O'Leary, Uygur Debate AI Job Losses, Middle East Energy Risks

O'Leary与Uygur辩论AI失业潮与中东能源风险 在新的太空和科技产业能够吸纳被替代工人之前，快速推进的AI自动化恐面临引发大规模失业和经济崩溃的风险。 Kevin O'Leary 与 Cenk Uygur 就 AI 快速部署和中东局势升级带来的双重经济威胁与机遇展开辩论。O'Leary 认为，AI 自动化与人形机器人将带来前所未有的生产力提升，并创造太空时代的新岗位；Uygur 则警告称，中产阶级大规模失业与企业垄断兼并已迫在眉睫。讨论随后延伸至外交政策，Uygur 批评了美国的竞选献金机制和中东军事干预，O'Leary 则强调不对称科技战以及对伊朗施加全球经济压力的必要性。最后，两人分析了公众对资本主义态度的转变、日益加剧的经济不满情绪以及潜在的政治力量重组。 Cenk Uygur 警告称，缺乏适当安全网的 AI 失业潮将重创中产阶层，而中产阶层正是维持企业利润的核心消费基础；同时已有超 70% 的美国人反对在本地建设 AI 数据中心。 (2:35) 随着 AI 工具普及，企业招聘模式正快速调整，熟练使用 AI 的入门员工产出可达普通员工的 5 至 10 倍，加速了软件开发等岗位的洗牌与裁员。 (35:30) Kevin O'Leary 驳斥失业悲观论，认为机器人技术、月球基地及火星探索等项目将创造数十万个高薪岗位，但 Uygur 指出高龄与体力劳动者面临严峻的转岗培训鸿沟。 (37:15) 公众对经济现状与中东冲突的强烈不满致使唐纳德·特朗普的支持率暴跌，不仅非 MAGA 共和党人的支持率降至 53%，其核心 MAGA 基本盘也流失了约 20%。 (48:55)

In a wide-ranging debate hosted by Steven Bartlett, commentator Cenk Uygur and investor Kevin O'Leary present opposing visions of artificial intelligence, geopolitical conflict, and economic stability, debating whether emerging technologies and corporate influence will trigger systemic collapse or unlock massive productivity. AI Automation and Workforce Disruption (0:00) Cenk Uygur contends that artificial intelligence poses an immediate systemic threat to the American economy, warning that corporate efforts to cut headcounts by 10% to 25% could drive national unemployment toward 10% or even 25%. He argues that when software engineers making $120,000 are laid off, an estimated Universal Basic Income of $36,000 leaves households with a 70% income loss, collapsing the middle-class consumer base that sustains corporate revenue. Host Steven Bartlett notes that major figures such as Sam Altman, Elon Musk, and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei have similarly warned of severe labor displacement, with Amodei predicting AI could eliminate half of entry-level white-collar jobs within five years. Capital Investment and Compute Infrastructure Kevin O'Leary dismisses catastrophic unemployment forecasts, arguing that technological disruption across two centuries of American history has consistently generated net new industries and higher-value jobs. He points out that all 11 sectors of the S&P 500 are using early AI tools to raise productivity and lower operating costs, and that frontier AI labs are reinvesting heavily into compute rather than hoarding net profits. He highlights his own desert data center initiative in Utah, which he reports generates 4,000 construction jobs over nine and a half years alongside 2,000 permanent engineering positions. Grid Strain and Data Center Opposition (2:35) Citing polling that shows 70% of Americans oppose local AI data center development, Uygur argues that tech companies externalize energy costs by straining municipal grids—driving up local residential electricity bills by roughly 30% in regions like Virginia—while privatizing the financial returns. In contrast, O'Leary attributes intense local pushback in Utah to foreign interference, claiming forensic auditors traced funding networks through Arabella Advisors and Neville Roy Singham back to Chinese influence aimed at stalling domestic compute expansion. O'Leary advocates a 'bring your own power' model that generates surplus energy for public grids, warning that China's addition of 400 gigawatts of coal power makes building domestic compute an urgent national security imperative. Middle East Conflict and Global Energy (48:55) Turning to international crises, Uygur links U.S. entanglements in the Middle East to domestic campaign finance and the influence of pro-Israel lobbying, arguing that continued escalation against Iran risks severe retaliation against Gulf infrastructure that could require 5 to 10 years to rebuild. O'Leary reframes the conflict around energy and drone-warfare economics, noting that while allied forces spend $1.2 million to $3 million per interceptor missile, Iranian drones cost roughly $35,000 to deploy. He expects regional normalization because China relies on the Strait of Hormuz for roughly 48% of its energy imports, creating heavy pressure from Beijing to resolve maritime disruptions that cost Iran an estimated $210 million every 24 hours. Corporatism and the 2028 Political Outlook Uygur criticizes the American economic model as corporatism backed by post-Citizens United campaign finance, asserting that corporate capture prevents genuine free-market competition and fuels public disillusionment. Looking ahead to the 2028 presidential race, Uygur suggests populist anger could make media figure Tucker Carlson a viable contender for the Republican nomination. O'Leary agrees that Carlson's independent digital infrastructure represents a significant political asset, though he rejects claims that the country is tilting toward structural socialism, citing historical 17-to-20-year rhetorical cycles and the regular migration of capital and workers from high-tax states to lower-tax jurisdictions like Florida and Texas. While Uygur insists that technological displacement and corporate subsidies require aggressive state safety nets and campaign finance reform, O'Leary maintains that market incentives, capital mobility, and geopolitical competition will ultimately drive long-term productivity and geopolitical stability.

