19th century. He's looking for the angle. He's very zero sum. He's the angle. He's very zero sum. He's the angle. He's very zero sum. He's looking for things that give him power. looking for things that give him power. looking for things that give him power. Doge is a way of getting power over the Doge is a way of getting power over the Doge is a way of getting power over the bureaucracy. tariffs are a way of bureaucracy. tariffs are a way of bureaucracy. tariffs are a way of getting power over the international getting power over the international getting power over the international financial system and foreign policy and financial system and foreign policy and financial system and foreign policy and breaking sort of traditional alliances. breaking sort of traditional alliances. breaking sort of traditional alliances. Maybe in his mind even getting Canada to Maybe in his mind even getting Canada to Maybe in his mind even getting Canada to become the 51st state. Maybe getting become the 51st state. Maybe getting become the 51st state. Maybe getting Mexico to change its immigration policy.

Mexico to change its immigration policy. Mexico to change its immigration policy. Use trying to weaponize the Justice Use trying to weaponize the Justice Use trying to weaponize the Justice Department against Derrick Adams as a Department against Derrick Adams as a Department against Derrick Adams as a way of getting power over Democratic way of getting power over Democratic way of getting power over Democratic mayor. Some of what they're doing with mayor. Some of what they're doing with mayor. Some of what they're doing with grants and money is a way of getting grants and money is a way of getting grants and money is a way of getting power over sort of other institutions in power over sort of other institutions in power over sort of other institutions in American life. Again, you could think American life. Again, you could think American life. Again, you could think it's bad or you could think it's good, it's bad or you could think it's good, it's bad or you could think it's good, but it is coherent, right? I think it's but it is coherent, right? I think it's but it is coherent, right? I think it's bad, but it is coherent and the people bad, but it is coherent and the people bad, but it is coherent and the people who think it's good think it's good for who think it's good think it's good for who think it's good think it's good for Trump to have power. Again, with the Trump to have power. Again, with the Trump to have power. Again, with the Eric Adams thing, they were very Eric Adams thing, they were very Eric Adams thing, they were very explicit about this, right? They said explicit about this, right? They said explicit about this, right? They said that it is worthwhile for the president that it is worthwhile for the president that it is worthwhile for the president to negotiate over his policy objectives to negotiate over his policy objectives to negotiate over his policy objectives and to trade things to get his policy and to trade things to get his policy and to trade things to get his policy objectives uh more fully carried out. objectives uh more fully carried out. objectives uh more fully carried out. And so, Eric Adams went from saying New And so, Eric Adams went from saying New And so, Eric Adams went from saying New York City would be a sanctuary city, York City would be a sanctuary city, York City would be a sanctuary city, they'd aggressively carry out they'd aggressively carry out they'd aggressively carry out deportations. You can think that kind of deportations. You can think that kind of deportations. You can think that kind of transactionalism is fine. And I think in transactionalism is fine. And I think in transactionalism is fine. And I think in this case, given that it's about this case, given that it's about this case, given that it's about corruption, it wasn't. But the idea, corruption, it wasn't. But the idea, corruption, it wasn't. But the idea, Trump's idea, that the problem is that Trump's idea, that the problem is that Trump's idea, that the problem is that the president doesn't wield enough power the president doesn't wield enough power the president doesn't wield enough power here, the way he does in Russia, the way here, the way he does in Russia, the way here, the way he does in Russia, the way he might in India, the way he might in he might in India, the way he might in he might in India, the way he might in China. Trump has spoken very openly of China. Trump has spoken very openly of China. Trump has spoken very openly of envying some of the powers these other envying some of the powers these other envying some of the powers these other people have. I think it's a consistent people have. I think it's a consistent people have. I think it's a consistent governing philosophy that needs to be governing philosophy that needs to be governing philosophy that needs to be taken as that, right? I think sometimes taken as that, right? I think sometimes taken as that, right? I think sometimes you describe one of the difficulties you describe one of the difficulties you describe one of the difficulties Trump poses is sometimes if you just Trump poses is sometimes if you just Trump poses is sometimes if you just describe what he's doing I think quite describe what he's doing I think quite describe what he's doing I think quite neutally. People say, "Oh, you're neutally. People say, "Oh, you're neutally. People say, "Oh, you're criticizing him. You're anti-Trump." But criticizing him. You're anti-Trump." But criticizing him. You're anti-Trump." But I I'm just describing what he's doing.

I I'm just describing what he's doing. I I'm just describing what he's doing. You could think it's good or it's bad, You could think it's good or it's bad, You could think it's good or it's bad, but like the fact that he wants to but like the fact that he wants to but like the fact that he wants to arrogate power and find points of arrogate power and find points of arrogate power and find points of leverage and tariffs are one. What he's leverage and tariffs are one. What he's leverage and tariffs are one. What he's doing through Doge is another. What he doing through Doge is another. What he doing through Doge is another. What he did with the DOJ is another. It's all did with the DOJ is another. It's all did with the DOJ is another. It's all very consistent. Um, the question is very consistent. Um, the question is very consistent. Um, the question is really then just whether or not you have really then just whether or not you have really then just whether or not you have what your normative view is on Trump what your normative view is on Trump what your normative view is on Trump having that much power. Yeah, I have a having that much power. Yeah, I have a having that much power. Yeah, I have a question about Doge. But before that, question about Doge. But before that, question about Doge. But before that, I'll just say that I don't I'll just say that I don't I'll just say that I don't think Donald Trump should have that much think Donald Trump should have that much think Donald Trump should have that much power. Um, because I think to this day power. Um, because I think to this day power. Um, because I think to this day my biggest criticism and concern is that my biggest criticism and concern is that my biggest criticism and concern is that he is a person that denied the results he is a person that denied the results he is a person that denied the results of the election. And so, of the election. And so, of the election. And so, uh, I'm unwilling, you know, I like uh, I'm unwilling, you know, I like uh, I'm unwilling, you know, I like George Washington. I like people that George Washington. I like people that George Washington. I like people that have the skill, the ability, the track have the skill, the ability, the track have the skill, the ability, the track record to walk away from power. And a record to walk away from power. And a record to walk away from power. And a person who's person who's person who's uh, unwilling to accept reality and is uh, unwilling to accept reality and is uh, unwilling to accept reality and is willing to bend reality to uh, maintain willing to bend reality to uh, maintain willing to bend reality to uh, maintain a grip on power. Uh, even if what a grip on power. Uh, even if what a grip on power. Uh, even if what they're trying to do is really good, they're trying to do is really good, they're trying to do is really good, maybe making a government more efficient maybe making a government more efficient maybe making a government more efficient makes me very concerned. But on the makes me very concerned. But on the makes me very concerned. But on the topic of Doge is more on the Elon side.

topic of Doge is more on the Elon side. topic of Doge is more on the Elon side. If we can sort of combine Doge and If we can sort of combine Doge and If we can sort of combine Doge and abundance as a abundance as a abundance as a topic, if Doge topic, if Doge topic, if Doge succeeds, the effort, let's just forget succeeds, the effort, let's just forget succeeds, the effort, let's just forget Doge, but the effort of making Doge, but the effort of making Doge, but the effort of making government more efficient, what does government more efficient, what does government more efficient, what does that look like um before the next that look like um before the next that look like um before the next election and after the next election, if election and after the next election, if election and after the next election, if we can just look at success? I know I'm we can just look at success? I know I'm we can just look at success? I know I'm jumping again, but I'll do something jumping again, but I'll do something jumping again, but I'll do something quick and then pass to you. I from my quick and then pass to you. I from my quick and then pass to you. I from my I'm not a huge fan of the experiment I'm not a huge fan of the experiment I'm not a huge fan of the experiment framing because amidst this experiment framing because amidst this experiment framing because amidst this experiment people are uh through USA ID as my people are uh through USA ID as my people are uh through USA ID as my colleague Nick Kristoff has documented colleague Nick Kristoff has documented colleague Nick Kristoff has documented and and potentially further and and and potentially further and and and potentially further and otherwise will die lose homes be scammed otherwise will die lose homes be scammed otherwise will die lose homes be scammed by things so I'm I feel like by things so I'm I feel like by things so I'm I feel like experimenting with government at that experimenting with government at that experimenting with government at that level is very dangerous level is very dangerous level is very dangerous but if assuming democracy survives but if assuming democracy survives but if assuming democracy survives um Democrats if they're going to make um Democrats if they're going to make um Democrats if they're going to make the government work again are going to the government work again are going to the government work again are going to have to become less rulebound than they have to become less rulebound than they have to become less rulebound than they were. Uh I have this line that the were. Uh I have this line that the were. Uh I have this line that the problem with the personality type of the problem with the personality type of the problem with the personality type of the right is it's autocratic now and the right is it's autocratic now and the right is it's autocratic now and the problem with the personality type of the problem with the personality type of the problem with the personality type of the left is it's bureaucratic and I don't left is it's bureaucratic and I don't left is it's bureaucratic and I don't want to see things going either to where want to see things going either to where want to see things going either to where Doge is in terms of I think there's a Doge is in terms of I think there's a Doge is in terms of I think there's a fundamental lawlessness to it but I also fundamental lawlessness to it but I also fundamental lawlessness to it but I also don't like the aims of it but I don't don't like the aims of it but I don't don't like the aims of it but I don't want to see things where Democrats were want to see things where Democrats were want to see things where Democrats were which is such which is such which is such unfathomably cons which is such respect unfathomably cons which is such respect unfathomably cons which is such respect for process that they will put the for process that they will put the for process that they will put the process ahead of getting their own process ahead of getting their own process ahead of getting their own things done. They will listen to any things done. They will listen to any things done. They will listen to any lawyer with any super intense lawyer with any super intense lawyer with any super intense interpretation of of any law and that'll interpretation of of any law and that'll interpretation of of any law and that'll turn them all the way back. What Doge turn them all the way back. What Doge turn them all the way back. What Doge has demonstrated is that the room for

