Joe Rogan podcast. Check it out.

>> The Joe Rogan Experience.

>> TRAIN BY DAY. JOE ROGAN PODCAST BY

NIGHT. All day.

>> Rolling. All right. Mr. Andre. Good to

see you, sir.

>> Great to be back. Thank you.

>> So, we were just talking about this wild

crime spree that happened this weekend

in Austin. So, it seems like it was was

it teenagers that were doing this?

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah.

>> 15 and 17.

>> You're not on the microphone there,

fellow. 15 and 17 years old.

>> 15 and 17 years old. And

>> terrible.

>> What was the purpose? Just going crazy,

I

>> think. So, yeah, they stole cars and

stole guns and switched cars and

>> and they shot they shot at like 10

different locations.

>> One person's at least one person's in

critical condition. They shot multiple

people.

>> Yeah.

>> So, you were saying that the reason why

they had a hard time catching them is

because of they had flock cameras in

Austin,

>> but then they shut those cameras off for

political reasons.

>> Correct. Yes. Yeah. So,

>> please explain that.

>> Yeah. So, these guys are driving around

in cars and yeah, they're switching

cars, whatever. Yeah. And they're and

they they went to like a dozen locations

and like fight, you know, and tried

shooting shooting at buildings and

people and houses and and all kinds of

stuff. And so, okay, so these guys

running around. So, they there's this

system called Flock, which is one of our

companies, and and what they do kind of

like in the movies, you you take all the

municipal cameras and traffic cameras

and everything, and you feed them into

an AI, and the AI is able to first find

a license plate in in real time. So, you

can you can find that, but but second,

you can actually find a car even if you

don't have the license plate. you can

find like distinct markings of the car.

It'll on the car. It'll track the car.

And so this thing is deployed. It's this

it's sold to city governments. It's used

all over the country. Um it solves

crimes every every day. We get reports

on, you know, carjackings with kids in

the back seat and their lives get saved

because, you know, they they track them

down. So a lot of a lot of lot of towns

cities have this and and they love it.

In cities like Austin with the intense

politics, you know, they they run into

backlash on on privacy and and um and

surveillance concerns. And so Austin had

flock and then turned it off. And as a

consequence, they were not able to find

these guys for I don't know whatever

several days. Um and then what happened

that the late breaking news today is

these guys drove into some adjacent town

um uh you know up against Austin and and

Flock is was live in that town. And so

Flock tagged them the minute they drove

into that that town and then they they

caught the guys. Subsequent to that, the

mayor your your mayor uh in Austin of

your mayor and your chief of police gave

a press conference and said, "We really

need to rethink this." Um because it's

it's it's crazy to have the ability to

solve crimes and stop crimes and not be

able to use it.

>> Yeah. So the concern is mass

surveillance, right? And the concern is

that someone's going to abuse this and

use AI for nefarious purposes, right?

Like what nefarious purposes would that

be?

>> Yeah. So this is a system. This is a

system that could be used in bad ways,

right? So bad people could use it in bad

ways. And so if you had a corrupt, you

know, chief of police and, you know, he

had some personal entanglement thing and

he wanted to track a, you know, ex

whatever, or if the mayor wanted to, you

know, do this to terrorize her political

opponents or whatever, like if you had,

you know, corrupt city officials, then

they could use it for bad things. But

>> wouldn't that be traceable though? Like

wouldn't that like isn't there like a

blockchain? Put that sucker so it's not

on your chin. Push it forward a little

bit. Yeah. Is is there a blockchain for

flock so you could know who's doing what

and how it's happening so someone

couldn't abuse it? Is it possible to

have circumvent that?

>> Yeah, it could. But well, this is like

the standard. Yes. And this, you know,

they log everything and you know, I'm

sure there's records of everything, but

but you know, look, it's like anything

else. It's, you know, it's why it's why

cops have to get a warrant before they

search somebody's house, right? You

there's always the question of like what

is the legal authority and what are the

safeguards that protect this kind of

thing. But but to take so I think

there's a completely legitimate question

which is how how should that all be

designed? What should be the controls?

What should be the penalties if somebody

abuses it? Um you know but there's all

that but then on the other side of it is

like are you really going to give up the

entire thing right

>> and and disarm disarm yourself in the

face in face of what's been a big

national crime wave for a long time. So

the other thing is so the city of

Chicago is the one that's pushed this

even further. Um so there's an older

system that's deployed in many cities

called Shot Spotter. Um uh what's it

called? It's called shot spotter.

>> Shot spotter.

>> Shot spotter.

>> Shot spotter. Oh, shot spotter. Like

spot someone shooting.

>> Spot somebody shooting. Um,

>> sounds very German.

>> Shot spotter.

>> It sounds very like

>> several

>> very Nazi

several lots.

>> Yeah.

>> On top. So, shot spotter is an older

system that works very well. It's

deployed in many cities. And what it is,

totally different system. What it is is

they put these these precision

microphones on top of rooftops all over

the city and then when a gunshot goes

off they're able to instantly

triangulate that a gunshot has gone off

and specifically where the gunshot went

off.

>> This has two two big benefits. Uh

benefit number one is um you have a

better chance of catching the

perpetrator because you can instantly

respond to the gunshot. You don't have

to wait for somebody to call it in or if

if somebody calls it in. Number two, if

somebody's been shot and they're

bleeding in the street, you can

immediately roll the ambulance to

location and you can you can you can

save lives. And so it's historically

it's considered a double win. Chicago

got so wrapped up on these political

issues that they also not only did they

not have flock they also turned off

their shot spotter system voluntarily.

Um and so people now get shot in Chicago

and they bleed out on the street and

nobody knows and nobody cares.

>> And what is the argument that they make

>> uh that that that it is um the so the so

I would say there there's maybe two

argument. is the civil libertarian

argument um which is all around

surveillance and abuse and control and

you know all these things and like I say

I think that's a very legitimate

argument and then I would say there's

like the woke the woke argument right

which is that the the argument goes the

American criminal justice system is

clearly biased in favor of some

demographic groups and against other

demographic groups and if you have

automated systems like Shot Spotter or

Flock or by the same thing comes up with

like traffic cameras that automatically

give out uh speeding tickets um that

that those will disproportionately

affect disadvantaged people in society

and disadvantaged groups. Um and so

therefore they are racist.

>> Uh they they are racist technologies

enforcing a racist system. Um

>> boy,

>> the problem with that the problem with

that argument is the victims um of

violent crime are disproportionately

also likely to be from those same

disadvantaged groups.

>> Um and so

>> woke politics are really fun. Yes. The

the the other problem with a lot of this

is there's a a large chunk of people

that are going to immediately think that

even this mass shooting was organized by

Flock so that Flock could get reinstated

in Austin to bring in the surveillance

state. Like this I guarantee you 100%

there's a group of people listening to

this right now saying, "Oh, Andre's a

shill. Rogan's shilling for flock. This

is what they're doing. They're trying to

get the mass surveillance. You know,

this is automatically

when um there's a situation like this,

any kind of a mass shooting, people

think it's a false flag. This is uh this

is where we're at. How Chicago

organizers managed to rid the city of

Shot Spotter. Controversial police

surveillance tech is often inaccurate,

according to research that allowed

activists to launch a fact-based

campaign and a political model for

organizers in other cities. Aha. So,

they're saying it's inaccurate. So what

it is and be fair to what it is what it

is it's directional microphones, right?

