《里士满以北的富人们》登顶，阶层流动困境，地产资本吃紧，特朗普再遭起诉

Jason Calacanis (00:00:00): Oh my god. Saks looks like I got hit by a mack truck. You okay, little fella. Woo hoo. How long were you out last night, Saks? Did you see this message? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:00:09): I got the text message, and I was like, what the fuck is going on David Friedberg (00:00:12): over there? I gotta Jason Calacanis (00:00:12): get back to the United States, time stamp, 1:39 AM Pacific. I'm still out drinking tonight. There's no way I'm making 9 AM. I'll do 10 AM to noon. This is Saks. The negotiation has begun And I'm waking up. It's my last day on the boat. I'm trying Chamath Palihapitiya (00:00:29): to get off the boat in a reasonable manner, and that's the first text David Friedberg (00:00:31): message I get. Jason Calacanis (00:00:32): That's the first text. That's 6 minutes later. Drake just came in. Better make it 11. Winter's ride. Rainman, David Sacker. Speaker 4 (00:00:47): And I said We opened said to the fans and they just call the reason. W S Ice. Queen of Ken Robinson. Jason Calacanis (00:00:55): Do you David Sacks (00:00:56): wanna tell you the story? So the thing I would compare it to is do you remember that episode of Seinfeld where Constanza stumbles onto the model bar? You know, he finds the place that all the supermodels are hanging out. And he calls it shangaroo law because it's like this mythical place. And he spends the rest of his life trying to find Shanger log in, but you can never find it? Jason Calacanis (00:01:16): Yes. That was you last night in LA. David Sacks (00:01:19): Well, so we were just out having a few drinks at this private club. That's a new in town. It's just me and, you know, my whack back. And the room is it's just, you know, a few of us having drinks Chamath Palihapitiya (00:01:30): I'm sorry. Who who is your whack pack? We can bleep out these names. Jason Calacanis (00:01:32): How many of the whack pack are on salary versus? Yeah. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:01:35): Yeah. Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:01:36): He's like an NBA player. It's like he rolls Chamath Palihapitiya (00:01:38): it with six people. Percentage are you the payroll Jason Calacanis (00:01:41): to a friend? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:01:41): And what percentage are your friends? Yes. Jason Calacanis (00:01:45): He's doing a calculation. David Sacks (00:01:47): About, I guess, about half received some sort of monetary payment from me. Not all of them are direct employees. Some are vendors. Jason Calacanis (00:01:54): Come her back. Okay. Got it. All your once you're aware of it. David Sacks (00:01:58): You know? Jason Calacanis (00:01:58): Yeah. Of course. Real estate brokers. Yeah. David Friedberg (00:02:01): Like black. You don't have to have them on payroll. Jason Calacanis (00:02:04): Oh my god. So, yeah, they're on they're fee based. They're fee based. We have You David Sacks (00:02:07): could call it an entourage. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:02:08): Wait. How many how many rolling you're entourage? How many are there? 5? Or I'm gonna say 6. David Sacks (00:02:13): I think we had about five people out. Jason Calacanis (00:02:14): Okay. That's that's an entourage. That's perfect because because that you can get into the club with that. David Sacks (00:02:19): It's more like a private club. It's not like a like, you know, a different kind of club. Jason Calacanis (00:02:23): Yeah. Now you're a member of this club. I take it. David Sacks (00:02:25): Yeah. I'm a member. Jason Calacanis (00:02:26): Got it. Okay. David Sacks (00:02:27): Alright. So we're just hanging out there and drinks, and, you know, the room's empty. It's just us And all of a sudden, there's like a subtle vibe change that happens. And we look around, like, 5 minutes later, the whole place is full. And it's like shingle off, basically. And we're like, what just happened? Jason Calacanis (00:02:45): What happened? David Sacks (00:02:45): And then Drake walks in. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:02:47): Ah. And David Sacks (00:02:47): we're like, oh, okay. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:02:49): Got it. David Sacks (00:02:49): He performed at a concert in LA that night. So the after party was basically at this place. So it's not like we were an hour. Speaker 6 (00:02:56): What were Jason Calacanis (00:02:57): you drinking? Are you on the tequila still, or what are you on right now? You you seem to love that tequila? Are you on the ranch water still? David Sacks (00:03:02): Yeah. I used to like bourbon or scotch it, but now these sort of highly refined tequila's are are better. So the the class of zoo is probably my favorite. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:03:12): Right. David Sacks (00:03:12): Clos arepasado. Yeah. These reposados are on yay hoes are really great. And I I've advocated to this group that we should actually have our own all in tequila label. Jason Calacanis (00:03:23): I'm in. I'm in. So David Sacks (00:03:24): we'll see. If the fans like that idea, let us know in the comments and we'll we'll work on it. Well, now Jason Calacanis (00:03:29): what do you how do you drink it? Are you a neat guy or you put a couple of ice cubes in, or do you do, like, a bill gurly ranch water situation? David Sacks (00:03:35): What what's the ranch? What do you mean by Jason Calacanis (00:03:37): ranch water? To take a Topachika, some tequila. And then what? You put a couple of limes in it, Friedberg? Cause you're on this ranch water kick too, aren't you? David Friedberg (00:03:45): I had a little ranch water the other night. I had some ranch water night. You hear you hear my voice. I have a little too much ranch water. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:03:50): But Topachika is just that's just it's a seltzer water, right, Jason Calacanis (00:03:54): in a glass bottle for a Mexican. David Friedberg (00:03:55): Like, but it's it's a fancy seltzer. Jason Calacanis (00:03:58): It's David Friedberg (00:03:58): delicious. Get lime juice in it. And it's just, you know, it's a very like, it's basically a double tequila and soda with some lime. So it's it's like Chamath Palihapitiya (00:04:04): a margarita minus the sugar. David Friedberg (00:04:05): No sugar. Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:04:07): No shit. It slows down very smooth, very refreshing. David Friedberg (00:04:09): You gotta have a good tequila for it to work. David Sacks (00:04:11): Yeah. I I don't bother with the mixers or the fruit or any of that stuff. It's just, I'll drink it on the rocks. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:04:17): I can't be bothered with anything that that is ranch and water. Just seems so down. Mark seems nasty. Yeah. No. It's a Texas thing. It's a tech David Friedberg (00:04:25): down market. David Sacks (00:04:25): No. If if you're drinking a high quality spirit, you don't need to mix it with anything. You know, if it's if it's a bad spirit, then you gotta put all sorts of things in it. David Friedberg (00:04:34): But You don't add seltzer to white wine to a good white wine. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:04:37): When Bobby Baldwin was still running the aria, and I was super gambling at the area. My host invites me, and there was a huge Chinese junket at the same time. And I'll never forget it. These guys had ordered every bottle of screaming eagle k? So whatever. 5, $6000 a bomb. And Welch's grape juice said they were missing. I'm screaming. I'd never seen anything like this before or since. It was unbelievable. David Friedberg (00:05:09): This looks like a joke? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:05:11): No. That's how they drink it. Come on. No. They asked for the most expensive bottle that they had, the most expensive California bottle with that. These guys pull out a case of screaming eagle, and they just started pouring we we were playing together. Pouring half screaming eagle happen. Welch is grape juice, like the grape soda. David Friedberg (00:05:26): I gotta be honest. That does sound pretty good. Jason Calacanis (00:05:28): I don't think you need a screaming eagle. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:05:30): Exactly. Yeah. David Sacks (00:05:31): Yeah. That's pretty nutty. David Friedberg (00:05:32): It's like a sangria. David Sacks (00:05:34): The big thing now that they do is they put the big ice cube in the drinks, you know, the big cube. Yes. Jason Calacanis (00:05:40): But I, you know, David Sacks (00:05:41): I think I'm I'm old fashioned. I prefer the the multiple rocks, you know, not the big cube because I I actually I want thighs to melt a little bit. You know, I want the Jason Calacanis (00:05:50): I drinks to change. You wanna open it up. David Sacks (00:05:52): It's a relationship. It's a relationship with the drink. Jason Calacanis (00:05:55): How does it start? How does it end? Exactly. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:05:57): David, I want an honest answer. Do you have, in the mausoleum, an ice cube mold of your face. David Sacks (00:06:06): Not, Jason Calacanis (00:06:07): Some super fit. Just put that in the merch store. David Sacks (00:06:10): Not in my face. But we do have our own ice cubes. We do have our own Chamath Palihapitiya (00:06:13): big cubes. That's the best. Jason Calacanis (00:06:16): Actually, there's a there's a room off of the kitchen. Which is the ice room. So they bring the ice down from Antarctica, and they cut it. Most of it melts because he's not Chamath Palihapitiya (00:06:25): there, but yeah. It's the best. Saks is the best. David Friedberg (00:06:28): Here's the best. Jason Calacanis (00:06:29): But you it opens up. Right? So tell me more about the relationship with you. You start. You got a very powerful, strong relationship with it. And then you want to ease into it. It gets Yeah. I mean, David Sacks (00:06:39): the reason why they do the big cube in theory, I mean, it looks cool, but it's because when the ice is kinda in one tube like that, it doesn't melt or it doesn't melt as fast. And so it doesn't water down the drink, but I want the ice to melt a little bit. You know, How can you is your drink? Jason Calacanis (00:06:54): When we drink Scotch. Yeah. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:06:55): Sachs, when you're drinking bourbon, is the whole shtick around Pappy Van Winkle? Is that real, or is that just like marketing David Sacks (00:07:02): a little bit like screaming eagle, which is to say it's good, but is it ten times better than the, you know, $300 bourbon? No. So there are other good bourbons, but Pappy is very good. It is undoubtedly very good. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:07:16): And what what makes a bourbon good versus Moderate average versus shitty. David Sacks (00:07:21): It's, I'd say Chamath Palihapitiya (00:07:22): Like, can you taste it like wine? Like, you can taste the difference in wine or not really? David Sacks (00:07:26): It's about how smooth it is. Personally, I don't want bite in either my bourbon or my tequila. So, you know, how smooth that is. And then bourbon compared to Scotch tends to be sweeter, but you don't want it to be too sweet. So just getting that balance right, you know, the the these new tequilas are kinda like that as well. You know, you choose how much bite you want, how sweet you want it. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:07:47): Three things you don't wanna bite in bourbon, Scotch, and Speaker 6 (00:07:51): Woah. Woah. Jason Calacanis (00:07:59): Did you ever have a drink with the Collins ice? You ever have the Collins ice? You know what that is? Check this out. David Sacks (00:08:06): Woah. Jason Calacanis (00:08:06): This is becoming a trend. They cut a very long, rectangular ice. What do they call that? High bow? Is that a high ball or is a high ball the shorter glass? I don't know. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:08:16): No. Highly, I thought it was a short glass. No? Jason Calacanis (00:08:18): No. That's the short glass, which makes no sense because they call it Chamath Palihapitiya (00:08:21): high ball. But, anyway, there's a Jason Calacanis (00:08:23): funny meme where he take this drink and you they show this. And it's like, what happens when your venture capitalists after a venture capitalist get their preferred and their liquidation preference, and they pull the ice cube out, and there's one ounce of drink left. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:08:39): That's great. David Sacks (00:08:40): That's a prep stack right there. Jason Calacanis (00:08:41): It's a prep stack. This explains the prep stack. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:08:44): Your comments Jason Calacanis (00:08:45): It's a liquid around that ice cube. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:08:48): That's really good. That's really good. That's really good. Oh, man. Can I admit something, which may be totally derided, but I have to say, have you guys ever had a Cosmo in a short glass? So meaning, not in a Martini glass, but just a Cosmo, in a glass. Yeah. In a glass. Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:09:05): Yeah. A glass. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:09:06): I think when a a cosmo is made while it's an incredible drink. You guys David Sacks (00:09:11): Too many ingredients. Jason Calacanis (00:09:13): Yeah. Nobody here is going with you on this one now. You're on your own. Pass. David Friedberg (00:09:17): Well, I I don't Chamath Palihapitiya (00:09:18): do card alcohol, but but when I do Yeah. It's it's a cosmo Jason Calacanis (00:09:22): You like you like a chicken. There are David Friedberg (00:09:23): so many better what about a neg like, a great Negroni Chamath Palihapitiya (00:09:26): not sweet enough for me. I like a Cosmo. David Friedberg (00:09:29): Yeah. And a and a margarita. I like Chamath Palihapitiya (00:09:30): well, I guess I like sweet drinks. I like margarita. Jason Calacanis (00:09:33): Oh god. Here we go. David Sacks (00:09:35): How does that take you to 2 It's a David Friedberg (00:09:40): good background. Jason Calacanis (00:09:41): What is oh, there's the entourage background. Yeah. I'm friends with a lot of the entourage guys now. I know Adrian, and I know turtle who, is a big knicks fan. So I'm I'm friends with 2 of the 4. 