has demonstrated is that the room for has demonstrated is that the room for movement inside the American government, movement inside the American government, movement inside the American government, inside the state, is much wider than inside the state, is much wider than inside the state, is much wider than anybody gave it credit for. Both anybody gave it credit for. Both anybody gave it credit for. Both Republican and Democratic Republican and Democratic Republican and Democratic administrations. It may not be as wide. administrations. It may not be as wide. administrations. It may not be as wide. It probably isn't legally as wide as It probably isn't legally as wide as It probably isn't legally as wide as what Doge is trying to do. And that's what Doge is trying to do. And that's what Doge is trying to do. And that's why they're losing all these court why they're losing all these court why they're losing all these court cases, but it is wide. And you could cases, but it is wide. And you could cases, but it is wide. And you could also use Congress, right? You could pass also use Congress, right? You could pass also use Congress, right? You could pass statute to make it wider. And you statute to make it wider. And you statute to make it wider. And you should. There is no abundance agenda should. There is no abundance agenda should. There is no abundance agenda that works if the Democratic Party is as that works if the Democratic Party is as that works if the Democratic Party is as rulebound and as process obsessed as it rulebound and as process obsessed as it rulebound and as process obsessed as it was in the last 10 years. It doesn't was in the last 10 years. It doesn't was in the last 10 years. It doesn't work flatly. Right? That is why so many work flatly. Right? That is why so many work flatly. Right? That is why so many of the stories we tell in the book are of the stories we tell in the book are of the stories we tell in the book are about process gone. Not just it's not about process gone. Not just it's not about process gone. Not just it's not process gone wrong because it's doing process gone wrong because it's doing process gone wrong because it's doing exactly what it was intended to do, but exactly what it was intended to do, but exactly what it was intended to do, but it is process that has become it is process that has become it is process that has become antagonistic to the promised outcomes. antagonistic to the promised outcomes. antagonistic to the promised outcomes. And so I do hope there's a kind of, you And so I do hope there's a kind of, you And so I do hope there's a kind of, you know, thesis, right? All the know, thesis, right? All the know, thesis, right? All the institutions are great. Democrats are institutions are great. Democrats are institutions are great. Democrats are the defenders of government. the defenders of government. the defenders of government. Anti-thesis, the government is a corrupt Anti-thesis, the government is a corrupt Anti-thesis, the government is a corrupt cesspool. It's a, you know, it's a ball cesspool. It's a, you know, it's a ball cesspool. It's a, you know, it's a ball of worms and it has to be destroyed and of worms and it has to be destroyed and of worms and it has to be destroyed and taken over by a by a benevolent or taken over by a by a benevolent or taken over by a by a benevolent or non-benevolent dictator. And synthesis, non-benevolent dictator. And synthesis, non-benevolent dictator. And synthesis, which is that the government's process which is that the government's process which is that the government's process has made it not a functional state. It's has made it not a functional state. It's has made it not a functional state. It's non-responsive in many important ways.

non-responsive in many important ways. non-responsive in many important ways. And it needs to be fun like reformed at And it needs to be fun like reformed at And it needs to be fun like reformed at a quite fundamental level but in a way a quite fundamental level but in a way a quite fundamental level but in a way that is lawful in a way that is that is lawful in a way that is that is lawful in a way that is thoughtful in a way that is running thoughtful in a way that is running thoughtful in a way that is running experiments. It gathers information and experiments. It gathers information and experiments. It gathers information and then can make adjustments in a way that then can make adjustments in a way that then can make adjustments in a way that is respectful of the human lives that it is respectful of the human lives that it is respectful of the human lives that it touches and affects in a way that is not touches and affects in a way that is not touches and affects in a way that is not hostile to the goals of good government hostile to the goals of good government hostile to the goals of good government but is more committed to them than it is but is more committed to them than it is but is more committed to them than it is committed to the process that government committed to the process that government committed to the process that government has erected and evolved over time. As has erected and evolved over time. As has erected and evolved over time. As you articulated the principle you articulated the principle you articulated the principle beautifully and just to put some meat on beautifully and just to put some meat on beautifully and just to put some meat on the bones, abundance is about being the bones, abundance is about being the bones, abundance is about being incredibly concrete about what you want incredibly concrete about what you want incredibly concrete about what you want to accomplish in the world. Then it's to accomplish in the world. Then it's to accomplish in the world. Then it's about understanding how to accomplish about understanding how to accomplish about understanding how to accomplish that. A a fa a stage of the process that that. A a fa a stage of the process that that. A a fa a stage of the process that I think Doge has entirely skipped. I I think Doge has entirely skipped. I I think Doge has entirely skipped. I don't think there we've reached the don't think there we've reached the don't think there we've reached the stage of understanding. We've destroyed stage of understanding. We've destroyed stage of understanding. We've destroyed and then maybe it's sometimes promised and then maybe it's sometimes promised and then maybe it's sometimes promised to understand the thing that we've to understand the thing that we've to understand the thing that we've destroyed after the fact. You want to destroyed after the fact. You want to destroyed after the fact. You want to set goals. You want to understand how to set goals. You want to understand how to set goals. You want to understand how to meet those goals and then you want to meet those goals and then you want to meet those goals and then you want to meet them. And the problem with meet them. And the problem with meet them. And the problem with liberalism of the last few years and liberalism of the last few years and liberalism of the last few years and last few decades is that it's become dis last few decades is that it's become dis last few decades is that it's become dis we've become disconnected from outcomes.

we've become disconnected from outcomes. we've become disconnected from outcomes. Really really crystal clear example. So Really really crystal clear example. So Really really crystal clear example. So Joe Biden in 2021 signs the bipartisan Joe Biden in 2021 signs the bipartisan Joe Biden in 2021 signs the bipartisan infrastructure law and he and Pete infrastructure law and he and Pete infrastructure law and he and Pete Buddhaj call it truthfully one of the Buddhaj call it truthfully one of the Buddhaj call it truthfully one of the most important infrastructure bills most important infrastructure bills most important infrastructure bills passed in the last few decades. $1.2 passed in the last few decades. $1.2 passed in the last few decades. $1.2 trillion to do exactly what Ezra and I trillion to do exactly what Ezra and I trillion to do exactly what Ezra and I want to do to build in the world. want to do to build in the world. want to do to build in the world. There's a piece of that law that's a $42 There's a piece of that law that's a $42 There's a piece of that law that's a $42 billion program called BEAD. Stands for billion program called BEAD. Stands for billion program called BEAD. Stands for broadband equity access and deployment. broadband equity access and deployment. broadband equity access and deployment. I think $42 billion to build rural I think $42 billion to build rural I think $42 billion to build rural broadband. Fast forward to 2024. broadband. Fast forward to 2024. broadband. Fast forward to 2024. Practically none of it is built. We're Practically none of it is built. We're Practically none of it is built. We're now four calendar years after it was now four calendar years after it was now four calendar years after it was passed. And the program is at this point passed. And the program is at this point passed. And the program is at this point it seems like it's going to die and it seems like it's going to die and it seems like it's going to die and they're just going to transfer the whole they're just going to transfer the whole they're just going to transfer the whole thing to Starlink. So why right we want thing to Starlink. So why right we want thing to Starlink. So why right we want to understand why does government fail to understand why does government fail to understand why does government fail to achieve its outcomes and how can we to achieve its outcomes and how can we to achieve its outcomes and how can we learn from those failures to allow learn from those failures to allow learn from those failures to allow government to succeed at its outcomes. government to succeed at its outcomes. government to succeed at its outcomes. Well you look into it and it turns out Well you look into it and it turns out Well you look into it and it turns out that in order to take this $42 billion that in order to take this $42 billion that in order to take this $42 billion and send it to the states the states had and send it to the states the states had and send it to the states the states had to go through a 14stage process in order to go through a 14stage process in order to go through a 14stage process in order to get the money. First, the FCC had to to get the money. First, the FCC had to to get the money. First, the FCC had to draw a map of the places where America draw a map of the places where America draw a map of the places where America needed more rural broadband. And then needed more rural broadband. And then needed more rural broadband. And then there was a challenge period where there was a challenge period where there was a challenge period where people could question the map. And the people could question the map. And the people could question the map. And the FCC would remake the map. And then the FCC would remake the map. And then the FCC would remake the map. And then the challengers would re sue them to change challengers would re sue them to change challengers would re sue them to change the map again. Then the states had to the map again. Then the states had to the map again. Then the states had to file a letter of intent and a 5-year file a letter of intent and a 5-year file a letter of intent and a 5-year action plan and a funding program. All action plan and a funding program. All action plan and a funding program. All of which could be subject to their own of which could be subject to their own of which could be subject to their own challenge periods. And in each of these challenge periods. And in each of these challenge periods. And in each of these challenge periods, the Commerce challenge periods, the Commerce challenge periods, the Commerce Department is going back to the states Department is going back to the states Department is going back to the states and saying, "We really like your 5-year and saying, "We really like your 5-year and saying, "We really like your 5-year plan, but your your workforce

plan, but your your workforce plan, but your your workforce development program didn't pass this development program didn't pass this development program didn't pass this matrix of uh equity, and you didn't matrix of uh equity, and you didn't matrix of uh equity, and you didn't reach out to the right biders over here, reach out to the right biders over here, reach out to the right biders over here, and if you try harder to reach out to and if you try harder to reach out to and if you try harder to reach out to more people who just aren't white men to more people who just aren't white men to more people who just aren't white men to be your employees, that would be be your employees, that would be be your employees, that would be fantastic if you could put that into the fantastic if you could put that into the fantastic if you could put that into the new um edit that you submit to us." And new um edit that you submit to us." And new um edit that you submit to us." And of course, there delays because every of course, there delays because every of course, there delays because every state has to do its own programs. The state has to do its own programs. The state has to do its own programs. The Commerce Department is backed up, yada Commerce Department is backed up, yada Commerce Department is backed up, yada yada yada. to get to a point where out yada yada. to get to a point where out yada yada. to get to a point where out of 56 states and jurisdictions that have of 56 states and jurisdictions that have of 56 states and jurisdictions that have applied to begin the 14-stage process, applied to begin the 14-stage process, applied to begin the 14-stage process, by the time the Democrats lose the by the time the Democrats lose the by the time the Democrats lose the election in November 2024, three out of election in November 2024, three out of election in November 2024, three out of the 56 have passed all 14 stages. And the 56 have passed all 14 stages. And the 56 have passed all 14 stages. And very little of the money has actually very little of the money has actually very little of the money has actually been spent because of all the problems been spent because of all the problems been spent because of all the problems that Ezra and I have discussed about how that Ezra and I have discussed about how that Ezra and I have discussed about how hard it is to build in the physical hard it is to build in the physical hard it is to build in the physical world. $42 billion therefore dies upon world. $42 billion therefore dies upon world. $42 billion therefore dies upon contact with planet earth. That's not contact with planet earth. That's not contact with planet earth. That's not government achieving its goals. And a government achieving its goals. And a government achieving its goals. And a doge that we were sort of you know doge that we were sort of you know doge that we were sort of you know dwombitates of in this parallel universe dwombitates of in this parallel universe dwombitates of in this parallel universe is one that would try very clearly to a is one that would try very clearly to a is one that would try very clearly to a articulate a goal. What are we trying to articulate a goal. What are we trying to articulate a goal. What are we trying to do here? We're trying to build rural do here? We're trying to build rural do here? We're trying to build rural broadband. Why? Because we think broadband. Why? Because we think broadband. Why? Because we think connectivity is incredibly important to connectivity is incredibly important to connectivity is incredibly important to the economy of the future. It helps the economy of the future. It helps the economy of the future. It helps people's health. It helps the economy of people's health. It helps the economy of people's health. It helps the economy of rural areas. Let's build rural rural areas. Let's build rural rural areas. Let's build rural broadband. two, what are the roadblocks?