本场辩论围绕人工智能对劳动力市场的破坏性冲击、数据中心基础设施的扩张代价，以及中东冲突对全球能源与美国政治的连锁反应展开。Cenk Uygur警告自动化与政商勾结将引发中产阶级崩溃和深度经济萧条，而Kevin O'Leary则坚称算力基建是赢得大国竞争的关键，技术进步终将带动生产力跃升并创造全新行业。 AI技术引发的劳动力替代与失业风险 (32:55) Cenk Uygur警告，大型企业正急于削减10%至25%的员工以迎合华尔街利润预期，若整体失业率突破10%，将重创消费型经济并把国家推向萧条深渊。他指出，初级软件工程师已被成批替代，而通用基本收入（UBI）无法弥补生活水准的断崖式下滑——从年薪12万美元骤降至年均3.6万美元的救济金，意味着70%的收入损失。Host Steven Bartlett援引Sam Altman、Elon Musk以及Anthropic首席执行官Dario Amodei的预测指出，AI可能在5年内消灭半数初级白领工作，且Uber约940万名司机也正面临自动驾驶替代的现实困境。 Kevin O'Leary对此持强烈乐观态度，反驳大范围失业论调是“末日悲观主义”。他依据美国200年的技术演进史指出，每次科技革新创造的净增岗位均远超其摧毁的岗位；当前的科技行业裁员主要源于疫情期间的过度招聘调整，而非AI替代。O'Leary认为工程师的本质在于解决复杂现实问题而非机械编写代码，且太空探索（如NASA月球基地和SpaceX火星计划）等宏大项目将催生数十万个涉及制造、分析和工程的高薪就业岗位。 数据中心建设、电网负担与地缘算力博弈 (2:35) 针对全美70%民众反对在本地建设AI数据中心的调查数据，Cenk Uygur指出公众的抵制根植于经济公平诉求：科技巨头让本地电网承受巨大压力，导致弗吉尼亚州等地的居民电费激增30%，形成了“成本由纳税人承担、利润由私营巨头独占”的特权模式。他主张企业必须自行全额承担用电与扩容成本，若动用公共补贴，政府与公众必须获得企业股权分红。 Kevin O'Leary则认为数据中心是医学突破与企业提效的基础设施，并披露其犹他州项目采用了“自带能源”模式，既不挤占居民电网，还为当地创造4000个建筑岗位和2000个长期工程岗位。此外，O'Leary称其法证调查团队发现针对其项目的反对活动涉及由Arabella Advisors及活动家Neville Roy Singham关联的外部资助，相关IP与财务证据已递交白宫与联邦执法机构。他强调，中国在19个月内新增了400吉瓦燃煤电力以支持算力扩张，若美国因内部阻力放缓DeepSeek同等级别的算力建设，将在关键防务与国家安全上彻底失去优势。 霍尔木兹危机与不对称科技战经济学 (48:55) 在中东局势讨论中，Cenk Uygur批评美国外交政策被金钱政治绑架，指出Sheldon与Miriam Adelson向Donald Trump累计捐赠逾3.17亿美元，且全美94%的国会议员接受亲以色列游说团体捐款。Uygur指出，美国的核心利益本在于核查无核化及确保霍尔木兹海峡畅通，但盲目配合以色列的领土野心与空袭行动，不仅导致加沙与黎巴嫩大量平民流离失所，还可能诱发伊朗针对海湾能源基础设施的报复，引发需要5至10年才能重建的全球能源危机。 Kevin O'Leary则将当前冲突定性为首场由算法和无人机主导的“高科技战争”，揭示出严重的成本不对称性：中东盟友被迫发射单枚成本120万至300万美元的美制拦截弹，去应对伊朗制造的单价仅约3.5万美元的割草机引擎无人机。O'Leary指出，海峡封锁导致伊朗每日损失约2.1亿美元能源收入，而依赖该通道获取48%能源进口的中国终将对伊朗施加实质性停火压力；他主张未来应由海湾周边国家参照苏伊士或巴拿马运河机制，共同出资每月约50亿美元建立国际护航与过境管理框架。 资本主义异化、体制腐败与民粹政治前景 (89:08) 辩论进一步延伸至政治制度与经济体制的根基。Cenk Uygur抨击美国当前并非真正的自由市场，而是充斥着“裙带资本主义”和政商勾结，最高法院自1970年代以来的裁决及“联合公民案”（Citizens United）使政治贿赂合法化。他主张借鉴北欧的“民主资本主义”，对AI巨额暴利征税以建立失业安全网，并预测受两党体制背叛的选民将在2028年大选中转向真正的民粹主义者，甚至可能助推Tucker Carlson赢得共和党提名。 Kevin O'Leary反驳了美国正在走向长久社会主义的观点。尽管盖洛普民调显示62%的美国年轻人对社会主义持好感，O'Leary认为这种思潮只是每隔17至20年出现的周期性波动，青年人一旦进入职场承担高额个税便会迅速回归务实；资本与高收入人群正大规模逃离马萨诸塞州和加州等高税率地区，流向佛罗里达和德克萨斯等低税率州。不过，O'Leary亦承认Tucker Carlson凭借其庞大的独立自媒体网络，确实已成为2028年不可忽视的政治变量。 本场辩论凸显了面对技术爆炸与地缘动荡时的根本分歧：究竟应优先通过政策约束和再分配机制对冲自动化对中产阶级的结构性毁灭，还是应依靠去监管化与资本扩张保持国家竞争力。双方一致认同的是，传统建制派政治正在失去对民意和宏观经济的掌控，而由此积聚的社会愤怒将成为重塑未来政策与大选格局的核心动能。

## Background 该视频由 YouTube 频道《The Diary Of A CEO》（主持人 Steven Bartlett）于 2026 年 5 月 28 日发布。节目邀请了《创智赢家》（Shark Tank）知名投资人 Kevin O'Leary 与《The Young Turks》创始人、资深政治评论员 Cenk Uygur 展开紧急辩论，深入探讨 AI 究竟会拯救还是摧毁经济、美国政客受游说集团左右的内幕、美伊冲突背后的地缘利益推手，以及 2028 年大选的潜在走向。 ## TL;DR 辩论围绕人工智能对劳动力市场的冲击与中东地缘危机两大核心议题展开。Kevin O'Leary 从商业投资与技术演进史出发，坚信 AI 是不可逆的生产力革命，未来将开辟航天基建与高薪新岗位，并主张能源责任制以推动算力扩张；Cenk Uygur 则发出严厉警告，痛批华尔街为了财报竞相裁员，指出技术性失业将导致中产阶层与实体消费端彻底崩溃，同时强烈抨击两党受利益集团与外国游说势力绑架卷入海外战争。双方针对资本主义分配制度、全民基本收入（UBI）的可行性，以及民粹主义者（如 Tucker Carlson）在 2028 年大选中的黑马潜质进行了激烈博弈。 ## Atmosphere & style 全场火药味十足且针锋相对，充斥着冷血商业现实主义与激进民粹批判之间的剧烈碰撞。Kevin 态度自负风趣、言辞犀利，频频以“扫兴鬼”和“未来太耀眼需戴墨镜”等讽刺修辞展现超级乐观派底色；而 Cenk 则情绪激昂、言辞沉痛，以极具穿透力的警世预言不断直击失业海啸与地缘战火的残酷底线。