And so it shot goes off, it triangulates

on a on a location. It's you know and

look it's going to I

>> it's also bouncing off buildings, right?

So there's a lot of echo and

>> I'm Yeah, I'm sure you get Yeah, I'm

sure I'm sure you get that effect.

Nevertheless,

>> but at least you know when a shot went

off

>> a shot went off. It went off in this

general area. I would assume we're not

involved in the shot spotter. I don't

know for sure. I would assume at this

point it's probably down to like it's

probably pretty accurate at the at the

at the level of a block at a street. Um

it's probably generally quite accurate

beyond that. But right. So exactly

right. I mean I think exactly what you

said which is like okay

>> at least you know a shot went off and if

you had both of those things flock and

shot spotter uh over 88.72%

of incidents flagged by shot spotter

ended with police finding no incidents

of gun crime. Okay.

>> But think right.

>> But that doesn't mean the gunshots

didn't go off.

>> Exactly. That doesn't mean anything. The

rarely produce evidence of a gun related

crime. That also doesn't mean anything

cuz it just shows that a gun went off.

If you have, first of all, Chicago is

one of the absolute worst places in the

country in terms of gun violence.

Correct. I mean, there's constant

shootings going on in Chicago

>> and an enormous death death every

weekend. An enormous death toll

>> and people are very accustomed to guns

going off. Not only that, people are

very accustomed to shooting guns. If if

people are accustomed to guns going off,

that must mean that people are shooting

those guns and they're getting very

custom accustomed to doing that. So then

you've got people that shoot people and

then get in a car and drive away and

then the cops come, there's no evidence.

That means nothing. One of the things

that we've learned uh when you deal with

uh politicians in particular that want

to talk about crime statistics like

crime is down incorrect crime reporting

is down. We have this

>> and especially in Los Angeles, my

friends in Los Angeles who still live

there who deal with breakins and home

invasions and cars being robbed.

>> They read those statistics or they hear

a politician saying that crime is down.

They're like, "What the are you

talking about?" No, no one calls 911

because if you do, you just get put on

hold. It lasts forever. No one comes.

They do come. It's hours late. No one's

coming to save you. No one calls. They

just accept it.

>> Y

>> San Francisco is the worst. People leave

their car doors open. They leave the

hatch open on their cars to let you know

there's nothing in there. Please don't

break my windows.

>> My car is here. Oh, crime is down.

>> Yep.

>> No, it's not down. Yep.

>> No. Crime is more prevalent than ever

before. It's just crime reporting is

useless.

>> Yeah. Well, yeah. Look, if you if you

know that you're not going to get you

you back up from what happens in the

system. If you know the criminals aren't

going to get convicted, then you know

they're not going to get prosecuted. If

they're not going to get prosecuted,

they're not going to get arrested. If

they're not getting arrested, they're

not going to get investigated. Yeah. And

this this I mean I I live I live

halftime near San Francisco and halftime

in LA.

>> Oh boy.

>> I I I I I'm

is 100% true. But the other scandal, by

the way, just as uh kind of also came

out, I think last week was um Washington

DC has been they got caught the police

got caught faking the crime statistics.

Yes. Just like this is very important.

>> Yeah. Just like overtly up to senior

levels of the of the Washington DC

police department and a whole bunch of

people got, you know, fired, indicted.

>> Right. This is very recent.

>> And just Yeah. And just like flat out

fake faking the numbers and and it's

like anything. It's like it's like

anything else which is if if you there's

an old thing which is if if if you

measure it, it's no longer a good

incentive. It's no longer good

motivation because it's just the the

it's like grade inflation in school.

It's just the temptation is so high to

monkey with the numbers.

>> Yeah.

>> Um and so in Washington at least they

were criminally monkeying with the

numbers. It raises the question of

whether that's happening in these other

cities.

>> Well, also Washington, didn't the mayor

actually thank Trump for bringing in the

National Guard, which is crazy. You have

a Democrat mayor who said thank you to

Donald Trump for bringing in the

National, which everybody thought was an

outrage. Oh my god, you're bringing the

National Guard into the cities. You're

going to militarize the police force.

Yeah,

>> she said thank you because crime dropped

off a cliff.

>> So I've also been spending a lot of time

in DC. So what was happening in DC? So

my friends in DC basically say they

turned the city from a place where you

couldn't be outside at night to all of a

sudden you can just walk around and it's

fine. And then what happened is like the

violence basically went to zero like in

in most of the neighborhoods like

extremely quickly. And so what happened

was you have all these people walking

around at night for the first time in

years and you know they're just like oh

there's a couple guys the National

Guard. This is great. Go over take a

picture with them. This is fantastic.

Okay. Okay. So then it gets reported as

it gets reported in the press as the

National Guard is not doing anything.

All they're doing is sitting around

taking, you know, selfies selfies with

tourists. You know,

>> God, I hate the press.

>> You know, they they don't need to be

here. They're not doing anything, right?

Um

>> why would someone report that? But can't

we just come to an agreement that crime

is bad? Yes.

>> Regardless of political party, can't we

agree that we all want to be safe?

>> One more thing. Well, let me give you

one more. I'll give you one more thing

and we we move off this. So the the

other thing you know you mentioned is

yeah drive by shootings the guy drives

away you there's no evidence of the

crime. The other thing if you talk to

cops if you talk to cops who work in

high crime areas or people who live in

high crime areas which I have in both

cases um a lot of people in high crime

areas do not want to ever talk to the

cops about things that have happened

because if it's gang violence there's

the very active threat

>> 100%. Snitches don't get stitches they

get morgs

>> 100%. And so if if you if you can't if

if you're relying on eyewitness reports

you don't solve crimes

>> right?

>> And so you need objective data. So, if

you're a criminal, it's pretty awesome

environment.

>> It's great. And and by the way, LA, I

was say again, not to not like LA has

been absolute ground zero for this kind

of behavior. I mean, the gangs in LA

have been going wild for the last 5

years, just like completely

unconstrained. I mean, it's been it's

been crazy.

>> I just don't understand why anybody

would want that. Y

>> I Do you ever put your tinfoil hat on

and going, what what are they trying to

do here?

>> So, the the the the

>> Cuz I know you wear a tin foil hat every

now and then. We talked about nuclear

bombs.

>> We did. We did. We did. Faking. Faking.

Yes, exactly. The the the now well-known

fact that all the the nuclear test sites

got got faked. Um,

>> so I mean, look,

>> I don't think they got faked.

>> I I know you're Well, you're you're a

believer in the official story. Uh, you

know, a little bit.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You believe what

Wikipedia says. So, um,

you know, you're famous for. So, um, so,

uh, I look, the one wonders if there's a

political motivation, right, which is

basically to get the responsible people

out of the city, uh, to be able to

change the voting patterns, right? Um

and so if

>> God that's so insidious.

>> Yeah. And so you you wonder you know

Yeah. You look at these programs over

time and kind of as as the you know the

populations of the major cities have

shifted like radically over the last 50

years like they they they have very

little in common with the population

distributions they had 50 years ago. And

so you wonder how much of it is

massaging the voter base. God, that's so

crazy to think that people would be

willing to sacrifice the safety of their

residents that are bringing in the

majority of the tax revenue, by the way,

>> so that they could somehow or another

make it so that they could stay in power

forever.