broadband. two, what are the roadblocks? broadband. two, what are the roadblocks? What are the bottlenecks? What's hard What are the bottlenecks? What's hard What are the bottlenecks? What's hard about taking a pot of money that exists about taking a pot of money that exists about taking a pot of money that exists in Washington and actually creating in Washington and actually creating in Washington and actually creating broadband networks in rural Kentucky? broadband networks in rural Kentucky? broadband networks in rural Kentucky? Let's understand what those roadblocks Let's understand what those roadblocks Let's understand what those roadblocks are so that we can do two things. We can are so that we can do two things. We can are so that we can do two things. We can take away the things that need to be take away the things that need to be take away the things that need to be taken away to accelerate the program and taken away to accelerate the program and taken away to accelerate the program and maybe we can add new policies that will maybe we can add new policies that will maybe we can add new policies that will accelerate the spending because bottom accelerate the spending because bottom accelerate the spending because bottom line, we want to make a difference in line, we want to make a difference in line, we want to make a difference in the world. That's a world where the world. That's a world where the world. That's a world where government is, to borrow Ezra's government is, to borrow Ezra's government is, to borrow Ezra's language, deregulated itself. It's language, deregulated itself. It's language, deregulated itself. It's easier for the government to achieve its easier for the government to achieve its easier for the government to achieve its goals. I think that it's really goals. I think that it's really goals. I think that it's really important at the level of sort of of important at the level of sort of of important at the level of sort of of principle here that liberals fall out of principle here that liberals fall out of principle here that liberals fall out of love with this procedural fetish that love with this procedural fetish that love with this procedural fetish that has dominated the left over the last has dominated the left over the last has dominated the left over the last half century and fall back in love with half century and fall back in love with half century and fall back in love with outcomes to be ruthlessly obsessed with outcomes to be ruthlessly obsessed with outcomes to be ruthlessly obsessed with how liberalism has failed and how these how liberalism has failed and how these how liberalism has failed and how these kind of failures aren't just kind of failures aren't just kind of failures aren't just technocratic stories to tell on a technocratic stories to tell on a technocratic stories to tell on a podcast. I think this is fundamental to podcast. I think this is fundamental to podcast. I think this is fundamental to why Democrats are losing the the why Democrats are losing the the why Democrats are losing the the communications war in an era of communications war in an era of communications war in an era of anti-establishment and anti-institution.

anti-establishment and anti-institution. anti-establishment and anti-institution. We find ourselves in the reflexive We find ourselves in the reflexive We find ourselves in the reflexive position of having all the cranks, so to position of having all the cranks, so to position of having all the cranks, so to speak, having left the Democratic party speak, having left the Democratic party speak, having left the Democratic party and we're the ones who defend all and we're the ones who defend all and we're the ones who defend all institutions. We're the ones who defend institutions. We're the ones who defend institutions. We're the ones who defend the establishments. We're the ones the establishments. We're the ones the establishments. We're the ones saying government can only do good. But saying government can only do good. But saying government can only do good. But as a result, we lose the ability to talk as a result, we lose the ability to talk as a result, we lose the ability to talk to people about how government fails and to people about how government fails and to people about how government fails and how they can see that failure and how how they can see that failure and how how they can see that failure and how sometimes they're literally leaving sometimes they're literally leaving sometimes they're literally leaving cities and states run by Democrats cities and states run by Democrats cities and states run by Democrats because that failure is so effing because that failure is so effing because that failure is so effing obvious to them. So this isn't just obvious to them. So this isn't just obvious to them. So this isn't just about the bead program. It's not just about the bead program. It's not just about the bead program. It's not just about 14step programs. It's not just about 14step programs. It's not just about 14step programs. It's not just about rural broadband. It really is about rural broadband. It really is about rural broadband. It really is about a higher level principle of about a higher level principle of about a higher level principle of political communication. How do you political communication. How do you political communication. How do you develop a liberalism that in an age of develop a liberalism that in an age of develop a liberalism that in an age of anti-establishment anger both reflects anti-establishment anger both reflects anti-establishment anger both reflects that anger and channels it for proactive that anger and channels it for proactive that anger and channels it for proactive purposes by not just doing destruction purposes by not just doing destruction purposes by not just doing destruction destruction but creative destruction. destruction but creative destruction. destruction but creative destruction. So, first of all, beautifully put and So, first of all, beautifully put and So, first of all, beautifully put and second sort of the big thing that Doge second sort of the big thing that Doge second sort of the big thing that Doge did is make this a sexy topic to discuss did is make this a sexy topic to discuss did is make this a sexy topic to discuss and then you can tear down Doge with the and then you can tear down Doge with the and then you can tear down Doge with the way they're doing it, say it's wrong, way they're doing it, say it's wrong, way they're doing it, say it's wrong, criticize, but then people are all of a criticize, but then people are all of a criticize, but then people are all of a sudden more and more caring about uh the sudden more and more caring about uh the sudden more and more caring about uh the efficiency of government and educating efficiency of government and educating efficiency of government and educating themselves, learning about it, and it's themselves, learning about it, and it's themselves, learning about it, and it's creating a culture of transparency to creating a culture of transparency to creating a culture of transparency to the whole thing. So now you can swoop in the whole thing. So now you can swoop in the whole thing. So now you can swoop in with a book like abundance and like with a book like abundance and like with a book like abundance and like describe here's how to do actually how describe here's how to do actually how describe here's how to do actually how to have a clear mission and metrics how to have a clear mission and metrics how to have a clear mission and metrics how to solve these problems. But like that to solve these problems. But like that to solve these problems. But like that allows as opposed to have this culture allows as opposed to have this culture allows as opposed to have this culture of process. Uh it me personally, one of of process. Uh it me personally, one of of process. Uh it me personally, one of the things that really frustrates me

the things that really frustrates me the things that really frustrates me about this world is that uh the about this world is that uh the about this world is that uh the bureaucracy of that kind of process, bureaucracy of that kind of process, bureaucracy of that kind of process, especially because everybody, at least especially because everybody, at least especially because everybody, at least in the United States, is just all so in the United States, is just all so in the United States, is just all so fucking polite everywhere about the fucking polite everywhere about the fucking polite everywhere about the whole thing. They're all so nice to you whole thing. They're all so nice to you whole thing. They're all so nice to you as they're doing the process about every as they're doing the process about every as they're doing the process about every single thing. They're just like they're single thing. They're just like they're single thing. They're just like they're this is and and then the you have to this is and and then the you have to this is and and then the you have to call from 9:00 to 5:00. there's hours call from 9:00 to 5:00. there's hours call from 9:00 to 5:00. there's hours and let's schedule a meeting in 3 weeks and let's schedule a meeting in 3 weeks and let's schedule a meeting in 3 weeks from now to discuss this document so we from now to discuss this document so we from now to discuss this document so we can have another document and all of a can have another document and all of a can have another document and all of a sudden the big dreams and the visions, sudden the big dreams and the visions, sudden the big dreams and the visions, the hopes that people have invested in the hopes that people have invested in the hopes that people have invested in in building a project that's an in building a project that's an in building a project that's an incredible project dies. It's not just incredible project dies. It's not just incredible project dies. It's not just the waste of money. It's the the the waste of money. It's the the the waste of money. It's the the possibility of a beautiful thing that possibility of a beautiful thing that possibility of a beautiful thing that could have been built never gets built. could have been built never gets built. could have been built never gets built. You you're retracing Ezra's lovely line You you're retracing Ezra's lovely line You you're retracing Ezra's lovely line about how the character of the right about how the character of the right about how the character of the right these days is autocratic and the these days is autocratic and the these days is autocratic and the character of the left can be overly character of the left can be overly character of the left can be overly bureaucratic. I hope there's a middle bureaucratic. I hope there's a middle bureaucratic. I hope there's a middle synthesis lane here where there's a synthesis lane here where there's a synthesis lane here where there's a political identity that believes in political identity that believes in political identity that believes in efficient bureaucracies. Sometimes it efficient bureaucracies. Sometimes it efficient bureaucracies. Sometimes it actually does take a lot of people to actually does take a lot of people to actually does take a lot of people to get certain things done. But you really, get certain things done. But you really, get certain things done. But you really, I think, need to have an eye toward I think, need to have an eye toward I think, need to have an eye toward institutional reform. This is a theme of institutional reform. This is a theme of institutional reform. This is a theme of our book that we haven't talked about as our book that we haven't talked about as our book that we haven't talked about as much yet, but I think it's so important much yet, but I think it's so important much yet, but I think it's so important for abundance to believe that each for abundance to believe that each for abundance to believe that each generation adopts is passed down generation adopts is passed down generation adopts is passed down institutions that were created for institutions that were created for institutions that were created for different eras, different decades to different eras, different decades to different eras, different decades to solve different problems, right? That's solve different problems, right? That's solve different problems, right? That's how you get an environmental revolution how you get an environmental revolution how you get an environmental revolution in the 1960s that solves the problem of in the 1960s that solves the problem of in the 1960s that solves the problem of clean of dirty air and dirty water, but clean of dirty air and dirty water, but clean of dirty air and dirty water, but leaves us with a set of norms like NEPA