主持人 Steven Bartlett 在两者之间精妙穿插务实的商业见闻与中立追问，整场对谈在宏大叙事与激烈反驳中步步升级，带给听众一种既真实紧迫又引人深思的思想过山车体验。 ## Bulletin - [03:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=186s) 民意调查显示高达 70% 的美国人反对在本地建设 AI 数据中心，Kevin O'Leary 指控背后有外国资金与暗钱组织操纵虚假舆论，而 Cenk Uygur 则直指居民电费账单暴涨及纳税人承担基建成本才是抵触的根本原因。 - [09:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=577s) 围绕 AI 引发的就业危机，Cenk Uygur 预言企业竞相裁员 10% 至 25% 将引发失业率突破 10% 甚至迈向 25% 的超级大萧条；Steven Bartlett 亦披露 Uber 总裁曾私下承认数百万司机岗位终将被自动驾驶取代且暂无应对之策。 - [13:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=819s) 在中美算力博弈维度，Kevin O'Leary 强调未来战争由 AI 主导，并披露中国在过去 19 个月内新增 400 GW 燃煤发电装机以支撑底层算力，若美国受制于内部阻挠自我设限，将拱手让出战略主导权。 - [51:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3073s) 中东冲突导致霍尔木兹海峡受阻并引发能源化肥通胀，Cenk Uygur 揭露 94% 国会议员受游说集团政治献金绑架，并预测战争与 AI 失业危机将在 2028 年终结两党建制派，使 Tucker Carlson 等反建制民粹候选人成为黑马。 ## Key takeaways - [03:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=186s) 关于 AI 数据中心的民怨根源存在尖锐对立：投资方归咎于海外敌对资本操弄环保焦虑，批评者则指出企业通过政治献金将高昂电费与能源外部性转嫁给普通居民。 - [09:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=577s) AI 引发的大规模技术性失业被视为系统性危机，全行业追逐财报降本竞相裁员 10% 至 25%，正打破“打工人即消费者”的经济循环基础。 - [19:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1177s) 全民基本收入（UBI）被指为虚幻解药：年薪 12 万美元的白领若跌入年仅 3.6 万美元的 UBI 体系，中产生活方式将彻底崩溃，且国会无法及时通过预案。 - [35:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2130s) 技术替代呈现“肌肉与大脑双重降维打击”：与工业革命仅替代体力不同，具身智能与大语言模型正同时替代脑力与体力，年长蓝领从业者几乎无路可退。 - [35:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2130s) 企业招聘门槛正经历根本性重构，精通 AI 工具的初级员工产出可达普通员工的 5 至 10 倍，AI 熟练度已成为初筛淘汰的关键指标。 - [45:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2732s) 硅谷高层在 AI 冲击上存在严重的“台前台后言行不一”，闭门会议中深知颠覆风暴的惨烈，但在公众前却刻意淡化数百万底层劳动者的转岗死局。 - [29:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1764s) 美国资本主义机制依赖州际税收套利与资本自由迁徙，过度对 AI 企业与富人推行高边际税率可能引发资本出逃与税基枯竭。 - [51:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3073s) 合法化政治献金（如 Super PAC）严重扭曲了美国内政与外交决策，两党建制派政客被军工、能源及外国游说集团深度俘获。 - [01:12:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4320s) 中东冲突暴露了现代防空防御的严重成本倒挂，造价仅 3.5 万美元的无人机需消耗 120 万至 300 万美元的精密防空导弹进行拦截。 - [01:22:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4962s) 军事领域的 AI 监控与目标定位系统（如加沙战事中的识别算法）因缺乏人类伦理底线干预，带来了巨大的平民伤亡与道德危机。 - [01:26:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5197s) 中东和平具备巨大的商业红利，伊朗及周边数亿人口的消费需求亟待释放，但外部游说施压与极限制裁反复阻断了停火协议的达成。 - [01:29:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5349s) 美国年轻群体对资本主义好感度降至低谷，呼吁转向遏制大企业暴利的“民主资本主义”，但激进极左社会主义方案同样在选民现实纳税承受力面前受挫。 - [01:37:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5864s) 2028 年大选的核心焦点将全面转向生活成本、边境安全以及 AI 引发的劳动力海啸，脱离传统金主绑架的民粹路线候选人展现出极高的政治动员潜力。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=0s) 序幕与开场交锋：AI将拯救经济还是毁灭工作？ 访谈一开场便充斥着火药味。Cenk Uygur 发出严厉警告：各大企业如今都在争先恐后裁掉 10% 到 25% 的员工，一旦失业率攀升至 10%，其破坏力将超越所有人此生经历过的任何经济危机，带来一场史无前例的大萧条。 Kevin O'Leary 对此嗤之以鼻，讽刺 Cenk 是个“扫兴鬼（Debbie Downer）”，直言眼前的 AI 革命是一场不可思议的历史性机遇，“未来的光明程度甚至需要多买几副太阳镜”。