2 of the 4. Not not really nice guys. David Friedberg (00:09:56): Like, when you say you know them, you mean you've dm ed with them, or done something in human life with them. Jason Calacanis (00:10:01): I've hung out with, Adrian Grenier many times. He's he's a big in tech. He's got a he's a he's a, like, a venture partner in a in a fund. And he lives in Texas, well known public that he's in the Austin area. So I've seen him many times. I think it's access to. He he he rides in our circles. And then, Yeah. Turtle is, a huge knicks fan, and I'm in a group chat with him where we talk about the Knicks. So shout out. And they're bringing it back, by the way. There's a big fight between, I guess, Mark Wahlberg, you know, 2 of the creators, but the whole cast wants to come back. And then they wanna do, like, what would Ari Gold be like in this era of cancellations and political correctness And I think that would be David Friedberg (00:10:43): because it's probably also he's gotta be a softer character too now that he's grown up. He's matured. He's past the the heyday of his career. He's reflecting on life a bit. It could be really good. David Sacks (00:10:52): Well, that would be a plot line. Yeah. Get you you put them in the middle of a cancellation crisis. Jason Calacanis (00:10:57): Yeah. Jerry Faron. David Sacks (00:10:58): He probably has to issue an apology of some kind. David Friedberg (00:11:01): Something from the past some texts he sent to some producer in the past. Jason Calacanis (00:11:04): Yeah. Don't what would be great is if I think the best entourage reboot would be making him the head of, like, Disney or something. Like, he's in charge. David Friedberg (00:11:12): Oh my god. Jason Calacanis (00:11:13): Here we go. And then By David Sacks (00:11:15): the way, are are you seeing the Snow White, the backlash? Jason Calacanis (00:11:19): Oh, here we go. Go on. Go ahead. Here's your re here's your rusty. David Sacks (00:11:22): I I don't care. I'm not gonna see the movie, and I don't care much Jason Calacanis (00:11:25): about it. David Sacks (00:11:26): But it's another Disney it's another Disney faux pas. Where conservatives are backlashing against this revisionist take on Snow White. The doors, apparently, are no longer doors. They're just people with, like, funky hair. David Friedberg (00:11:42): No way. Really? Yeah. They made them non they made the doors non doors. David Sacks (00:11:46): I think they're still called doors, but they're you know, normal height people. David Friedberg (00:11:51): So Lord. Jason Calacanis (00:11:51): But David Sacks (00:11:51): they've got, like, blue hair or pink hair or what's moving on. Jason Calacanis (00:11:54): Well, this is the thing. The term dwarf I I think is not I think there's some in the community, some debate if it's offensive or not. So I I don't know if it is. If it is, apologies. David Friedberg (00:12:06): In the small person community? Like, what community? Jason Calacanis (00:12:10): Person, there is a term person of short stature. Little person and dwarf. Those are the commonly used terms, according to the internet. I don't think you get canceled for any of those, but I do think it's a sensitive subject, and there are some differences of opinions. Anyway, somebody who is a person of short stature, complained about this, and then a bunch of folks who are persons of short stature were very upset because how many iconic roles are there for people who are are in this. Right. Well, that this is kind of David Sacks (00:12:43): an ancillary issue, Jason. The the main thing that's raised tackles is that the actress who placed note wide has been giving all these interviews in which she's trashing the original movie. And basically saying that Prince Charming was a stalker in the original, and so they had to change that And so I guess remember that that that's so white was the original IP of Disney. That was the first big movie they did that put them on the map. I think before that, it was more like short animated films. And I think Snow White was the one that Walt Disney figured out we can make a feature length animated movie and it made the Walt Disney company. So you have here this actress is taking a lot of heat because she's saying a lot of things sort of trashing their original movie. Now I personally don't blame her because the thing she's saying, I think, are the filmmakers intent. And so, really, you have to question the wisdom of the executives at Disney who, you know, could have left this material alone. They didn't have to go here. Jason Calacanis (00:13:38): Yeah. David Sacks (00:13:39): But they did decide to go here. They did decide to do a remake. Yeah. And they changed all these things. Why even bother? You know? All you're gonna do is ruin the public's perception of the original. Jason Calacanis (00:13:50): Yeah. That'd be like the the new Star Wars people being like, oh my god. Hand solo was a misogynist that like, well, yeah. He was a scoundrel. They they literally call him a scoundrel in it. Like, yeah, I mean, he's not the best guy, but he has an arc and he turns around. I mean, it's a problem with trying to, you know, have to look at art in context, obviously. And, you know, speaking of which, I don't know if you guys saw this movie. David Sacks (00:14:09): A need for them to rehabilitate that movie by remaking it in a completely different way. Jason Calacanis (00:14:14): Yeah. Here's what I say. Standards have changed over a 100 years. So some of the things that you might see on film or in media or in books might be different over the last century, and, you might wanna put them in context. At the end, let's move on. But speaking of media, are are you guys aware of this, song that has rocketed to number 1? Rich Madman? Listen to it. Richmond? Alright. So I just I I thought I'd bring this up. I think it's have you have you heard it, Friedberg? David Friedberg (00:14:39): Great song. Great voice. Jason Calacanis (00:14:41): Incredible. Can you play it? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:14:42): Because I I haven't heard it. David Sacks (00:14:43): I have no idea what Jason Calacanis (00:14:44): it is. Let me play you a little bit. I want you to just listen to some of the lyrics here. And then if for context, nobody knew the song a week ago. It got 25,000,000 views on X in a week or 3 days, and it's the number one song on iTunes right now. Number 1's track in the country. Here we go. Coming at you. Oliver Anthony, Rich vowed to Rich be coming at you on a Thursday. Speaker 6 (00:15:04): Hours for bullshit pay so I can sit out here and waste my hive away, drag back home and drown my troubles away. It's a damn shame. What the world's gotten to? Jason Calacanis (00:15:18): People like me. Speaker 6 (00:15:20): People like me. Jason Calacanis (00:15:20): People like me. I wish I Speaker 6 (00:15:22): could just wake up. And it'll not be true. With and hold. So the rich man knows the rich man, or knows how to total control. Wanna know what you think. Wanna know what you do, and I don't think you know, but I know what you do. Dollar ain't shit, and it's tax to no pen. Jason Calacanis (00:16:02): Incredible. When you hear the song I saw that Saks was getting into it. David Friedberg (00:16:07): This is a popular song. He's crooning the American voice. Absolutely. David Sacks (00:16:11): It's I'm into it. David Friedberg (00:16:12): It's the 80,000,000 people Jason Calacanis (00:16:14): vote for Trump David Friedberg (00:16:14): that, you know, and if you read the the top YouTube comment, it's the 80,000,000 people that feel like they don't have a voice that, you know, Trump was speaking to? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:16:23): He sounds like Wesley Schultz of the Lumineers, the beautiful voice. David Friedberg (00:16:26): But obviously, the the lyrics are what speak to people. It just delivers it so well. Jason Calacanis (00:16:30): Let's do a little, all in for the first time. A little, cultural you know, what would you call this appreciation of the lyrics here, or an analysis? I've been selling my soul working all day over time hours for bullshit pay. So I can sit out here and waste my life away, drag back home, and drown my troubles away. It's a damn shame what the world's gotten to. For people like me, people like you, wish I could just wake up and it not be true, but it is. Living in the new world with an old soul. These rich men, north of Richmond, Lord knows they just wanna have total control. This is this is a key line. They just wanna have total control. They wanna know what you think, Zack. They wanna know what you do. And they don't think you know, but I know you do. And so what's happening here is the, author of the song, the lyricist, is saying, this is about Big Tech. This is about the CIA. This is about the FBI tracking us and then thinking that we're schlubs that we don't know they're tracking us. They don't know they're tracking workmen, but the author speaks to the listener. And says, I know you do. Just let it sink in. Do you have any lyrics here that spoke to you, Friedberg? I know that you're you're living this blue collar life in? David Friedberg (00:17:50): I just wanna wax philosophical for a second. I do I do think that, you know, for all humans to find happiness, in life, they have to feel like they're progressing. And if folks are not progressing because of challenges they face in the world, there's always an orientation that the system isn't delivering to me the things that it was supposed to deliver or the system is rigged and corrupt against me. That's been the case for all of human history. It's certainly the case today. And with, you know, you read Thomas Picketty's book, Capital, he speaks so much about wealth disparity, in an era of globalization. In an era of, in an era when the world is seeing some people have extraordinary gains, but most people not. On a relative basis. And that voice speaks to a system that is preventing those folks from finding that path in life that they believe they're due and that they think is obviously something that everyone should be born, to be able to pursue. Jason Calacanis (00:18:44): I think it's beautifully said. It's beautifully said. David Friedberg (00:18:46): It really speaks to the core and the heart of people term this populism. I hate that term, but it's a lack of progressivism. It's the fact that folks don't feel like they can progress. Not just in the US around the world today, but really the US voice is so strong and so loud on this point. It's why Trump was elected that the system whether it's the companies, the people, the institutions, the large, large, large federal government agencies, are preventing folks clogging up, giving people not delivering to the people the things that they said that they would and not enabling them to progress on their own. And I think that's really this this this song encapsulates the emotion of that feeling so well. Jason Calacanis (00:19:28): I think it also I David Friedberg (00:19:28): think that's what's going on. Jason Calacanis (00:19:29): Yeah. It's beautifully said, and I think to build on that and then and bring Chamath in here, There's something unique about the American spirit that we're never happy, that we're always striving. And I think this also encapsulate this, that and if you look at the European spirit, specifically Italy, where you are right now, there are people who very much enjoy life and accept life and have, maybe a little more peace and happiness and aren't trying to, you know, upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, upgrade to get the latest version of whatever it is car boat house. You know, ipod, whatever. And it's super interesting. This lyric. Because it shows this frustration. And and if you think about the frustration framework to your point, we have the lowest unemployment in the history of this country, oh, in in our lifetime, I should say, and, wars aside. And and when we have 10, 20% unemployment in certain groups, people complain about that. When people complain about their retirement we complain here about our portfolios and our equity positions and them being down. Everybody in America complains. It's why we are so successful is because we never accept it, and we never actually take a moment to smell the roses. If any thoughts on on that, and then, I'll just read some more lyrics. And then go to sex. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:20:38): I don't know how to reconcile all of this with the other part of America, which is you pull yourself up by your bootstraps, and the system still roughly works. How do you make those two things work together? It just seems like One cohort of people says the system is rigged. Another cohort of people say, if you work really hard, America will give you a better chance than anybody else, and it still does, and it still does a better job than it ever did. And there are team examples that they'll point to. So who's right? Is it that they're both right? I think it is. Jason Calacanis (00:21:15): I was about to say, I think it's it's both right, Sachs. You could have a group of people, who are unhappy with our current condition. And there are people from around the world who look at American and say, I want to be part of that system. If only I could be in that country. In fact, All three of your parents, Friedberg, Sachs, and Shamab, said that, I need to get there. I need to get to America, sex with us, and Shamabaugh's point about this disparity. This paradox. David Sacks (00:21:40): So the way I interpret this word populism is failure of the elites. When you hear people expressing populous thoughts. What they're really saying is that the people running this country, the ruling class, the elite, has failed. And we've just seen with 2 years of COVID, that the ruling class got everything wrong, pushed these insanely destructive lockdowns, lied about every aspect of the virus and pushed a vaccine that didn't work, So I don't wanna rehash COVID, but the point is just the elite, the ruling class, completely failed, and yet their failure was covered up by the media. Jason Calacanis (00:22:14): It's the best example. Let's just say let's just call it what it is. It is the best example. David Sacks (00:22:19): Right. So I think people are just fiably angry about this failure of the elite combined with the lack of accountability because there's not honesty about what they're getting wrong. And you see this pattern repeated over and over again. So I think it's repeated in terms of how we got into this completely unnecessary Ukraine war. It's repeated in terms of the crisis we've had at the border. It's repeated in terms of the export of all of these industrial jobs to other countries. And that has David Friedberg (00:22:48): Collapse of cities. Jason Calacanis (00:22:49): Collapse of cities. David Sacks (00:22:50): The collapse of cities with, you know, again, we have hundreds of thousands of people living on the streets. I think all of these things have made a huge difference in the lives of many ordinary people in the country. And so, yeah, the this is a land of opportunity for people who have certain kinds of skills. Listen, if you are technologically inclined, it's still a great country. We're in this industry. We know there's some opportunity. It's always a great time to start a company, but many people in the country have been adversely impacted by these policies. And there appears to be no willingness of the ruling class to admit the problem and make changes. The line, Jason, you quoted, where it was kind of like they know we know and they keep doing it anyway. Yeah. Reminds me of a line from a soldier knitson who said that we know they are lying. They know they are lying. They know we know they are lying. We know they know we know they are lying, but they are still lying. That's the vibe I'm getting is this this Solar Netson line. David Friedberg (00:23:46): Nick, if you just pull up the link I just sent, this is a a really important, I think, dataset for us to all look at. And for everyone to understand, you know, what's gone on in the United States. This shows in $20.20 per capita income in the US. By quintile. So the top 5 percent of earners in the US, you know, since call it the mid nineties, have seen a near doubling of their earnings. The top quintile, which is the top 20 percent of earners in the United States have seen their earnings climb by 60% since that time period. But the rest of America, the other 80% have been flat. Jason Calacanis (00:24:27): Yep. David Friedberg (00:24:28): And I think what if you are born into the United States or told the story of the American dream, the story of the American dream is you can come here, work hard, be smart, may put in the effort, put in the time, and you'll be able to progress in your life in terms of comforts and assets and all these things. And for most of Americans, that story has not played out. They've worked hard. They've put in the effort. They've tried to be smart. They followed the rules. They've done what the systems and the governments said you should do in order to get the rewards, and they're left with flat earnings over several decades. And that's the story of America right now. And because of this, the top 20 percent, the top 5 percent have acquired, you know, an outsized amount of the assets and outsized amount of the income, as as we all know and have all benefited from. And the vast majority of Americans So that have been working, but I have a question for Chamath Palihapitiya (00:25:19): free Friedberg, do you think that we should implement policies to change the lines on this graph? It's exactly what I was gonna ask. Yeah. David Friedberg (00:25:29): I wanna reference you guys to the Tim Ferris interview with a Charles Koch from a couple years ago. In that interview, he gives a really good example, and I'm gonna mess this up a bit. But he talks about how certain women that are hairdressers in the inner city, they wanna go do a hair braiding thing. But in order to do it, they have to pay 1000 of dollars to school to get certified, and then they have to go to the city to get a license in order to be able to do that job. So the economic cost of getting there is insurmountable for them. And there's countless examples like this where in the US we've created policies that have attempted to be forms of protection or perhaps be forms of income generation for cities and governments and so on. That in the process, unfortunately, have limited the mobility of people that wanna be individual earners and entrepreneurs in the US. I think that is the first thing I would do to address this problem. Give every American the opportunity to be an entrepreneur to build their own path. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:26:28): Do you think that hair braiding licensing fixing that problem will cause the dashed black line or the blue line to shrink? Or I guess what I'm trying to ask you is, should those lines shrink? Jason Calacanis (00:26:42): Yeah. I don't think it's the government's role. Right? I mean I'll tell you I'll I just wanna know. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:26:48): I wanna hear I wanna hear Friedberg answer, Jason. I'll David Friedberg (00:26:51): answer the question. I'll answer the question. Jason Calacanis (00:26:53): Okay. David Friedberg (00:26:54): I've said this in the past. If you shrink those lines, you will limit overall progress. And what I mean by progress is improvements in productivity, improvements in advances in technology, in business, in economic growth, because, we've seen this many times in the past, there's a certain limit on taxation. So one method is to tax, right, pull more money out of the top earners. And redistribute it. The problem is when you do that, there's less capital in the hands of those who have proven themselves to be good at driving productivity and improving access for goods and commodities and things that are cheaper for everyone. So there is a cost to doing that, and that has been this has this has played out. I mean, this is the Roman empire. This is the British empire. This has played out countless times in history. In recent years, it's played out probably half a Jason Calacanis (00:27:42): dozen times. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:27:42): You're evading you're evading the question just Jason Calacanis (00:27:44): want to Chamath Palihapitiya (00:27:45): know what you think. What do you think? David Friedberg (00:27:50): I think that there's an important balance to strike. So I don't think it's about taking away from the top as much as it's about enabling the bottom, if that makes sense. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:27:58): It doesn't because that's what everybody says they wanna do, and this is that's been 50 years of people saying that. Doesn't work. What? David Friedberg (00:28:04): Yeah. So he he's not gonna answer. Jason Calacanis (00:28:05): So you've you answered Shamoff. What do David Friedberg (00:28:07): you think? I'm just telling you there's a consequence to doing, you know, whatever we wanna do to try everyone equal and end up in a certain state. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:28:12): Here's my here's my issue. Right. The the way that you present it, like, you tell it in a language. And even I felt it where I was like, wow, this guy's really empathized. Wow. My god. He's really but then the follow-up to, like, well, what would you do is non existent, and I think that that's the real problem. A lot of people wanna pretend that this is an issue, and they wanna get the sympathy of the masses by giving the populist rhetoric of why this is an issue, But when push comes to shove and the question is, do you believe that the dashed black line Jason Calacanis (00:28:40): or the blue line should be legislatively brought Chamath Palihapitiya (00:28:40): down to meet the other lines People just evade the question. In my perspective, the answer is no. You cannot do that. And the reason why United States GDP is where it is is because of that dash line. It's an existence proof of the fact that this is the largest economy in the world. And so one has to make a really simplistic decision, which is do you want economic supremacy and then try to figure out ways of rebalancing things or do you not? I say you absolutely must start with that, which means that that dash line and that blue line will always have a rate of acceleration that is greater than the other lines, and that's just natural OpEx leverage that exists in any company. If you look at a company with 50% EBITDA margins versus a company with 15% EBITDA margins because one uses technology and the other one doesn't. It's Calacanis is rife with these examples. David Friedberg (00:29:39): Yeah. Chamath, that is the smartest first thing you've said in a 142 episodes of the all in part. But I agree, a 100% to mouth with your I Jason Calacanis (00:29:49): think it's well said. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:29:50): But then you should just say it. I think we do a huge disservice by pretending to care and then not seeing the ugly truth. The ugly truth is none of us want the government to try to bring that dashed black line or that blue line down, we want them to stay out of our way. That is the truth. David Friedberg (00:30:10): Yep. So if you talk to that guy that wrote that song and his 80,000,000 followers Chamath Palihapitiya (00:30:16): He I don't think What do you say Jason Calacanis (00:30:18): to them? What do you say to them? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:30:21): I don't know. David Sacks (00:30:22): Katya shot at this. Jason Calacanis (00:30:23): My honest answer. I wanna get sex in sex too. David Sacks (00:30:25): Okay. Look. I think when you see a chart like that, the natural instinct is that you wanna argue for redistribution. You basically wanna take from one of the top lines and just give it to one of the bottom lines. And I think that only works to a degree. I think it's important that we have a social safety net, but what we've seen is that Marxist redistribution doesn't ultimately work. It actually makes a society. Or I think this work Chamath is right. The simplistic solutions don't work. We're not gonna move from fundamentally a capitalist system to a sort of Marxist's redistributive system. But that doesn't mean that we can't do things to improve the situation for the average American. And I think there, the policies are more complicated, but I think we could have much more prudent handling of our fiscal situation so that inflation, for example, doesn't eat away the wages of American workers. I think we could have a much more sensible immigration policy so that there's not I think a lot of competition for, let's call it low end jobs. I think we could have had a better, trade policy with China over the last 20 years. I think there are things that we could do that were more nuanced that would have improved the situation for working class Americans, and we didn't do it. And you compound that with Again, all these elite failures around things like COVID, around things like foreign wars, and let's add to this, the Robert F Kennedy junior critique of regulatory capture that the military industrial complex is bleeding this country dry. And I think you add all those things together, and I can see why there are complaints. David Friedberg (00:32:02): There have been 4 major responses over the past 50 years to this problem. The one And, and all of them involve creating budget dollars to fund access to everyone of 3 major things, which is healthcare, education, and housing. And it sounds good in principle. It is a good thing to say everyone deserves to have access to buying a home. Everyone deserves to have access to an education. Everyone deserves to have access to health care. The problem is when the federal government has stepped in, to build the programs to provide these solutions. They've created extraordinary incentive problems that have caused asset bubbles, and have ultimately caused failure in the underlying system that you're trying to give everyone access to. We have told every American that they should put all of their net worth and more into their house. And as a result, we've had to continue to drive up the price of housing in the US, drive up create a housing bubble by pouring a ton of capital in to keep that asset safe and protected because it is where most Americans have put their nest egg. We've given everyone access to an education by giving free student loans out, and those student loans have caused an asset bubble in the price of education. And we have tried to provide health care to everyone through the federal government that has no accountability. And as a result, the cost of health care has ballooned. So I I think the the the one question for you guys is in the sense that most people are saying these are three critical things that I need access to, but when the federal government gets involved and provides them the cost sores, And we have all of these bubble problems and disincentives that arise in the system and money gets stolen and yadayada. What's the right solution then? Right? How do you provide Saks at that that you know, that 80% of Americans access to these things that, you know, boost their condition in life without causing what is effectively in across all Jason Calacanis (00:33:45): the world. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:33:45): I don't think those are these areas. Jason Calacanis (00:33:47): Yeah. I I would like to start by just saying, when we look at this chart, I think it maybe looks worse than it actually is in reality. I think when you look at the chart, you say, oh my god. This is terrible, but there are people around the world who are fighting together in this country who want to be part of this chart. Now why do they want to be part of this chart? It's because they perceive that, you know, even the the middle quartile, even the 4th quartile here, the bottom quartile they feel like that's better than their lot in life in their country. So this, if you were to expand it and put a couple of other countries on it, you would say, hey. Even the the people who are in the 4th quartile in America are doing better than people in the middle quartile in another country, and the opportunity is still here. And as my second point, which is, you know, how easy is it or how possible is it for, you know, the next generation, you know, if you came here as immigrants, like, like many of you did, and, obviously, you know, my my, grandparents did. How easy is it to get from that green line to the orange one, the orange, to the red, the red, to the purple, etcetera? That's the general reason. I think we need to focus on. Forget about all the programs forget about tax moving up. How do you move up? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:34:56): That's a wonderful point because I think the generalization that this chart is like chart porn because it's meant to be titillating, but it tells a very poor story of that exact dynamic, which is if you started in the green line, which I did. You know, my parents my parents made 32,000. That's the most they ever made in their best year. But most of the time with welfare, we were on living on between $1521,000 a year. Yet somehow, you know, we went from the green line to the dashed black line. So the thing that this chart isn't really representing is, is there enough people that go from green to orange, orange to red red to purple, purple to blue, blue to dash black. That's what really matters. That's what that's why I think this chart is mostly pointless. Because if in fact what you saw was that in any given cohort of people, they were not the cohort before that was in the dash BlackLine, you would say, wow. We're actually creating wealth distribution in a very unique way, which is an entire new cord or to people, are becoming wealthy in every generation. If, however, it's the same fifty people that are in the dash black line, obviously, that's not good. But our lived experience is not that. So I think, like, the real question is, like, can we just be Can we find a different way of actually telling the truth using this information so that instead of Jason Calacanis (00:36:22): so Chamath Palihapitiya (00:36:22): that instead Jason Calacanis (00:36:23): of Chamath Palihapitiya (00:36:23): bare hugging random Populous sentiments and statements to try to win favor with people, we actually just acknowledge the problem where it lies. That individual that wrote that song, which line is he on, which line was his father on, and which line will his children be on? That's the critical question. It's not that the line shouldn't exist. David Friedberg (00:36:46): Yeah. And nowhere else on earth with the 3 of us. Jason Calacanis (00:36:49): I mean, You know, which line did you start on? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:36:53): I started in the green. Jason Calacanis (00:36:55): I know. I'm I'm asking for you, but we just I I started between the 4th quartile and the middle of David Friedberg (00:36:59): my time. I mean, when we when we moved to the US, my parents always just looked for gigs that they could make money at. Jason Calacanis (00:37:03): So you were 4th quartile, you think? 40 k? David Friedberg (00:37:05): Yeah. We had no money. I don't know tell you. I mean, we, you know, my parents, we moved to LA when I was six years old from South Africa, and they worked gigs their entire lives. Jason Calacanis (00:37:14): Yeah. I think my my family from 4th to the middle, and then my brothers and I all went up to at least 1 or 2 lines higher. David Friedberg (00:37:21): By the Chamath Palihapitiya (00:37:21): way, that's the sorry. David Friedberg (00:37:23): I think that's I think that's the important story. If you guys read some of the comments on YouTube, which we always argue we should or shouldn't have, but You know, the the but audit, honestly, I just wanna point this out. There's to Shamab's point, there's immediate approximation of people based on which quartile or quintile they're in rather than an approximation on their traversal of the quartiles or quintiles or whatever. Jason Calacanis (00:37:45): And David Friedberg (00:37:45): I think what what what's what's really true about all four of us is that we all transverse the quintiles. We all moved from there to there, and none of us were wealthy just a few years ago, we all, you know, made our way in the world and in the United States in a way that we would not have been able to anywhere else on earth. And I do think that that is the most powerful aspect of, you know, American liberalism and democracy still. I think this characterization of people based on their, their wealth is what's so disturbing to me because you hear it Speaker 6 (00:38:16): a little Jason Calacanis (00:38:16): bit more. David Friedberg (00:38:17): You hear it from AOC. Yeah. But but it discredits the fact that those people typically were not wealthy a few years ago, that the people that should be celebrated are the ones that went from not wealthy to wealthy through the means of creating things that ended up being useful and productive or whatever, the system, asked for, and they created value there. And I think that the, the lack of recognition of entrepreneurship, the ability for immigrants to come to this country and transverse these quintiles. Jason Calacanis (00:38:42): Yeah. But that was It was David Friedberg (00:38:43): one of the challenges. Yep. Jason Calacanis (00:38:45): That would require them to be a little bit curious about the individual and to not use the individual as just an object to win their argument. And, you know, I think that's that is the sin of politics is that they're just using just different objects out there. David Friedberg (00:38:57): Zach, let me ask you the question then. What do you say to the blue collar worker enrichment? That this guy is speaking to in terms of their ability to transverse those quintiles, to to go from low income earner They they're they're a blue collar worker. They work a union job or they work as a plumber or or they work in, you know, some manufacturing facilities. They Jason Calacanis (00:39:16): work as David Friedberg (00:39:17): a job at teaching. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:39:18): You're not supposed to grind fuck him. So by pretending, like, the all of the this is what they hate. They hate all of you fucking people grind fucking them. Stop grind fucking them. Stop pretending that you care that you really care and, oh, what was them? But the reality is it is implicitly impossible for anybody on this fucking podcast. To talk about how this system has not worked for them. Okay? And so what we need to do is actually take a step back and just acknowledge the fact that we were in the green line We somehow buy a bunch of fate and luck and hard work and opportunity that this country provided. And so the real question is, what did that guide can he do differently? Has he done or shouldn't have done that has kept him in there? And one of the things that I would like to bring up that are that is really worth exploring from multi generational Americans, which is not talked about enough, is when we introduced or when we, I'm talking Collectively, we, Lyndon Johnson, really, the war on poverty that had an inexorable change in the dynamics of America. In black wealth, in white wealth, in the trapped amount of wealth, the destruction of nuclear families, all of these trends started a few years post the introduction of the war on poverty, and nobody talks about that. So I disagree with you, Friedberg, when you point to health care, and all those are secondary and tertiary derivatives of the actual war on poverty. And that was Lyndon Johnson's signature legislation post the assassination of JFK and nobody really looks at what that actually did to change and potentially misalign incentives in the United States that have compounded to create this issue. So I I would say to the Richmond person, I have enough respect for you, sir, to not grind fuck you and tell you how well was this graph. I don't know what the solution is, and I think we just need to talk and figure out to see if there are some ideas that that can improve the situation. But some of them do some of them do come to the fundamental incentives that the government has created that we need to either undo or change. Jason Calacanis (00:41:22): Zachs? David Sacks (00:41:23): Yeah. I mean, I think there's a lot of good points in there. Just to echo some of the things you guys said. I think when my family came to America in 1977, I think my dad was making $27,000 a year. So Jason Calacanis (00:41:34): Can't green light. David Sacks (00:41:34): Was the, you know, it was green or orange or something like that. The one one of the bottom 1 or 2 quintiles. And then we moved up because he's a doctor and had that education. So, you know, how you do in this country is gonna depend a lot on what kind of education you have, what kind of skills you have, like you guys are saying. Now that being said, I still think there is a policy role here. I do think that A lot of the policies around this country over the last couple of decades have not been great for working class people, and I think there are things we can adjust. But to Tremas point, declaring a civil war on poverty that's based around redistribution doesn't work because what we've seen is that it also creates a lot of dependency. And so a lot of these policies backfire. So simplistic redistribution is not going to solve the problem. However, I do think that having a policy response that does try to create more opportunity in these working class communities. Again, we didn't need to hollow out our industrial communities by exporting jobs to China, we didn't need to create all this low end wage pressure by basically having an open border for so many years. So there were choices that we made that did make life rougher disease people, and then when they start to complain about it, we censor them or call them deplorables. And so I do think that the response that the elite has and that really the mainstream media has towards these people does fuel the alienation and polarization. So we could be reacting. We could be reacting a lot better to the complaint here. Jason Calacanis (00:43:04): I'll tell you what's happened, I think, is America went from, you know, a country where people pulled themselves up by the bootstraps. They believed in radical self reliance and that they determined, you know, their fate. And then over time, we've solely looked at the government as the determinant of our fate. And, you know, what handout, what tax break, for the rich, you know, what what can I get? What edge can I get on the system? What angle shot? How can I, you know, look at the government as a solution to our problems? And what I think all sides of the political spectrum need to look at and celebrate. And this is why I think Chris Christie and Vivek are like really good candidates is because they're not looking at handouts or blaming the government or looking to the government to solve problems but looking at your community, looking inside yourself, and saying, Hey, what are the ways in which if I want to, if I want to move up those Shratic? And remember, some people work to live. They don't live to work. They just wanna do their 9 to 5, put their time in and spend time with their families or do their art, whatever. Their job does not define them, and and we are a bias group. Of entrepreneurs who are define ourselves in large part by what we do in in our work. Doesn't mean we don't care about our families, but we we we put that front center. Some people don't wanna move up the lines. They're they're happy and content where they are. But the the entire dialogue in America is about how unfair, you know, we split that tax base, as you talk about Friedberg, the spending, and everybody wanting their peace, and everybody wondering who got a bigger piece of the pie. As opposed to wondering, Hey. How can I improve myself? How can I provide more value to the world? How can I build a business? How can I build a skill set? And that's where the dialogue needs to move. And I and I just when I hear Vivek speak, you know, I disagree with him about a lot of things. Jason Calacanis (00:44:47): I hear Chris Christie speak. I I obviously disagree with him about a couple of issues. But I'm liking those candidates, and I'm liking the direction we're going. David Sacks (00:44:55): Vivek has a great line, which is victimization is a choice. And you you see different versions of it on both the right and the left. On the left, the victimization is based on identity politics where if you're born into a certain group, then you're automatically a victim. Regardless of, really, your circumstances. On the right, it's more, again, it's it's more of this populous critique where if you're a working class person, then you've been victimized by those policies. I think there's some degree of truth in both critiques. I mean, I do think that policy makers have to meet people halfway. We need to have policies that work better for working class, mean to have policies that prevent discrimination. At the same time, people can't just buy into this victimhood mentality where they're like, okay, I don't need to do anything on my own to improve my circumstances. The whole system is so rigged against me that I don't need to take any agency for for my own action. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:45:46): Also David Sacks (00:45:47): And I think it needs to be both. We have to have policy makers and people meet halfway on this thing. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:45:51): I also think that there's a social dynamic that's also worth exploring here, which is that we live in a culture where a lot of people spend a lot of time projecting a version of themselves, And that version of themselves is mostly meant to accrue social capital to them But by implication, it's to make other people feel envious of them as well. And that's the whole, I'll call it the Instagram phenomenon. And I also think I just think it's important to acknowledge that we live in a point where there's this heightened psychological sensation that everybody else is doing better than you are. And so you you have to find these mechanisms of rationalizing and explaining. And and I think that that's also very dangerous. So, Jason, to your point, there is so much respect. You know, a lot of the reason why I spent so much time in Italy is my friends here are just very, very simple. You guys met so many of them. Just normal everyday people. And and and they're happy, and I have so much respect for that because they have a balance in their life. And one of the things that defines them is they don't spend time in these media formats that actually exacerbate the sense of being less than everybody else. Competition. And I find that to be consistent thread amongst all of these people that are really well balanced that at every strata of whatever line you're on, The healthiest people in each of those lines are the ones that actually have a definition of themselves that comes from within that is multifaceted that generally includes a deep relationship with one romantic partner, and it includes their kids. You know, everything else is very much secondary. Jason Calacanis (00:47:42): It David Friedberg (00:47:42): and it's not defined by where you wanna go Jason Calacanis (00:47:45): and David Friedberg (00:47:45): where you wanna be. It's defined by the day you're living. I had a great conversation after a lot of wine and tequila and beer and I don't know what else. Joe at Chihuahua's wedding, actually. Jason Calacanis (00:47:57): I forgot David Friedberg (00:47:58): the guy's name. With Drake. I said to the guy, this Italian guy, Samantha, I'm sorry. I forgot his name. Really nice guy. And we were talking about the difference between Americans and Italian and how the Italians are all about, let's just live for today, enjoy our moment, enjoy our experience, enjoy our time, The Americans all just wanna talk about where things are going, where we're headed, what we're looking for, what we're trying to achieve, and so much about it's the irony is, I've got my brother visiting Europe this week. And so much of the conversation difference that that we've talked about is in America, we talk about winning. It's like everything is a everything is a contest. Everything is about getting ahead. Everything is about a challenge. Everything is about what's next. How do I get to the next level? Jason Calacanis (00:48:41): Scorecard. David Friedberg (00:48:41): Scorecard. And that's what's made us the greatest entrepreneurial, you know, society, the greatest 250 years of progress in human history is that I disagree Chamath Palihapitiya (00:48:50): with that. I disagree with that. But Jason Calacanis (00:48:52): I also makes you profoundly stat. If you only live with a scorecard and Chamath Palihapitiya (00:48:55): not I don't think entrepreneurs have to scorecard. I don't think they're looking at somebody else saying I'm gonna beat that guy. I don't think that that's where it comes from. David Friedberg (00:49:02): I I forget about the term score. Forget about competition. Just make it about progress. Where am I going? And that we orient ourselves around where we headed versus where are we today, you know, just enjoying this moment that you have today, the moment. And I think that there's a big cultural difference between the US and the the guy I was sitting next to at your wedding, Shamar, these folks are just very much about enjoying this experience and not thinking about what's next and where we're going. We come in. Everyone's falters around. No one's thinking about what time we have to start. Everyone's just enjoying their time with each other. The Americans are all like, when when are we starting the wedding? When are we doing this? When when are we doing that? You know? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:49:36): The litmus test for that, I find is when you first meet somebody, and I encourage all of you guys to try to do this is to not go to what do you do as the question. Right. American question. How long can you go without asking that question? What do you do Yeah. And I find it's so amazing to actually have conversations with people where that question never comes up. You will really, really, really learn a lot about people. Jason Calacanis (00:50:09): I think a lot of this also is, like, you know, I I was watching the center of Tim Scott. I'd love to have him on the program. I know he's maybe not got the highest percentage right now, and we got a bunch of other candidates coming on the program, by the way, for the audience. But I I was just taken back by I I saw, Joy Bahar or whatever the host of the view is. David Friedberg (00:50:29): Joy Behar. Jason Calacanis (00:50:29): And jo Joy Behar. And and she was just admonishing him that he doesn't understand systematic racism He's a black man. And he's like, I am the product of the American system. I'm proud of where I got to. And she was you know, she's constantly trying to make him feel worse that the the the, you know, the conditions are terrible? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:50:52): It's funny, though, because, like, it's a very it's Jason Calacanis (00:50:54): basically just joint. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:50:55): Somebody basically saying that Tim Scott is not allowed to be proud of his journey. Jason Calacanis (00:50:59): Basically. That's what she did. Why? Who's right Chamath Palihapitiya (00:51:03): is that? Jason Calacanis (00:51:03): It just take the win. Like, just let him, you know yeah. It's it's really weird. And, I just wanna take one other moment from the song because the this song got pegged as, like, maybe it's propaganda. I don't know if it is. Maybe this guy people started doing there, like, how do we take this guy down? Like, the left and the right lunatics, you know, in the fringe, always try to do. Something happens. That's nice or know, whatever. We gotta take the person down. And and maybe the guy is a woman who knows. He's just an artist to me. But he liked or had a playlist of 911 conspiracy theories. But he says here in the song, lord, we got folks in the street and got nothing to eat. And the obese, milk, and welfare, Well, god, if you're five foot three and you're £300, taxes ought not to pay for your bags of fun fudge rounds. Talking about the welfare state. Young men are putting themselves 6 feet in the ground because all this damn country does is keep kicking them down referencing, I think, you know, Jordan Peterson and the the suicide rate amongst young men and their hopelessness and, you know, etcetera. In it's very hard. I think I would encourage people to be careful trying to pin this as a left or a right song. This is about you know, working class people feeling frustrated with the system is was my read on it. And, maybe even fighting back and taking a little bit bit of their power. But a great song. Congratulations to him. And I I hope he writes some more tunes. Reminded me of pick a a song like the river by Bruce Springsteen or Telegraph Road by Dyer Straits just so many great, songs about the working man. Congratulations on hitting number 1. And, everybody else can tear it down and in the comments, you can tell us we're out of touch even though we moved up the lines I think that's, by the way, why some people like this show. And and, you know, have is because maybe we did move up a couple lines, and maybe we might have a perspective at some point in you know, how to do that. Let's move on, I guess. I think everybody got their shot at this. Jason Calacanis (00:53:01): Alright. The big short 2, Michael Murray, He just made a bet against the markets. This was trending. I'm not sure how much of this is all true, but there's been some reporting on it. Burry's fund has recently bought 866,000,000 and put options against the S and P and 739,000,000 puts against the Nasdaq. These are headline numbers on the SEC. There's probably more to it. Context, obviously, we all know the market's ripped. NASDAQ up 37% this year. S and P up 15% this year. Inflation getting cracked. GDP looking strong. Unemployment on the floor. Number of job openings still above 9,600,000. Pretty crazy to think about how resilient this economy is with pockets of disastrous stuff, but what what's your take on this Friedberg? David Friedberg (00:53:49): Yeah. I think the reporting's a little wrong on this. Jason Calacanis (00:53:52): So okay. David Friedberg (00:53:53): This came out of a 13 F filing. And on the 13 F filing, you when you report option contracts, remember, each option contract represents a 100 underlying shares. And you don't have to talk about the on the option contract when you do the 13 F filing. So we don't actually know what the strike or the expiry is on the option. That dollar amount that's being reported is when they take the number of option contracts multiply it by a 100, which is how many shares per contract, and then just use the price on the actual underlying he may have paid a dollar an option. He may have bought an option that was 3 years out and way out of Jason Calacanis (00:54:30): the money. It could be much smaller. David Friedberg (00:54:31): It could be short term contract. It's just a near term hedge on the portfolio, and we have no idea how much the actual dollar value of the contract is. It could be really way out. It could be it just be a short term hedge. So we we really don't know directionally or or magnitudinally how significant this this this is. So it's a bit of a reporting without knowing the strike and the expiry. We don't know how much he actually spent buying these puts and what the bet really means. Is it a near term better Jason Calacanis (00:55:00): And what percentage of his portfolio in Richmond? You Chamath Palihapitiya (00:55:03): don't have to disclose in the 13 f what your short positions are. And so all you have to do is disclose what your ownership is. So my suspicion is that Michael probably has what's called the short straddle on. And so a short straddle is when you're basically selling a call and you're buying a put. And so, you know, we've talked about these a lot, which is instead of taking a naked exposure for $1,600,000,000, which seems very aggressive and risky, and he's not the type of guy. If you look at his trading activity that does that kinda His typical positions are 50 basis points, 80 basis points, a 100 basis points. So he's not a big risk taker. So what he probably has on is what's called the short straddle. And what you don't have to disclose in these 13 f's is the other side of the trade where you're sure to Calacanis so I suspect that's what that is. So this is a big much to do about nothing. It's good headlines in a Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:55:55): That's the in Chamath Palihapitiya (00:55:56): a in a moment where there's not much to talk about. Jason Calacanis (00:55:58): It's August. And the media, you know, this is the media business losing its business model and Google and Facebook taking all their revenue and Craigslist and Facebook you know, marketplace taking all there. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:09): And Michael, by the way, Michael can go on Twitter and tell us that we're wrong, David Friedberg (00:56:12): but, yeah, we've got dollars to donuts. He's he's got a short stretch. Didn't he go off Twitter? Like done with Twitter? Jason Calacanis (00:56:17): He goes on and off and he auto deletes his tweets. So I set a Zapier up anytime he tweets Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:21): to put it in Jason Calacanis (00:56:22): the slack room for me. Have you Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:23): guys noticed the quantity of wine? I'm drinking. This is Yeah. I know. We're David Friedberg (00:56:26): we're getting a lorry here. Oh, woah woah. Jason Calacanis (00:56:29): You got ice cubes in that? Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:30): And I no. But let me just say this. Look. I'm I'm back in the United States next week. So this is the end of the vacation. Jason Calacanis (00:56:36): The end of the day. Yeah. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:37): It's end of a 1 month where I don't exercise except for swimming and walking. I eat gelato every day, and I drink wine every day. So this is the end. And then I'm back. Jason Calacanis (00:56:46): What's the weight difference? Day 1 to day 30. What's day 1 to day 30? David Sacks (00:56:50): Look at perfectly chilled Montrache. Oh. Look at that. The glass is Jason Calacanis (00:56:53): perfectly chilled. The condensation. I see the condensation from here. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:56:58): I've I've gained 2 and a half kilos. So what is that? £5? Jason Calacanis (00:57:02): You said, yeah. That's fine. You can't that's the level. That's the level. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:57:04): I have a moderate 4 pack. David Sacks (00:57:06): That's 2 weeks of Mjarno. Big deal. Yeah. Jason Calacanis (00:57:08): No. You'd be good. You'd be back in the game with a little whatever. We'll get you back in the game kit. David Friedberg (00:57:11): I'm gonna see Jake Helen about, in about an hour. Jason Calacanis (00:57:14): Freeburn and I are going on a a love walk, but, you know, we we have, like, a lot of romantic moments, so we're just gonna do a little. David Sacks (00:57:18): Can I shift the very short back Jason Calacanis (00:57:21): into Before just my last point on the bird thing? The media needs to do a better job of making sure they understand these things just a bit because the headline is just a little bit weird. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:57:31): Totally Jason Calacanis (00:57:31): Without knowing total contacts. Like, it's very hard to be a finance writer, you know, because if you're a great finance writer, you could be in finance and be a capital allocator. Oh, Hey, kids. Uh-uh. Oh, oh, yeah. Where's the monkeys? Where are the monkeys? Where are the monkeys? I'm so sorry. I'm so Chamath Palihapitiya (00:57:46): sorry. Hold on. Hold on. Jason Calacanis (00:57:47): Hold on. I'm gonna let me fix it. Let me Let me fix. Where's the gelano? You know Chamath Palihapitiya (00:57:54): what's gelano? You know, these 2 kids this past week, were literally, like, jumping. Jason Calacanis (00:58:00): There's a light. There goes the camera. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:58:02): They were jumping in the sea. These two kids were swimming without any help whatsoever. It was the most incredible thing to see when little kids learn how to swim, isn't it? It's joyous? It's joyous. It's joyous. Okay. Back to you guys. Sorry. Jason Calacanis (00:58:17): Back to me. Chamath Palihapitiya (00:58:17): I love you. No. I love you. Jason Calacanis (00:58:18): Bye bye. Bye bye. Bye bye. Tell me. Let's talk about wealth disparity from Italian coast. Alright, Zack. With your monk with your $500 Moncler hat, let's talk about Wealth Disper to go. David Sacks (00:58:30): No. It's my points on about Wealth Disper. Okay. I think we should follow-up on where the economy is right now and and what the macro situation is collected and why and why Michael Berry might wanna short the market. Jason Calacanis (00:58:41): Yes. David Sacks (00:58:41): So in terms of where things stand today, I think the consensus view of the street is that inflation is largely in the rearview mirror. It was down to 3% last month. And the bet now, I think, is that it will continue to remain low. It will be in this 2 a half to 3% range at the end of the year. And therefore, the Fed will be able to cut rates next year. And the market has rallied quite a bit in anticipation of that. I think that is the consensus view. I think there are at least 2 really big risk factors to that. One is that inflation could still rebound. We haven't really gotten that many months of good inflation data. And if inflation ticks back up, if there's another wave of it, in the next several months, and then will not be rate cuts next year. And that means if it's rates are higher than anticipated, valuations come down. So that would be a big risk factor to the market. The other big risk factor is, I think, in the real economy. It's true that the economy does not seem to be hurt so far by these huge interest rate hikes that we've had. However, there is typically a big lag in the impact on the real economy of rate hikes And I think you could still see these rate hikes take effect over the next several months, and you could see a real dip in the economy potentially a recession, and that would be a big risk factor to the markets because right now, the markets are pricing in a soft landing or or no landing. They're We're just gonna do a fly by. Right. Right. So what is the evidence that there might be a lag? Well, a couple of things. And it really has to do with real estate, which I think is the most impacted asset class by rate hikes. You saw that the mortgage rate is the highest it's been in over 20 years. Jason Calacanis (01:00:23): Yeah. Since 7.09%. David Sacks (01:00:26): And the rates I'm seeing in Florida and other places, mortgages are like 8%. Well, if it's gonna cost you 8% to buy a new house and it used to be 3% a couple of years ago, you're not gonna be able to afford to buy that same level of house. And you can't afford to sell your current house and buy a new one because your current house is financed to 3%. You're not gonna give up mortgage. To trade in to an 8% mortgage. So we're already seeing a huge reduction in the number of transactions in residential real estate and So that means that we're not seeing a lot of fresh marks in terms of where prices are, but that doesn't mean the valuations haven't gone lower. I think that as this washes through the system, you could see a big correction in the values of residential real estate, which is most people's main asset. I think there's a big risk factor there. The other big risk factor is on the commercial real estate side. There was a interesting article in the Wall Street Journal, about distressed funds are forming in anticipation of a lot of commercial real estate projects basically going under. So the vultures on Wall Street are gonna be looking to scoop up these projects. I think the really interesting thing about commercial real estate right now is multifamily. Until now, the conversation has all been about office space, and we know that office space is impaired because of the high vacancy rates that the the sector just hasn't come back the same way since COVID. Right? Exactly. But now we're starting to see real distress in the multifamily sector. Now why has this happened? Because multifamily is full. There's no vacancy problem. Jason Calacanis (01:02:03): Yeah. We it's hard to get a home, and more people would be renting if mortgage and supply. So explain why that. David Sacks (01:02:08): The demand side. The problem is in the capital stack. So let me describe the the problem of what's happened here is let's say that you are a, real estate developer who bought multifamily, you bought it at a certain price level. Let's say you financed it 2 thirds with debt, you now need to go out and refinance that project because let's say you did a value add. Let's say you you basically did some improvements to it. That means you didn't put long term debt on it. You can't put long term debt on a project that's not stabilized yet. If you wanna do value add work to it, you get what's called a construction loan for 2 or 3 years. So there's a lot of real estate developers who need to go out right now and finance these projects that they bought, and they bought these projects at the top of the market. So let's say you're going out now to refinance. First of all, the rates are much higher. You're looking at paying 8 or 9% instead of the 3 to 4% that you had penciled in your model a couple of years ago. Moreover, there's another problem, which is potentially even worse, which is loan to value. You had basically gotten 2 thirds loan to value a couple years ago, but values were much higher. Now values are lower because, again, multiples have shrunk as interest rates have gone up. And so the amount that you can finance is much lower. So you either have to top that off by coming out of pocket with your own equity, or you have to go to one of these mezzanine funds. So now there's these Jason Calacanis (01:03:31): short funds. David Sacks (01:03:31): They are total sharks, and they're gonna charge you not 8 or 9%, but like 15%. So your capital stack has basically is completely upside down. You thought that you could borrow all this money really cheaply, but now it is super expensive. And this project no longer pencils, meaning you're underwater from a you got negative leverage on the project. And so I think you're gonna see, again, not just impaired office space, now impaired multifamily, And there is not, I think, a sector of real estate developer who is not in distress right now if they need financing in the year or 2. David Friedberg (01:04:05): That's what do you what Chamath Palihapitiya (01:04:06): do you get a rate from Hesh? Jason Calacanis (01:04:08): Right. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:04:08): David David, what do you what do you do if you're long these assets? Do you just default on them and just give them back to the bank? David Sacks (01:04:14): One major real estate guy told me that the the big guys like, you know, Blackstone, he the words he used was they are throwing their keys at the bank. Meaning, they are so underwater. They're not even gonna bother trying to figure out a workout. They're just gonna give the key they're just gonna say to the bank you own this asset now, they're gonna move on to the next fund. Jason Calacanis (01:04:34): There's actually David Sacks (01:04:35): That was his take at least. That was Jason Calacanis (01:04:36): his take. You sent a tweet to the group chat about, the last line of, like, hope, which was called the hope note which is like where one of these mezz financers just takes your property. And then if they happen to hit your high watermark again later on, that you would get that, you would get some, you know, idiot insurance and get a little taste of the the sale. Shamab, you had a tweet. About the housing and what's your take? Chamath Palihapitiya (01:04:59): Well, no. My only thought around housing was that it very much just supporting what Saks just said. Like, we're in a incredibly untenable situation mostly because as rates go up, mortgage applications go down. And so what you're seeing is just like the number of people trying to transact is very small. And so the inventory is very small. And so Saks said well, so I I don't really have much to add except that When you think about where this lands squarely in terms of the wealth creation that it's supposed to represent or most Americans, It's a very difficult situation. It's frozen. This is I actually think the poll like, people talk about the political pressure from the White House to the Fed. And I think that this actually is probably a very powerful lens with which to look at it. And the reason is because this touches all voters in every state across all political lines And I think when people talk about is the economy doing well or is the economy not doing well? And as a result, where are your political leanings? I think something like this actually represents a much larger percentage of how people represent whether they feel they're doing well than any other thing. Even earnings, quite honestly, because I think that a home is just such a fundamentally visceral psychological component of safety. Jason Calacanis (01:06:20): And a percentage, a large percentage or well, and 60% of people own 1, and the people who own 1 are the people who vote. So may only be 60% of people, but it might be 80% of voters. I'm not sure. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:06:30): Yeah. I think I think that's that that could probably be very well be true. So my my only point in in that was just more that This could actually if if the Fed is susceptible to political pressure, I think this is the kind of thing that pressures them to move forward the point at which they start cutting and to start to let go of the release valve just because there's just too much pressure in the system. If you like to Jason Calacanis (01:06:55): There's talking to them doing a safety rate hike doing another 25 bps the end of the year just to be safe. And, you know, I think One of the things we've learned here is I Chamath Palihapitiya (01:07:04): don't think the data really supports that, to be David Friedberg (01:07:06): honest with you. Jason Calacanis (01:07:06): But but they've made poor decisions this whole time. And this is not like the Fed's, you know, impact with this tool is not like driving a car where you hit the accelerator, you hit the brake, and you get an immediate reaction. This is more like driving a train where, like, it takes a little while to get up to speed. And if you slam on the brakes, this thing can come off the rails. David Sacks (01:07:25): Yeah. Jason Calacanis (01:07:26): And and that's a scary part for me. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:07:27): Just to build on what Saks said, the the most interesting thing about this for me is that typically we think about the fed as being very silent in election years. They really don't try to get that involved mostly because they don't wanna seem like they're tipping in an election one way or the other. The problem that we have is that rates are at a neartermhigh. The tenure is ratcheting faster than we ever expected. It's rallied in terms of rates meaningfully more than anybody thought at the since the beginning of the year. Answer. Now we're in this odd position where will the Fed cut? And why will they cut? And if they cut, will they cut sooner than they would have? If they hold on, is it that they just want the country to enter a recession in which case they wanna see quote unquote regime change. It's a very interesting set of financial and political politics that that I don't think we've seen in resyncers. David Sacks (01:08:21): Yeah. Well, there there's a lot of, real estate developers who are literally hanging on by their fingernails, and they're hoping and praying for a rate cut. The problem they're gonna have is that even if inflation doesn't rebound, even if the Fed does cut rates next year, the rate that the fed cuts is the short rate. It's basically the fed funds rate. That's at 5 a half percent right now. Even if they cut that, to call it 3 to 4% next year. There's no guarantee that the tenure rate, which is what real estate developers get financed on, will move down. Jason Calacanis (01:08:53): Right? David Sacks (01:08:53): The 10 year rate is what is it now at? Like, 4 point David Friedberg (01:08:56): 4 a half David Sacks (01:08:56): percent. Yeah. Something like that. And that rate may not come down. A lot of economists are warning about this, Larry Summers warned about this because the federal government has such huge financing needs. And so just because short rates come down, it's no guarantee that the long rate's gonna come down. And so there may not be this relief that real estate developers are looking for next year, and And, again, there's this wall of debt that has to be refinanced. So I'll give you an example from my own portfolio. I have a building just to simplify the valuation. Jason Calacanis (01:09:21): A couple of buildings, but okay. We've tried that one. David Sacks (01:09:24): Building. That's worth $15,000,000. It's an office building. Okay? There's a $9,000,000 loan on it that is coming up to be refinanced at the end of the year. So I'm talking to the lender about rolling it over. And what they agreed to do. Here here are the terms. They agreed to give me 2,400,000 out of the 9 secured by the building. That's it. They they wouldn't roll over the 9. They'd only give me 2.4. For the other 6.6, they wanted me to post additional collateral in the form of public securities. So they basically wanted me to fully collateralize the loan. So in other words, they're adding like a margin account on top of Jason Calacanis (01:10:00): Exactly right. David Sacks (01:10:01): Commercial real estate. Jason Calacanis (01:10:02): That's exactly right. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:10:02): That's exactly right. So you David Sacks (01:10:03): want me to over collateralize the building with a bunch of security. Jason Calacanis (01:10:06): So Why do you need a loan? It's not a real estate loan. Yeah. David Sacks (01:10:10): Right. And they want me to personally guarantee it. Jason Calacanis (01:10:13): So why don't you just sell the shares? Just sell the shares and No. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:10:16): So you you just sold a participating preferred in your bill? No. You're still participating preferred in your building. What the fuck? David Sacks (01:10:22): Right. David Friedberg (01:10:22): No. When he took out a margin loan on his own security portfolio Right. Jason Calacanis (01:10:25): So when I say this, David Sacks (01:10:26): listen, I don't need this, so I'm just gonna pay it off. So I'm gonna pay off a loan. And also own the building a 100%. And when this credit crunch is over, whether it's next year Jason Calacanis (01:10:34): or 2 years from David Sacks (01:10:35): now, I'll just refi it then. But here's the thing, the average developer can't do that. Like, how do they go out and just get that extra 9,000,000? David Friedberg (01:10:41): Well, Zach, let's just point out the opportunity cost to you. You could buy treasuries that pay you 5 a half percent. So your actual cost on that capital that you're using to finance the building yourself to buy, you know, to buy the debt, is costing you 5 and 5% a year of Quarter 1000000. Risk risk free income for the, for the 9,000,000. Yeah. David Sacks (01:10:59): It's not a pleasant situation. It's something that I can manage through. But my point is that this is something that's gonna be afflicting pretty much every real estate developer needs to refinance in the next year or so. David Friedberg (01:11:09): And they don't have and they don't have what you have. Is the balance sheet. Yeah. Exactly. Jason Calacanis (01:11:13): They they don't got the they don't have the chip stack. David Sacks (01:11:15): And by the way, my my real estate guys tell me that this deal that I got offered is a good deal right now. It's a good deal because lenders Yeah. Jason Calacanis (01:11:22): That's a good deal. At least David Sacks (01:11:23): they were trying to be flexible and work with me. Most of these lenders, they're just, like, not even open for business. David Friedberg (01:11:27): I heard there's just no bid. I mean, this guy these guys I know that work in commercial real estate debt said, though, they're putting out these syndicated loan, proposals to the typical funders. And there's no bid. They're like, well, just tell me the rate. They're like, there is no rate. There's just no bid. Jason Calacanis (01:11:42): Well, in interesting news, we've been talking a little bit about you know, these bond offerings, etcetera. And, you know, the US is, when the higher yields still continuing to draw buyers, Japan, very, very soft in terms of getting people to buy their securities and 127,000,000,000 this year into funds that invested treasuries on pace for a record year. Bank America Corp said last week, Alright. Let's move on to we got NVIDIA left on the docket. We got hopping as a peak zerp The Friedberg sold out a lot of shares. Let's pick one of these stories, or we got the SBM, which is gonna be big drama, next year when this goes to court, or Saks, we could go. David Sacks (01:12:28): Those are the stories. There's not a lot of meat on them. I think this has been 5 months. Jason Calacanis (01:12:32): Should we do the indictment? David Sacks (01:12:33): Giving you your red meat. Jason Calacanis (01:12:34): Oh, me giving me my red meat? David Sacks (01:12:36): I think 5 minutes of you ranting and doing your TDS, and then we can wrap. Jason Calacanis (01:12:40): Alright. Well, listen. I don't wanna speak to your TSS. Your Trump stockholm syndrome, but I will say that Trump, yes, has his 4th indictment. You thought the hat trick was a lot, and now he's got 4 Fulton County, Georgia 13 felony counts, but this one's incredible. It's got a, you know, a lot of co conspirators. And, all I'll say is there is, a small town in Georgia. Coffee is, I think the name of it. And There were a bunch of election machines and a and a group of this whack pack went in there and committed a bunch of cyber crimes accordingly. And it's not clear yet, but when, this thing goes to trial, just keep an eye on that. There's an incredible law fair, article, and we'll put it in the show notes and, a podcast. But I think that opening up the aperture of it is, what's really interesting to me. What I'm seeing is I think there's a lot of viable, moderate Republican candidates that would appeal to somebody like me. I have voted 25% Republican 75%, a democrat. I'm a a moderate, but left leaning moderate. I would say, on social issues. On fiscal issues. I'm I'm definitely in the Republican camp, but I'm looking at Christie. I'm looking at Vivek. I'm looking at a lot of those kind of Republicans even Tim Scott and saying, you know what? Maybe that's a better choice than Biden who is very senile. And I think the Republican Party has its moment right now to disassociate itself and say enough with the meshugna, enough of Trump, and you're starting to see pence come out very strongly in sacks. Vivek is still bootlicking, I think, and it's still, like, trying to get the VP spot Trump. I think it's a huge mistake. And I think, Christy, and maybe it's time for your guy DeSantis who is in the part in camp as well, but maybe it's time for him to, you know, maybe start criticizing him. Jason Calacanis (01:14:31): And then I think it's time to negotiate a pardon for both Trump and, Hunter Biden, pardon both of them, get them out of political life, and let's move on as a country. I believe that you're gonna see, Chris Christie and Vivek surge. It's gonna be a three horse race with DeSantis, and I think Trump's gonna be out of the race in the next 6 to 12 months. That's just my prediction. Your thoughts, Saks. David Sacks (01:14:56): Well, I wanna give you a chance here to expound on your blue meat Not red meat. For you, it's blue meat. Jason Calacanis (01:15:02): Blue meat. David Sacks (01:15:03): Your TDS is flaring up again, Jason. I think it's boosting. Jason Calacanis (01:15:06): No. TDS. David Sacks (01:15:07): Let me let me ask you to expand on this pardon theory because you you claim that you think that Trump is now playing for a pardon that that's I think he's playing Jason Calacanis (01:15:14): for a pardon. Yes. David Sacks (01:15:15): Did you explain that? How do you how do you get from here to there? Jason Calacanis (01:15:18): He is going to go Buck Wilde. He is, you know, lashing out, etcetera. In the hopes that he can cause so much chaos because you're seeing him, you know, with these tweets that are kind of border lighting on violence and inciting people gag orders, that kind of stuff. I think he's going to keep pushing the envelope to the point at which he breaks the Republican party makes Americans really burnt out because the Republicans can't win with him. He's got, like, 30% support, whoever. He's not gonna beat Biden. You you've said that before. I think everybody knows he he's the weakest candidate of the field, and I think you guys really wanna get a win and you wanna move past him. So I think this combination of the Republican Party flipping on him and you're starting to see the crack, you know, and people starting to criticize him. Once the evidence comes out and people see him in court, and people hear the details of his criminal behavior, his abhorrent behavior, his behavior that Vivek governor Christie, you know, either side of the aisle would never participate in. I think there's gonna be kind of the United States is gonna say, you know what? Pardon him. Blanket pardon if he just steps out of, public life. And I think Biden's gonna need a pardon too for Hunter, And so I think this could be the solution for everybody to move forward. It sounds crazy, but I think that the stuff that's gonna come out is gonna be much worse than Watergate specifically you know, again, I'll reference the the article of some of the behavior of his whack pack and what they were doing, you know, in, coffee county, like the beverage, coffee counter, Georgia. When when you start hearing what they did, you know, lying, forging documents and basically committing computer crimes, this woman who trump, Sydney Powell, Trump put his fate in Sydney Powell, and and, Giuliani, It's a critical era. And I think it's all gonna blow up in his lap. These people were lunatics. They were committing crimes, and I think they get they're gonna get him. And I think he's gonna need a pardon. Jason Calacanis (01:17:15): So He's not billed for jail. I can tell you Trump is not billed for jail. David Sacks (01:17:19): Well, this is one problem with your theory, Jason. Jason Calacanis (01:17:21): Go ahead. David Sacks (01:17:23): President can't pardon state crimes. Jason Calacanis (01:17:26): That is true. I think they could be a grand negotiation. David Sacks (01:17:29): This Georgia Rico indictment can't be pardoned. Jason Calacanis (01:17:33): Well, however, I do think that there could be a plea. And so this could play out. I think they probably wanna play it out. Every people wanna clear this stuff out. Right? Both sides. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:17:43): That's gonna have to go share. See what you're about to talk about. Jason Calacanis (01:17:46): I know. And you know what? If you wanna talk about deep state conspiracies and Sachs believes in this deep state compared here's a conspiracy for you. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:17:52): I just think that you Freightballed all fortunately. I just think that you cannot think rationally Jason Calacanis (01:17:56): when it comes to this stuff anymore. Okay. Fine. David Sacks (01:17:58): You didn't know that Biden appointed Mary Carlin. You didn't know that these Georgia Georgia cars can be recorded. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:18:04): Federal and a state crime. Jason Calacanis (01:18:05): Of course, I do. Of course, I mean, I've talked about it being not part of the before. I think there is going to be a grand reconciliation. I think everybody's gonna get together. And say, how do we move on? And I I think that might even be underway right now. David Sacks (01:18:17): The one thing that's definitely not gonna happen is Trump takes a a plea deal. He's gonna fight this to the bitter act. Jason Calacanis (01:18:23): Lattice like a button. Look. David Sacks (01:18:24): You know what's gonna happen? I set it back in August last year when they Yeah. I set it last August when they rented Marla is that the way they're carrying on with this these law fair attacks on Trump, we now have the 4th indictment. Apparently, he's a mobster. Going after him with a reco statute that was invented to get organized crime and mobsters. And apparently, these lawyers you relied on as dopey as they were. Apparently, there are, like, button men for the mob who have to be indicted as well under the Cerico statute. I think people can see this for what it is, which is it's a I'm Jason Calacanis (01:18:57): trying David Sacks (01:18:57): to think of the right word. I mean, it's it's basically law fair. Right? They're bending the law in any way they can't take after Donald Trump. And I know that his behavior wasn't wasn't good in this, but I don't Do Jason Calacanis (01:19:06): you think anything might have been criminal? David Sacks (01:19:09): No. I'm I'm part of that. Jason Calacanis (01:19:10): A 100%. You don't think it's criminal? Okay. Interesting. David Sacks (01:19:13): Let's look at that Fox News poll where they asked. Jason Calacanis (01:19:16): Do you think the Republican party let me see this. Do you think the Republican party's gonna cut ties? David Sacks (01:19:20): Think the Fox News poll asked the right question, which is in connection with the efforts to overturn 2020 election, did Donald Trump do something illegal? Something wrong, not illegal? Nothing seriously wrong. I'm in that middle. I'm in the middle bucket. Jason Calacanis (01:19:33): Got it. David Sacks (01:19:33): I think it was wrong, but not illegal. Jason Calacanis (01:19:35): Got it. David Sacks (01:19:35): Look, I think that what Democrats are doing with this partisan law fair is that they are polarizing the outcomes. They're either gonna send Donald Trump to the big house or to the white house. That's what I said back in August last year when they raided Mar a lot because they're gonna send to the big house or the white house? Jason Calacanis (01:19:51): I'm here for the pardon. I'm here for the pardon. Do you think the Republican party is going to support him, or do you think they're gonna break ties and and try to move on? And what do you think they should do as a strategist? David Sacks (01:20:01): This, they see the way in which the law is being misused as being weaponized in a partisan way to get 1 of the major candidates or president. They're trying to drive him out of Jason Calacanis (01:20:12): I know. Do you think the republicans are gonna stand by him as he's as he goes to court and these thay these trials start to happen. David Sacks (01:20:18): That. Jason Calacanis (01:20:18): They're rallying or cut ties. David Sacks (01:20:20): Of course, they're rallying around him. It's ensuring that he will be the nominee. Jason Calacanis (01:20:23): Okay. I think they're gonna cut ties, and the Republican party's gonna spell him. David Friedberg (01:20:27): Okay. Jake, how did you not also predict that Jeff Bezos was gonna run for president? Jason Calacanis (01:20:31): I I think Jeff Bezos will run-in his time. And and and not necessarily this one. I said, you know, I think Jeff Bezos will run his lifetime. I think when you Jeff David Sacks (01:20:38): Bezos is living his best life on a yacht with Totally. Jason Calacanis (01:20:41): I know. He's my friend. A Chamath Palihapitiya (01:20:42): $1,000,000 yacht You can Jason Calacanis (01:20:44): do that. I had Chamath Palihapitiya (01:20:44): a nice shot. And then I was like, 500,000,000. Jason Calacanis (01:20:47): Your yacht delivers his toast every morning. David Friedberg (01:20:52): Aesos watch Bob Eiger try and get back in the ring. He realized. Jason Calacanis (01:20:54): Uh-uh. He'll do 5 10 years. He'll do 5 years max. 5 years max on the yacht. He get bored out of your mind. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:21:00): So crazy. My yacht has a support vehicle. His yacht has a support country. Yeah. It's David Friedberg (01:21:07): called Malta. David Sacks (01:21:08): It's like Jason Calacanis (01:21:08): Your your support yacht is his being Chamath Palihapitiya (01:21:11): His, it's a family. 5 Jason Calacanis (01:21:12): years. That's the max you can do on Chamath Palihapitiya (01:21:14): a yacht. David Friedberg (01:21:14): His boat Jason Calacanis (01:21:14): is correct. 1 year on a yacht. Sacks did 1 year on a never again. He's done. It's too boring. Yachts are boring. David Sacks (01:21:21): Yeah. Jakeout thinks it's a groundswell to put guys with huge yachts in office. Jason Calacanis (01:21:26): I I think I think so. David Sacks (01:21:28): Listen to that song and play it. Jason Calacanis (01:21:30): No. I think Bezos every month. David Sacks (01:21:32): On the Zebra trip. He spent a 100,000,000 Jason Calacanis (01:21:35): Oh, man. David Sacks (01:21:35): That's the first question, the first debate. Boom. He's out. Jason Calacanis (01:21:38): Yeah. No. He he he missed his window. I will, man, Bloomberg would have been great. David Friedberg (01:21:42): I was a Bloomberg. David Sacks (01:21:44): Jake out Jake out is betting on the yacht groundswell. Jason Calacanis (01:21:48): I mean, a a boy can dream Are you telling me you wouldn't vote for Bezos if he was, I can just yes. Of course, you would. Would you David Friedberg (01:21:56): vote for Bloomberg? Jason Calacanis (01:21:57): Of course, you would. You want an executive in here. That's what the country means. A professional who's your nontraditional candidate Friedberg? Who would you love most? Who's, you know, like, you know, not going to obviously run, or, like, it would be a small chance. Who would you? Uh-uh. Yeah. David Friedberg (01:22:13): It's an economist. Jason Calacanis (01:22:15): Oh, okay. David Friedberg (01:22:15): It was an economy. They're they're just terrible political speakers. They're just not good at that. Jason Calacanis (01:22:20): Shamoff, who would be your wild card? Then, I'm Chamath Palihapitiya (01:22:22): texting I'm texting that to Jason Calacanis (01:22:23): bring me another class of mine. Oh, god. He's so drunk. David Sacks (01:22:27): I think we're wrapping David Friedberg (01:22:28): that up. The last 4. Jason Calacanis (01:22:29): Oh, he's the last 4. That's glass 4 on air. You know what I mean? I'm gonna keep pregame. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:22:34): Keep going. Keep going. Keep going. I'm gonna keep pregame. Jason Calacanis (01:22:37): Keep pregame. Saks, who is your wildcard. If you had to pick a wildcard, nontraditional, not for this election, but for an election. Somebody who's not part of David Friedberg (01:22:45): it is. Jason Calacanis (01:22:46): Peter Teal, Chamath Palihapitiya (01:22:46): who would be the case. RF carrier. Jason Calacanis (01:22:48): No. No. Out of this information. David Sacks (01:22:49): Listen. I've I've I've supported either financially or at least verbally. RfK Junior, DeSantis, and Vivek. I mean, how many more candidates do I have to support? Jason Calacanis (01:23:00): Well, can you guys give me a favor and just my agent? David Sacks (01:23:02): You're clinging to Trump. Are you gonna unload Trump? Jason Calacanis (01:23:05): How about you? How about your guy? Young? David Sacks (01:23:07): Supporting 3 candidates, not named Trump, but for you, it's never enough. Jason Calacanis (01:23:11): Well, no, I wanna hear you throw me to the the same. We'll see. Someday you will. Someday you'll stand up against him. I said when you did one's wrong, David Sacks (01:23:18): I just don't think it was organized time. It wasn't a Rico indictment. I Jason Calacanis (01:23:21): wanna hear you say he should drop out of the race. As an influencer in the party, I want you to say you should drop out. That's all I want you Alright. Let's move on. What How about Adient? I wanna talk about Adient? No. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:23:32): I wanna talk about Adient being down 40% of it. Jason Calacanis (01:23:35): Okay. Ads of the stock with public. That's the competitor to Stripe since 2018. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:23:43): This one's incredible. Since 2018, Adient has reported every 6 month period of growth at these 26% or greater, and they reaffirmed a 65% EBITDA margin And they're they were down at one point today, 40%. David Sacks (01:24:05): Oh, that channel. Holy cow. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:24:06): And so if you look Jason Calacanis (01:24:08): if you look Chamath Palihapitiya (01:24:09): at if you look at Adien, what does it mean about Stripe. And I think the answer is that Stripe at that $50,000,000,000 round, $55,000,000,000 round is worth 25,000,000,000. So there's a 50% mark down right there. That's a 20 Jason Calacanis (01:24:24): feet at a 100? A peaked at a 100? David Sacks (01:24:26): Bill Gurley had a great tweet on this. Multiple compression is a bitch. David Friedberg (01:24:30): Multiples is David Sacks (01:24:31): the same Jason Calacanis (01:24:31): thing that's happening in real estate. David Sacks (01:24:33): Same thing that's happening in real estate. Yeah. The reason why that is the sum. Jason Calacanis (01:24:37): Might be a buy. David Sacks (01:24:38): Reason those multi family developers are getting whammied right now is, again, it's not because of vacancy. Everyone wants their apartments. The problem is multiple compressions. The value is much lower, which means they can't get as much debt. Jason Calacanis (01:24:53): So all David Sacks (01:24:53): of a sudden, they gotta pony up a bunch of equity or get expensive mezz to fill out the capital stack. This is the problem is there's bull Yeah. Compression everywhere. More pain to come. Yes. Jason Calacanis (01:25:03): It's more pain. David Sacks (01:25:04): To work through the system. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:25:05): This is a train. What is Frankfurt? Not a car. David, where do you where do you buy socks? Where do you buy spray? David Sacks (01:25:10): I I think you're right. I think that we have a almost perfect comp there. So, yeah, you're right. Down 46% year to date. That doesn't even include what happened last year. Yeah. Right? Jason Calacanis (01:25:21): Yeah. So I should write you 2022 14,000,000,000. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:25:25): The thing to remember about all these businesses Stripe Adient PayPal is that they're middlemen businesses, which by definition means that they don't have pricing power. They actually have to reflect the prevalent pricing power of the incumbent sponsors of their technology. So for example, if you have a deal with McDonald's, McDonald bids you out to 5 different cause people, and they pick the cheapest one. Right? So your margins over time tend to be compressed. And over time, your share of profits tend to be compressed, and you have to give up a lot. So how do you maintain profitability? So an maintain 65 percent EBITDA margins in the face of this revenue decline. The only way they can do that is by cutting staff using more technology and creating OpEx leverage that replaces what they're losing. So the real takeaway is that they this is a very tough, tough business that is a race to the bottom. And it is a surplus business that benefits the buyer, IE, The Ubers, the McDonald's, the door dashes of the world, not the seller, I e, the Adjens, the PayPal's, the stripes. Jason Calacanis (01:26:31): It the what's the changing cost? You know, if you're if you're at Uber and you negotiated a deal for 3 years with Stripe, and then you go to Adya and then you your next deal, and they wanna win it because they need the top line revenue. And now you got a dog fight, you know, let alone all the other players who are Speaker 4 (01:26:45): gonna competitors. Jason Calacanis (01:26:46): These are Chamath Palihapitiya (01:26:46): all race to the bottom business Jason Calacanis (01:26:47): And so Tough business. Tough business. If you have Chamath Palihapitiya (01:26:50): a very diffuse business model where you're trying to do too many things. And so as a result, you have a somewhat bloated op relative to a company that's gonna do a lot less, but do it just much better. I think you're gonna be very challenged. Jason Calacanis (01:27:02): Yeah. Well, you know, this this could be the buying opportunity for a lot of these equities, if you believe in them, long term. I saw it. Dan Loeb is placing a bunch of bets. He bought some Uber. He bought Nvidia, you know, he he's he's out there buying up stuff. So we'll see. Let's talk about Dave Portner. I think this is like a very interesting one. We didn't get to it last week. Penn Gaming, a gambling company, and gambling's become legal in the United States. Sports wagering has been accepted by the NBA, ESPN, TV shows, everything. It's been incorporated into Chamath Palihapitiya (01:27:29): I've been gambling for fucking 30 years. Right. Jason Calacanis (01:27:32): Of course. But now it's been integrated into Jamont, if you Chamath Palihapitiya (01:27:36): don't have any on glass boards Jason Calacanis (01:27:38): or Wow. David Sacks (01:27:39): All the buttons are gone. Jason Calacanis (01:27:41): When I Chamath Palihapitiya (01:27:41): was thinking about right now, when I bought when I bought a piece of the warriors, the funniest thing was I got a call from the NBA. Because you have to submit, like, this huge application, like, you know, everything opened the kimono. Okay. And they knew that I was a big fucking sports better. And they were like, hey, dipshit. We'll allow you to sports bet in Vegas if you show the tickets. But otherwise, you know, they knew who my bookie was. They were like, you cannot call this Jason Calacanis (01:28:07): guy anymore. You can't sports it was crazy. Well, then when I caught call Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:14): Okay. Don't Did you Jason Calacanis (01:28:15): say the don't say his fucking name. I said so Nick. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:21): Delete the fucking dog. That's a little bit. We've got the first part. Jason Calacanis (01:28:24): Delete the puppy to do that. That doesn't put the bag. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:27): Put small. It's just like an asshole thing. Okay. David Sacks (01:28:31): Wrap it. Come on. We gotta go. Let's go. Jason Calacanis (01:28:33): 4. I really did see you guys. I love you guys. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:41): No. I really love you guys, and I miss you. Jason Calacanis (01:28:43): I love this. I can't Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:44): wait to come back. Jason Calacanis (01:28:45): I can't allow it to be back when there's denial, please. Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:48): Alright. So am I gonna see you when I get to LA? I'd like to see you. Sure. Yeah. David Sacks (01:28:53): When when do you get your Thursday? Chamath Palihapitiya (01:28:55): No. Wednesday. Wednesday. Wednesday, like, 1. David Sacks (01:28:57): Oh, yeah. I'm here. Jason Calacanis (01:28:58): Put me out the group chat with Drake. Try a shout out to Greg. David Friedberg (01:29:01): Jake and I have a lunch date. We gotta go. Okay. Jason Calacanis (01:29:03): So for the queen of Kinois, the Sultan of Science, the architect, the sasshole himself, and the dictator, Shamoff. I love you guys. Strunky monkey. Shamoff, Paul Papatia. I am. Undoubtedly. The world's greatest moderator. We'll see you next time. Speaker 4 (01:29:30): We open source it to the fans, and they've just gone crazy with it. David Sacks (01:29:38): Besties are Speaker 4 (01:29:45): my dog thinking, I noticed your driveway. We should all just get a room and just have one big huge door because they're all just useless. It's like this, like, sexual tension, and they just need to release her vowels. Speaker 6 (01:30:02): Feet. What? Jason Calacanis (01:30:06): We need to get mercy's artifacts.