Lemonade Stand - The 2028 Presidential Draft | Ep. 022 Lemonade Stand 🍋

Episode Date: July 30, 2025

On this week's show... Atrioc looks into the future, DougDoug doesn't talk about AI, and Aiden gives out more "financial advice". We launched a Patreon! - https://www.patreon.com/lemonadestand for bonus episodes, discord access, a book club, and many more ways to interact with the show! Episode: 22 Recorded on: July 29th, 2025 Clips Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCurXaZAZPKtl8EgH1ymuZgg Audio Listeners can hear us: Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0Yz44z9z3t8VQu4WRmsrs6 Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/lemonade-stand/id1799868725 Amazon: https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/7d7e1f54-49a3-4082-81e8-f70bfe1ace63/lemonade-stand iHeart: https://www.iheart.com/podcast/269-lemonade-stand-269417962/ Follow us TikTok - https://www.tiktok.com/@thelemonadecast Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/thelemonadecast/ Twitter - https://x.com/LemonadeCast The C-suite Aiden - https://x.com/aidencalvin Atrioc - https://x.com/Atrioc DougDoug - https://x.com/DougDougFood Edited by Aedish - https://x.com/aedishedits Produced by Perry - https://x.com/perry_jh Segments 0:00 Topics 01:58 Our Republican Picks 17:06 The Democrat Picks 36:58 Other candidates 43:01 EU Trade Deal 57:24 Microsoft Contract Drama 1:13:02 The UK is Failing 1:24:08 Billionaires are Changing New takes on Business, Tech, and Politics. Squeezed fresh every Thursday. #lemonadestand #dougdoug #atrioc #aiden Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Need a vehicle that isn't afraid to make a splash? That's the Volkswagen Taos. Capable and confident, the Volkswagen Taos is fit for everyday life. Nimble in traffic, agile and tight spots, and still spacious enough for weekend getaways. While available 4-motion all-wheel drive gives confidence in rain and snow. The capable Taos, you deserve more confidence. Visit vw.ca to learn more. SuvW, German engineered for all.

presents Laura versus fruit flies. Swarming your fruit and terrorizing your kitchen. These little freaks multiply at a rate that would make a rabbit say, yo, chill. But Laura shopped on Amazon and saved on cleaning spray, countertop wipes, and fly traps. Hey, fruit flies, your baby boom ends here. Save the Every Day with Amazon. There's something else here now. Something new. From, exclusively on Paramount Plus, it's the series Stephen King

calls scary as hell. Everything here is impossible, but it's also real. Sci-fi vision calls it the best show streaming right now. We're running out of time and we still don't know the rules. Don't miss what the movie blog calls something you need to watch.

Saving those children is how we all go home. From, binge all episodes, on Paramount Plus. Oh, Jesus Christ. Come to a lemonade, and everybody. How's it going? I would...

Did somebody just crash their car in your fucking barrier, dude? No, they superped up ready to the news. Oh my fucking God, dude. We killed a couple patrons there. If we kill a few patrons

for a great product, I'm willing to do that. Anyone who's killed me. You got a heart attack, dude. I'm too old for this. that's wild. Don't shuffle your papers like you're a newscaster after you said

to kick it off. Ladies gentlemen, welcome to lemonade stand. Today we have a lot of big topics for you including who's going to be the leader of this great nation. Yes. We're going to talk about who the Democrats and Republicans and

maybe Elon Musk's America party. Who they're going to put up in 2028. We're also going to talk about some open AI drama. Yeah. It's spicy. It is spicy. It's not about AI.

really, it's funny business drama. You have to clarify, it's not AI. I swear. It's funny business. It's, it's AI is the setting. It's like AI Island. You don't know there for the island. You're there for the weird drama.

I wasn't on the island. It's not always love on love island. And then you have, what was your topic, Aidan? Oh, just a little, little adventure. Oh, yeah, it's about how the UK is screwed. Into why the UK is fucked. And I also want to talk about the US-EU trade deal,

which doesn't include the UK, because they left. So we got a lot of topics today, but the big one is the reason we have props for the first time. We each brought in secret our picks for the Republicans and the Democrats in 2028. And the reason I'm bringing this up now, even though we're three years away, is because they're already making moves in both parties. Democrats are going to swing states like South Carolina. Republicans are going to Ohio. They're all starting to get the feelers out or beginning to say the right things.

And I saw, I think we'll kick off with Republicans because I think it's more clear. your cut there. If you can pull up the polymarket, Perry, this is the current. I think don't spoil it. Don't spoil it. You don't want to know? I don't want to know yet.

I want to see what you guys picked first. What are the polymarket ons on the wig party coming back? Oh, that's a good question. And we should set the stakes. For those of know, Polymarket is an online crypto betting website, which has like blown up in popularity the last few years and is now considered one of the sources of truth for the state of politics.

That's state of affairs. Well, no, okay. No, there's an actual reason for this, because typically people go off polls and polls are in some ways like opinion based or very like selective you have some pollster who goes out into some community and gets a poll and they're like

based off these 50 people I talk to in Iowa this is what the country thinks and then the benefit of polymarket is people are putting money on this right so there's a stronger incentive to like really believe that you think your guy is going to win if you're putting a million down on this person right so there is it's not that it is the truth

but it tends to have a little more like weight to it That's why that got to put $100 grand on Jesus Christ coming back this year. He believed. That guy at church is the true believer. Yeah, you're correct. And this happened in the last election where Polymark it was more accurate than polling. A lot of polling was saying Kamala was just going to crush it or it was really even. And Polymarket uniquely was like, no, Trump has like an 80% or something.

Yeah, was ahead of the game on Trump winning. Way, way, way, way ahead. In fact, somebody in France made a life-changing amount of money betting on Trump early because he did his own poll. you know, if you poll someone and ask them who they're going to vote for, it was pretty even. But if you ask them who they thought their neighbor was going to vote for, 80% said Trump. Most people said Trump. And he's like, all right, I'm going all in. And he went all in on Trump when it was flat.

He made millions. It was crazy. So anyway, Pine Market, we're going to be using that today to see the rough betting odds on who's leading. But I guess we could start with our picks. If you got, if you think, I was going to do the safe picks first and then go to us. Oh, oh, oh, okay to see who's the real. Because this is early. Yeah, it's true.

That's true. Unless you really, okay, hit Polymarket. Let's take a pink in the front of the market. So we'll start at the bottom. Um, well,

there's only really three candidates here. There's only three really in the running. Can you hover that green line, Perry? That's Ron Zed. Donald Trump in the running. I see four. I see a fourth guy.

So does Santa is rolling? This is pulling lower than Donald Trump's third term. Okay. Those are our four options. People have put money into this. There are, it looks like what, $170,000 put on Donald Trump being the president. We're laughing now. Obviously, we're laughing now and we'll see that number spike.

Okay. Now, one thing is certain is that these numbers will be wrong. I'm also certainly, if you look at all the polymarkets from way before elections up to now, they changed so dramatically. Famously, the Canadian election was completely flipped entirely. Australian election flipped entirely. Like, things will change a lot in three years. But the current front runners are Ron DeSantis. Donald Trump's third term, Marco Rubio,

and in a clear lead, J.D. Vance. Jaddy Vance is currently dominating the field and hasn't really changed months. In fact, when they asked Marco Rubio if he was considering running, he politely said, no, no, no, Vance is going to be a great candidate. Really? However, Nikki Haley, I believe,

or maybe it was Laurelumer. Sorry, I'm mixing up Republican women. I think Laura Lumer. She said she was very confident that closer to 28, the infighting is going to start. People are going to start sniping for their seats. Like they're going to start making moves. But right now it's way too early to rock the boat.

Interesting. So those are what the betting market says, but we're smarter than that here on lemonade stand. Yeah. And worryingly, given that disasters happen shortly after us talking about them, one of these candidates is probably in trouble. Well, if one of us listening while driving, they're probably madame up.

You just killed a policy. Desantis drives into a median living here. To our FBI, this is a joke. And Xi Jinping, please let us send to China. This is a joke. We do not kill politicians. I would love to hear your pick. I don't know. I want to start with Aden. Aiden, I want to start with Aden. Aiden, who is your surprise pick for 2028 Republicans? For the Republican nomination? I believe the first person I have on my list. Well, you're going to flip your thing, right? You have a list. Wait, did I flip my thing? This is your, it. You show it. You show it. The red is your vote. Oh. I didn't know. I thought this was a whiteboard and I was going to have to write it. No.

No, of course. It's printed. Well, well, well, would you look at presumably Marco Rubio? Marco Rubio. Okay. I think he was just my best guess. He was your best guest. Why do you put him above Vance?

I think Vance doesn't make it through the next three years. Not in a nominee. Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. I didn't mean in a liver-on-eye scenario. The secret service is covered to your house. No, no, no, no, no, no. That's not what I meant. That's not what I meant.

Hold on. Is it not what I meant? FBI who's still listening. They've already clicked off. They're in the car driving your house right now. It's just not what I'm mad. You said it so confidently. No, Rubio seems like the more

maybe normal or reasonable candidate of the two to me. I'm raising my hand. Yes. We live in the United States of America. What makes you think we're going to get a normal or reasonable candidate? That's a priority at all the voters.

Well, and I like his hair. For audio listeners, Aiden is holding the poster board, looking at it himself. We can't see it. The camera can't see. He's just admiring Marco Rubio. You do a good job, nice haircut. In all, I, look, in all seriousness, I think that J.D. Vance strikes me as somebody who lacks the RIS necessary to have the top position.

He doesn't carry the same authority or weight. that I think Trump has been able to command through his past two campaigns. I think a lot of people sort of lean in the direction of tolerating him rather than liking him. Right. I don't think people's feelings about him are necessarily super aligned with his actions,

at least on the Republican side. And I mainly think that he is more likely to be tied to lack of success or controversy in the next three years while also lacking that charisma. Whereas I remember when Marco Rubio was campaigning in the Republican primary in 2016, and I remember him being one of the people that stood out a bit more among that group.