然而 Cenk 反唇相讥，指出 Kevin 根本不敢正视即将到来的失业海啸；这场灾难如同泰坦尼克号撞向冰山，而社会完全没有做好准备。 针对所谓“破坏性变革”的争论，Kevin 认为恐吓公众说“所有人都会失业、机器人会吃掉小孩”纯属无稽之谈。Cenk 则回应称，没人说过机器人会吃小孩，但变革必须受到审慎对待。到 2028 年，AI 导致的失业潮与地缘冲突危机将接踵而至，留给美国的生路只有选出真正有远见的领导人。在此背景下，共和党的选民热情已然彻底崩溃，民主党同样迷失了方向，而共和党内部唯一有胜算的潜在黑马或许正是 Tucker Carlson。 --- ### [01:36](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=96s) 主持人致辞与对话初衷 主持人 Steven Bartlett 在正式切入辩论前向观众致意，说明了本期节目的初衷。他指出，由于平台订阅算法的异常，许多长期观众被系统悄然取消订阅，因此恳请认可节目的观众检查订阅状态，支持团队持续带来高质量、无门槛的深度对谈。 进入正题后，Steven 向两位嘉宾致谢。他强调，面对当下错综复杂的国际局势与技术浪潮，自己并不是为了制造一场博眼球的口水战，而是希望通过两位持有截然不同世界观的意见领袖——一位是华尔街与商界的投资大佬，另一位是资深政治评论员——在人工智能、地缘政治与美国社会转型等关键议题上的激烈交锋，探寻被迷雾掩盖的真相。 --- ### [03:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=186s) 犹他州数据中心抗议风波与“外国势力介入”指控 辩论的切入点是一项民意调查：高达 70% 的美国人反对在本地社区建设用于 AI 运算的大型数据中心。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 数据中心争议与资金流向指控 accDescr: 图表展示了围绕AI数据中心引发的两种不同叙事：Kevin的外部操纵论与Cenk的本土民生论。 subgraph Kevin ["Kevin O'Leary 的调查指控"] A["犹他州拟建 AI 数据中心"] --> B["出现大量虚假舆论: 耗电、争水、占地"] B --> C["聘请法证审计团队与数据科学家分析"] C --> D["溯源至 Arabella 及 Neville Roy Singham"] D --> E["向白宫、FBI 递交 90 页外国 IP 与 IRS 990 报税单"] end subgraph Cenk ["Cenk Uygur 的民生与成本反驳"] F["居民反对数据中心的根本原因"] --> G["居民电费账单暴涨，沦为补贴方"] F --> H["企业借合法化政治献金转嫁基建成本"] F --> I["核心焦虑: AI 带来的不可逆转性失业潮"] end ``` Kevin O'Leary 从经济与科技演进史切入，认为任何颠覆性技术在萌芽期都会带来阵痛，但最终都能转化为美国经济的巨大生产力。攻克癌症的靶向研发、教育普惠、深空探索，乃至于标普 500 指数中大小企业的效率提升，统统离不开底层的算力基础设施支撑。 然而，Kevin 随即抛出一则惊人爆料：针对犹他州数据中心项目的汹涌民怨背后，隐藏着恶意势力的政治操弄。他表示，针对项目“霸占 4 万英亩土地”、“抢夺地方水源与电力”的传言全属虚构。为此他专门雇佣了法证审计师和顶尖数据科学家进行网络追踪与 IP 抓取： - 顺着美国国税局（IRS）的 990 报税表格与资金流向，指控抗议活动资金源自与中国关联的资本网络，经由 Arabella 机构向当地的“争取更好犹他联盟（Alliance for a Better Utah）”输送资金； - 牵涉资助者 Neville Roy Singham，指控其资助并煽动各地反对美国本土新建电力设施的抗议； - 审计团队向白宫及联邦特工提交了长达 90 页的外国 IP 地址名单，并维持每 4 小时一次的实时数据递交； - 透露其高管团队曾遭遇死亡威胁，涉案人员已被联邦调查局（FBI）在丹佛当地上门警告。 Kevin 强硬表态，自己坐拥 1,200 万社媒粉丝，绝不会在舆论战面前退缩，他所做的只是“递交不可辩驳的事实数据”。 --- ### [07:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=444s) 资本转嫁成本与全社会的失业隐忧 Cenk 对 Kevin 的“外部势力阴谋论”不以为然，发出一声嗤笑，直言这完全与中国无关，根本不需要扯上复杂的跨国阴谋。Cenk 表明自己毕业于沃顿商学院，同样是企业创办者与资本主义的坚定支持者，但他主张的是真正的公平资本主义，反对由纳税人埋单的“裙带资本主义”。 Cenk 剖析了公众对数据中心爆发抵触情绪的真实根源： 1. **电费与资源转嫁**：科技巨头利用美国合法的政治献金体系游说地方政客，将数据中心产生的巨额用电成本摊派到普通社区居民的日常账单中。如果企业享受着人工智能带来的超额利润，就必须全额自担基建与能源成本，绝不能将外部性转嫁给分文未赚的纳税人； 2. **重蹈 2008 年金融危机覆辙**：Cenk 尖锐批评了 2008 年美国救助华尔街银行的行径，认为纳税人出资救市却未获得任何股权分红，正如纳税人出资补贴药企的基础科研却仍要承受天价药一样，让普通大众沦为了“冤大头”； 3. **机器替人与真正危机**：能源账单只是导火索，公众内心最深层、最理性的恐慌在于 AI 必将引发的大规模失业潮。科技界整天畅想“未来机器人会给人类烹饪三文鱼”的虚幻愿景，而大众根本不在乎三文鱼由谁来做，真正致命的是，当人类的工作被全面替代后，社会该如何生存。 ### [09:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=577s) 席卷而来的裁员潮与政府预案的缺失 森克·维古尔（Cenk Uygur）直击当前经济最核心的痛点：AI 是否会引发全社会范围的大规模失业。在他看来，商界目前正在发生一件无可争议且极其危险的事——所有企业都在争先恐后地解雇 10% 到 25% 的员工，因为抢先裁员的公司能立即获得成本优势并受到华尔街资本的奖赏，推高股价。然而，如果全美企业都同步裁撤一到两成半的员工，迎来的将不仅仅是一场普通的经济衰退，而是“人们有生之年从未见过的经济大萧条”。森克痛批大家都在“吹着口哨走过墓地”（盲目乐观、假装看不见危险），而整个美国政界几乎毫无预案，除了加州民主党众议员罗·康纳（Ro Khanna）在尝试制定应对这场失业海啸的方案外，其他人全都鸦雀无声，整个国家正全速撞向冰山。 