>> I mean,

>> and then get money out presumably from

the state, right? Like which is how New

York City got bailed out. Yeah.

>> Which is a hilarious story. They

balanced the budget, right?

>> Oh, congratulations. Mom Donniey's a

genius. He figured it out. Socialism

works. So you balance the budget and

then you realize they got $4 billion

from the state so they could balance

that budget. So all these folks that are

living in small towns with no crime and

living in rural like West New York and

like they had to pay.

>> Yep. 100%. And then by the way the

states get bailed out right by the feds

>> federally. Right. So fun.

>> It is very fun. So, so I just came from

New York and so New York has their own

version of this now with their new

mayor. And the big controversy there

last week was their mayor did a video

>> standing in front of somebody's home.

>> Yes.

>> Calling him out by name. Ken Griffin.

>> Ken Griffin,

>> who's uh a very wealthy guy who brings a

lot of jobs to New York City and was in

the middle of a huge project. It's a $6

billion project and now he's considering

tanking it. Yeah, he's yeah, he's he's

he's I think he spoke last week at a

conference and you know, all but said

he's he's he's going to he didn't say

he's going to pull entirely out, but he

said he's going to move much more of the

of the business to Florida. But

>> the other significance Ken Ken who I

know Ken is a major philanthropist. Ken

has donated hundreds of millions of

dollars particularly to healthcare in

New York City on top of being a major

taxpayer and source of tax revenue on

top of being a major employer. And so

the new mayor has deliberately targeted

him personally um to try to force him

out.

>> Why?

>> Yeah. Do you think that's the ca that

that's why he's doing it or do you think

he's doing it because that appeals to

his base because there's these eat the

rich people?

>> But it's kind of the same. It's it's

what I'm saying like I would I give

people the benefit of the doubt. I I

would assume they believe everything

they say

>> and they feel very strongly about it. I

would believe that they also have a

political incentive. Um because it right

if you get if you get if you get

somebody who's going to oppose you out

of the city that's good. Um

>> the top 1% of New York aren't they

responsible for 50% of the tax base?

>> Yeah. on that on that order. Yeah,

something also roughly also roughly the

case in in Cal in in California in the

year 2000 1,000 individuals were 50% of

the tax revenue. Um was was the all-time

peak, but I think it's roughly 1% of the

taxpayers are 50% of the tax receipts.

And so one could imagine a position that

says, "Wow, we want these businesses to

work. We want to generate all the tax

revenue and we want to pay for all the

all the programs."

>> Yeah.

>> One could also imagine a somewhat more

let's say yolo approach um which is to

drive out the revenue and Yeah. and then

and then you know presumably accounted

bailouts.

>> I just don't understand. Well, I guess

people that are not playing a long game.

They're only thinking of their own

political careers and staying in power

that they wouldn't care.

>> Yeah, I think there's that. And then I

think you just I mean obviously there's

a lot of opportunism. And then the other

thing is I think you just you have a lot

of people you have a lot of people you

know a lot of people in politics have

not run a business. They haven't made a

payroll. They haven't right

>> they don't have any

>> what we would consider to be real world

experience and so the the idea of

business is somewhat alien to a lot of

these people.

>> I I mean I I'm not a businessman

although I kind of am. I kind of am in

some weird way. I become a businessman.

Um, but this idea that it's easy to

become a billionaire and that these

billionaires somehow or another are the

problem because they're not paying their

fair share is so weird that that is that

that's a narrative that actually gets

pushed through when you look at the

actual numbers of the tax base and how

much they contribute and how many jobs

they provide and yeah, they make more

money than everybody else, right? You

could do that too. It's like this is one

of the things that America is

really good at. You can come from

nothing and become incredibly wealthy if

you figure something out and go and we

just assume that everybody who makes an

incredible amount of money stole it,

>> right?

>> That they robbed someone that someone

the only like this is a narrative that

gets pushed along democratic socialists

that no one achieves that. I think I

literally heard AOC say this recently

that no one achieves substantial wealth

without somehow or another victimizing

other people.

>> Yeah. And then Jeff Jeff Bezos is the

obvious counter example which is like

every time you do the one click and the

thing gets delivered to you two hours

later at the cheapest possible price

>> saving saving you and your family a lot

of time and money

>> but at the expense of small mom and pop

stores allegedly

>> although although a lot of them sell on

sell on Amazon. A lot of small

businesses sell on Amazon. Um, no look

100%. The the other thing you can do is

you can compare and contrast to other

countries that have more draconian

policies in the direction that those

folks are are are are suggesting. And so

Europe in particular, you know, many

European countries have a much more

draconian, you know, much even more

hostile uh to to to business and the

result is they are much poorer. You

know, their their slower growth are

actually shrinking. Um, the people there

are much less welloff. There's much less

funding for social programs. And so you

can also do the cross, you know, the

cross country comparison and which I

think kind of gives up the game. This

episode is brought to you by Black Rifle

Coffee. The only coffee we drink here in

the JRE studio. There's a lot going on

in the world right now, but America is

still the freest, most innovative,

wildest experiment humanity's ever

pulled off. I mean, this is the country

that went to the moon, allegedly, built

the modern world, tamed the Wild West,

and won back-to-back World Wars. But

here's the thing. Some companies only

want to celebrate America when it's

trendy or when there's a big anniversary

attached to it. Since 2014, Black Rifle

Coffee has been celebrating America

freedom and the people who keep this

country moving forward every single day.

And this summer, Black Rifles dropping

limited edition America 250th

commemorative bags for Just Black,

Beyond Black, and Spirit of 76.

And if you need a little extra kick in

your system, they've also got Tiger

Strike, their new bomb pop flavored

energy drink. You can grab these Black

Rifle products now at Walmart, your

local BlackRifle coffee shop, or get 30%

off your next order with code Rogan at

blackriflec.com/jogan.

Veteranfounded Black Rifle Coffee

Company, America's Coffee. Well, that's

the weird thing about the whole

socialism thing is that it's never

worked ever and they just go, "Well, it

hasn't been done right." Yes, maybe it

will work for us.

>> But it's it's crazy that that works. And

I I get Is that a failing of our

education system? Is that a failing of

the media explaining things to people in

a way that makes sense?

>> Or is it just that people feel so

helpless that they're making, you know,

uh just enough barely to get by and

they're living check to check and they

see these people in yachts and they see

these people in private jets and they

say, "They must have stolen this. this

is impossible to achieve this kind of

wealth.

>> Somehow or another, the system is wrong.

Wealth inequality.

>> Yeah.

>> So, I think there's two there's two

moral definitions of fairness. Um

there's a definition of fairness, which

is you get out of something what you put

into it, right? Proportional. If I work

twice as hard as you do, I get twice as

much. And by the way, that could be, you

know, if we're in a race together and,

you know, I run twice as far, I get to

eat twice as much, you know, pie at the

end of the race. Like, anything like

that. I put in more effort, I get more

results. The other version of fairness

is uh everybody gets an equal slice.

>> Yeah. The equality of outcome.

>> And those both feel right those both

feel correct like there's something I

think in our wiring right in our brain

wiring where those both feel like

they're morally correct but they are in

direct conflict with each other. Um, and

it's like and you so when I when I

really have this conversation, you know,

it's got to kind of lay those two ideas

out on the table and kind of say, okay,

you know, pick one, right? And again,

it's not like it's not like, you know,

then the caricature is, well, somebody's

arguing then for like under strain

libertarianism, whatever. And it's like,

no, like we we're these are all social

democracies. Like we're going to live in

social democracies forever. There's

always going to be a progressive tax

system. There's always you have to have

you have to have business success in

order to fund all the social programs.