leaves us with a set of norms like NEPA leaves us with a set of norms like NEPA that make it impossible to add clean that make it impossible to add clean that make it impossible to add clean energy in our generation. just a a energy in our generation. just a a energy in our generation. just a a tragedy um of unintended outcomes. And tragedy um of unintended outcomes. And tragedy um of unintended outcomes. And to narrow this down to, you know, a to narrow this down to, you know, a to narrow this down to, you know, a world that I know you care a lot about, world that I know you care a lot about, world that I know you care a lot about, there's a chapter in our book about there's a chapter in our book about there's a chapter in our book about science policy and the history of the science policy and the history of the science policy and the history of the NIH. And the NIH really comes into its NIH. And the NIH really comes into its NIH. And the NIH really comes into its own after World War II. And it is own after World War II. And it is own after World War II. And it is immediately this beautifully funded immediately this beautifully funded immediately this beautifully funded crown jewel of biomedical research. Just crown jewel of biomedical research. Just crown jewel of biomedical research. Just the federal government irrigating the federal government irrigating the federal government irrigating university researchers studying cancer university researchers studying cancer university researchers studying cancer and heart disease and brain science and and heart disease and brain science and and heart disease and brain science and everything else. I mean practically everything else. I mean practically everything else. I mean practically every single scientific breakthrough in every single scientific breakthrough in every single scientific breakthrough in the US in the last 70 years at least has the US in the last 70 years at least has the US in the last 70 years at least has bears the fingerprints of NIH but the bears the fingerprints of NIH but the bears the fingerprints of NIH but the NIH is also a bureaucracy and like every NIH is also a bureaucracy and like every NIH is also a bureaucracy and like every bureaucracy it has accumulated a set of bureaucracy it has accumulated a set of bureaucracy it has accumulated a set of processes and habits that it's the processes and habits that it's the processes and habits that it's the people most affected by it scientists in people most affected by it scientists in people most affected by it scientists in America told us and will tell anybody America told us and will tell anybody America told us and will tell anybody else who's listening has flaws according else who's listening has flaws according else who's listening has flaws according to some surveys 40% of the time that to some surveys 40% of the time that to some surveys 40% of the time that scientists are working today in America scientists are working today in America scientists are working today in America they are filling out grants and doing they are filling out grants and doing they are filling out grants and doing paperwork, not doing science. That is paperwork, not doing science. That is paperwork, not doing science. That is astonishing. I mean, as we say in the astonishing. I mean, as we say in the astonishing. I mean, as we say in the book, imagine if we discovered that one book, imagine if we discovered that one book, imagine if we discovered that one year there was a virus that broke out in year there was a virus that broke out in year there was a virus that broke out in the American academic scene such that the American academic scene such that the American academic scene such that our scientists suffered from chronic our scientists suffered from chronic our scientists suffered from chronic fatigue disorder between January and fatigue disorder between January and fatigue disorder between January and June every single year. They just June every single year. They just June every single year. They just couldn't work. We'd be like, "This is an couldn't work. We'd be like, "This is an couldn't work. We'd be like, "This is an absolute sha. We have to fix this absolute sha. We have to fix this absolute sha. We have to fix this problem." This problem exists. It's our problem." This problem exists. It's our problem." This problem exists. It's our own bureaucratic rules. It's the rules own bureaucratic rules. It's the rules own bureaucratic rules. It's the rules that we wrote that's slowing down

that we wrote that's slowing down that we wrote that's slowing down science. So what should we do? I don't science. So what should we do? I don't science. So what should we do? I don't think we should tear down the NIH. I think we should tear down the NIH. I think we should tear down the NIH. I don't think we should slash and burn don't think we should slash and burn don't think we should slash and burn grants as we're currently doing in the grants as we're currently doing in the grants as we're currently doing in the administration. I think we should administration. I think we should administration. I think we should understand what's broken and be clear understand what's broken and be clear understand what's broken and be clear about our desired outcomes. My desired about our desired outcomes. My desired about our desired outcomes. My desired outcome for science is that we produce outcome for science is that we produce outcome for science is that we produce and pursue high- risk, highreward and pursue high- risk, highreward and pursue high- risk, highreward science under the theory that almost no science under the theory that almost no science under the theory that almost no important breakthrough is going to be important breakthrough is going to be important breakthrough is going to be obvious before you discovered it. If obvious before you discovered it. If obvious before you discovered it. If it's obvious, you probably already knew it's obvious, you probably already knew it's obvious, you probably already knew it. So why is it some new science? You it. So why is it some new science? You it. So why is it some new science? You should want to incentivize scientists to should want to incentivize scientists to should want to incentivize scientists to ask their biggest, most curious ask their biggest, most curious ask their biggest, most curious questions in a high-risisk, highreward questions in a high-risisk, highreward questions in a high-risisk, highreward environment. And right now, the NIH environment. And right now, the NIH environment. And right now, the NIH doesn't do that. The NIH for a variety doesn't do that. The NIH for a variety doesn't do that. The NIH for a variety of reasons, whether it's aspects of the of reasons, whether it's aspects of the of reasons, whether it's aspects of the peerreview process or just assumptions peerreview process or just assumptions peerreview process or just assumptions that scientists have of the system is that scientists have of the system is that scientists have of the system is too incrementalist. It funds older too incrementalist. It funds older too incrementalist. It funds older researchers and it wastes a lot of researchers and it wastes a lot of researchers and it wastes a lot of scientist time with bureaucratic scientist time with bureaucratic scientist time with bureaucratic paperwork and cludge. We'd love to paperwork and cludge. We'd love to paperwork and cludge. We'd love to reform it. We have ideas for reforming reform it. We have ideas for reforming reform it. We have ideas for reforming it. But if liberals don't use the it. But if liberals don't use the it. But if liberals don't use the language of and act on institutional language of and act on institutional language of and act on institutional reform, we will allow institutions to reform, we will allow institutions to reform, we will allow institutions to grow old and sclerotic and piss off grow old and sclerotic and piss off grow old and sclerotic and piss off Americans and they'll vote for people Americans and they'll vote for people Americans and they'll vote for people who come in with a wrecking ball to tear who come in with a wrecking ball to tear who come in with a wrecking ball to tear it down. Right? So, it's that's why I it down. Right? So, it's that's why I it down. Right? So, it's that's why I think it's so important for abundance think it's so important for abundance think it's so important for abundance liberals like us be very clear about our liberals like us be very clear about our liberals like us be very clear about our goals, our outcomes, and exactly what we goals, our outcomes, and exactly what we goals, our outcomes, and exactly what we want to accomplish because I think want to accomplish because I think want to accomplish because I think that's the only way to really see how that's the only way to really see how that's the only way to really see how and why institutions that are all around and why institutions that are all around and why institutions that are all around us truly do need reform. Listen, I hope us truly do need reform. Listen, I hope us truly do need reform. Listen, I hope uh I hope your book becomes the

uh I hope your book becomes the uh I hope your book becomes the manifesto of the Democratic Party. It's manifesto of the Democratic Party. It's manifesto of the Democratic Party. It's a beautiful vision. I'm a little bit a beautiful vision. I'm a little bit a beautiful vision. I'm a little bit skeptical because of the momentum of skeptical because of the momentum of skeptical because of the momentum of bure bureaucratic thought, but I'm bure bureaucratic thought, but I'm bure bureaucratic thought, but I'm nevertheless remain hopeful. Um, I have nevertheless remain hopeful. Um, I have nevertheless remain hopeful. Um, I have to ask this. I'm a fan of both of you. to ask this. I'm a fan of both of you. to ask this. I'm a fan of both of you. In the interest of In the interest of In the interest of time, time, time, Ezra, you had an intense debate many Ezra, you had an intense debate many Ezra, you had an intense debate many years ago years ago years ago uh, with Sam Harris. Okay. So, you're I uh, with Sam Harris. Okay. So, you're I uh, with Sam Harris. Okay. So, you're I would say, like I said, I'm a fan of would say, like I said, I'm a fan of would say, like I said, I'm a fan of both of you. You're both intellectually both of you. You're both intellectually both of you. You're both intellectually rigorous people. So, it was the debate, rigorous people. So, it was the debate, rigorous people. So, it was the debate, the contentiousness of it was was both the contentiousness of it was was both the contentiousness of it was was both sad to me, but also just a fan of you sad to me, but also just a fan of you sad to me, but also just a fan of you and and uh since I admire your and and uh since I admire your and and uh since I admire your intellects, it's just fun to watch what intellects, it's just fun to watch what intellects, it's just fun to watch what is it uh Godzilla and King Kong fight. is it uh Godzilla and King Kong fight. is it uh Godzilla and King Kong fight. Uh I wish there was more of it. I wish Uh I wish there was more of it. I wish Uh I wish there was more of it. I wish you would do his podcast again and you would do his podcast again and you would do his podcast again and debate it more on some other topic and debate it more on some other topic and debate it more on some other topic and argue. It's just great. Anyway, uh you argue. It's just great. Anyway, uh you argue. It's just great. Anyway, uh you know in some time has passed in in what know in some time has passed in in what know in some time has passed in in what was this eight years ago now? Yeah.