主持人斯蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）随即补充指出，不仅是政治评论家在预警，连站在 AI 最前沿的科技巨头 CEO 们也多次发出过同样的末日预警。例如 OpenAI 创始人萨姆·奥尔特曼（Sam Altman）就曾断言未来必须推行某种全民基本收入（UBI）计划，他创立的另一家通过虹膜扫描确认人类身份的项目 Worldcoin，其核心宗旨之一就是为了向全人类发放 UBI。巴特利特以此反问凯文·奥利里（Kevin O'Leary），是否真的不相信森克在社交媒体上所称的这场“失业大劫难”。 - **企业裁员竞赛**：商业界为追逐短期财报利润与股价上涨，正竞相裁员 10% 至 25%，形成全行业向下的恶性循环。 - **政治应对缺位**：在全美政客中，森克指出目前仅有众议员罗·康纳（Ro Khanna）一人在积极研究应对 AI 失业潮的政策预案。 - **UBI 与 Worldcoin**：奥尔特曼等行业领袖早已预判大规模失业不可避免，并着手布局通过虹膜识别向公众分发基本收入的机制。 --- ### [11:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=662s) 奥利里的反驳：能源责任制与对“末日论”的不屑 凯文·奥利里首先系统拆解了森克的“灾难清单”。在能源问题上，他出人意料地认同了森克的警示：AI 数据中心绝不能直接接入现有公共电网，弗吉尼亚州就是前车之鉴，那里的数据中心直接导致当地图书馆、教堂和社区中心的电费飙升了 30%。奥利里指出，这种模式已不可持续，他在犹他州推进的项目就必须“自备电力”。但他强调，解决之道不是阻止建设，而是实行“能源责任制”——数据中心必须自主发电，并将多余电力反哺给当地及国家电网，实现电力增容与算力扩张的双赢。奥利里同时指责，阻碍犹他州能源建设的舆论背后有“阿拉伯拉（Arabella）”等暗钱组织及海外宣传势力的恶意操纵。 随后，奥利里对失业末日论发起猛烈反击。他用极具讽刺意味的口吻嘲讽道：“所有人都会被机器人取代，然后机器人还会把小孩吃掉？我根本不买账。”奥利里回顾了美国 200 多年的科技发展史，指出每一次重大技术颠覆虽然在初期带来阵痛，但最终都创造了海量的新机遇和生产力飞跃，使美国经济始终领先全球其他经济体 20% 以上。他指出，当天股市再创新高正是美国企业活力的直接体现；即便是在拥有 5 到 500 名员工的小微企业中，经营者也在全面利用 AI 降本增效、拓展客户，而非盲目摧毁岗位。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: Kevin O'Leary's Proposed AI Data Center Energy Model accDescr: Diagram contrasting the legacy grid-draining data center model with Kevin O'Leary's proposed self-powering and surplus-returning model. subgraph LegacyModel["传统高风险模式 (如弗吉尼亚州)"] A["新建 AI 数据中心"] -->|"直接接入公用电网"| B["挤占公共电力资源"] B --> C["居民/社区电费暴涨 30%"] end subgraph ProposedModel["奥利里自建闭环模式 (如犹他州方案)"] D["AI 基础设施项目方"] -->|"自主投资新建电站"| E["独立大容量电力供应"] E -->|"自给自足"| F["数据中心全力运行"] E -->|"富余电力反哺"| G["增强公共国家电网"] end ``` --- ### [13:39](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=819s) 中美 AI 军备竞赛与 400 吉瓦的煤电现实 奥利里将讨论引向国家安全与地缘政治竞争的严肃维度。他直言，无论是经济繁荣还是国防安全，中国都是美国最大的战略对手。近期中东冲突已充分证明，现代战争几乎无需大量地面部队，胜负完全取决于高精度制导与技术协同；而在未来，战争将彻底由 AI 主导，“掌握最强 AI 技术的国家将赢得战争”。奥利里警告，美国一旦在算力和能源基础设施上自我设限，就等于拱手让出战略主动权。 为了说明形势的紧迫性，奥利里给出了极具冲击力的对比数据：当美国各州因环保审查和阻挠连普通新电厂都无法落地时，中国在过去 19 个月内通过燃煤发电直接建成了 400 吉瓦（GW）的电力装机容量。奥利里描述道：“他们根本不管什么环保政策，最高领导人手指往地上一指说：‘在这里建一座燃煤电厂，后面再建一个数据中心，否则你 18 个月内就会消失。’底下人立刻高呼‘遵命’照办。”相比之下，美国受制于繁琐程序与内部政治拉扯，甚至有外力在各州暗中出资阻挠美国企业家的建设脚步。奥利里透露，他正全力向联邦政府多个部门和特工机构提供一手调查线索，誓要“踹开这扇肮脏内幕的大门”。 - **军备与算力绑定**：未来战争将彻底依托 AI 演进，算力优势直接等同于制空权与精确打击能力。 - **中国电力基建速度**：过去 19 个月内新增 400 GW 燃煤发电装机，全力支撑 DeepSeek 等本土 AI 模型的算力集群。 - **暗战与内部阻挠**：奥利里坚称存在敌对资本和组织资助游说活动，试图通过煽动环保焦虑来瘫痪美国的能源和数据中心审批。 --- ### [15:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=930s) 科技巨头高管的悲观预警 vs. 现实算力博弈 主持人巴特利特对奥利里的乐观论调提出质疑，指出这种“认知失调”恰恰来源于 AI 行业的缔造者们本身，因为他们按理说是最没有动机唱衰自己产品的人： - **萨姆·奥尔特曼**（2021 年 3 月）：AI 将取代当今绝大多数人类工作，整个工种类别将彻底消失。 - **埃隆·马斯克**（2024 年 5 月）：未来可能所有人都不需要工作，工作只会变成一种类似“业余爱好”的选择，AI 和机器人将满足所有商品和服务需求。 - **达里奥·阿莫代伊**（Anthropic 创始人，2025 年）：AI 可能会在 5 年内消灭一半初级白领岗位，将失业率推高至 20%，公众眼下看到的只是一层被裹上糖衣的虚假安慰。 面对这些白纸黑字的预警，奥利里反驳称巴特利特是在搞“断章取义的选择性引用”。他反问，阿莫代伊同样发出过严厉警告：“如果我们未来 6 个月内不大幅扩建算力集群，中国的 DeepSeek 就会全面赶超我们。”