That then that makes sense. And really,

very few people argue against that

anymore,

>> right? It does make sense,

>> right? It does make sense. But but there

is this fundamental question underneath

that which is the the level of degree to

which you buy into that first definition

of fairness. What you put in is what you

get out versus that second definition

which is everybody gets the same amount.

>> Well, the problem with the equality of

outcome is it's not an equality of

effort.

>> Right. That's right.

>> And this is the beautiful thing about

America

>> is that you really can just work 20

hours a day and achieve something

spectacular. And the idea that you

working 20 hours a day like a

maniac, literally wasting your health

away,

>> right?

>> That you should get the exact same

amount of money as someone who barely

works,

>> right?

>> Just kind of shows up, does the bare

minimum, leaves 5 minutes early, and

that this person should achieve the same

result as you. That's crazy.

>> Yeah. Well, I mean, it's it's it's sort

of like anybody who's ever the teachers

say one thing. Anybody's ever been in a

class project with other students.

>> Yes.

>> You immediately observe

>> Yes. There are certain people who stand

up and like lead the way. And there are

certain people that like sit back and

free ride,

>> right?

>> There's no there's no uh there's no old

old story when after after the Soviet

Union collapsed, you know, reporters

went in and try to, you know, figure out

what what it happened and they

interviewed somebody, you know, about

like what it was like to work at a

socialist, you know, socialist factory

and the line that the guy the guy said

was, "Oh, well, we pretended to work and

they pretended to pay us."

>> Right.

>> Right. If if you're getting the thing

regardless of because everybody's

guaranteed equal outcomes. If you're

getting the thing regardless, then

>> you kill motivation. And motivation is

everything for people achieving things.

No one achieves anything spectacular

without some sort of motivation that's

going to get them a result that's a

reward for all their hard effort. If you

really thought you were just working for

the sake of the people, like no one's

doing that. That's not that's not human

nature. And this is the problem with the

concept of socialism is that it punishes

high achievers and it rewards laziness.

And that's not to say that everyone

who's poor is lazy.

>> That's right.

>> And there's a lot of people that are

poor because of circumstances beyond

their control. They're poor because of

all sorts of conditions that they really

had no say in. It's like bunch of things

happened to them. But the the game is

there's an opportunity if you figure it

out to get out of that situation in this

world. And you can get out of that

situation. There's so many stories,

these rags to riches stories, which is

you don't get that in a cast system,

right? You don't get that in socialism.

You don't get that. There's a lot of

places where that doesn't happen. In

America, that that is still a

possibility.

>> Yeah. That's right. That's right. And

the more you punish that, you're

actually punishing the the real concept

of the American dream. Now, I'm not

saying that you should work 20 hours a

day and become a so sociopath and get on

Aderall and just only try to achieve

financial wealth. And there are people

like that. You know them, right? Of

course,

>> I'm sure you travel in those circles.

>> But you get lumped into those people

even though you're not that person at

all because you're extremely wealthy.

>> I I cap it at 18 hours a day. Yeah.

>> Cap at 18.

>> 18. Yeah. Is that really what you work?

Do you really work 18 hours a day?

>> No, I don't. I don't. I don't. That's

not That's not Yes. No, not quite. But

>> But you have to work a lot.

>> You work a lot. You work a lot. You work

a lot.

>> How many businesses are you involved in?

>> A lot.

>> At any given time.

>> I mean, the fir our firm, you know, it's

over a thousand. Um, so yes.

>> God,

>> something tells me you you would not

enjoy that as much. Um.

>> Uh, no. I I I wake up every day going,

should I be doing less?

>> Yes,

>> that's what I do.

>> Yeah. Yeah. But I I have a lot of

recreational things that

>> that I'm obsessed with that don't pay me

any money that I really enjoy.

>> Yes.

>> So, I'm always like, maybe I should just

do that.

>> Yeah.

>> You know, but the point is choice,

freedom. You should be able to do

whatever you want. And if you want to be

some psycho that works 18 hours a day

and makes an insane amount of money.

>> Yeah.

>> The benefit of that to the tax base is

massive.

>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. The societies that

don't have that are much poorer.

Everybody's poorer. There are entire

European I probably shouldn't name.

There are entire European countries

where they rank below our 50th ranked

state. Yes.

>> That we consider to be fully developed.

I was going to bring that up.

>> Modern countries.

>> Yeah. Like Mississippi.

>> Yeah. And their per capita income is

lower than all 50 of our states.

>> Right.

>> And

it's hard even it's like

congratulations. Like is is that going

is that going well? Are you happy with

the outcome? And you know, you have that

convers I had those conversations with

the folks over there and they they

literally the conclusion generally is,

well, we need to do more of the things

that resulted in that outcome.

>> My buddy Ari Maddie, hilarious comedian,

he's from Estonia and he has friends in

Estonia that have university degrees

that choose to work in shoe sales

because if you make more than $60,000 a

year, your taxes are so high,

>> it actually benefits you to make less

money. Yeah.

>> And so they just give up.

>> Yeah. They nail you

>> and they just exist. and that's why he

fled and why he came to America.

>> So those are the type of people that are

the least

>> accepting of any kind of socialism.

They're they're the least charitable

when people start talking about

socialism. Talk talk to socialism about

someone who fled Venezuela. That's

right.

>> You know, or Cuba, they they'll

stab you, you know, they get they get

angry and crazy because they know what

the consequences are, the real world

consequences are. And it's also one of

the beautiful things about America. You

can have these utopian ideas of the

world and you could get on college

campuses and rant and rave and no one

arrests you.

>> Yeah. Yep. 100%.

>> Yeah.

>> Um yeah, I would say look I we are in a

time in which this kind of what you

might call radical socialist politics is

back. Like so this is going to be a big

thing. It's I say it's be a big thing in

the 28 election. It's going to be a big

thing in the midterms. It's going to be

a big thing. You know a lot of these

cities and states, you know, some of

these new you know this new mayor of

Seattle is very radical. New mayor of

New York City very radical.

>> The new mayor of Seattle's hilarious.

He's very radical. It's kind of

hilarious. She lived with her parents.

Yes.

>> Her parents supported her. She's in her

40s. Never had a real job.

>> And uh now she's running what how many

what how many billions of dollars is the

economy of Seattle?

>> Yes. A lot. A lot. It's it's a huge

>> and her response Yes.

>> to rich people leaving. Well, bye

>> bye.

>> Like okay.

>> Now, having said that, I have enormous

faith in the American people. And I

think that the American people do not

ultimately want this. Um and

historically, when the American people

have been given this choice, they

haven't they haven't taken it. I think

they have to see the results, right?

They have to see it fall apart. But the

problem is once things fall apart, it

takes so much longer to bring them back

than it does for them to fall apart.

>> Like Los Angeles, for instance, Los

Angeles, like you said, fell apart in

like 5 years.

>> Yeah.