was this eight years ago now? Yeah. was this eight years ago now? Yeah. 2018ish something there. Yeah. The 2018ish something there. Yeah. The 2018ish something there. Yeah. The battles you have fought over the years battles you have fought over the years battles you have fought over the years that's just lot lot of chapters. Lot of that's just lot lot of chapters. Lot of that's just lot lot of chapters. Lot of chapters. Yeah. This is like several chapters. Yeah. This is like several chapters. Yeah. This is like several chapters ago. Um but you know uh in the chapters ago. Um but you know uh in the chapters ago. Um but you know uh in the interest of camaraderie what do you interest of camaraderie what do you interest of camaraderie what do you admire uh most about Sam Harris? Oh admire uh most about Sam Harris? Oh admire uh most about Sam Harris? Oh that's not a hard question. If you go that's not a hard question. If you go that's not a hard question. If you go back, if you listen to that debate on my back, if you listen to that debate on my back, if you listen to that debate on my show at Box, I show at Box, I show at Box, I introduce Harris on like this specific introduce Harris on like this specific introduce Harris on like this specific conversation he had with Charles Murray conversation he had with Charles Murray conversation he had with Charles Murray about race and IQ, but he's good on about race and IQ, but he's good on about race and IQ, but he's good on meditation. He's good on psychedelics. meditation. He's good on psychedelics. meditation. He's good on psychedelics. He's good on consciousness. He's good I He's good on consciousness. He's good I He's good on consciousness. He's good I don't know if I said AI back then, don't know if I said AI back then, don't know if I said AI back then, though. I think he's good on AI. I though. I think he's good on AI. I though. I think he's good on AI. I always felt in that without going like always felt in that without going like always felt in that without going like back into the wayback machine that Sam back into the wayback machine that Sam back into the wayback machine that Sam really thought like he really somehow really thought like he really somehow really thought like he really somehow got where I was wrong and I thought I got where I was wrong and I thought I got where I was wrong and I thought I offered like a lot of POS like tries for offered like a lot of POS like tries for offered like a lot of POS like tries for deescalation and you can he did me deescalation and you can he did me deescalation and you can he did me weirdly the favor of publishing our weirdly the favor of publishing our weirdly the favor of publishing our whole email correspondence and I think whole email correspondence and I think whole email correspondence and I think if you read that you can see that like I if you read that you can see that like I if you read that you can see that like I was not angling for a fight here. Um was not angling for a fight here. Um was not angling for a fight here. Um what I admired about him since I think what I admired about him since I think what I admired about him since I think the thing that he's been good on is he's the thing that he's been good on is he's the thing that he's been good on is he's been very independent. So Sam at that been very independent. So Sam at that been very independent. So Sam at that time there was sort of the emergence time there was sort of the emergence time there was sort of the emergence around then of this thing that people around then of this thing that people around then of this thing that people then called the intellectual dark web then called the intellectual dark web then called the intellectual dark web and it was like Sam and the Weinstein and it was like Sam and the Weinstein and it was like Sam and the Weinstein brothers and Ben Shapiro and um I forget brothers and Ben Shapiro and um I forget brothers and Ben Shapiro and um I forget who was part of it and as a bunch of who was part of it and as a bunch of who was part of it and as a bunch of those people I think I mean it kind of those people I think I mean it kind of those people I think I mean it kind of split up over time but Harris has done a split up over time but Harris has done a split up over time but Harris has done a good job not falling into conspiracy as good job not falling into conspiracy as good job not falling into conspiracy as the Weinstein brothers did not letting

the Weinstein brothers did not letting the Weinstein brothers did not letting um his anger at the left blind him to um his anger at the left blind him to um his anger at the left blind him to the fail failures of the right. He's a the fail failures of the right. He's a the fail failures of the right. He's a guy, you know, I guess both for better guy, you know, I guess both for better guy, you know, I guess both for better and for worse, as we all are, but he is and for worse, as we all are, but he is and for worse, as we all are, but he is perfectly willing to stand alone in a perfectly willing to stand alone in a perfectly willing to stand alone in a crowd. Like, I haven't listened to that crowd. Like, I haven't listened to that crowd. Like, I haven't listened to that much of his stuff lately, but my sense much of his stuff lately, but my sense much of his stuff lately, but my sense is he's been like quite cleareyed from is he's been like quite cleareyed from is he's been like quite cleareyed from my perspective on Donald Trump. So, like my perspective on Donald Trump. So, like my perspective on Donald Trump. So, like I don't think Sam, my view is not that I don't think Sam, my view is not that I don't think Sam, my view is not that Sam Harris is in general a bad actor. It Sam Harris is in general a bad actor. It Sam Harris is in general a bad actor. It just isn't. Yeah. He's been like uh just isn't. Yeah. He's been like uh just isn't. Yeah. He's been like uh difficult to categorize and fearless difficult to categorize and fearless difficult to categorize and fearless about it. meaning like he doesn't um he about it. meaning like he doesn't um he about it. meaning like he doesn't um he deliberately resists audience audience deliberately resists audience audience deliberately resists audience audience capture. So yeah, which is a hard thing capture. So yeah, which is a hard thing capture. So yeah, which is a hard thing to do. I think I saw a clip of him on to do. I think I saw a clip of him on to do. I think I saw a clip of him on this show sort of like going after Trump this show sort of like going after Trump this show sort of like going after Trump and it became like a big whole thing. and it became like a big whole thing. and it became like a big whole thing. Yeah, I mean he's been very consistent Yeah, I mean he's been very consistent Yeah, I mean he's been very consistent on that. Let's let's try to find the on that. Let's let's try to find the on that. Let's let's try to find the interesting uh thing here. I actually interesting uh thing here. I actually interesting uh thing here. I actually had a while back a podcast with Richard had a while back a podcast with Richard had a while back a podcast with Richard Hire. He studies intelligence and it was Hire. He studies intelligence and it was Hire. He studies intelligence and it was a very a very a very detailed non-policy detailed non-policy detailed non-policy uh discussion about IQ tests and all uh discussion about IQ tests and all uh discussion about IQ tests and all that kind of stuff and there I that kind of stuff and there I that kind of stuff and there I did I tried extremely hard to be very did I tried extremely hard to be very did I tried extremely hard to be very nuanced cuz that felt like an nuanced cuz that felt like an nuanced cuz that felt like an uncomfortable topic back then. It uncomfortable topic back then. It uncomfortable topic back then. It doesn't feel so uncomfortable now. Do doesn't feel so uncomfortable now. Do doesn't feel so uncomfortable now. Do you think the Overton window has you think the Overton window has you think the Overton window has expanded? Do you think the kind of expanded? Do you think the kind of expanded? Do you think the kind of things we're willing to talk about now?

things we're willing to talk about now? things we're willing to talk about now? I mean this has to do with the Trump I mean this has to do with the Trump I mean this has to do with the Trump moment also. I think the place where the moment also. I think the place where the moment also. I think the place where the topic seems to me to have changed in my topic seems to me to have changed in my topic seems to me to have changed in my ambient awareness of it is two things. ambient awareness of it is two things. ambient awareness of it is two things. One is a sense of the Flynn effect which One is a sense of the Flynn effect which One is a sense of the Flynn effect which is yeah it's hard to individually change is yeah it's hard to individually change is yeah it's hard to individually change your IQ but there is a very well your IQ but there is a very well your IQ but there is a very well doumented effect and I talked to James doumented effect and I talked to James doumented effect and I talked to James Flynn before I talked to to Sam. Um Flynn before I talked to to Sam. Um Flynn before I talked to to Sam. Um there is a very well doumented effect there is a very well doumented effect there is a very well doumented effect where IQ's have been rising over time. where IQ's have been rising over time. where IQ's have been rising over time. There's good evidence now that that has There's good evidence now that that has There's good evidence now that that has stopped. Um again this is ambiently my stopped. Um again this is ambiently my stopped. Um again this is ambiently my sense right? I've read some things like sense right? I've read some things like sense right? I've read some things like in passing I have not I did not come to in passing I have not I did not come to in passing I have not I did not come to this podcast preparing to talk about IQ this podcast preparing to talk about IQ this podcast preparing to talk about IQ or I would have prepared very carefully or I would have prepared very carefully or I would have prepared very carefully and then there was an interesting FT and then there was an interesting FT and then there was an interesting FT article just the other day that was like article just the other day that was like article just the other day that was like have we passed peak human intelligence have we passed peak human intelligence have we passed peak human intelligence and my sense is not is it that that and my sense is not is it that that and my sense is not is it that that wasn't about IQ although again like I wasn't about IQ although again like I wasn't about IQ although again like I don't remember exactly what was in it I don't remember exactly what was in it I don't remember exactly what was in it I kind of glanced at it and put it aside kind of glanced at it and put it aside kind of glanced at it and put it aside to read more later but that literacy to read more later but that literacy to read more later but that literacy scores are going down a number of test scores are going down a number of test scores are going down a number of test scores are going down and the the sort scores are going down and the the sort scores are going down and the the sort of sense of the piece was that we are of sense of the piece was that we are of sense of the piece was that we are making ourselves stupider by endlessly making ourselves stupider by endlessly making ourselves stupider by endlessly staring at screens and social media, staring at screens and social media, staring at screens and social media, which I think is probably right. Um I which I think is probably right. Um I which I think is probably right. Um I I've had this sort of line since I've had this sort of line since I've had this sort of line since becoming aware of that piece in my head becoming aware of that piece in my head becoming aware of that piece in my head that uh we spend a lot of time talking that uh we spend a lot of time talking that uh we spend a lot of time talking about how to get smarter and not enough about how to get smarter and not enough about how to get smarter and not enough time talking about how to avoid getting time talking about how to avoid getting time talking about how to avoid getting dumber, but we do a lot of thing that a dumber, but we do a lot of thing that a dumber, but we do a lot of thing that a lot of things that we think make us lot of things that we think make us lot of things that we think make us smarter like I would say having social smarter like I would say having social smarter like I would say having social media on our phones cuz like oh you're media on our phones cuz like oh you're media on our phones cuz like oh you're getting all this information all the getting all this information all the getting all this information all the time that in fact make us dumber. uh time that in fact make us dumber. uh time that in fact make us dumber. uh because it's not just that the because it's not just that the because it's not just that the information is bad, but the lack of information is bad, but the lack of information is bad, but the lack of concentration, the constant distraction,