奥利里质问，难道美国要因为害怕转型阵痛就全面关停算力研发，“围坐在营火旁唱起《Kumbaya》（假装天下大平），去指望对手也会停下脚步吗？”他直言那纯属脱离现实的幻想——对手不会停步，甚至可能不动一兵一卒、仅凭 AI 瘫痪电网就拿下台湾地区。如果放弃竞争，未来美国在癌症研究等尖端领域就只能受制于人，甚至“二十年后在纽约吃早餐的孩子吃什么都要由别国说了算”。 --- ### [18:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1107s) 森克的回击：非精度的致命代价与虚假稻草人 针对奥利里的反驳，森克迅速予以尖锐回击。他首先戳穿了奥利里的修辞技巧：“我可从没听任何人说过‘机器人要吃掉小孩’，感谢凯文发明了这个话术来树立假想敌。”森克表示，自己完全不担心虚构的童话恐怖，但极度担忧 AI 在现实中制造的真实伤亡，而这种杀戮实际上已经发生。 森克当场举出最新中东战局的残酷现实反唇相讥：有充分报道显示，军方在德黑兰空袭一所女子学校时正是使用了 AI 辅助目标定位，直接导致超过 160 名无辜女学生惨死。森克愤怒地质问，如果这就是奥利里口中引以为傲的“精准武器”，那这种沾满鲜血的“非精准”技术根本不值得夸耀。在关乎生死的重大抉择上，必须永远由人类亲自负责，绝不能把剥夺生命的权力交付给冷酷且频频误判的算法系统。 - **拒绝稻草人谬误**：森克驳斥“机器人吃小孩”是奥利里用来转移焦点的夸张说辞，指出真正的危机在于现实失业与致命误判。 - **德黑兰女校误炸惨剧**：森克援引实战案例，指出 AI 定位技术导致 160 多名无辜女童遇难，彻底打破了所谓“高科技精准打击”的神话。 - **人类底线伦理**：坚决反对将剥夺生命和开火决策全权交由算法自主控制，强调生死抉择必须保留人类的道德介入。 ### [19:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1177s) 全民基本收入的幻觉与不可避免的失业海啸 Cenk Uygur 坦言自己对人工智能在军事领域的应用极度担忧，并直截了当地表示自己根本不信任像 Palantir 这样的国防数据科技巨头。紧接着，他把矛头对准了硅谷广为推崇的“全民基本收入”（UBI）解决方案。他指出，许多人把 UBI 当作 AI 冲击就业的万能解药，但只要简单算一笔账就会发现其荒谬之处：如果一名软件工程师年薪为 12 万美元，这在美国属于过得体面的中产阶层薪资；一旦被 AI 取代转而领取 UBI，哪怕在最理想的设想下每月能领到 3,000 美元，一年也仅有 36,000 美元。从年薪 12 万暴跌到 3.6 万，对任何中产家庭的财务状况都是毁灭性的打击，更不用说美国国会根本不可能在失业大潮席卷而来的瞬间迅速通过 UBI 法案。 Cenk 指责 Kevin O'Leary 刻意回避了失业这一核心现实。每一家顶尖 AI 公司的 CEO 一边在资本市场上宣称自己的技术值上万亿美元，一边私下承认“你们都会被解雇”。裁员潮早已不是推测，而是已经在初级程序员群体中真实发生。年轻工程师感到遭遇背叛，不得不寻求转行；但如果说聪慧的年轻白领尚有一线转行希望，那么对于那些 58 岁或 62 岁的卡车司机而言，面对来势汹汹的自动驾驶，他们根本无路可走。Cenk 澄清自己并非盲目抗拒技术变革，他甚至坦承相比人类司机自己更信任 Waymo 无人驾驶出租车，但他强调汽车不再需要人类司机的经济代价必须有人买单。 - **薪资断崖对比**：中产程序员现有年薪约 120,000 美元，若跌入设想中的 UBI 体系，年收入骤降至 36,000 美元（每月 3,000 美元），生活水平彻底崩溃。 - **高危转型群体**：年轻技术人员或许尚能尝试转换赛道，但 50 岁至 60 岁以上的人力劳动力（如卡车司机、出租车及网约车司机）面临完全被挤出劳动力市场的绝境。 --- ### [21:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1294s) 华尔街的盲目狂欢与“中间向外”经济学的瓦解 Cenk 痛斥当前的华尔街已经彻底失去理智，在资本市场屡创新高的同时，资本家们完全没有考虑一个基本逻辑：当打工人全被裁掉后，谁来购买企业生产的商品？他引述了西雅图成功企业家 Nick Hanauer 提出的“中间向外经济学”（Middle-Out Economics）： ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 经济分配模式对消费市场的不同影响 accDescr: 对比中间向外经济学与涓滴经济学对实际消费与经济运转的差异 subgraph MiddleOut["中间向外模式 (Nick Hanauer)"] A["资金/利益流向中产阶层"] --> B["中产阶层立即将收入投入市场消费"] B --> C["有效需求扩大，实体经济良性循环"] end subgraph TrickleDown["涓滴经济学 / 新自由主义"] D["利润与税收减免集中于富豪阶层"] --> E["富人边际消费倾向低，资金沉淀停滞"] E --> F["社会有效购买力匮乏"] end subgraph AIImpact["AI引发的系统性崩盘"] G["企业大规模削减员工以降低成本"] --> H["打工人丧失收入（员工即消费者）"] H --> I["消费端塌陷，企业产品无客户承接"] I --> J["经济彻底鱼雷式搁浅"] end ``` 数十年来新自由主义推行的“涓滴经济学”给富人大量输送利益，但富人根本不会把这些钱全部花到实体流通中；相反，流向中产的财富会立刻转化为消费。然而如今体制将巨额补贴和利益奉送给拥有庞大游说团队的石油巨头与制药公司，对即将到来的就业灾难却毫无防备。Cenk 警告，失业率飙升至 10% 几乎已成定局，甚至可能向 25% 迈进，这将严重超过当代人经历过的任何经济危机。当“员工即客户”的链条断裂，缺乏购买力的市场将直接拖垮整个宏观经济。尽管全球面临中国、俄罗斯乃至以色列的 AI 军备竞赛而无法单方面停滞研发，但当下美国的技术竞逐只服务于 AI 高管和股东，完全背离了广大选民的利益。 - **失业率警报**：10% 的系统性失业率已是板上钉钉的必然趋势，极端情况下甚至可能触及 25% 的毁灭性水平。 - **游说特权与产业倾斜**：政府动辄为石油大亨和大型药企提供政策便利与补贴，却对技术性失业毫无宏观预案。 --- ### [24:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1468s) 合法化贿赂、冰山灾难与“草叉反抗”的风险 主持人 Steven Bartlett 追问，既然技术竞赛无法叫停，那么具体怎样才能实现所谓的“负责任的 AI 发展”。