And I also think he's in a position within the current administration to be less controversial to that base. So that's why he was my pick. I feel like the opposite, so, you know, again, I'm not deeply knowledgeable at the Republican stuff. my knowledge largely comes from people on Twitter saying stuff because I just get fed a lot of that. And the perception seems to be Jady is in line with Trump.

And so for the hardcore Trump believers, that's their man. Like he will be the successor, the natural one. And like, you feel that that's the perception that people have. That is the perception that I have seen from tweets when I'm surfaced random, you know, Marjorie Taylor Green type people who are like, love what J.D. Vance is doing. And I think the thing that differentiates him from Rubio, Rubio, again, seemingly is considered to be more competent and is like running stuff more effectively. J.D. Vance is more like mouthpiece for Trump, but in a way that really aligns with like the base.

And in theory, that's kind of what you want as the president, right? It's just, or at least that's what you want if you're trying to win. Is somebody who can just like talk well and go on talk shows. And like his whole thing in the run up to the campaign is he would just go on talk shows and just go into like confrontational environments and just hold his own, depending on how you view that. How you view it. We just did that over and over where Rubio, Rubio feels like a more boring, like get the job done type of person to the right. J.D. Moore feels like, yeah, he's another Trump fan. You know, they didn't beef back in 2016. Fair. I think that's fair. I will say, like, you brought up Riz. Yeah. I don't know that Vance has what Trump has. And I think there's a fair case to me. I read an article where he's about Ruffington's 2028 problem, which is just that if Trump doesn't run, he has been the one unique, unique.

of all these different groups. I think like the tech ride, for example, is way more amenable to J.D. Vance than perhaps like the Bannon right, that kind of, you know, I think they're less excited about him. And I think Trump has been the uniter and his like unique brand of,

I don't know, he's goofy, he's funny sometimes. He's, he's appealing to a lot of people. I don't know that Vance has that in the same way, even if he says the same lines. I also think it's worth mentioning, man, he just seems to come off to me at least, and obviously this is biased, but he comes off as someone that will say anything for power.

But I think most people, because he did, you know, in 2016, say all this terrible stuff about Trump, compared him to Hitler. He said he's, uh, you know, he makes people around me afraid. And then he's now he's the biggest pirate supporter. I have some,

some images that I sense, Perry. But like, this is him in 2021 saying like, we have to release the epistle. files. Why would any government hide it? If you're a journalist, you're not asking questions about this case. You should be ashamed of yourself. And then I have a follow-up question of him talking about

Wall Street Journal, asking questions about the case being like, what the fuck? This is bullshit. You shouldn't be, you shouldn't be, but what you should be doing? You know, it just feels like he is a bit of a chameleon. Yeah, he's a comedian. I mean, even within the scope of the current presidency, he's flip-flopped on a bunch of stuff which feels like the type of person who is

less likely to riz his way into the position. Maybe that's exactly why he'll win. It's quite possible. He's willing to just go with the tide. Yeah. I mean, he let, you know,

going into the election, he was like, absolutely you should not pardon any January 6th protester who was violent. Ben Trump pardons them all. And it's like, and then he just didn't say anything. So it's like he seems to be willing to just bite his tongue whenever something like goes against him. He's very little finger.

I don't like it. But I think that's, that is probably a winning thing. when it comes to a bunch of people. And he is leading. And I do think if they held it now, he would win. You know. I do think one funny thing in the context of this conversation is Trump,

the idea of Trump running for a third turn is just a thing that we've, we passively accept as possible. Do you know, it's not like impossible that he would do it, but the idea that like he would get up on stage and announce it is not crazy to me. It's not even considered that crazy. Yeah. It's not crazy enough for 5% of people to be putting money on it. Which brings me to my pick.

I don't think Trump will run for third term. I think this entirely new guy... This entirely new upstart out of the nowhere character. This looks to me like a picture of Donald Trump with a mustache. No, this is an entirely new guy. This is Donald Trump, but he's going to help us get some of the Latino vote. And he's a he's a character. charismatic, suave.

What? Oh, Mike, sorry. I'm like, yeah. Sorry, I move right here. So this guy is going to make sure we don't have any constitutional crisis with a third term of the same president. We're going to have an entirely new guy that still keeps the Republican unity, but with a dashing mustache along the way. This is my semi-sincere pick other than the mustache. I literally think Trump is going to consider it as they get closer, if there's in fighting.

You think he's genuinely going to consider putting on a mustache, bro. Yeah. That's what you're genuinely considering. Wouldn't be the craziest thing of American politics. No, I don't think it put on a mustache. I'm keeping open the idea of a Trump third term being floated. If he wasn't old, I think he would do it guarantee. He might actually just be too old.

You might, by the end of this, not have the stamina or whatever to do it. But if he was like a Sprite 71, I think he would do it in a heartbeat in 28. Okay, that leads to my pick. Okay. It relates to the youth. So I was thinking about it, some of the most influential political. politicians are ones who left their lifelong party, right? Think about, like, if you sacrifice everything to leave your party, it shows a genuine desire for your beliefs, right? And so you're

willing to lose everything for it. RFK Jr., lifelong Democrat, massively a Democrat, his whole family, right? He leaves the Democrats because he's frustrated, eventually joins with Trump. They win the election. Trump himself, lifelong Democrat. Right. Leaves has now won two parties. That's why, whose best position to leave the Democrats, who has a huge base of support, is capturing the hearts and minds of the youth. That's right. Joe Biden. Imagine, okay, fresh off the Hunter Biden interview,

everybody's got fresh empathy for him. It was humanizing, and we all love him as a dad. He's America's dad. He'll have just beaten cancer. I've never heard Joe Biden referred to as America's dad. That's what they called during his term. That's what they called. That's what he called.

We were all saying it. I think this is our man. Joe Biden, but more Republican and more old. That is what people want. That's what America's been wanting. He is younger. Wait, is he younger than Trump? No, he's older.

He's older. He's like a month or something. They're both around. They're both pretty old. He's got a year on a year two. I just, just so you guys are aware, he's eligible to run. Unlike Trump, he can go for another term. Dude, he's not eligible for like any regular job in the workforce, but he's

eligible to run again. He couldn't get his forklift certification. But he can lift his. country up in the Republican Party. This is my president. Dude, it would be, it would be funny if he ran and somehow got the nomination

just to see everyone have to delete the old Joe Biden's tweets in the moment. Yep, yep. Yeah. What if, okay, what if he just, what if it was just a bad cold? Oh, he's actually like, he's doing great.

He just needed to take some things. He just had a bad head cold for like four years. All right, well, that's my pick. I think, you know, while Joe Biden is my dark horse, probably JD. Do you think we'd have a revolution

if we got the same election again Biden Trump? They just flipped. Dude, I would. I think, if they just flipped, they ran again. I did,

if they did that, I stormed the capital. I think I'm storming the capital. That would be the breaking point. Oh, let's do if you were meet and greet at the capital. On the January 6th. Inside of Pelosi's office.

Guys, just come on out. We're peacefully open the windows with a break. We're just some boys, and we're just some boys. proud boys and girls proud boys and girls that's good uh all right jo Biden so Joe Biden Trump in a mustache and Marco Rubio this is a dream team. Wow and what a lineup right now

can the Democrats counter that let's find out can you bring up the pot market for the Democrats this is a more dude I have such competitive field in fourth place Andy Bashir 7.4% I don't know when he got that spike around uh early July or late July. You had a big spike. I think that's when he went to South Carolina and did like a little bit of like, Andy heads were going crazy. Andy has a lot crazy. Pete Buttigieg flat at 12% AOC at 16%. And our co-host, our, our good friend and co-host is the current frontrunner for the Democratic president's you know, I have a criticism for your co-host. Every time he gets interviewed and they ask him if he's going to run, he gives the most annoying answer possible.

What would you know about interviewing Gavin Newsom? I'm sorry, we have two experts here. You know how like a coach sees a game from the sidelines. The thing is, when you're in his gaze, it's hard to focus. You can't think. Yeah, he does. He's obviously running. In fact, he says some line.

I'm trying to remember what I know you're talking about. He says some fucking stupid line where he's like, I think he literally said like, it would be the greatest honor if I could serve the people, but I, you know, I'm focused on what I'm doing now. It's just almost, he drops like two paragraphs that leave you with, okay, so yes or no. Yeah, but it's yes, because it would be a no. Yes.

No, I think he literally said recently, he was like, I'm not considering it, but it's not off the table, which means you are considering. Yeah, that doesn't mean anything, you know? So anyway, Gavin Newsom, to anyone's even untrained eye, he's very obviously angling for the presidency. see. He's doing a lot of out of California. Well, you guys know, you guys would know.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. He mentioned to me off pod, actually. Off pot. He was talking. Off pot. He mentioned that to you. He was like, yeah, president. Very close book. I will say this, despite being close personal friends with him after that interview. I am hesitant in his ability to be a broad America-wide popular candidate. I get the feeling that most people look at Gavin Newsom and see nice hair,

Smarmy California politician. Yeah. And I don't think he can overcome that. He, I think the stain of California bad is too big right now. Yeah. There is just a very pervasive idea that, you know, without diving into the nuance of why or why not, it might not be true. That California is one of the worst places in the country right now.

Yeah. And it's just this thing in political and popular culture. And he is directly. tied to it. And I don't, I don't think I've ever looked at an interview with him on YouTube where the comments are really supportive at all. Even medium. Because from a California perspective, right, there's a lot of people who are much more left-leaning in California who fucking hate Gavin Newsom. Right. And then the people on the right don't like Gavin Newsom. Yeah. So it feels like a path to disaster from my perspective. Feels like a path to doing the exact same thing

the Democrats normally do is slightly younger but the same thing. Right. It feels like if you're kind of like Democrat establishment, you're like, of these four, you're like, yes, Gavin Newson. That being said, I don't know who Andy Bershaw is. Bashir. Bashir. I don't know what that is. I've only heard this guy's name. I actually don't know. I can't put the name to the face

right now. I can't, but I don't know much about Bashar. I mean, I feel like I'm failing the podcast as the political expert. Yeah, I'm actually failing this. He was. It's crazy how you pulled up the photo and actually didn't help me at all. He was one of the frontrunners to be, Kamala's VP. Oh.