concentration, the constant distraction, concentration, the constant distraction, the sort of lack of focus. And so my the sort of lack of focus. And so my the sort of lack of focus. And so my sense is that there is a different kind sense is that there is a different kind sense is that there is a different kind of conversation here. I'm not sure it's of conversation here. I'm not sure it's of conversation here. I'm not sure it's really an IQ conversation, but that really an IQ conversation, but that really an IQ conversation, but that there is a sense that we there is a sense that we there is a sense that we are are are inflicting a possibly global, certainly inflicting a possibly global, certainly inflicting a possibly global, certainly societal cognitive wound on ourselves, societal cognitive wound on ourselves, societal cognitive wound on ourselves, right? That's what John Height's book is right? That's what John Height's book is right? That's what John Height's book is a little bit about, right? That's sort a little bit about, right? That's sort a little bit about, right? That's sort of more coming at it from a behavioral of more coming at it from a behavioral of more coming at it from a behavioral standpoint. But we have, you know, the standpoint. But we have, you know, the standpoint. But we have, you know, the Flynn effect reflects, right? This is Flynn effect reflects, right? This is Flynn effect reflects, right? This is how James Flynn would would uh describe how James Flynn would would uh describe how James Flynn would would uh describe it. The Flynn effect reflects societies it. The Flynn effect reflects societies it. The Flynn effect reflects societies putting on, as he I think put it, the putting on, as he I think put it, the putting on, as he I think put it, the scientific spectacles. You create scientific spectacles. You create scientific spectacles. You create societies where we prize things like societies where we prize things like societies where we prize things like reading, abstract intelligence, symbolic reading, abstract intelligence, symbolic reading, abstract intelligence, symbolic logic. You teach people in them a lot logic. You teach people in them a lot logic. You teach people in them a lot and we get better and better and better and we get better and better and better and we get better and better and better at doing it. And I mean, reading changes at doing it. And I mean, reading changes at doing it. And I mean, reading changes the brain. It changes the physical the brain. It changes the physical the brain. It changes the physical structure of the brain. are hijacking structure of the brain. are hijacking structure of the brain. are hijacking parts of the mind and meant for other parts of the mind and meant for other parts of the mind and meant for other purposes to to do this kind of purposes to to do this kind of purposes to to do this kind of interpretive work. But it's of course interpretive work. But it's of course interpretive work. But it's of course possible just as we became society possible just as we became society possible just as we became society connected and then made more and more connected and then made more and more connected and then made more and more widespread technologies like literacy widespread technologies like literacy widespread technologies like literacy that changed our brains and led to the that changed our brains and led to the that changed our brains and led to the increase in this thing we call G, right?

increase in this thing we call G, right? increase in this thing we call G, right? G intelligence and decreases in other G intelligence and decreases in other G intelligence and decreases in other things, right? Like I'm really shitty at things, right? Like I'm really shitty at things, right? Like I'm really shitty at knowing which direction I'm going into. knowing which direction I'm going into. knowing which direction I'm going into. the sort of part of my brain that does the sort of part of my brain that does the sort of part of my brain that does navigation is terribly atrophied navigation is terribly atrophied navigation is terribly atrophied compared to somebody in a in a more um compared to somebody in a in a more um compared to somebody in a in a more um in a society that did not have Google in a society that did not have Google in a society that did not have Google Maps. Uh it's entirely possible to go Maps. Uh it's entirely possible to go Maps. Uh it's entirely possible to go too far in that, right? It's entirely too far in that, right? It's entirely too far in that, right? It's entirely possible to move on to technologies that possible to move on to technologies that possible to move on to technologies that begin to to to weaken that. I have this begin to to to weaken that. I have this begin to to to weaken that. I have this concern very profoundly about AI by the concern very profoundly about AI by the concern very profoundly about AI by the way which obviously you have a lot of way which obviously you have a lot of way which obviously you have a lot of your roots in and I have a there are your roots in and I have a there are your roots in and I have a there are parts of AI I'm very optimistic about parts of AI I'm very optimistic about parts of AI I'm very optimistic about but my biggest concern about AI is we're but my biggest concern about AI is we're but my biggest concern about AI is we're going to make ourselves much stupider going to make ourselves much stupider going to make ourselves much stupider without realizing it because the things without realizing it because the things without realizing it because the things that are easy to automate in AI which is that are easy to automate in AI which is that are easy to automate in AI which is like getting the AI to summarize the like getting the AI to summarize the like getting the AI to summarize the reading of something or getting AI to reading of something or getting AI to reading of something or getting AI to write the first draft of something write the first draft of something write the first draft of something that's where all the intelligence that's where all the intelligence that's where all the intelligence happens in my view um I think you know happens in my view um I think you know happens in my view um I think you know one advantage I have over a lot of other one advantage I have over a lot of other one advantage I have over a lot of other podcast host those who superficially do podcast host those who superficially do podcast host those who superficially do what I do. Probably this is true for what I do. Probably this is true for what I do. Probably this is true for you. I'm sure this is true for you. I you. I'm sure this is true for you. I you. I'm sure this is true for you. I know is that I really do do the reading. know is that I really do do the reading. know is that I really do do the reading. No summary is equivalent to me doing the No summary is equivalent to me doing the No summary is equivalent to me doing the reading and sitting there and making the reading and sitting there and making the reading and sitting there and making the associations myself and spending the associations myself and spending the associations myself and spending the time in the book and then like sort of time in the book and then like sort of time in the book and then like sort of thinking about what it brought up in me.

thinking about what it brought up in me. thinking about what it brought up in me. I write the first draft. Chachi PT I write the first draft. Chachi PT I write the first draft. Chachi PT cannot write the first draft of my book. cannot write the first draft of my book. cannot write the first draft of my book. The first draft is fucking hard to write The first draft is fucking hard to write The first draft is fucking hard to write and it's often hard because like it's and it's often hard because like it's and it's often hard because like it's completely wrong, but not because it's completely wrong, but not because it's completely wrong, but not because it's narrowly wrong. Right? Chachi P will narrowly wrong. Right? Chachi P will narrowly wrong. Right? Chachi P will never tell you that the problem with never tell you that the problem with never tell you that the problem with what you're trying to do is you're just what you're trying to do is you're just what you're trying to do is you're just trying to do the wrong thing. It'll trying to do the wrong thing. It'll trying to do the wrong thing. It'll never tell you if you tell it to write a never tell you if you tell it to write a never tell you if you tell it to write a first draft that's the wrong direction first draft that's the wrong direction first draft that's the wrong direction for this draft. Some part of you has to for this draft. Some part of you has to for this draft. Some part of you has to know it. And often the problem is you know it. And often the problem is you know it. And often the problem is you just haven't done enough reporting, just haven't done enough reporting, just haven't done enough reporting, haven't done enough research. And Chad haven't done enough research. And Chad haven't done enough research. And Chad GPD can't tell you that either. And my GPD can't tell you that either. And my GPD can't tell you that either. And my worry for my kids, my worry for society worry for my kids, my worry for society worry for my kids, my worry for society is creating is creating is creating technologies that make it incredibly technologies that make it incredibly technologies that make it incredibly alluring to automate the part of alluring to automate the part of alluring to automate the part of creation that is most difficult, most creation that is most difficult, most creation that is most difficult, most laborious, and most likely to lead to laborious, and most likely to lead to laborious, and most likely to lead to genuine insight and the sort of genuine insight and the sort of genuine insight and the sort of sharpening of your own mental acuity. I sharpening of your own mental acuity. I sharpening of your own mental acuity. I mean, we better fucking hope the AIS can mean, we better fucking hope the AIS can mean, we better fucking hope the AIS can autonomously make innovations cuz we're autonomously make innovations cuz we're autonomously make innovations cuz we're going to stop I really we're going to going to stop I really we're going to going to stop I really we're going to stop being able to. Yeah, I definitely stop being able to. Yeah, I definitely stop being able to. Yeah, I definitely think and all that is brilliantly put I think and all that is brilliantly put I think and all that is brilliantly put I I definitely think that social media is I definitely think that social media is I definitely think that social media is making me dumber. Like I if I spend a making me dumber. Like I if I spend a making me dumber. Like I if I spend a week checking social media versus week checking social media versus week checking social media versus reading books, reading books, reading books, I'm just distinctly the quality of my I'm just distinctly the quality of my I'm just distinctly the quality of my thoughts, even the same content. I don't thoughts, even the same content. I don't thoughts, even the same content. I don't read things anymore as much as I can on read things anymore as much as I can on read things anymore as much as I can on like a screen. I print everything out like a screen. I print everything out like a screen. I print everything out and I sit at the table and I read it. I and I sit at the table and I read it. I and I sit at the table and I read it. I can read it on my iPad. I read it at my can read it on my iPad. I read it at my can read it on my iPad. I read it at my laptop. I print it all out because my laptop. I print it all out because my laptop. I print it all out because my attention is different. And the same attention is different. And the same attention is different. And the same goes for AI. Whether we're talking about goes for AI. Whether we're talking about goes for AI. Whether we're talking about this kind of uh research, uh it's more

this kind of uh research, uh it's more this kind of uh research, uh it's more distinct and rigorous in the other space distinct and rigorous in the other space distinct and rigorous in the other space that I do every single day is that I do every single day is that I do every single day is programming. I'm definitely becoming a programming. I'm definitely becoming a programming. I'm definitely becoming a worse programmer by using AI offloading worse programmer by using AI offloading worse programmer by using AI offloading because it actually works really well because it actually works really well because it actually works really well there. I'm becoming worse at creative there. I'm becoming worse at creative there. I'm becoming worse at creative thinking at what you're saying, writing thinking at what you're saying, writing thinking at what you're saying, writing the first draft, which require that the first draft, which require that the first draft, which require that skill, that first little leap, that skill, that first little leap, that skill, that first little leap, that little mini leap into the creative little mini leap into the creative little mini leap into the creative genius that we all do every single day. genius that we all do every single day. genius that we all do every single day. Uh AI is not able to do that and it's Uh AI is not able to do that and it's Uh AI is not able to do that and it's definitely dulling that. All right, we definitely dulling that. All right, we definitely dulling that. All right, we covered a lot of ground today. What covered a lot of ground today. What covered a lot of ground today. What uh on the note of optimism, what gives uh on the note of optimism, what gives uh on the note of optimism, what gives you hope about the future of this great you hope about the future of this great you hope about the future of this great nation of ours, the future of America nation of ours, the future of America nation of ours, the future of America looking out in the next few years, in looking out in the next few years, in looking out in the next few years, in the next few decades, centuries when we the next few decades, centuries when we the next few decades, centuries when we colonize the s the solar system and colonize the s the solar system and colonize the s the solar system and beyond or we could just stick to the beyond or we could just stick to the beyond or we could just stick to the next couple decades. Sure. Um, you know, next couple decades. Sure. Um, you know, next couple decades. Sure. Um, you know, despite the fact that our book is a deep despite the fact that our book is a deep despite the fact that our book is a deep diagnosis of modern liberalism with a diagnosis of modern liberalism with a diagnosis of modern liberalism with a ton of criticism of the last half decade ton of criticism of the last half decade ton of criticism of the last half decade in politics, I am at root a profound in politics, I am at root a profound in politics, I am at root a profound optimist about everything. Uh, like just optimist about everything. Uh, like just optimist about everything. Uh, like just at a at a general personality sense, at a at a general personality sense, at a at a general personality sense, right? Like to a certain extent, a right? Like to a certain extent, a right? Like to a certain extent, a question like this is attempting to question like this is attempting to question like this is attempting to elicit a little bit of what can be elicit a little bit of what can be elicit a little bit of what can be considered analysis of the world, but considered analysis of the world, but considered analysis of the world, but you're also eliciting what is you're also eliciting what is you're also eliciting what is fundamentally like personality, right?