Cenk 直截了当地指出，由于美国政治制度的彻底腐败，在当前的窗口期内根本不存在合规监管的可能。自 1970 年代最高法院相关判决以及后来的“联合公民案”（Citizens United）以来，“金钱政治”在美国实际上变成了合法化的行贿受贿。无论是民主党还是共和党政客，绝大多数都沦为金主阶级的提线木偶；AI 科技公司早已开始重金介入党内初选，通过资金优势扫除对自身监管不利的政治对手。 Cenk 预言，美国社会正不可避免地撞向冰山。当灾难全面爆发、数千万人失去生计而 AI 公司却敛聚万亿财富时，公众的滔天怒火将不可遏制。届时人们必将质问：“凭什么科技巨头卷走所有暴利，而把失业的巨大社会成本甩给全社会？”他呼吁至少应当对这些 AI 公司征收巨额特别税，强制其全额资助失业救济金体系并支持基本社会民生。尽管 Cenk 强调自己是坚定的非暴力倡导者，但他神情严肃地警告亿万富翁群体：“如果你们继续坚持‘我拿走一切，你们一无所获’，拿着草叉的底层民众迟早会找上门来。” - **政治阻碍根源**：1976 年、1978 年最高法院判决及 Citizens United 判例确立了政治献金的合法性，导致两党政客优先听命于 AI 巨头的资金游说而非普通公众。 - **政策反制诉求**：要求由 AI 科技公司承担技术失业带来的负外部性成本，强制注资并托底全美失业保险系统。 --- ### [27:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1624s) Kevin O'Leary 的强势反驳：商业现实与犹他数据中心案例 Kevin O'Leary 随即展开反击，戏称 Cenk 今天是个十足的“悲观扫兴鬼”（Debbie Downer）。他调侃道，美国经济界每隔 20 年就会跳出一群预言“自由世界末日降临”的人，但这种末日论调从未成为现实。Kevin 展开逐项“事实核查”，指出 Cenk 所谓 AI 公司赚得盆满钵满根本脱离实际：现实中的 AI 初创与模型公司眼下每年都在巨额亏损数十亿美元，甚至尚未探索出清晰的变现模式，它们完全依赖风险资本注入，与中国展开生死时速的技术耐力赛。资本市场之所以愿意下注，是因为看到了 AI 在攻克癌症、教育普惠以及驱动全要素生产率上的颠覆性潜力；标普 500 创纪录的财报已经证实，全部 11 个行业板块都在第一波 AI 赋能中实现了显著的降本增效。 针对“摧毁就业”的指责，Kevin 以自己正在犹他州投资建设的大型数据中心项目为例，用一组实打实的工程数据予以回击： | 项目指标 | 具体数据与实际情况 | |:--- |:--- | | **工程建设期就业** | 提供约 4,000 个高薪建筑工程岗位，工期长达约 9.5 年 | | **长期运维期就业** | 创造约 2,000 个极高薪的现场工程师与技术支持岗位 | | **选址与用地影响** | 设立于偏远沙漠腹地，绝非居民后院，未占用任何农田 | | **资源与环境负荷** | 辟谣掠夺水资源的说法；不仅不挤占犹他州能源网，反而向电网反哺电力，且严格遵守空气许可要求 | Kevin 强调，历史上没有任何人能够准确预言一项全新颠覆性技术最终催生出的就业全貌。作为一名聚焦创业与实体投资的企业家，他的职责是保持实干、尽可能多地雇佣工人，而不是沉溺于制造恐慌。他呼吁讨论必须回归冷酷的商业事实与科学常识，而不是天天用“机器人吃婴儿”这种荒谬而歇斯底里的末日修辞来吓唬公众。 ### [29:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1764s) 资本迁徙与美国例外论：凯文为富人税与资本主义辩护 凯文·奥利里（Kevin O'Leary）对普遍存在的“人形机器人恐慌”嗤之以鼻。他指出，机器人的形态绝不会像大众幻想的那样，是个两条腿走路的人形铁皮人、下楼替你倒垃圾；几十年来，工业机器人早已在汽车制造、医疗科研和芯片代工中大显身手，它们从不需要长得像人。针对“AI 巨头大发横财、应当被课以重税”的论点，凯文直言，美国绝大多数税收本就是由富人承担的，他们早已缴足了所谓的“公平份额”。一旦加税幅度超过 50%——正如加州、纽约州、新泽西州或马萨诸塞州的做法——美国建国先父在宪法中设计的“州际竞争机制”就会立刻生效：富人们会毫不留情地把资产和企业迁往佛罗里达州或德克萨斯州，就像星巴克前首席执行官霍华德·舒尔茨（Howard Schultz）和谷歌的联合创始人那样。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 凯文的资本流动与税收反弹逻辑 accDescr: 展示过度征税如何迫使资本与富人迁徙，从而削弱税基的逻辑链条 subgraph 征税压力 T1["州政府推行高税率 (>50%)"] T2["富人与高管承受重税"] end subgraph 迁徙应对 M1["州际套利：迁至佛州、德州"] M2["跨国出走：寻找新庇护地 (如摩纳哥)"] end subgraph 经济后果 R1["原属地税基枯竭"] R2["证明'社会主义耗尽别人钱财'定律"] end T1 --> T2 T2 --> M1 M1 -.-> M2 M1 --> R1 M2 --> R2 ``` 凯文警告称，劫富济贫的逻辑在历史上屡试不爽地走向失败，“社会主义和共产主义的死穴，就在于你很快会把别人的钱给花光，因为富人会直接拔腿走人”。他援引历史案例说明：英国当年将最高边际税率推升至 90% 时触发了富人出逃；法国因为苛待本国富豪，迫使他们把家搬到四英里外的摩纳哥，一手造就了如今的摩纳哥避税天堂。在凯文眼中，美国繁荣的基石在于保护企业家精神与就业创造——全美仅有三分之一的人口拥有创业天分，而这三分之一的人雇佣了其余三分之二的人口。他用数据强调了美国的不可替代性：全球主权财富基金中，每 1 美元就有 52 美分流入美国，世界上没有任何一个国家拥有同等机会，“根本没人会说‘天哪，我好想投资朝鲜、能不能帮我买点俄罗斯基金、或者投点钱去古巴养老’”。他呼吁所有人深吸一口气、放轻松（"chillax"），不要破坏正在运转的美国梦。 - 凯文指出，美国三分之一的创业群体雇佣了其余三分之二的劳动力，这套体系支撑了美国 200 多年的繁荣。 - 全球主权财富中有 52%（每 1 美元中的 52 美分）选择配置在美国资产中。 - 富人应对极端税收的方式自古皆然：从英国 90% 高税率出逃，到法国富豪涌入摩纳哥，再到如今加州和纽约富豪迁居佛罗里达与德克萨斯。 --- ### [32:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1932s) 中产阶级危机与消费崩溃：森克的失业警钟 针对凯文的“出走威胁”，森克·维古尔（Cenk Uygur）报以冷笑并回击道：“别拿这种好事来威胁我（Don't threaten me with a good time）。”