Governor of Kentucky. Look at that. I don't know much. He's like he's got that Republican cred. I understand. He's like, you know, he's in a red state,

but he's blue. Oh, is it kind of the Bill Clinton vibe where you're... A little bit southern charm, a little bit of, I can be bipartisan. I don't think he has risen anyway, but he's got that going for him.

Aiden. Who's your pick? My pick. I want to hear your pick. It's surprising to not see this person in the list. I didn't see them on the list at all. That is weird. It was interesting to me.

Because I feel like she still has so much further to fly. Are you, is it cool? Oh. It's Nancy Pelosi. I thought you for sure we're saying. Doug, it is time for this chick to leave the nest. Nancy Pelosi. Check the age.

real quick. An old age check on Nancy Pelosi. Currently 85. So we're at risk 90. When we're... Risk 90. Born in 1940 during World War II. A wealth of experience to bring to the table. Yes.

She's helped us fight Hitler. Every important she was there for Hitler and she's here for Trump. She's here. She's combated every issue of our time. Dude, she was legitimate. You know, at a personal level, I'd let her log into my Robin Hood account any day.

Dude, get her in the White House, let her manage our fund, our national sovereign wealth fund. Just let her go hog while with it. Incredible. Get nuts, Nancy. Nancy Pelosi. Imagine with her at the wheel of a sovereign wealth fund that we all get a little, little squee in. Dude, it's infinite money. Every, like, Fox News host that makes a living off of, like, ribbing, whoever the Democratic nominee is,

you literally have like, it's like COVID for streamers. You just made them, you just made them so much money. I think that's an important thought. Think about all the job growth in the right wing media sector. She was elected. Pelosi was the candidate. It would be unreal. Everybody,

everybody would have a job. It would be unreal. That'd be awesome. That's a good pick. You want me to go next? Yeah. Okay. For the 22nd.

My pick. Democratic. I think Democrats need someone different. They need someone with broad appeal. They need someone with a little bit of Riz. And they need someone who in four years is going to have some free time. Ladies and gentlemen. LeBron James.

LeBron James' NBA career is about to wrap up. Mine is serious, by the way. I have a bitch in Canada. Mine's serious too. I love LeBron James. He's my goat. He's better than Jordan. What better way to prove that?

Not with another meaningless basketball stat, but by becoming the president of the United States. Becoming the president of the United States, LeBron James, I think is what the Democrats need. Shut up and dribble? No. Shut up and vote. Wow.

His VP, Ronnie. This is crazy because I feel like I, so I made a full list of candidate ideas. Yeah. Okay. He was on mine. He's on your list. He was also on mine. But you know, if you go on the polymarket and you scroll down enough, not even that much.

LeBron's on there. He's there. He unironically could poll. He could do great. I mean, the other one. I tell you what, he'd do better than Stephen A. Smith. People make that joke all the time. I actually agree.

If they write hand to head, I think, I'm sorry, I don't know, maybe you're on the wrong thing, but the other person on there that's not talked about, both Republicans and Democrats,

the other person on both Paul America list is Dwayne the Rock Johnson, who is a, is a, is a dark horse candidate for both parties. He's actually going to be

at the forefront, the wig party, the wig's revival. Right, the way needs to put on a wig. He does. He does. He's going to have a big.

Ball joke. Let's go. Let's go. All right, Doug, who's your pick for the DNC in 2028? This is a real one. I really think this would be the best pick for the Democratic Party. Now I'm starting to doubt that it's a real. No, it is real.

You've said it so many times. You've said it so many times. All right. What I'm trying to do is let the listeners know, look, some of us actually took this seriously, okay? Are you fucking kidding? What's not serious about this? What's not serious about this pick?

What's not serious about this pick? Wall Street Journal put out a poll, okay? And right now, like right now, the Democrats are the least favorable they've ever. been. They're like people dislike the Democrats more than they've ever been disliked in 30 years. The Democratic Party is underwater. The Republicans are not, they don't have a favorable rating, but it's still way better than the Democrats.

So you have a fundamental problem with the Democratic Party where even a quote I liked was the Democratic brand is so bad that they don't have the credibility to be a critic of Trump or the Republican Party. You've got to fundamentally change the image of the Democrats. That's why, boom, Mark Cuban. Mark Cuban. Okay. you might think, what, that's a little weird.

Okay, first off, the Democrats, they're trying to get traditional masculinity back on, right? That's their big thing. They lost men. They lost Gen Z men. They lost millennial men. He's traditional mastian, right? He's big into sports. He loves the Steelers.

He's like, you know, he's your traditional kind of more manually guy on the shark tank, right? Yeah. Next, non-establishment candidate, right? The reason Trump is so successful right now and people are so averse to somebody like Gavin Newsom, they're sick of the institutional kind of rot of the political party. You can see it in this, right? He comes from outside. He's not like a hardcore Democrat. He considers himself independent, right? He's really popular with independents. Okay. Again, everybody hates the Democrats. If he comes in and he says, I'm a billionaire businessman, like Trump did, I can handle the economy. One of the things in this Wall Street Journal article is they say that even though people don't like Trump's tariffs, they don't like the way he's handling the economy. They still trust the Republicans to handle the economy more than Democrats. So there's a perception, even with how much they dislike Trump.

The country broadly thinks Republicans will handle finances and business and economy better. You counteract that with Mark Cuban. You say, look, this is a billionaire businessman. This is somebody you've seen on TV all this time. He's got that big brand. He's well known just like Trump. He's got that big, you know, he had the Mavericks. Not only did he own the Mavericks, and everybody loves him for that because he won the championship with his NBA team.

Because of that, he could win Texas for the Democrats. Think about that. Unironically smart, right? I think before they lost Lucas. Texas, I would not have traded Luca. That's what he says. He says stuff like that. Everybody loved him. Okay, check out this story. He's good at PR. He's like brash in a likable way. In a nationally publicized incident in 2002, he criticized the NBA league's manager of officials, Ed T. Rush, saying he wouldn't be able to manage a dairy queen.

Dairy Queen's management took offense to Cubans comments and invited him to manage a dairy queen restaurant for a day. Mark Cuban accepted the invitation, worked at a day, worked for a day at a Dairy Queen in Colbelle, Texas, where fans lined up to get a blizzard from the owner of the matter for it's exactly how trump this is like the reverse trump playbook he has a show like the apprentice but his shark tank yes he's a billionaire okay he's doing the brash stuff he actually wants to run he he he he commissioned polls in 2020 that showed he would get 25% of the vote the only reason he didn't is because his family vetoed it that's what he said and so if his family this would be eight years past that point is like hey mark you're good to go now we're off in college or whatever he gets to go

do it uh he's not too old he's 66 but by the time he's running when he's 69 that's you young enough to get the boomers on board, but not so old that he'll die. That's, that's super young. He supports transparency in health care through cost of drugs, fiscally conservative. He's pro-crypto. I don't like crypto, but a lot of young men like crypto. Again, if your things you're hemorrhaging young men, this is the man to take you back. This guy will bring all the men into one tent, one big sweaty blue tent together. They're going to say a whole tent. I genuinely think this is such a smart pick. Tell me I'm wrong. Doug, you might be wrong. What?

That's such a smart pick. Sorry. Sorry. And I say this as a political expert on this show. Give me, I'll pose a question. Do you think this is a smart pick to win? Or do you think this is a smart pick for the United States? Both.

Because, you know, we could argue, say that there's no, maybe we completely transform the election process, right? And we want somebody in power who's going to do the best job possible in terms of the actual, like, day-to-day decisions and direction we're pushing in. I feel like it's probably, some quiet guy or woman who doesn't want to run. That's what I'm saying. So that's what I'm saying.

Do you just see this as a path to winning more than, but or do you think the answer is more? I think even of the people who have a realistic path to winning, he then would govern. So there's like, I actually looked into his policies to get curious about this. He's like fiscally conservative, but he wants to increase taxes on wealthy and big corporations

while minimizing them on small families, small businesses. Yeah. Like big focus on small business, but he still obviously has enough experience to get, big business, big tech on board because he's been involved with that. In healthcare, that's like a big thing he's pushed for. If you've heard of cost plus drugs, this company he runs, that's all about transparency and healthcare. So he has like concrete ideas and a track record to

help fix the healthcare system, make it more affordable, make like super poor people be able to actually like stuff even if they're uninsured. So I think he actually has legitimate, likable, well, reasonable policies that are broadly appealing to both bases. Yes. Okay. The two directions that I was pulled in here are, one, an immediate revulsion to the idea that another TV personality billionaire is going to be the next president of the United States. Yeah. I feel like that is something that we need to get away from. It feels like a movement in the direction of... Idiocracy. Like Linda McMahon being the head of the Department of Education. What are we doing here? You know? But pulling back a bit and thinking about stuff that I've heard Mark Cuban...

say or Mark Cuban advocate for. I'm not sure how appealing a billionaire is going to be, even at the surface level, to a huge portion of the left in this country, or at least the Democrats in this country. But I feel like everything I've seen him say publicly about things like taxes, health care, in like social direction of the country all feel pretty progressive. And this is, you know, I'm open to hearing quotes of how maybe he says

we should, you know, billionaires should pay lower taxes and I didn't see that. No, he explicitly says, he explicitly says raise taxes on me, like taxes on the wealthy should pay for a bunch of social services that we do not have in the United States. All of these things that I think are personally important.

Yeah. I think those, and he seems to stand behind that. So I guess, my open question of people listening is, besides the fact that he just is a billionaire straight up, how many things has he said publicly that don't seem like they would be moving us in a better direction?