fundamentally like personality, right? fundamentally like personality, right? like what what makes you like what what makes you like what what makes you optimistic? I've just always been a real optimistic? I've just always been a real optimistic? I've just always been a real optimist. Um I'm optimistic about optimist. Um I'm optimistic about optimist. Um I'm optimistic about science and technology. Um especially in science and technology. Um especially in science and technology. Um especially in the realm of um biomedical science in a the realm of um biomedical science in a the realm of um biomedical science in a big way. I think if you look at what's big way. I think if you look at what's big way. I think if you look at what's happening right now in mRNA cancer happening right now in mRNA cancer happening right now in mRNA cancer vaccines in CARTT cell therapy for you vaccines in CARTT cell therapy for you vaccines in CARTT cell therapy for you know redesigning tea cells to attack know redesigning tea cells to attack know redesigning tea cells to attack cancers if you look at the GLP-1 drug cancers if you look at the GLP-1 drug cancers if you look at the GLP-1 drug revolution and some of these studies revolution and some of these studies revolution and some of these studies that have been done on the fact that that have been done on the fact that that have been done on the fact that GLP1 drugs while they you know were GLP1 drugs while they you know were GLP1 drugs while they you know were initially synthesized from lizard venom initially synthesized from lizard venom initially synthesized from lizard venom to help people with type 2 diabetes turn to help people with type 2 diabetes turn to help people with type 2 diabetes turn out to have these effects that seem to out to have these effects that seem to out to have these effects that seem to reduce bodywide inflammation that not reduce bodywide inflammation that not reduce bodywide inflammation that not only rewires our minds and makes it only rewires our minds and makes it only rewires our minds and makes it easier for people's desired sense of easier for people's desired sense of easier for people's desired sense of moderation to be actual iz. So people moderation to be actual iz. So people moderation to be actual iz. So people who want to eat more fruits and who want to eat more fruits and who want to eat more fruits and vegetables seem to find it easier to eat vegetables seem to find it easier to eat vegetables seem to find it easier to eat more fruits and vegetables when they're more fruits and vegetables when they're more fruits and vegetables when they're on GLP-1 drugs, but also because there's on GLP-1 drugs, but also because there's on GLP-1 drugs, but also because there's probably a lot of neurological issues probably a lot of neurological issues probably a lot of neurological issues that are fundamentally issues of that are fundamentally issues of that are fundamentally issues of inflammation, including maybe dementia inflammation, including maybe dementia inflammation, including maybe dementia and Alzheimer's, we might have and Alzheimer's, we might have and Alzheimer's, we might have accidentally from the tongue of a lizard accidentally from the tongue of a lizard accidentally from the tongue of a lizard a partial medicine for Alzheimer's a partial medicine for Alzheimer's a partial medicine for Alzheimer's disease. The ability of science to disease. The ability of science to disease. The ability of science to connect these dots in the cosmos just connect these dots in the cosmos just connect these dots in the cosmos just absolutely thrills and fascinates me.

absolutely thrills and fascinates me. absolutely thrills and fascinates me. And I hope that we get better at making And I hope that we get better at making And I hope that we get better at making those connections. And while I have a those connections. And while I have a those connections. And while I have a lot of fears about AI, many of them lot of fears about AI, many of them lot of fears about AI, many of them shared by Ezra, I am really interested shared by Ezra, I am really interested shared by Ezra, I am really interested in the possibility of AI being useful in the possibility of AI being useful in the possibility of AI being useful for synthesizing large bodies of for synthesizing large bodies of for synthesizing large bodies of knowledge to allow people to make knowledge to allow people to make knowledge to allow people to make cross-domain comparisons. I think a lot cross-domain comparisons. I think a lot cross-domain comparisons. I think a lot of inventions in tech history are of inventions in tech history are of inventions in tech history are essentially ingenious recombinations of essentially ingenious recombinations of essentially ingenious recombinations of ideas. Like to a certain extent, you ideas. Like to a certain extent, you ideas. Like to a certain extent, you look at something as fundamental or look at something as fundamental or look at something as fundamental or archetypal as Thomas Edison inventing archetypal as Thomas Edison inventing archetypal as Thomas Edison inventing the incandescent light bulb. What did he the incandescent light bulb. What did he the incandescent light bulb. What did he do? He just tested 10,000 different do? He just tested 10,000 different do? He just tested 10,000 different materials and figured out that actually materials and figured out that actually materials and figured out that actually it was like a very special kind of it was like a very special kind of it was like a very special kind of bamboo that burned for the right amount bamboo that burned for the right amount bamboo that burned for the right amount of time and said, "Boom, I did it. I of time and said, "Boom, I did it. I of time and said, "Boom, I did it. I made the incandescent light bulb." the made the incandescent light bulb." the made the incandescent light bulb." the ability to have a ability to have a ability to have a machine syn or accelerate the degree to machine syn or accelerate the degree to machine syn or accelerate the degree to which we understand what those 10,000 which we understand what those 10,000 which we understand what those 10,000 materials can do or synthesize knowledge materials can do or synthesize knowledge materials can do or synthesize knowledge so people can combine it and say we're so people can combine it and say we're so people can combine it and say we're going to take a little bit of um you going to take a little bit of um you going to take a little bit of um you know crisper over here and a little bit know crisper over here and a little bit know crisper over here and a little bit of cancer science over here to develop a of cancer science over here to develop a of cancer science over here to develop a gene therapy that targets a particular gene therapy that targets a particular gene therapy that targets a particular inhibitor that allows the immune system inhibitor that allows the immune system inhibitor that allows the immune system to attack a protein that is explicitly to attack a protein that is explicitly to attack a protein that is explicitly related to pancreatic cancer. I do related to pancreatic cancer. I do related to pancreatic cancer. I do absolutely believe that we might be on absolutely believe that we might be on absolutely believe that we might be on the doorstep of those kind of the doorstep of those kind of the doorstep of those kind of breakthroughs. And that makes me breakthroughs. And that makes me breakthroughs. And that makes me incredibly optimistic cuz I think at incredibly optimistic cuz I think at incredibly optimistic cuz I think at base it's like, you know, what's life base it's like, you know, what's life base it's like, you know, what's life about, right? What's abundance about?

about, right? What's abundance about? about, right? What's abundance about? Why housing and energy? Well, because we Why housing and energy? Well, because we Why housing and energy? Well, because we think they're fundamental to living a think they're fundamental to living a think they're fundamental to living a good life. You need a place to live. And good life. You need a place to live. And good life. You need a place to live. And people deserve the freedom to live where people deserve the freedom to live where people deserve the freedom to live where they want to live. Energy is what powers they want to live. Energy is what powers they want to live. Energy is what powers the entire economy. And more energy the entire economy. And more energy the entire economy. And more energy would power technologies that we can't would power technologies that we can't would power technologies that we can't even imagine or are just beginning to. even imagine or are just beginning to. even imagine or are just beginning to. Whether it's supersonic flight powered Whether it's supersonic flight powered Whether it's supersonic flight powered by clean fuel or fusion technology that by clean fuel or fusion technology that by clean fuel or fusion technology that basically gives us infinite solar basically gives us infinite solar basically gives us infinite solar energy, the sun's actual energy in a energy, the sun's actual energy in a energy, the sun's actual energy in a particular location. I mean these these particular location. I mean these these particular location. I mean these these are beautiful things that can happen. Um are beautiful things that can happen. Um are beautiful things that can happen. Um but also I think the good life is about but also I think the good life is about but also I think the good life is about is about health. It's about health and is about health. It's about health and is about health. It's about health and it's about the wealth that comes and the it's about the wealth that comes and the it's about the wealth that comes and the freedom that comes from from finding freedom that comes from from finding freedom that comes from from finding health in your own life. And I do I am health in your own life. And I do I am health in your own life. And I do I am incredibly optimistic that we might be incredibly optimistic that we might be incredibly optimistic that we might be at the cusp of a real golden age in at the cusp of a real golden age in at the cusp of a real golden age in taking all these little ingredients that taking all these little ingredients that taking all these little ingredients that we've spent decades on, whether it's we've spent decades on, whether it's we've spent decades on, whether it's genomics and proteomics and a little bit genomics and proteomics and a little bit genomics and proteomics and a little bit of AI. We're at the at a moment right of AI. We're at the at a moment right of AI. We're at the at a moment right now, I hope, where we can have this now, I hope, where we can have this now, I hope, where we can have this explosion of explosion of explosion of combinatorial intelligence and that combinatorial intelligence and that combinatorial intelligence and that hopefully in an optimistic way, AI could hopefully in an optimistic way, AI could hopefully in an optimistic way, AI could be useful in accelerating us toward that be useful in accelerating us toward that be useful in accelerating us toward that future. But I also think to the point of future. But I also think to the point of future. But I also think to the point of this book, we have to get institutions this book, we have to get institutions this book, we have to get institutions right too. These are discoveries that right too. These are discoveries that right too. These are discoveries that are going to happen inside of are going to happen inside of are going to happen inside of institutions and how those institutions institutions and how those institutions institutions and how those institutions work and how they're funded and the work and how they're funded and the work and how they're funded and the incentives that are created by law or by incentives that are created by law or by incentives that are created by law or by technology really matter in terms of the technology really matter in terms of the technology really matter in terms of the world that we build. And so that's why I world that we build. And so that's why I world that we build. And so that's why I think it's really important to not only think it's really important to not only think it's really important to not only be obsessed with what the technology can be obsessed with what the technology can be obsessed with what the technology can do, but how it's instantiated in the