>> I mean,

>> for me, it was leaving in 2020. I was

like, I saw the writing on the wall. I'm

like, I see where this is going and I

know that things don't get better quick,

if they get better at all. This is not

going to get better. This is going to

get worse. And uh that's it's headed in

that direction. And if someone came in

with sweeping change and pulled up all

the encampments and cleaned up all the

streets and made things safe again and

actually started prosecuting crime and

it would take so long to fix it.

>> Yeah. Yeah. But you know, you get we'll

see what happens with So the new I will

say this, the new DA, the new district

attorney in LA is much better

prosecuting crimes. Um and then Mr.

Spencer Pratt.

>> Is that how you go you have your tips

on? H I would just say like his sudden

rise um is has to be considered a

miracle. Um it's kind of fun.

>> It's incredible to watch.

>> He is doing such a great job

>> and he's got really good ideas and

people are saying what who is this

reality star? Why should he like

what about the other people? What about

them? What is so great about their

ability to lead that makes you think

that they're going to be extraordinary

choices above and beyond what Spencer

Pratt's capable of doing? What are you

talking about? I I live, you know, we

have a home down there and we we we

fortunately didn't lose our home, but

we, you know, we were we were it was it

was nerve-wracking for a while. And I,

you know, I think everybody knows this

now, but the city response was abysmal

to non-existent. The state response was

terrible. Um, and by the way, none of

that has been fixed as far as I know.

Like it's we're we're set up for that

fire, you know. So, the the the fire,

what is it year ago? A little more than

a year ago, took out uh twice the square

mileage of the Nagasaki bomb. um

obliterated. If you've seen like photos,

it it destroyed Pacific Palisades. It

looks like a bomb hit like the cars were

melted into the pavement.

>> Yeah. It was gone. Um and then Altadena,

which is like a working-class

neighborhood and and and then it, you

know, took out like half of Malibu. And

so,

>> uh like it was like and it almost took

out all of West LA. Like it came very

close to jumping the freeways and just

taking out like Beverly Hills, Bair,

Santa Monica. Like it was all in the

line of fire. I don't think any of

that's been fixed. I don't think there's

any plan to fix any of it. Um, and so

yeah, Spencer, you know, Spencer has

been through this the hard way along

with a lot of people in the city, which

is his, you know, they burned his house

down. Um, and

>> what is the response when Karen Bass is

questioned about what are you going to

do if this happens in the future?

>> You know, everything is everything is

remember the Lego movie? Remember the

song Everything is Wonderful.

>> Yeah.

>> Yeah. Everything is wonderful.

Everything is amazing.

>> Um, there's a viral AI video which is

Spencer Fr, one of his fans made, which

is it's everything is awful. Um, and

it's LA. It's it's a it's like the Lego

movie set in LA. It's with like Lego

junkies bleeding out of the street.

>> Oh, his AI videos have been amazing.

>> The Lego cities on fire. And so I I I

think there's just there's just an

advanced level of denial. Um I mean it

just I think I don't know if it came out

today. I just saw the report today, but

apparently the head of the LA water

department, you know, is a super high

paid, you know, person. And apparently

she apparently according to the

information was unaware that the key

reservoir was not full. Didn't have

water in it. Do you know that? So the

fire hydrants didn't have water in them,

>> right?

So the the police the the the fire

trucks would pull up and they would plug

in and there would be no water coming

out. I mean so it's it's a level of

dereliction that is cosmic and to your

point Spencer is articulating that in a

way that shockingly no nobody else has

been able to.

>> There's also talk about the Palisades

about them selling the land about

acquiring the land selling the land.

Like what is going on with that?

>> It's nuts. So I I don't know all the

details. I do know right out of the gate

uh there was a state ban on quote

unquote predatory uh land sales uh so

predatory offers um and so there was a

ban the state put in place a ban on

anybody making an offer on the land at

less than the last appraised value uh

which included the value of the house on

the land and so they they chilled the

because a lot a lot of property owners

so you lose your house in LA okay so you

lose your house in LA by the way it's

been almost impossible and I think for a

lot of people actually impossible to get

fire insurance in LA for years because

of because of all these issues because

the insurance companies aren't stupid

they don't want to left holding the bag,

>> right?

>> Um and so there's a lot of people whose

houses burned down and their first

thought was screw it. I'm out of here,

right? I'm just going to like sell I'm

going to sell the land. I'm going to go

some someplace sane. Um and and then all

of a sudden the state moved in and

basically said you can't you can't they

didn't say you can't sell your house.

They said people can't bid on your house

at your now destroyed house below it its

previous value. So the previous value,

so if you had a $10 million mansion on a

lot in the Palisades and it's worth $15

million while it was there and you say,

"I'll sell it to you for five." You

can't do that.

>> Uh you can sell it. You the prohibition

was on offers.

>> What

>> the prohibition was I don't know the

exact I remember the exact details. the

prohibition was. So because all

immediately immediately there were

people, you know, say speculators,

right,

>> investors, right, who immediately came

in and they're like, "Oh, this is this

is, you know, prime land." And, you

know, surely at some point the city will

be governed rationally.

>> So we're we're going to we're going to

buy up all these lots. We're going to

build new houses and we'll make money.

And so the state immediately stepped in

to make sure that that didn't happen by

by by by preventing the the the offers.

Um, that's one. Step two is it was

almost impossible to get a permit to

build anything before this. It's

certainly harder now. How many houses

have been rebuilt?

>> Oh, I I mean it rounds to zero

effectively. None. I mean it this is

we're talking I don't know up to 15

years. Um maybe for the rebuild maybe. U

and and by the way maybe never in a lot

of places.

>> 15 years for individual homes or 15

years for all the homes?

>> Oh 15 years. 15 years all in. Um like I

I haven't seen any prediction that's

less than 15 years to re to to to

rebuild everything because any

individual home could be I don't know 5

years, eight years, 10 years. Um

>> why so long?

>> Because it was almost it's almost

impossible these these cities almost

never it's almost impossible to get

permits to do anything in these cities,

you know, on a good day. They don't they

don't let you do they don't let you

build things.

>> Why?

>> Because of the the the local pol the

local politics of not ever changing

anything. um and not I mean everything's

you know everything's historic or

everything is this or that um or to

rebuild the other thing they do is if

you want to rebuild something you have

to do some other trade and so this is

the other thing's kicked in is now the

politics of what they call affordable

housing which means you know government

housing so now there's demands that you

know a certain percentage of the land be

devoted to you know government housing

projects you know in in the middle of

what had been a residential neighborhood

and so that that's a whole snarl um and

then on top of that there's all the

logistics of actually building anything

which is there's only so many general

contractors right

>> around to be able to do it. And

>> how many thousand homes were

>> many? I don't know the exact number.

Many thousands. I mean, for people who

haven't, by the way, experienced this,

there's this great this really good

movie on Amazon called Crime 101 that

just came out with Chris Hemsworth. Um,

and it's a great LA crime caper. It was

filmed in Pacific Palisades right before

the fire. And so, you watch this, it's

gorgeous. It's a gorgeous movie. And you

watch this movie and if you're in LA,

you're just, you know, it's hard to not

literally tear up seeing because it

that's just gone.

>> Yeah.

>> It's all totally gone. So, you can get a

sense of the devastation. Just imagine

everything in that movie got destroyed.

Um, and so yeah, so it's it's it's

completely Yeah, it's it's completely

snarled up. Um, you know, and I I don't

know. Look, we'll, you know, it's you're

back to the age-old thing. It's a single

party state. Spencer Grass running as

Republican.