I don't actually think this is a great pick, but I do think that there is an interesting, like getting past my first like five, 10 second reaction, there's something interesting here. Yeah, I mean, what I'll say is, you know, we're scrolling this list of options. This is all, it's a bad group. I'm saying in terms of like,

I guess what I'll say is for the almost all the elections of my lifetimes, has I been able to vote? Most people have felt like we've had two bad choices. They felt pretty bad. So of this low bar, I actually think Mark Kuhman's fine. Like I think he can hang with everybody that he could, you know,

him and Biden, I don't feel like, oh, I'm so leading for Biden or Kamala. I'm so leaning for, like he's, I would pick him over either of those two actually. There's a big problem that I see.

that you alluded to at the beginning. And the next two people below Gavin Newsom were AOC and Pete Buttigieg. And I think the problem right now, because the approval is so low, this applied to Gavin, but applies to everybody else, is anybody that is tied to the Democratic Party

in the past five to ten years feels like they have to overcome a massive hurdle in order to get accepted into the position. Like I think AOC and Buttigieg might be decent options functionally, but my faith in their ability to win is actually rather low because of their association to the party at large. The only person I can even think of that has a commanding place in, let's say, left-wing politics in the United States that I think could overcome this is Bernie. And the reason I say that is because there is a strong narrative, even among Republicans, that the Democrats fuck. him the first time. And he's also an independent outside of that. So I don't think he's the guy either because he's just too old and it's too late for his window. But other than Bernie, all of the

people that have had all this democratic politician face time in the last few years, it feels insurmountable for them to become the candidate that everybody likes. And that's the, that's why it feels like this weirdly, Mark Cuban feels more reasonable. And that he's, he's fresh and new. I think you have to go in two directions, either for to the left to somebody like AOC, or I guess like more center, but with an outsider, and that's what Cuban would represent.

And so I have to go one of those two. You can't, yeah, yeah. If I wanted to win, I would campaign, you know, whether I'm Mark or whoever, I would definitely take a piece out of Trump's playbook

and campaign on a populist message. I think right now you have to take like a hard left populist message to, to win in, in some way. You know, whether or not that all of the messaging that goes along with that is 100% the solution

to every problem. But I think the path to winning has something to do with Trump took populism in a bad time and won with it and the other side needs to do the same. And I don't think the Democrats, no matter who it is at the moment, really represent the everyday man.

I think there's two routes this goes and depending on that is how you're going to pick your candidate. So there's the first route, which is that things mostly hold up okay over the next three years and the Democrats need to pick somebody who's a little safer who can pull over some center-right Republicans.

There's another route where things get so bad over the next three years. Democrats are almost guaranteed to win. And in that case, you want to pick a candidate who's a little more, I don't know, exciting or progressive

or different because this is your chance to make, you can get real change fast. You can make really big changes. Because you're almost guaranteed to win because the economy or job or whatever so bad that you're just going to win by default, which is kind of, to be honest,

what Trump sort of had this last election, that people were so mad about inflation, he was kind of running with a huge wind at his back. There's a real chance that happens again. And so there's a chance you could waste this opportunity by picking someone super safe or there's a chance where it's a close relation, you need to pick somebody who's like more broadly appealing. I don't know what's going to be.

I don't know. I've no idea. We're three years on. It could be an AOC or it could be a Mark Cuban. I really don't know. me, we preface, this conversation is more for fun than anything, right? Because so much can change between and now. It will change. Speak for yourself. I'm a political expert. Fair enough. Fair enough. Political expert, Doug. I mean, think about how much happened in the last three years.

It's insane. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, a lot will change. If you have your own suggestions or picks. What I'll say is like, I feel there's a pretty strong chance that we get a Mark Cuban or LeBron type figure. Not to this degree necessarily, but somebody who's kind of like a popular. brand because I feel I don't see us moving away from that. Mr. Beast? Mr. Beast. Mr. Beast. I'm not saying I like that, but it feels like it'd be hard to move away from that after that's dominated the conversation for 12 years and you've seen how utterly, ruthlessly

efficient Trump has been with like utilizing that. Last to leave the White House gets a million dollars. That would be a banger video. Do you want to hear my other? Oh yeah. And also, not chat, sorry. Viewers. please leave your comments on who you think

might be a great Dark Horse candidate who you think's gonna win. I wanna read them. I'm excited. It's interesting. Well, I think it's tough to say what party some of these guys would run for. It's just challenging.

So I've just kind of put a party on them. Like I've taken a guess as to like who would be the best fit. So for the Republican party, I have Jeff Teague. Jeff Teague. Yeah, yeah. The basketball podcaster. Jeff Teague, the basketball podcaster?

You think you'd run for Republicans? Yeah, probably a Republican. Is he a billionaire? Otherwise, I'm not interested. Okay, not a billionaire. Cross him off the list. I have the corpse of Lee Kuan Yew. Feels like it could go in either direction.

God willing. God willing. I'd vote for it. So this is actually, this guy's his own party. He'd be bringing something else to the table. Shee Jinping. Xi Jinping. Are you imagining that he sort of does a flip like Biden might do for the Republicans?

or that he merges? He just continues running for the CCP but in the United States and that he just sees how the cards fall. Yeah. I have Elizabeth Warren. Would we happen to her? Would China become the 51st state

or would we become a new province of China? Probably a province in that case. It doesn't really seem like it would go the other way around. Yeah, I get a lot of votes. Like that's, that's. And then my last pick, forgive me here,

Gerben Gouli, Burden Mu, Hamido. Burbin, Jew, Hamadow. Did you make up somebody? Imagine your friend? No, this is the guy who used to be the president of Turkmenistan, and there's that video of him riding a horse in a pre-planned race that he got to win every year. And then he, on the final stretch of the horse race, faceplants into the ground in front of everyone, and is knocked out cold.

And then they pick him up off the track, delete all the video of the event, 30 minutes in silence the arena sits. and then he walks back out and then they just carry on as if he won and they award him a medal. And then they had all of the journalists delete the footage off their phone. That makes me think,

I think a good candidate would be Coney 2012. Is that guy, is Coney alive? Happened to that guy. Tony 28. I mean, you said the corpse of Lee Kuan Hughes. Oh, yeah, that's true. That's not a prerec for you. Actually, I didn't said that pre-reg, you're right, you're right.

And then I had a, I had Mitch McConnell, but he, you know what? Dude, this makes me think how we have a country of 300 million and we just, I think we just pick like the worst people. That's pretty bad. You know there's got to be

just some regular person who's like, proud to be an American, works hard. There's probably so many people who are like ultra-competent. Yeah, they would be great. They'd be great. They would do a really good job. They're not psychopaths.

They're not willing to try to be the president. They have to be like built for TV in the media environment and social media and debates. And what if it was like the mass singer? Like we don't, you can't see them and you can't hear them. The mass president? Yeah, but you just like, they submit.

And the Xi Jinping reveals he got us. Submit like a college, an anonymous college essay. And then our college admissions program decide who had the best one. That person is. 300 million chat GPT. Why I should be president. Fuck, yeah. I like this.

I like this. Well, you know, we can talk about campaign reform another time. But one of the big changes I would advocate for. corpses should be allowed. Yeah. I think a weekend at Bernie style. This is the video.

Dude, this shit is crazy, dude. Wait, so we do have the video. So, yes. So how it worked was all of the journalists and visitors that were there at the time got stopped and searched for their like SD cards and cameras, right?

But some people managed to sneak out footage in their bags or pockets or whatever. Like not everybody got stopped. Okay. So he's winning He just face plans And he doesn't move

This is the president of Like a dictator president Of this country right They take him off They make sure he's okay Nobody is sure what to do For 30 minutes And then he just comes back out

And they just all The whole of society Pretends that he won Dude that's So beast That's so beast. And that's the type of the thing that gets, you know,

Gen Z men back to the other part? Yeah, that's what I could win, for sure. Yeah, he's a great horse racers, what I've heard. Yeah. Men get emotional about horses. You see that Nicola? Yonkish clip. That's true. That's our ticket back to that. All right, well, that's our political analysis for 2028.

We pretty much solved it. We'll flash forward in three years and see how correct we were. When it's Joe Biden for the Republicans running against LeBron, James did Democrats. When it's my girl, you're going to be fucking sorry. The one thing we didn't mention, and this is worth mentioning, is by 2028, there could actually be an America party by Elon Musk. I mean, he's making moves to set that up.

He cannot run himself, though Trump can't do a third term. Things can be crazy, but he can't run himself. But his stated goal is to try and win at least one Senate seat so he can be the deciding vote for things and possibly run a presidential candidate for the America party. I don't know if he would run. So Elon Musk can be the decision. decided to vote for things. That well,

that's his party, yeah. Yeah. I think he's gonna run big balls or, or, uh, cat turd or,

like some, he has so many people in the arsenal. Who could run for president, uh, which would be, you know, worth mentioning insane. Because if he did do that,

that would reasonably split the Republican vote, like pretty, yeah, significantly. Are Twitter bots allowed to vote? We're screwed. So, tell us about trade.

What's going on? Yeah, yeah. And I quote a huge W from Donald Trump. I won't say what person on the podcast. Say that exactly? Could have been anything. Who said that off on? It wasn't just his new mustache.

I want to talk about Trump and bullying and trade. I've been pretty negative on his trade policy on this podcast thus far. In that I thought it's been pretty effective, pretty lackluster. But his general stance is...

Pretty ineffective? Sorry, pretty ineffective. Okay. Yeah, pretty ineffective. Pretty lackluster. And pretty damaging. America's trade partnerships and prestige and et cetera and the dollar. However, the core philosophy of it, which is like America has the consumers of the world. We spend a lot of fucking money. You want to shop here,

you got to pay my fee. This kind of like mafia style bullying that he's been doing has been mostly ineffective this far. I want to say with yesterday's announcement of the EU trade deal, I think he got his first in his mind, dub. And I do want to say like it is, The deal is so stacked in America's favor and so bad for Europe that it is impossible not to mention that his system in that way worked for this one. In that they are now paying a across the board. Now, I mean, we have an across the board 50% tariff on all goods from Europe and they have no. 50 or 15? 15. 15. Okay. And they have no tariff on us. Now, normally the problem with the trade war is you put tariffs on them.