do, but how it's instantiated in the do, but how it's instantiated in the institutions that we have because it's institutions that we have because it's institutions that we have because it's it ultimately is institutions and it ultimately is institutions and it ultimately is institutions and individuals that build the world, not individuals that build the world, not individuals that build the world, not technology acting on its own. Yeah. And technology acting on its own. Yeah. And technology acting on its own. Yeah. And I should say that you make a really I should say that you make a really I should say that you make a really great case for investing in weird great case for investing in weird great case for investing in weird science, meaning stuff that doesn't on science, meaning stuff that doesn't on science, meaning stuff that doesn't on the surface make sense. We said lizard the surface make sense. We said lizard the surface make sense. We said lizard venom. You know, there's all this venom. You know, there's all this venom. You know, there's all this popular criticism of scientific projects popular criticism of scientific projects popular criticism of scientific projects that sound like a waste of money when in that sound like a waste of money when in that sound like a waste of money when in reality, at least in the scientific reality, at least in the scientific reality, at least in the scientific realm, uh projects that seem like they realm, uh projects that seem like they realm, uh projects that seem like they don't have any positive effect, might don't have any positive effect, might don't have any positive effect, might actually end up being the ones that uh actually end up being the ones that uh actually end up being the ones that uh transform human civilization as we know transform human civilization as we know transform human civilization as we know it because of the unintended discoveries it because of the unintended discoveries it because of the unintended discoveries that happen. and all the Eureka moments, that happen. and all the Eureka moments, that happen. and all the Eureka moments, all the special discoveries all the special discoveries all the special discoveries happen truly happen truly happen truly uh when you're just passionately uh when you're just passionately uh when you're just passionately pursuing a cool thing in science. That's pursuing a cool thing in science. That's pursuing a cool thing in science. That's how scientific minds work. And so it how scientific minds work. And so it how scientific minds work. And so it makes sense to invest in things that uh makes sense to invest in things that uh makes sense to invest in things that uh in in in uh exploring weird shit, the in in in uh exploring weird shit, the in in in uh exploring weird shit, the weird mysteries of the universe. So weird mysteries of the universe. So weird mysteries of the universe. So anyway, uh Ezra, what gives you hope?

anyway, uh Ezra, what gives you hope? anyway, uh Ezra, what gives you hope? I'm a less temperamentally authentic I'm a less temperamentally authentic I'm a less temperamentally authentic person than Derek by a lot, actually. person than Derek by a lot, actually. person than Derek by a lot, actually. Yeah. And I would usually give a pretty Yeah. And I would usually give a pretty Yeah. And I would usually give a pretty similar answer to this question that similar answer to this question that similar answer to this question that Derrick gave, which is, you know, Derrick gave, which is, you know, Derrick gave, which is, you know, technological advancement, right? We we technological advancement, right? We we technological advancement, right? We we live in an age of of Marvels. I guess live in an age of of Marvels. I guess live in an age of of Marvels. I guess I'll say from the realist perspective I'll say from the realist perspective I'll say from the realist perspective that we live in a more liquid moment that we live in a more liquid moment that we live in a more liquid moment than many that, you know, if one of the than many that, you know, if one of the than many that, you know, if one of the advantages of the '9s of, you know, part advantages of the '9s of, you know, part advantages of the '9s of, you know, part much of the life that I have grown up in much of the life that I have grown up in much of the life that I have grown up in is that much of the structure of is that much of the structure of is that much of the structure of technology of global governance was technology of global governance was technology of global governance was fairly stable. we could sort of like fairly stable. we could sort of like fairly stable. we could sort of like look at it and there were certain not look at it and there were certain not look at it and there were certain not certainties but but but fairly reliable certainties but but but fairly reliable certainties but but but fairly reliable guard rails of what was and what wasn't guard rails of what was and what wasn't guard rails of what was and what wasn't going to happen and there were going to happen and there were going to happen and there were disruptions like 9/11 and the financial disruptions like 9/11 and the financial disruptions like 9/11 and the financial crisis they weren't small and slowly crisis they weren't small and slowly crisis they weren't small and slowly they broke that entire system but there they broke that entire system but there they broke that entire system but there you know there I think one of the things you know there I think one of the things you know there I think one of the things people sort of miss sort of feel about people sort of miss sort of feel about people sort of miss sort of feel about the way history's accelerated is that the way history's accelerated is that the way history's accelerated is that things have just all gotten faster and things have just all gotten faster and things have just all gotten faster and less predictable and they really have I less predictable and they really have I less predictable and they really have I think gotten faster and less predictable think gotten faster and less predictable think gotten faster and less predictable we're in an age it seems to be more like we're in an age it seems to be more like we're in an age it seems to be more like the early 20th century late 19th century the early 20th century late 19th century the early 20th century late 19th century then um then like the then um then like the then um then like the 1990s and that means the possibilities 1990s and that means the possibilities 1990s and that means the possibilities range very widely right when you think range very widely right when you think range very widely right when you think about AI when you think about biotech about AI when you think about biotech about AI when you think about biotech advances when you think about energetic advances when you think about energetic advances when you think about energetic advances when you think about the sort advances when you think about the sort advances when you think about the sort of shifting nature of global alliances of shifting nature of global alliances of shifting nature of global alliances of the technological and political of the technological and political of the technological and political systems the r in the most high variance systems the r in the most high variance systems the r in the most high variance period that I think has happened in in period that I think has happened in in period that I think has happened in in in a very very very long time and that

in a very very very long time and that in a very very very long time and that carries carries tremendous peril. Things carries carries tremendous peril. Things carries carries tremendous peril. Things could go terribly and it it carries could go terribly and it it carries could go terribly and it it carries tremendous possibility, right? What if tremendous possibility, right? What if tremendous possibility, right? What if AI is an incredible boon for humanity? AI is an incredible boon for humanity? AI is an incredible boon for humanity? What if we do invent and deploy the What if we do invent and deploy the What if we do invent and deploy the clean energy technologies that deliver clean energy technologies that deliver clean energy technologies that deliver energy abundance, not just a a kind of energy abundance, not just a a kind of energy abundance, not just a a kind of answer to the worst of climate change, answer to the worst of climate change, answer to the worst of climate change, but genuine energy abundance, unlocking but genuine energy abundance, unlocking but genuine energy abundance, unlocking new things like des like mass new things like des like mass new things like des like mass desalination and um you know, all like desalination and um you know, all like desalination and um you know, all like what if we do like I'm an animal what if we do like I'm an animal what if we do like I'm an animal suffering person. I'm a vegetarian. I suffering person. I'm a vegetarian. I suffering person. I'm a vegetarian. I care a lot about animal suffering. What care a lot about animal suffering. What care a lot about animal suffering. What if we did figure out um cultivated meat, if we did figure out um cultivated meat, if we did figure out um cultivated meat, right, that we grow in in, you know, right, that we grow in in, you know, right, that we grow in in, you know, breweries and on scaffolds and we don't breweries and on scaffolds and we don't breweries and on scaffolds and we don't have to kill tens of billions of animals have to kill tens of billions of animals have to kill tens of billions of animals that we've raised in unimaginable that we've raised in unimaginable that we've raised in unimaginable suffering every single year, right? suffering every single year, right? suffering every single year, right? Like, you know, what if we do figure out Like, you know, what if we do figure out Like, you know, what if we do figure out how to make government better and more how to make government better and more how to make government better and more responsive, right? What if that thesis responsive, right? What if that thesis responsive, right? What if that thesis antithesis synthesis thing does work antithesis synthesis thing does work antithesis synthesis thing does work out? But it's not hope. It's like that's out? But it's not hope. It's like that's out? But it's not hope. It's like that's a future you have to create, a future a future you have to create, a future a future you have to create, a future you have to call into being, a future you have to call into being, a future you have to call into being, a future you'll have to fight for. So it isn't so you'll have to fight for. So it isn't so you'll have to fight for. So it isn't so much that I found myself hopeful about much that I found myself hopeful about much that I found myself hopeful about what America or the world would be like what America or the world would be like what America or the world would be like in 2030 or 2040, but I find that I in 2030 or 2040, but I find that I in 2030 or 2040, but I find that I believe in the possibility of enough believe in the possibility of enough believe in the possibility of enough remarkable outcomes that it makes like remarkable outcomes that it makes like remarkable outcomes that it makes like the present really worth being engaged the present really worth being engaged the present really worth being engaged in and you know really worth trying to in and you know really worth trying to in and you know really worth trying to you know do your small part to bend the you know do your small part to bend the you know do your small part to bend the arc of uh of of the time in the arc of uh of of the time in the arc of uh of of the time in the direction that that you find more just.

direction that that you find more just. direction that that you find more just. Well, thank you to both of you for Well, thank you to both of you for Well, thank you to both of you for fighting fighting fighting uh for uh for uh for abundance and writing this manifesto for abundance and writing this manifesto for abundance and writing this manifesto for abundance and um for all the writing and abundance and um for all the writing and abundance and um for all the writing and the work you do in the podcast and just the work you do in the podcast and just the work you do in the podcast and just being um incredible minds in this world being um incredible minds in this world being um incredible minds in this world uh that I'm a fan of. So, uh thank you uh that I'm a fan of. So, uh thank you uh that I'm a fan of. So, uh thank you for talking today. Thanks very much, for talking today. Thanks very much, for talking today. Thanks very much, Lex. Thanks so much. Thanks for Lex. Thanks so much. Thanks for Lex. Thanks so much. Thanks for listening to this conversation with Ezra listening to this conversation with Ezra listening to this conversation with Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson. To support Klein and Derek Thompson. To support Klein and Derek Thompson. To support this podcast, please check out our this podcast, please check out our this podcast, please check out our sponsors in the description. And now, sponsors in the description. And now, sponsors in the description. And now, let me leave you with some words from let me leave you with some words from let me leave you with some words from Napoleon Napoleon Napoleon Bonapart. In politics, stupidity is not Bonapart. In politics, stupidity is not Bonapart. In politics, stupidity is not a a a handicap. Thank you for listening and handicap. Thank you for listening and handicap. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.