You know, the voters have a choice.

>> A lot of people whose houses burned down

are not coming back. Like, you know,

this and again, this goes back to the

thing and like I don't I don't think

the, you know, we now know who the the

fire was set by this crazy guy who had

his own political agenda,

>> right? But like

>> who was a fan of Luigi?

>> It was Luigi terrorism. Like we now we

now believe that based on based on the

reporting and the indictments. Um and so

like I you know I think that that was

likely the real cause. But like you you

do wonder if a you do wonder politically

if a side effect of this is to get

responsible homeowners out of the city

permanently to change the voting

composition. So

>> God, you know, like you can probably

explain the dysfunction without that,

but you do wonder if that's a if that's

a motivation somewhere in there. Yes.

So, we'll see. You know, look, I maybe I

should also say, look, I because I can

sit and I can I can do this for hours

beat up on California. California is

also the most, you know, spectacular

place on earth. Like, it is like it's

amazing. I mean, it's it's it's a

natural wonderland. And then on top of

that, you know, we have two of the great

global industries um in, you know,

culture in LA and tech and Silicon

Valley. We have a, you know, but

apparently infinite gusher of money uh

coming out of these these two industries

that can fund, you know, both amazing

things and horrible things. But aren't

both of those industries kind of leaking

out of LA right now?

>> So, so, so LA, so my understanding is

there's less film and television

production happening in LA than there

was during the last strikes. Um, and so

it's become related. It's become almost

impossible to shoot anything in LA. Um,

and you know, many many of the great

movies and TV shows in history of course

were shot in LA. That's where all the

big studios built their lots. It's the

whole point of of being there. And that

that's almost all gone. So the the the

local economyy's just been destroyed

completely independent of the fire.

right?

>> It's been destroyed by the basically the

crushing of the um of of the production

side of it.

>> Um and so so yeah, so LA was already

reeling uh from that and that that

continues to be a big problem. And then

you know, look, the the there's this

state, you know, there's this new tax

this new ballot proposition for an asset

tax. Um and the number of people in

Silicon Valley who are leaving the state

is quite large.

>> And I would say we're it was a trickle

and now it's a stream and it's on it's

it's becoming a flood. And I know a lot

of people um who are leaving the state

uh because they they feel like their

assets are going to get seized if

>> let's explain this asset tax because

it's people are thinking it's just as

simple as you get an additional x amount

of percentage of your income but it's

not. It's unrealized income as well.

>> So yeah. So there's there's so there's

lots

>> unrealized gains.

>> Yeah. So there's lots of different kinds

of taxes that one can have and there's

you know the obvious ones sales tax when

you buy or sell something. There's

property tax based on you know paying

property tax on on property you own.

There's you know all all these theories

in this. There's tar tariffs which are

taxes on international transactions. So

you have to get tax revenue somewhere

and you can decide from among these

taxes. Historically the US didn't in the

old days the the US didn't have an

income tax and then the income tax was

introduced about 100 years ago. Uh and

and it was a big deal at the time. It

was a big deal. It was like oh wait a

minute I'm I'm getting a salary. I'm

getting paid at the time whatever it was

$100 a month and you're going to take

you know whatever ex you're going to

take a percentage of my income of money

that I earned and so that was like very

controversial. It started out I if I'm

remembering properly it started out it

was like a 3% tax only on rich people.

You know this is a but what happens is

they they got the mechanism in place and

then before you know it you know 30

years later it's you know you 50% tax

rates and then by the 1950s the marginal

tax rates on on high- income people were

up in the 90s right and so so it was a

very big deal to get to be able to get

the ability to seize a percentage of

somebody's income. But we're all used to

that now. And so you know we all pay we

all pay we all pay federal income tax in

California. We pay a lot of state income

tax. We pay local income tax. I mean, my

income tax rates some, you know,

something like 60%, maybe at this point,

62 or 63% all in.

>> You're not paying your fair share.

>> Exactly. Exactly. ought to be ought to

be ought to be ought to be ought to be

99 clearly if not 100. But we're all

used to income tax. Okay. So, park that

for a moment. Then there's this concept

of an asset tax. And so, in various

terms, asset tax, wealth tax, um or you

might think of it as a property tax that

applies to everything you own,

>> right? So, not just the land that your

house is on, but everything.

>> Car collection, art collection,

>> art collection, all the stuff on the

walls, all your clothes, all your

jewelry, all your everything. Your house

pets, like the whole thing.

>> It's also stocks, right?

>> Stocks, bonds, yes. Everything, crypto.

>> How did this get proposed? How is it

possible that someone proposed something

this insane?

>> So, this has been running, this idea has

been running around for a while. Um, by

the way, there are other countries that

have done this with disastrous results

because all of the people with any level

of assets flee the country. Um, and so

Europe has been through this multiple

times and you know we we don't we don't

pay attention to that, but you know

there's there's case studies from that.

It's worked out poorly every time. Um,

it's been kicking around for a while. It

it almost passed. There was almost a

federal wealth tax uh asset tax in u

2022 that almost passed that didn't

pass. Um, and then the Biden

administration uh said in their 2024

fiscal plan for 25, they said they were

going to come back and do a federal

wealth tax asset tax in 25 if they had

gotten reelected. Um, and then now in

California, there's a ballot proposition

that a specific union has put on the

ballot specifically for itself. Uh, um,

um, the comp politics are weird because

it's it's it's a bad ballot proposition

because it's one union where all the

money just goes to it and its causes.

And so it it's it's a weird one, but

this is the first of what's going to be

a flood of these. And and so the and and

again, you can imagine the story. The

ballot proposition is it's a one-time

tax, 5% of assets for people with a net

worth above some level. Um, and then

that level, you know, kind of moves

around depending on who's talking about

it. And by the way, depending on what's

included and what's not included. And so

I think in the current proposition, for

example, they exclude property, they

exclude like real estate.

>> And I think they did that.

>> But stocks and bonds,

>> but stocks and bonds would be included.

>> Um, and so um yeah, if you so if you if

you were above a if you were above a

certain and you know, it's starting out

with a with a high threshold on on on

wealth. And so today, just like the

original income tax on day one, it

doesn't hit anybody. Um, and then it's a

5% and of course the argument is these

people make 5% a year anyway and so more

than that and so they'll they'll make up

for it and then and then they say it's a

onetime tax but we know from the history

of the income tax that this is how it

starts and then we know where it goes

right

>> and then you know you smash cut in the

movie you smash cut you know 10 years

later and everybody's getting hit with

it and people are losing their houses

because they can't it's just you know

you can't okay so let me give you the

the twist on this in California the

twist on this is it's a specific

punitive strike aimed at tech founders

and tech companies um and so they have

the calculation of the value that you

owe is based on the greater of your

economic interest in your company or

your voting interest in your company.

Um, and so if you are the Google

founders as an example, um, you have

what's called super voting stock, right?

Um, and because you want the company to

have a long-term outlook and you want

the founders to to stay in charge. Um,

and so let's say I'm making numbers up.

Let's say the Google founders own 3% of

the economic value of their company, but

they own 15% of the control value of

their company or say 55% of the control

value of their company. the tax gets

calculated based on the higher of those

two numbers. Um, and so for founders in

the valley, particularly private

companies, but also public companies

where they have controlled stock, if

this tax passes, they go they instantly

go bankrupt.