They put tariffs back on you. It escalates. It becomes this big problem. Everyone gets poorer. but they have agreed to do nothing. They will, they just bend over and take it and they're gonna buy more natural gas. They're gonna invest money in America. This last part is pretty nebulous. Everyone says this and usually doesn't happen. But there's a 15% tariff on basically all European goods

going in America and, uh, sorry, 15 or 15. 15%. Okay, that's, but on all good. You said 50 the first time and I was like, that's a lot. That'd be insane. No, 15, but, but none on American goods to Europe.

And so, you know, I looked into this. And this is pretty widely agreed. European sources, American sources, to be a very, very one-sided deal. And it's interesting to think about that because Europe as a whole is economically about the same as America. Like they're roughly the same in terms of GDP output. You know, it would be like the China block,

the EU block, and America block are roughly equally economic powerful. However, political power is much more difficult to find in Europe because they are fragmented. This was a negotiation by committee, and they kind of got picked apart, is basically the idea that I'm seeing. In that Trump went in very forcefully and kind of scarily, and they couldn't react fast enough. Now, Canada and China both reacted very forcefully. China responded immediately with counter tariffs. They banned rare earth metals.

They did a lot of things to, like, muscle their way back in the conversation. Same with Canada, which did like American good boycotts and tariffs of their own. Europe was not able to move quickly, and they were very divided internally on how to respond how forcefully. There's a block of like France and Spain that were like, we need to respond incredibly forcefully. We need to do huge tariffs on America. We need to pass. And there's a block of like Germany and Italy that were like, if we get into a trade war, it's really scary for us. We have a lot of manufacturing exports. If they stop buying German cars or whatever, it's going to be terrible for our economy. And because of that, they ended up in a place where they,

They took the easy out that was the less bad option. They took the 15% rather than maybe getting a 40 or 50 and getting into a trade war. So in this case, the bullying, at least in the short term, kind of worked in America's favor. And I want to like bring, I want to just be, it's a narrative violation of it to what I've been talking about,

but it's worth mentioning. Not being said, you know, the social ties, the political ties have deeply frayed. Like we're really making Europe an enemy. or like at least a sovereign block that is not tied in America, but on trade, this deal is pretty bad for them.

I don't know if you guys have any thoughts or anything you want to ask or what. I have questions. Yeah. I'm wondering, so as it stands now, you know, in the short term,

seems not that good for Europe. Yeah. Good for the United States, right? Longer term, what are the consequences to us that you might have been reading about? And also longer term, what are the ways that Europe

can make up for the shortfalls of this agreement. Like what you've talked about in the past that decisions that the U.S. is making and the aggression that the U.S. is using towards Europe pushes them in potentially other directions in terms of who they work with more closely. Like, you know, whether it be China or they're more like interlocked in...

Yeah. Let me jump on that, okay, because that is the big thing. I think that's what I might have gotten wrong in my earlier analysis, which is basically that my first team, take on this, which is that China's this rising power, and this is going to push all the people in China's arms. What has actually happened in practice is that Europe has found itself between

a rock and a hard place because they have a massive trade surplus with America. They make a lot of cars and goods and pharmaceuticals and they sell it to America, but they have a massive trade deficit with China. So they can't run to China's arms because China is already dumping products on them. They can't sell, China's not buying enough European goods. So, you know, if they're like, all right, fuck America will go to China, they just, they just, their manufacturing still is lost because China's out competing. They're getting out competed by the companies in China that are dominating the Chinese market already. Like I wish I had a graph for you, but it's, it's, you know, with America is this massive surplus for, for Europe and they need that. That's their

cut. That's what a lot of their jobs are making things to sell in America. They don't have a lot a job is making things to sell in China. And so it's harder for them. In fact, they had a meeting with Xi Jinping and the Chinese delegation like four days ago where Xi Jinping said, I'm urging you to make the right choice wink in this upcoming trade. But like they were calling him out because the deficit between Europe and China has gotten so big that they were calling him out. Europe was calling China. Yeah, Bondi Land who did the EU negotiations with America was calling China out and basically saying the deficit between Europe and China has gotten so big that we have to. to fix this gap. We can't... They're saying China, if you want, to get what you want and for us to

forge deeper ties, you need to do things that help us compete better in the Chinese. You have to buy more European stuff. Yeah. Like if we're going to buy a ton of Chinese stuff, you have to buy a bunch of European stuff because right now it's very one-sided. Right now China wants to manufacture for everyone in the world and basically no one else has manufacturing jobs. They make it all. You buy from them. You get cheap goods, but you lose the jobs you had manufacturing. Europe does not want to do that. So this is the argument that I heard from Scott Besson, who's the Treasury Secretary, who's basically the guy in the administration, Trump administration, who's leading this.

And I remember listening to him when all this tariff stuff started. And his argument was, it's a bad idea for any country in the world to, you know, threaten us because we buy everybody's stuff. We have the power here, right? Like China, this is the argument from him. Like China needs us because their economy right now, which is based on manufacturing things and selling it. And we as America are the biggest buyer. And so we need them more than they need us.

And it sounds like that's kind of what's going on with Europe as well. Or at least that's the argument in terms of being able to bully them into something. I would say with China, it didn't work out the way he thought. In that China, first of all, I think was more ready for it. So they are still manufacturing for everyone outside of America. And they have found many, many ways to send it to Mexico or Vietnam or Cambodia and it gets around it. So it hasn't really impacted them in the same way. Europe blinked is how I've read from European and American sources.

They just, they were too scared of this escalating and in the short term having like empty factories in Germany and like just they don't have that system set up. They're built for free trade with the United States and they thought 15% tariff won't change the price enough that everyone switches to non-European goods. By the way, I do want to say very clearly the data is now out like who is paying the tariffs. It is still American consumers. like 80% of the tariff is paid by American consumers paying higher prices. So it's not like it's a great thing for us. We're raising more money from tariffs,

but it's not, it's just less bad than it is for them. So I was going to ask, when you look at this from an American perspective, is the main downside or the only downside that we have to pay more, we have to pay more for European goods. Yes.

But that's it. That's the downside, yeah. And what is the win from Trump's camp? perspective. Tons of money rates from tariff revenue. I.e. from Americans paying more. It's like a VAT tax. And then over time, the idea is that that extra tax is going to make European manufacturers less competitive to Americans and we'll get some of that business. Can I maybe a cascading bit of logic here and jump in to correct me if I'm wrong. My understanding, goods from Europe are usually

finished higher-end products rather than things that are used to build or produce things, right? Like a lot of what we get from China or Canada might be timber or oil or minerals, right? Things that go into the base manufacturing of something else in the United States that you go on to make a house out of the timber, for example. Sure. But from Europe, you're buying more finished goods

or higher-end goods like BMWs. Luxury goods, wine, pharmaceuticals, cars. Yeah, those are like they're big. So even though the prices are going up on those things, the impact to American businesses might also be lower because they're end consumer products that are... Do you see what I mean? They don't influence the cost of a bunch of things after the fact,

whereas... Or do you not think that's true at all? I see what you're saying, but I think economic theory would say that over time, like an American wine producer is going to have an advantage long term over the European one. If there's a 15% tariff that makes them more expensive. That should eventually happen. What Europe is gambling on is that 15% is not big enough to change anyone's buying habits.

Like they'll just take this smaller tariff. It kind of sucks. Their prices are going to be more expensive. But the structure of global trade won't trade will change. They still have their leadership in the industries they have in pharmaceuticals and all that. That's their idea. We don't know exactly what's going to. play out. Again, so far, outside of this deal, it hasn't really worked out on the Trump side for what

they've said's going to happen. Like, again, one thing I really want to mention is that China and the rare earth metals thing was the ultimate knockout punch. Like that, that turned out to be a really strong negotiating position because they own, again, almost the entire supply chain on rare earth metals. They, until your company comes up. But, but for now, when they did that, Trump had to back down and change some things and soften because that cut off so much of American businesses that use rare earth metals to build things and it all goes through China. Like once they cut that off, it was a, they had the balls and the vice. I heard someone describe it as. So that's what I mean. Yeah. Is there nothing, is there nothing like that that has been imported from Europe that has

equal stake in, in terms of security or economic value to underlying economic value to American businesses, is that part of the reason why this decision can get made? No, I think the thing that Europe had in its quiver they could have used was that trade between America and Europe is actually more balanced than Trump says it is, but it's, they buy services. They do a lot of digital services. Basically, our big tech dominates Europe. And so a lot of money from there flows us, but doesn't count as a goods trade, so that's why we have a deficit.

They have rules they created after Trump won for this situation where they can really, you really cracked down on American big tech. And they thought about using them. And France was saying to use them. They decided not to because they didn't want to escalate this trade war. What is the, the out, the employment of that would be something like I have a sales force contract with a company in France and they can add a tax to that contract. Yeah, something like that. Or, you know, they could put a tax on Google AdSense or on they could, uh, anti-exam.

I trust regulate meta and Instagram or they could really make big tech's life hell in Europe. And if they did that, the threat would be that is going to, you know, that's the seven stocks holding up America. If we really hammer big tech, it's going to fuck your stock market. And so they considered it. It was a serious thing, but they got afraid. They blinked. And whether it's the right call or not remains to be seen. Some people say this was the smart choice.

Tariffs are paid by Americans. They can deal with the problem will hold steady and get American good. for cheaper. I'm just saying like this is the first time someone's got truly bullied with no response. And they're saying that, not just us. Like European diplomats are saying we got rolled over, we got steamrolled. France is saying this is submission. We're agreeing to submission right now.

Like, you know, this is what's happening. And so I don't know what it'll mean going forward. It's definitely a fraying of the relationship. But if this deal is signed and holds, you know, it's a win for America. on trade versus Europe, yeah. This could be tough because I do love making fun of Europeans. Let's cap this out with a quick test.