>> Jesus Christ.

>> But they can't possibly pay the tax

because their their tax bill by

definition is is a multiple on top of

their assets. Um, and so this is on the

ballot proposition. We just filled out

our ballot at home. Um, you know, this

is happening right now. This is the

first of these. Um there will be I am

positive a dozen more of these the next

time in California. Um I am positive

that this will arrive in every you know

blue state that has any sort of ballot

proposition you know uh thing where you

can put things directly on the ballot.

I'm positive this is going to get

proposed in every other blue state over

over the next few years. It it's the

obvious thing to do. And then I am

virtually positive that this is going to

be a big uh campaign uh platform issue

for the 2028 election at the federal

level. And isn't it also set up that

they can completely move the goalpost

for what is the threshold that you would

get taxed at? So if it's a billion

dollars now, it could be $500,000 in six

months.

>> Yeah. Once it's once it's in, they just

patch it. They just patch the law

>> and they don't no one votes on that.

>> Yeah. They just Well, it's a it's a

Democrat. So it's a so California is a

Democratic supermajority in both houses

of of both the the the House and the

Senate in California and a Democratic

governor and of course the judges are

all Democrats and so the the Democrats

can pass anything they want. Um and so

they they get yeah they get they they

get in with the force of the of law from

the ballot proposition and then they

then they modify as they see fit.

>> So it's a Trojan horse for a lot of

these people that are like yeah the

billionaires like what about the

thousanda buddy? 100%. Well, you know,

this is the classic thing where Bernie

Bernie stump speech used to be I'm

against the billionaires and the

millionaires until he became a

millionaire and all of a sudden the

stump speech is right.

>> This is that. Okay.

So, a lot of people have gone to, you

know, our governor um and said, you

know, this is going to be very bad news

for the state. Um and so, you know,

Gavin, to his credit, says, yes, I agree

this is very bad news for the state

because if you you can if you're in

California, you can easily go to Nevada

or Texas or Florida.

>> Can he veto it? Uh no, he can't veto it

because it's a proposition, not a law.

>> Um so there there's no veto power. Um

however, what he's doing is he's sort of

signaling indicating in his statements

that that basically that the the the b

his position b you know running for

president we all believe what his

position is going to be is obviously you

shouldn't do this at the state level,

you should do this at the federal level

because the problem with this tax at the

state level is you can flee the state.

You can't flee the country. Um

>> holy

>> Practically speaking, you can't free the

country. And so my my expectation is

that this is going to be a very big uh u

sort of you know leftist populist uh

campaign measure um on the part of you

know basically all the Democratic

candidates in in in 28 and so a a yeah

so an asset tax I think is coming

federally

>> unrealized gains asset tax

>> important important to understand yes

this is unrealized gains um and so this

is in the fullness of time as this

expands you own a small business you're

a business you own your business you own

your business sitting here

>> by the way what's your business

Who knows,

>> right?

>> You know, unless you have like, I don't

know, active secondary transactions in

your stock or you take your company

public, who knows what your business is

worth. And so, a government, this is go

down the rabbit hole. A government

appraiser is going to show up and decide

what your business is worth.

>> Oh boy.

>> Yes. Guess what their incentive is,

right? To have it be as high as

possible,

>> right?

>> Right. Um, and so, and then they're

going to and they're going to do this.

And then, by the way, they're going to

look around and they're going to say,

"Whatever, what other assets does he

have?" And they're going to go through

your brokerage accounts and they're

going to go through your art collection.

And then next thing, then they're going

to want to know what's in your safe. Do

you have

>> jewelry in your safe? Does your wife

have jewelry in her safe? Um, you know

what?

>> You go right down the rabbit hole. You

know, oh, nice nice guns you have are

any of them antiques. We need to get

those appraised.

>> Straight up communism.

>> Yeah. And so, and that and and and

that's actually a whole separate

argument against this is the level of

invasiveness on the part of the

government to be able to actually figure

out what your assets are. And and of

course, what's going to happen is every

person with any level of assets is going

to do anything they can to h to hide,

right? And so you're going to try to

like do whatever level of shuffling

>> and then you're going to be looked at as

a criminal trying to evade paying your

fair share, especially by the

proletariat.

>> 100%. Right. Exactly. And and you can

never It's you know, it's a little bit

It's a funny thing in the current tax

system that you you have this thing

where you estimate what you owe in taxes

and you send it into the IRS and then

they tell you whether they think you're

right or wrong. They they don't tell you

what you owe, right? They leave it to

you to quote fill out your tax return to

estimate what you think you owe and then

they judge you on it. But at least with

income, it's like relatively

straightforward because it's like I have

a salary or I have, you know, whatever

interest payments or whatever

>> for a wealth tax, asset tax, like you're

trying to judge the value of your

assets. They're trying to judge the

value of your assets. Third parties are

trying to value the value of your

assets. Like who knows what these things

are worth.

>> Yeah.

>> Like who knows? And so and so as a

consequence like I it slides towards a

very totalitarian outcome which is you

know how how do you prove that you're

not guilty? How do you prove that the

thing on the wall is not worth twice

what you say it is?

>> Right.

>> You can't.

>> Right.

>> Well, or the only way you could is you

could liquidate it, right? You could you

which you probably have to do anyway to

be able to pay the tax but people say

it's worth not even what you paid for

it.

>> Exactly.

>> Right. Because sometimes you buy

something and then 10 years later it's

worth way more.

>> Yeah.

>> So now you have to pay taxes on

something that you paid a fraction of.

>> Yeah.

>> Well, and then and then think about this

compounding over time, right? So let's

say it starts out as 5% one time and

then let's say it goes to 5% annually.

Okay. So now you own a small business.

>> So now they're coming and taking 5%

every year.

>> The one time thing is

Everybody knows it's

>> Of course. Right. Because of course they

got they immediately come back

>> once they get addicted to getting that

money and then they have to balance that

budget again.

>> Yeah. That's right. That's right. And so

and then just do the math on the

compounding. Let's say it stays at 5%.

It's 5% every year for 10 years. What

percentage of your business is gone

after 10 years? They just they just chew

it apart.

>> Where are you moving? So,

>> where are you moving to?

>> So, my partner Ben uh and his family

have moved to Las Vegas. They are

extremely happy.

>> Vegas is a good spot.

>> They are extraordinarily happy. Um I

have a lot of friends coming to Texas.

>> Good restaurants in Vegas.

>> They're very good restaurants in Vegas.

Very wonderful place. Um

>> good gun laws.

>> Yes. Also that um a lot of outdoor

>> You can buy weed.

>> You can buy a lot. You can buy You can

buy a lot of things in Vegas. Um it's a

very very entertaining place. Um a lot

of people going to Florida. Um a lot of

people going going to Nashville. um a

lot of people going, you know, all kinds

of places.

>> Um in the in Europe, what they do is

they just go to another European

country, right? So they just and they

have all these tax they have like Malta

and these

>> crazy places that you can you can escape

to.

>> In the US, there's nothing like that.

And if you try to if you try to leave

the I only have one friend who's ever

left the US and you have to pay an exit

tax of like 45 you have to pay an asset

exit tax already today. You have to pay

like 45% of all of your assets to to to

uh to no longer be an American taxpayer

and to leave the country. Um, and so

that that's why

>> I'm not leaving.