See if this whole thing that Trump's doing worked. Okay. Aidan, will you finally start manufacturing Ludwig's merchandise here in America? No. No, it wasn't really getting made. You weren't making it in France. It was only getting made in Europe

sometimes, some things sometimes get made in Portugal. Yeah. So it might change that a little bit, but it's not going to move it to America. You're not going to finally open up a factory? Do you hate America? I mean... You're the one going to Sweden, bro. All right. Well, speaking of tech giants, I have some fun little information about Open-Aid Microsoft. So I think there's an interesting dynamic that a lot of people aren't really aware of, which is the biggest AI company, Open AI, and Microsoft, the biggest company in the world, have a very strange relationship. that is maybe about to implode.

So the context here is that open AI is, in theory, rumors going to release GBT5 in a couple weeks. They've been saying that. They've been saying that for a while. So that's the most recent rumors. It hasn't been fully confirmed. Okay. But in theory, they're going to drop the big new model GPD 5.

Right now we're on GBT 4.5, arguably, there's all these different fractional things. So the average person who isn't super into the AI stuff, you probably don't give a shit, right? GPT5 coming out doesn't really affect your life. Chat, GBT will be like a little bit smarter in these ways. Well, it's worth saying, I'm putting a link here for, for Perry, if you could pull this up. But Sam Altman, he does this every time.

But he has been on a little bit of a press tour saying that he is scared of GPT5. It's so good. It's scary. Yeah. This might. This leads into it. Okay. Okay.

Perfect. Okay. So why would you give a shit if GPT5 is a little bit better, right? You're probably, most people are probably like, okay, there's a hundred new models every month. Who cares? Okay. Well, there's a very interesting thing between Open AI and Microsoft. Open AI started, again, they make.

chat jpete 10 years ago 2015 before the internet for the internet before the internet before the internet before the internet craze back then it's just a scrappy little group of AI researchers they're like we want to try to make like crazy AI stuff they even got investment from Elon Musk and they called it open AI because they were going to be

open about it and it's a non-profit they're like we're not trying to make money and they won Fy one Dendi and Dota oh yeah they were the Dota guys yeah they did the Dota stuff so early on they made a Dota bot basically using these AI concepts and training and that was like cool little test thing that they did.

This simple time. Yeah. I was there in person for that. Really? Really? Yeah. That's sick. Damn. So for a couple of years...

You could have stopped this. You could have stopped the Terminator, bro. So this is, if you guys remember 10 years ago or eight years ago, this is how most people thought of AI. It's like, oh, that's funny. Somebody made a chess AI or whatever, right? Yes. But they start getting smarter and smarter.

In 2018, this big paper comes out on Transformers. The AI craze, as we currently know it with large language models, kicks off. And they start developing. this GPT models in earnest and start to really get some traction. Most people don't know about it yet, but in 2019, they are like, okay, we're starting to actually get something here. And they go to Microsoft and they say, look, we need to raise a lot of money. The problem is they're still a non-profit. So they can't really do that. And so they then split from not just a nonprofit. It's a nonprofit who owns a for-profit company. And the for-profit company is able to raise investment

dollars for Microsoft at like cap return. So it's like, hey, Microsoft, you won't make a ton of money if you invest with us, but you can actually make some. And in return, Microsoft gives them a billion dollars. That doesn't sound that crazy because we talk about big numbers all the time. It's a crazy amount of money for any company, particularly a small research lab. And the thinking was they were going, look, we thought this would be this cute little nonprofit thing at the beginning,

but it is now becoming clear that these models need a crazy amount of computation power. We need a ton of money to throw out the problem. We're going to start feeding all the data on the internet into it, et cetera, et cetera. Okay. So Microsoft agrees. But there's some weirdness here because Microsoft needs to put a ton of money into a very early company with this like moonshot idea. Nobody knows is real. So a couple things go back and forth. Microsoft will get a profit return, right? So that's pretty standard. They also get access to the IP. So if Open AI develops any AI, Microsoft gets it. Microsoft is the only company still to this day, this has continued sense, that has access to the actual like mechanics of what OpenAI and ChatDBT does. Nobody else can do that. They also get to run their products like ChatTbtbt on the. their own servers. So you can go to chat GPT and buy stuff there, but you can also go buy the same services on Microsoft. Yes. Remember when we talked about open source models versus closed source

models and we were talking about deep seek? So they basically have the access that everyone has to something like deep seek, but for chat GPT and they're the only people that have that. Yes. So Open AI has been developing this thing and Microsoft's the only one who gets access to it. Every time, every few months when OpenAI releases some crazy new thing, Microsoft has access to it and they get to incorporate it into all of their products. So, Microsoft makes this big gamble. They're like, we are going to put more money in. We're going to put all this money into Open AI. It's still early. Put a billion. But with this gamble that if this goes really well, we have access to your stuff behind the scenes, we're going to grow our businesses together. And that's a kind of big risk for a big tech company rather than doing it in house. And this all sounds, you know, pretty decent, except they add something called the clause. And this is where it gets really weird. Okay. So Open AI convinces Microsoft to put a clause in the contract that says, if we open AI, create a. artificial general intelligence. We create an AI that's like as intelligent as a person. The contract is null and void. You no longer get access to any of our stuff. It's only ours now. That is an

insane thing for an investor. If you are a company offering a billion dollars and they're like, hey, we're partners. You get access to everything. Up until we make something that's really awesome, then we take it away and you get nothing. That's fucking crazy. And this is in the contract that they've had. This is called the clause. Now you might wonder, what does that mean. That's the point. Nobody knows what that means. AGI doesn't mean anything. It means our artificial general intelligence, and every single tech company has a different idea

of what that actually means. It's like if Microsoft was edging and they want to get... They can only... They can edge closer and closer and closer. Yeah. But if they get over the hump... If they get over the hump...

If they get over the hump, it's game over. It's not like that. But getting over the hump is not well defined. Right, right. I won't put it a lot of legwork in for my analogy. So far they have not climaxed.

and we don't know if or when they will. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. You might have heard people talk about artificial general intelligence. The funny thing about it is everybody has their own definition. For some people, it means you've created a god being that's as smart as humans. For some people, it's like, well, they're just better at a PhD student. For some people, it's, it provides a certain amount of economic value.

Maybe it's like you run certain businesses. Maybe it's like can replace a human at any job. Maybe it's only at math jobs. Maybe it's only at manufacturing jobs. Everybody has a different definition. And the problem with everybody having a different definition, is that two of the biggest tech companies have a contract that says one of them gets to bail and take everything if they achieve AGI which neither of them defined. So that contract and that clause has existed since then.

Both companies have continued to grow massively. Open AI is becoming bigger and bigger. ChatGBTGBT is now the biggest AI product in the world. It's arguably one of the most influential things in the world. They are the big dominant AI company. And Microsoft is their partner. They've invested like 14 billion at this point. They're 49% stakeholder. And at any point, if OpenAI comes out and says, we did it. We made the super smart AI. We did it. They get to cut the contract and run.

That's crazy. And so Microsoft is very concerned that they're going to come out and do this. And in fact, both CEOs are saying different things in the press tour. Sotia Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, says, oh, there's a great quote. He's like, us claiming some AGI milestone, that's just nonsensical benchmark hacking. So he's trying to say, look, AGI is that's just a concept. Meanwhile, Sam Altman is like, yeah, we think we're getting close. It's within the next couple years.

And internally, there was a memo leaked at OpenAI where they defined clearly what it is, and it basically means an AI can manage an organization, which is not like that far off. So they're both trying to pin the targets. They can bail from the car. It's crazy. It can manage the vending machine.

So they can manage the vending machine. And that's what it, and so, and get this even crazier, and then we'll cap it off. right now, Open AI is having a problem because when they spun it into a for-profit company, that was still limited. They're now trying to turn it into a full for-profit public benefit corporation. They're trying to turn into a corporation so they can give their employee stock, so they can raise more money from things like SoftBank. They think this is vital to them being able to survive.

Microsoft can block them from doing that. So OpenAI wants to turn into a for-profit company so they can expand even more. Microsoft can stop them and is saying you can't do that. We're not going to give you approval until you get this fucking clock. out of our contract that says you guys can run and bail. All of this might, might climax. We might finish edging in the next month when they release GPT5, which, as you said, Sam Altman is going around being like, it scares me.

I couldn't believe, I felt useless as a human. He's saying things like this publicly because Microsoft is like, oh shit, are they going to drop, in quotes, AGI? Yeah, there's two things I want to say about this. I have two links for you. Number one is, no, the two I just added. number one is Sam Altman video if you can play the one at the bottom

this is Sam Altman he's a he's a sharp character he knows what he's doing he is he's uh he's he's been in this plan for a while the press to her being like I'm scared of this like it's crazy and then the other guy being like it's actually

dog shit it's actually not even that good what the fuck are you talking about this is a iconic thing of Sam Alman being grilled by Congress where they ask him do you have any shares in this thing? Like, are you doing this for money? And then ask him. Okay. You make a lot of money, do you? I make, no, I paid enough for health insurance. I have no equity in Open AI. Really? That's interesting. You need a lawyer. You need a lawyer or an agent? I'm doing this because I love it.

Yeah, so that was a really nice thing to say. He didn't have any equity in the non-profit form of Open AI. However, he's about to have a ton of equity in the for-profit spin-off that they're making to actually manage the whole thing and it's going to become a massively successful billionaire after this all is through into it. So I thought that was a little bit of funny thing. Secondly, is this article that just came out eight hours ago, Microsoft in talks to maintain access to open AIS tech beyond AGI Miles. Oh, damn. Okay. So exactly what you're talking about. They are in deep negotiations right now. And as you've said, Satina Della is very focused on getting this clause the fuck out. Because having this key man risk where someone says we have AGI and you lose your

$300 billion valuation investment is, I mean, it's not just, you would take Microsoft stock. It would be, yes. It's not just that. Like all the AI companies, our entire stock market as a country is based off of big tech jerking each other off about how AI is going to make everybody trillions of dollars. That like that's the current state of it. I get the edging metaphor. Yes. That's what's going on. Microsoft is at the head of that. I believe still they're the most valuable company in the world, right? Oh, they got, oh, right, okay, they got bought. Anyway, but they're they're up there, right? And they briefly were the number two. Yeah. Microsoft's, the goon commander.