>> That's why they think the well and then

you get to this. And so my answer is I'm

not leaving the US and furthermore I'm

not leaving California. Having said

that, you know, I

>> So you're not leaving California.

>> I am not leaving California.

>> Having said that, you know, you do start

to wonder, okay, if like half the tax

base leaves,

you know, what happens to the other

half? And then if these other taxes

pass, what happens? And so like the

situation is the situation is fraught.

Like this is the this is the this is the

single most activating thing I've seen

happen in politics that has people in

the valley cranked up. And again

literally it's it's not even so much the

money. It's they see their ability to

actually have a company destroyed.

Can you start a tech company, work on it

for 10 years and still own any of it at

the end of the process? And and why

would you do that? And so that that's

the thing in the valley uh that's really

harsh. Um, and then the other side of it

is like how many if everybody else is

leaving, do you want to be the last man

standing and do you want to be the last

remaining target,

>> right?

>> And so the game theory on that is

getting tricky. Um, and so like I said,

I think we're we're definitely from

trickle to stream and we're entering

flood territory.

>> And what do you think is going to happen

with this?

>> It's on the ballot. Um,

>> what is your assumption?

>> The the professionals the professional

telling us it's basically a 50/50. Um,

so that what the professionals tell us

is that California, California is

naturally prone to be in favor of this

kind of thing because of the composition

of the voter base. It's the same reason

we have a Democratic supermajority in

the in the in the legislature and so

forth. Uh, having said that, the

American people, including Californians,

don't like socialism. They don't like

assets asset seizures. And so, this

thing started out life polling at like

45 or 50%.

What the pros say is for a proposition

to pass, it needs to start up polling at

like 60%, because the initial poll is

before there's been a counter campaign

and the counter campaign can almost

always knock the, you know, the support

down at least, you know, 10 or 15

points. And so the the pros say there's

a chance that this doesn't pass because

the 50% goes to 40%. And then doesn't

pass. The counterargument to that is

this is be part of the national mood,

right? Um, and this is a rolling thing

and you know all the all the all the all

the narratives and all the all the

issues that you're that you're well

aware of. Um, so I think it's 50-50 and

then by the way there will be like the

mother of all court challenges following

this you know because this is going to

get litigated and then there's going to

be all the specific you know I mean the

number of people I know who are like

figuring out all kinds of advanced

maneuvers to try to figure out how to

shield their assets. It's amazing. So

there's going to be like all kinds of

crazy

stuff that happens from that. I I don't

know what happens, but I kind of think

this kind kind of goes like I kind of

think it's not even this this one is not

the issue. The the issue is what follows

this one. Um and and so the issue is

what all the other states and cities do.

What else happens in California? And

then I think the big issue is what

happens federally, which is where I

think this is headed. By the way,

Elizabeth Warren has already come out uh

advocating for a 6% annual wealth tax at

the asset tax at the national level.

>> Unrealized gains.

>> Unrealized gains. Unrealized% 6%

>> national level.

>> National level. Uh, and I I believe

Angel. Um, and so that

>> she's such a cook.

>> So that's the that's the opening gambit.

A lot of a fair number of people in

Washington have already signed up for

that. Like I said, the Biden

administration wanted to do this. Like

they they they tried twice. Um, so this

this is not crazy. Like this this is

>> the Biden administration tried this.

>> They tried in 22 to do a federal asset

tax. Um, and for some reason it was it

was during CO and all the craziness and

people weren't paying attention, but

they tried and they got close. Um, and

then they they said in 24 in their

official plan for 25, they said they

were going to do it in 25 if they had

won re-election. And so,

>> well, what would that do to businesses

if they did it on a federal level?

>> It's everything we've been Yeah. I just

Yeah. You know, nice farm you have here.

We're going to take 6% a year until it's

all gone. Nice house you own.

>> But what's the endgame, though? This is

what doesn't make any sense.

>> Fairness. Fairness.

>> Fairness.

>> A complete

dissolving of massive businesses is

fairness.

>> Yeah.

>> I mean that.

>> And then what happens? How where do you

get your iPhone?

>> Well, what actually happens is everybody

gets poor. I mean, what what actually

happens is everybody gets poor, but that

of course that's not the sales pitch.

So,

>> good lord.

>> I know things are getting sporty.

>> Sorry. I did not mean to come in here

and be a little black raincloud. That

wasn't my

>> Well, then also there's a problem that

We people look at what's going on right

now with the Republicans, the

the the Iran war, which is extremely

unpopular, very unpopular. I mean I mean

what is it polling at now? It's

something like low 30% of people that

think it's a good idea.

>> So the Democrats come along, you know,

and they win in 2028. And then you have

these ideas pushed forward because

people want something different than

what you have now.

>> Y

>> and then it just opens the door to this

stuff.

>> Yeah. Yeah. I mean look this is playing

out in the UK right now. Um so you know

the the UK government just blew up. Um

so the K carrier Starmer is the prime

minister a very very so in this

direction like he's got AOC Mumani sort

of style politics. Um he just he just

blew up under because actually because

an Epstein because an Epste scandal

catalyzed it but he just blew up and so

he said he's stepping down. There are

four candidates for UK prime minister to

replace him. All of them are to the left

of him.

>> Oh boy.

>> And so um there and you know same thing

is happening in France, same thing is

happening in Germany. Um you know so

there's a yeah there's something in the

water um that's pushing uh in this

direction and then yeah and then you

have to

>> so what what could be done to counter

this? I mean you have obviously the

narrative has to change. people have to

understand what the ramifications of

these things are, what the repercussions

are.

>> Yeah. And then look, I I think you have

to and and again, this is where I have I

have a lot like I I'm still I'm still

I'm still extremely optimistic about the

US specifically and and and here's the

reason is because I I would imagine

anybody who's listening to this is like

you know there's two two ways to listen

to everything we've been saying which is

oh this these guys are out of touch and

d the other way to think about it is I

own a home. I own a small business. I

own a store. I own a farm. I want to you

know I want to leave something to my

kids and they're going to come and take

it. And so I I think that like

inherently that's a bad that's a bad

sales pitch. And so I I think as that

becomes clear like this just isn't this

isn't because right because specifically

right now it's only in California and

everybody just kind of thinks

California's crazy anyway. But I think

as this becomes a national issue I mean

my expectation would be people take a

look at it. They're like oh that clearly

is leading in a direction I don't want

to see it. And then like I said and then

as they think through the implications

of like okay guess what like they're

going to be coming and looking at my

wife's jewelry. Like

>> do you think that things like this that

they have to get this bad before people

get rational that sometimes you need uh

an enemy that's so obvious that people

sort of unite and realize like oh this

is not the direction we want things to

be headed in. Let's figure this out in a

better way.

>> I mean that has happened a lot. I mean

you know that that you know that is that

is a sustained pattern. I mean Eastern

Europe you mentioned that is you know a

lot of people there don't do not hold

any of these ideas because they've

they've been through it. They have the

direct experience. Um, you know, yeah,

these things are easier to, you know,

these things are easier to kind of not

think about hard if they're not right in

your face. Um, yeah, there's that. But

again, like I said, it's just, you know,

look, the US has had multiple Oh, okay.

1948, 1948. Uh, so, um, 1944, uh, the,

uh, vice president of the United States

almost became a guy named Henry Wallace,

who was an actual communist. Um, who was

an actual actual actual communist, like

an actually like in league with the