I've been saying. And yeah, their valuation is, like the other companies, largely propped up by the AI concept of them saying, we're going to put AI into all of our products and everything is going to get way bigger. I don't really think that's necessarily going to happen. But if they suddenly lost access to the company that is supplying the AI models that is propping up this entire concept, this entire pitch, they're going to tank. This is a huge deal for Microsoft.

Yeah. It's just funny that opening that I went from like, this. is a pure nonprofit to get us to AGI safely. We're a for-profit spinoff that is managed by the nonprofit. And that's because we have to make some money, but it's all for this plan. And then it's just going to be a for-profit company. Technically, it will still be owned by, so they tried to do that. Yeah.

They received pushback. Basically, it turns out legally, the states were not going to allow them to just turn their nonprofit into a for-profit. So the now attempt that they're trying to do is to keep the nonprofit with ownership of the for-profit, but the for-profit becomes a proper corporation with shares. Yeah, but has all the right, like, owns the IP now instead of...

Yes, but the nonprofit would have control, like can set the board of directors and veto things. They still have a lot of control, but it's, it's been a pretty blatant shift towards profitability. I thought maybe this is what you're talking about when there was a group of people on the board of open AI, the original group of people

had labeled them, primarily as ethical altruists, like a Sam Bangman Freed. And they had a different outlook of the company. Wasn't there already a power grab within the company and change of the board in order to transition it to a private company? No, there was an attempted, I don't have to call a power grab, but they tried to force Sam Altman out. They kept him out his CEO.

They said he was a liar. And they said he was trying to make things into not what they agreed on as their mission. Yeah. And all of the employees revolted because they want their stock to be worth something. they do not want, so everyone said, we're just going to leave if this head goes through. And so they brought Sam Oman back and everything went back to. But through all that, it remained a nonprofit.

Yes. Actually, because of that, I think is why they got the AGI clause. I think that was like the one thing. No, no, no. Really? Okay. That started 2019. Okay.

Yeah, that's a long time. So, yeah, there's a weird history. And basically Sam Altman as the CEO has kind of like gotten control. And it's funny because, like, Elon Musk, if you enjoy following him on Twitter, every few days, he'll be like, scam Altman and just tweet something about what Sam Altman has done. He's like super pissed. He's so bad. Yeah. Because Elon again at the very beginning of this in 2015 when it's a little scrappy research

company to Elon's credit for a long time he's talked about the importance of AI regulation and the necessity for it to be like open and safe. So he invested I forget how much but at least millions of dollars into the original opening eye. It was like a hundred million wasn't it? It was something crazy. The first hundred million. Actually I think he promised a hundred million and didn't give it. Yeah. But but he didn't give money for free. The thing is My understanding of the story is that Elon Musk puts this money in. And then as it's growing after the Dota stuff, he's like, I need to have soul control.

Right. And they were like, no. He saw Dandy lose that one v. one minute. He's like, this is getting out of head. Everybody involved with the story is not right to be honest. They have their own incentives. And they all pretend they don't. But it's all comes back to money.

45 million dollars. Whoa, that is way more than I thought is what Musk put into it, apparently. So yeah, he put into that being like, ah, it's going to be this open. source thing and they are one of the most closed source AI companies out there. They have, nobody has any access to it except for Microsoft right now, asterisk. Yeah, so there's a bit of war there. And now they're both competing to see who can give Jensen Huang more money every day. Yeah. It's so weird. It's so weird to put a clause like that to be like, hey, if the spooky ghost shows up, it's all con, like it's all canceled. Well, I think, you know, it's weird. I feel like

we've, like, as a society, we've given up on regulating it in just one year. But, But in the crazy before times of 2019, it was like, one day we'll have AGI. We need to be ready for that. We need to be prepared and needs to be not for profit. It needs to be. But now everyone's like, I like Chad JBT. They're going to make money. I feel like society has already given up on the fact that anyone will slow down at all for any reason.

Anyway, we'll see. I don't know. The drama is crazy. It was wild when the CEO of Twitch was OpenAI CEO for two days. During the drama when Sam Altman got out. ousted very briefly, because again, the board was like, you're a lying scumbag. We don't want you leading the company anymore. Emmett Shear got installed as a new CEO of Twitch.

Imagine that stuck and it's been Open AI under Emmett Shear this whole time. Chad, you'd be talking about Harthstone for nods stuff. It would have, the company would have failed rapidly. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, people didn't like him. Funny stuff. Funny stuff. Funny stuff. Aiden, what's funnier than Open AI drama?

it's making fun of British people and they're collapsing society. One of my favorite time. And it really is. I mean, I thought ever since beans on toast, they've been screwed, but you're telling me it's got even worse. The London bombings?

Yeah, I'm going back all the way to 2005. Hey, what's going on there? I'm going all the way back to 2005. All right. I think this was an interesting thing that I'd see reported across a bunch of different videos. Yeah.

And in general, I think we have this idea that the UK economy, not on the best track, right? They have a situation. Can I just say from a YouTuber POV saying the UK is failing is printing money. It's the new China is dead in 30 days. I've seen it in my niche, all these business finance channels, they just make a video saying, the UK is a failed state, the UK's in trouble, the UK's about the collapse, and you just print views. So everyone's doing it. and it's all over,

everyone's talking about all the time. So that is the context with which you're telling me this story, okay. Yeah. So as the country is in this pretty rough spot, right? One place in the UK is doing relatively well, at least from an overhead economic view, right? London is still a place that people go to,

like if you're in the UK, you often need to go to London for opportunity, London for jobs. That's where things still are in the country. And over the past, I mean, more than decades, London has always been a global center for finance, right? And until the global center for finance, until New York surpassed it. Right. But it's still a really important place

within that context. And the place that, you know, London stock exchange, much, much smaller than New York Stock Exchange. Right. So what is the economic value of London? They have found a niche of supplying very wealthy people with specific services to store, and hide and invest their wealth. That is the market that is primarily in London. If you want to figure out, if you're an internationally rich person and you wanted to go somewhere

to strategize how to structure and store your wealth abroad in order to avoid paying taxes, you go to London. And they have spent a lot of effort supporting this industry of finance within London over the past decades. And that's why so much of the opportunity in Britain is centralized in this one sector, in this one city.

And it's the one thing that still has a lot of movement behind it, basically. However, in recent years, there has been a spike of millionaires in the UK choosing to leave the country. They have the most millionaire flight, at least as of last year, of any country, more than China even. More than China even. And where are all these UK millionaires going, right? this wealth is choosing to flee the country

for a variety of reasons that they say. They go to places like the UAE, maybe they go to places like Switzerland. It's also important to note that a lot of these millionaires that have been choosing to leave are not actually British citizens or not originally British citizens.

They're people that came to the UK for the economic opportunity of how to structure or hide their wealth in certain ways, and now they are choosing to leave as more and more time passes. And there's something interesting here in that they're, the UK leaned really heavily into designing an economy that supports these really wealthy people, right?

And they made a lot of concessions along the way in other ways that leave normal people behind, right? Wealth inequality is increased. Opportunities in other cities are really low. It's difficult for anybody to afford a home in a place like London where all this wealth is congregated. and these people are now choosing to leave an economy that was like specifically designed to support them, right? And why would they go to a place like the UAE? At a base level, there's just no tax, right? They're offering a better version of the service that was available in the UK prior to this.

Or for other people, they don't like where their tax money in the UK was going. So they might be not fleeing to a country with no taxes. They're just fleeing to places where the taxes feel more representative of something impactful. Maybe they wind up going to Norway or Denmark or Switzerland. The Aden, yeah. All right. We don't have to give it an Ate or anything. I think as this is, the reason I wanted to bring this up is while I was kind of exploring this story and learning about

people's place in the people moving to the UAE because of this or moving to other countries for various reasons that there is sort of this two-layer structure to the economy that comes into existence in these places. So in London, right, there is an economy that services rich people and is leaving the poorest behind and also increasing wealth inequality the longer it exists. And then in places like the UAE, this might be even more dramatic, where they've specifically structured their country in a way that invites businesses and invites wealthy people to come and get residents there or set business up there because of their really friendly tax laws. But all of the services and economy in the UAE is built on very cheap, imported foreign labor,

that is, you know, in practice, basically slavery. Like getting people coming over from Southeast Asia, revoking their passports so they can't leave, they can't change jobs so they have no negotiating power, and they're just trapped in the UAE to build buildings and operate services and basically service this rich person economy that exists, right? This structure of you let really wealthy people run rampant.

You change a bunch of rules to accommodate the wealthiest and attract them from all over the world in order to create this vision, of success or a seemingly successful economy. While it's supported by people who have very little resources or very little autonomy or increasingly bad economic circumstances and it's a bit of this race, this interesting race to the bottom, right? Where London was this hub and is this hub in so many ways still until things, the strain on the

system breaks and people start, they just go to the next rich person place or the next tax haven, right? They don't stay and stick it out and try to fix things. They just go to the next place that can accommodate what they're looking for. And then the country that remains behind them is this a broken place that has no economy, you know, built for normal people anymore. And this, you know, this happens with, with a bunch of other places in tax havens. And I'm still learning. more about this. But I wanted to just bring up this interesting idea of like two tiered economic systems where wealth inequality has been stretched to the extremes. And so these countries are incentivized to make things better and better for the remaining rich people that have money or to

attract outside wealth into their country. And then eventually they pay the price because they have to make some sort of concession or something about the system breaks. And then all of those rich people that you spent all that time building a system for and attracting, just jump ship and go to the next best place they can go to and you're left with nothing at the end of it. Why are rich people more loyal? That's a great question.

No, I actually wanted to talk about this. I read a book called As Gods Among Men, a history of the rich in the West. And it was a pretty boring book, but it did talk about something very similar to this that I think that I want to bring up. And it was just talking about how, for the longest time,

there was a bit of a social contract with the wealthy because there's always been some form of the wealthy in almost all societies. The social contract was they're getting a larger slice of the pie, but a lot of that is being reinvested into the place they live. So they are like, they did a lot of beautification efforts. They would build fantastic public libraries and they would improve the area around them

because they wanted to live in a nice place. What this book pointed out is, our recent crop of mega rich in our lifetimes, something has changed dramatically, and that is the internet and private jet travel. And it has created a new, global super rich that no longer see themselves as part of one individual country. They see themselves as a jet-setting elite that are, they have more in common with another

billionaire from Dubai than they do than someone in their own country. That is their cohorts. And so they just kind of move around, as you said, to wherever they can get the best deal. And they don't feel a particular allegiance to any town, state, region, thing. And so their money is no longer even a portion of it flowing back into the area they live. And so it's purely extractive. And that is breaking the system that is at least somewhat worked in other areas in the past where you would benefit from having a wealthy person in your area.

But now it's almost purely parasitic in that they are just finding the deal where they could pay absolutely minimum tax possible. I think the analogy that came to mind is that there's ultra wealthy people that are moving around and they're ringing out the towel of wherever the system they're in is. And the government of that place is doing whatever they can to like increase the size of the towel

or add water to the towel. But eventually there's no more water to get out. And then the rich person or the rich entity just cuts and runs, throws it out and runs to the next place that has towels available. Because in a previous time, if you lived in the UK and you were wealthier, seeing society start to crumble around you is an incentive for you to not want to,

like you'd have to do something to invest in where you're at. Yeah. Because it just ruins your quality. Even purely from a, but now you can get on a private jet and you can go anywhere. You literally don't have any reason to stay in that spot. And that is a fascinating change. And I do think the UK has been just,

I mean, you talk to people in the UK. It just feels like it's been looted. It feels like it's been pillaged, bro. But of course, what happens everywhere, where it feels like the second this happens, the number one thing to blame is immigrant.

Like, they're in a huge anti-immigrant wave right now. Like, that's the problem. That's what's looted the UK. And it feels like that's not the case. I think there's some messaging online that is pushing against that a little bit. Like, I think that's the core of Gary Stevenson's messaging. That is getting really popular there and getting traction there.

There are way more layers to this that I have been touching on as I've looked into this or listened to videos about it that I find really interesting right now. But one thing I wanted to mention was this idea of the city of London that I think a lot of people don't know about. There is a city, an area within London, that is literally called the city of London

that is legally distinct from London, the larger city. And they have their own mayor and a bunch of exceptions for how the laws are treated. the laws of this area go back to medieval times and the Lord or like the mayor, the Lord Mayor, excuse me, is chosen by like a board of companies that operate within that place.

It's not an elected official. And then they also get a seat in the House of Commons. This is not an elected person. They are selected by companies that operate within the city of London and then they get a seat in the House of Commons. The thing that reminded me about this earlier, was when we were talking about Elon trying to win a seat

under his new political party that presumably would vote in whatever way he wants. And the city of London is this interesting vehicle for all of these wealthy foreign people and companies and not all foreigners necessarily, but a lot of foreign interests that have flown in there over time. And they're using the different laws of the city of London to escape tax.

and form relationships with like offshore, kind of in the British, like kind of in the UK islands, like Jersey and Isle of Man. And it's a very interesting world of like global finance and ways that people dodge taxes that I want to spend more time digging into. But a lot of, I think a lot of this is what the, do you remember when the Panama Papers came out? Yeah.

A lot of that, it's about stuff like this. London has been used as this a vehicle for hiding money and avoiding taxes. Yeah, I saw a documentary. It was called like the spider's web. And it was basically saying that after World War II, World War I basically, Europe or, I'm sorry, UK realized that it was no longer the financial center of the world. They, they are losing their colonies. London was replaced by New York.

And they decided to pivot 100% into creating a global spider's web of wealthy tax avoid. Like you said, they're just, I'm fully leaning into the fact that you can go to London and you can hide your cash in Bermuda or in Jersey or in, and it's part of the UK, but nobody checks and it's off the books. And then if some foreign entity, if some foreign entity comes to the UK and they're like, hey, can you check up, uh, you know, we think this loophole is being taken advantage of or we think this citizen of our country is hiding money in a shell company or a shell company in a trust in Jersey, then the UK just goes like, well, they're independent and we don't really have any

like pull here. Like there's not really anything we can do. And it's just functioned on the basis of that for so long. And it's, it feels like something that is hitting the UK particularly hard in the last few decades. And I'm, I'm really interested. I talk about all of this in, I'm spending a lot of time looking more into this right now so I can kind of present something more cohesive. I would also love to hear how the corporate side of this works because you hear about Ireland being where everybody sets up corporations because of the low taxes.

Would they suffer a similar thing at some point where another country comes in and says, we'll do it for even less? And then people start fleeing there. I think yes, yes. So I can give you a short answer to that right now. There's a really interesting thing with Ireland where if you look at their GDP figure,

it goes through this massive jump in a really short period of time in recent years. And the reason this is the case is Apple sort of lobbied in Ireland to create this specific law where if you formed a corporation in Ireland but brought in revenue through an outside asset, it didn't have to be corporate,

it didn't have to be hit by their corporate tax anymore. and then Ludwig, Jesus, oh my God, I'm leaking. And then Apple sets up a corporation in Ireland, right?

Their new like global headquarters or their EU headquarters and then gets a patent or like sells the copyright to the Apple logo to a foreign holder for Apple in an offshore or account

in somewhere like, the Cayman Islands or something like that. So it's coming from the Cayman Islands. And then they attribute a ton of the value of the sales of iPhones and other products to the value of the brand, which is not copyrighted in Ireland. And because they basically paid Ireland

to write the law in this way, take in all of this revenue through the company in Ireland as untaxed. And that was, and because they created this loophole, a bunch of other big tech companies followed suit and set up in Dublin because of this, right? And that's why GDP has skyrocketed on Ireland,

but it's totally disjointed from actual individual wealth in Ireland. And this- Ireland's GDP has absolutely skyrocketed in the last 15 to 25 years of Norway. I think they're just more productive. The factor you want to look at is GDP per capita. It is insane.

the leap that is taken. Yeah, but the quality of life is not. That's what I'm saying. The quality of life for the average person in Ireland is not very well represented by that number anymore because of the fashion in which it was inflated. So that's an example of like a corporate loophole that was or is being taken advantage of.

I think there's a lot more layers to this and I want to spend more time looking into it. But I was particularly fascinated about this idea of, you know, two-tiered economic systems where the rich take advantage of a system at the expense of like the poor in that country and then when the system is absolutely exhausted

and won't work for them anymore, they just cut and run and jump to the new place. At the risk of sounding handery and I said this last week on our Patreon episode, one of the beliefs of mine that has changed over the last six months as we've done this show and done a lot of research and read books is the belief of like,

it seems like you really need to race tax on corporations and particularly wealthy people because there's just so many weird knock on consequences of not doing that that don't benefit people. And I know that, yeah, it's, I know for many people and certain political ideologies, that's obvious. But I think it's taken a lot of us looking at many,

many, many different examples of how it harms things over time to be like, yeah, this makes sense. Like you have to, yeah. It's like a short-term thing to not. Let me villain chair. Really? Let me villain chair. You're going to villain chair.

Why do we let the rich from a living? No. The struggle that I see here, and this isn't to say that, you know, raising taxes or combating these issues is not important. But what you said about people on private jets cutting and running and going to wherever is convenient,

the difficult part for at least the wealthiest of the wealthy, right, or companies. Because they can just bail from any... It's much harder to hold it down. Right, to hold an account. Because I do think one, maybe one thing to note here is that the, there's one thing before I go to the next part.

The idea of capital flight because of taxes being raised, I think from my very limited understanding, is a little bit of a myth. Because these people, the taxes have been high in the UK for a while. In the case of corporate taxes, I think they've gone down. And, but the spike in millionaire plus, you know, wealthy people leaving has happened in recent years, right? It's in reaction to something deeper than just the tax rate being high, right? I think when people live, like rich people in Scandinavia aren't leaving in droves, even though the tax rate is

ridiculously high, right? In Denmark, they have an insane top-end tax rate on the wealthiest people, right? But millionaires aren't fleeing Denmark. It's because I think they have a very conscious view still that their taxes pay into a system that is working very well for them. The society, around them still is good. So I think there is a degree of people choosing to leave eventually when things get bad in the surrounding area. I think for the people who are the wealthiest of the wealthy and can move mountains with the amount of money they have, I do worry is like whenever there's one country willing to break off from the rest, you need an agreement from all nations, right, that you're going to supply a base level corporate tax rate, a base level

income tax rate. And as soon as countries choose to start breaking off from that, you create an avenue for those people to leave and take advantage of it. And I think it's like that global unity part that is really, really challenging. I think there's already been efforts to raise the OECD like corporate tax rate, which is just, you know, a bunch of developed countries coming together to establish like what the minimum corporate tax rate should be, right? And I think they wanted to raise it and Ireland didn't want to do it because they aren't, you know, they're in a beneficial position because of it. That is the challenge in the future

as people can move around way more easily is how do you plug all the holes? How do you prevent one country from deciding hey actually we're going to let these people in letting these people in being the fucking ultra wealthy

you know billionaires. So I think this whole thing has so much more to dig it to but they're like cats. They're hard to find what will keep them around you know but sometimes they're new toys being introduced every month. You can be like, no, stay here in America.

Don't go outside. Come here. Yeah. Come here, Jeff. We got a new massage chair. Come here. It's only in America. Come here. We have a city on grocery store in New York. Come eat at it. We'll give you free food. Stay here. Pay us taxes. Telling Jeff Bazze, you can get free food in New York. That's what pulls them in.

Guys, thanks for watching. I appreciate you. Oh, you have a new topic. No, thanks for coming to the lemonade stand. We served up some good lemonade today. We've picked the candidates for 2028. And we solve taxes. It was easy. Appreciate you.

Nancy Pelosi, 2028. Get on the card down. See you next week. Bye, everybody. Bye.