森克澄清，自己既不相信“机器人吃小孩”的离奇迷因，也不主张共产主义，作为一家媒体公司的首席执行官，他本身也是资本主义的一员。然而他坚信，资本主义绝不等于“碾压普通人、让企业高管通吞一切利益”。健康的美国模式必须拥有一个无比强大的中产阶级，他们不仅是高生产力的公民和选民，更是最核心的消费主体。如果持续削弱中产阶级这只“下金蛋的鹅”，当消费者兜里掏不出半分钱时，富豪们即便移居海外也无法独善其身。 森克尖锐地指出，辩论进行到此时，对方阵营对于“AI 引发的大规模失业潮”依然拿不出任何切实可行的应对方案。AI 巨头当前的巨额亏损就像早期的亚马逊，只是投资周期的必经阶段，其推向天际的股价证明它们未来必将攫取万亿级利润。而这笔财富绝非仅由少数创业者创造，纳税人支撑的公共基础设施和全社会的数据贡献才是底层功臣。更危险的是社会结构的崩塌——数以千万计的年轻男性一旦沦为无业游民，伴随而来的必然是犯罪率飙升与社会动荡甚至战争。而面对如此迫在眉睫的危机，整个 AI 行业和凯文给出的回应却只是轻佻的“放轻松、别担心，钱我们赚走，你们自求多福，大不了我们搬去摩纳哥”。 - 森克强调，中产阶级是资本主义的“金蛋之鹅”，失去了具备消费能力的普通大众，企业生产的产品将彻底失去市场。 - AI 巨头的百亿投资与账面亏损模式复刻了亚马逊早期的成长逻辑，其高估值预示着未来寡头利润的高度集中。 - 大量年轻男性陷入长期失业往往是历史动荡的导火索，会直接诱发犯罪激增与武装冲突。 --- ### [35:30](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2130s) 招聘范式重塑与双重替代：当AI同时颠覆脑力与体力 主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）打断了情绪化的争锋，将讨论拉回真实切身的商业世界。作为一名雇佣数百人的企业创始人兼 CEO，史蒂芬透露，就在过去六个月内，随着高级代码生成模型的爆发，他的招聘哲学发生了剧烈转变。在面对初级岗位应聘者时，他第一眼审查的就是对方是否具备“AI 熟练度（AI proficiency）”；那些缺乏 AI 技能的求职者会被直接淘汰，因为一个精通 AI 工具的初级员工在产出上能够以一当十（5x 到 10x）。面对这一观察，凯文回应称，人们误以为 AI 代码工具（例如 Claude）会彻底消灭软件工程师，但企业雇佣工程师的核心是为了“解决问题”，编写代码仅是手段；近期各大科技巨头的裁员潮并非由 AI 直接造成，而是在消化过去几年盲目激进招聘所积累的“组织脂肪”。 | 历史变革维度 | 工业革命时期 | 当前 AI 与具身智能革命 | |:--- |:--- |:--- | | **体力（Muscles）** | 蒸汽机、机械取代大量重体力劳动 | 人形机器人（如 Figure 01）接管精细搬运与操作 | | **脑力（Brains）** | 对复杂决策和认知计算无根本触动 | 大语言模型与代码工具（如 Claude）重构认知劳动 | | **冲击深度** | 机器替代肌肉，人类向脑力与管理迁移 | **肌肉与大脑同时遭受降维打击，无处可退** | 史蒂芬随即以具身智能的突破深化了论点：机器人公司 Figure AI 刚刚完成了一场连续四天的无间断直播，展示其人形机器人在车间分拣包裹，其速度与精准度已全面超越人类工人。史蒂芬援引埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）的预言指出，未来全球智能人形机器人与人类的比例可能会达到 2:1。尽管马斯克在时间节点上偶尔延期，但他许下的技术承诺（从“筷子”机械臂夹住回收火箭，到特斯拉全自动驾驶）最终都兑现了。如果马斯克关于人形机器人将在 2027 至 2028 年超越人类外科手术与保洁能力的预判成真，人类将迎来前所未见的生存危机：工业革命仅仅取代了肌肉，而这一次，代表人类生产力引擎的“大脑”与“体力”正在同时遭到颠覆。随后史蒂芬以自己融资逾 3000 万美元的旧金山公司 Thirdweb 为例，展开了更具体的商业见闻。 - 史蒂芬指出初级招聘门槛已被改写：具备 AI 熟练度的员工产出可达普通员工的 5 至 10 倍，不具备该技能者面临初筛淘汰。 - Figure AI 进行了为期 4 天的人形机器人仓库分拣连续直播，其效率与稳定性已战胜人类分拣工。 - 马斯克预测未来人形机器人与人类的比例将达到 2:1，甚至提出在 2027 至 2028 年左右在复杂手术与精细家政上全面超越人类。 ### [39:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2349s) 机器人爆发的前夜：智能是缺失的最后拼图 Steven Bartlett 分享了他最近去旧金山拜访一家创业加速器的震撼见闻。他大约有两年没去过那里，一走进位于旧金山占地 40,000 平方英尺的孵化空间（如 A16Z 相关的创投生态网络），眼前的一幕让他十分错愕：“为什么这里的每个人都在做机器人？”负责人对 Steven 解释道，机械和机器人硬件部件早在几十年前就已经成熟完备了，人类过去真正缺乏且成本极其昂贵的关键部分其实是“智能”（Intelligence）。在参观过程中，Steven 亲眼目睹了机械臂在厨房炒菜做饭，还看到一台大型机器能够根据指令现场为你调配制作出任何你想要的专属香水。负责人直言，既然现在机器有了智能大脑，而且获取智能的成本已经降到了几分钱，大家便不再只是写纯软件了，所有人都在全力进军机器人硬件。 这种快速演进让 Steven 深刻意识到，未来的图景将在极短时间内与过去彻底不同。作为一个务实的现实主义者，Steven 转向 Kevin O'Leary 并抛出一个尖锐的核心问题：既然机器人智能以如此低廉的成本爆发，Kevin 是否承认，今天人类所拥有的绝大多数工作岗位都将不可避免地面临消亡？ ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 机器人技术爆发的逻辑驱动 accDescr: 解释为何过去几十年成熟的机械硬件在融合低成本 AI 智能后迅速催生实体机器人浪潮。 subgraph Hardware["硬件基础（过去数十年）"] H1["机械臂与工业机电"] H2["传感器与伺服电机"] end subgraph MissingPiece["核心缺失项（近期突破）"] AI["AI 认知决策能力<br/>（成本降至数美分）"] end subgraph Boom["机器人应用爆发"] R1["自适应餐饮烹饪"] R2["个性化调香与制造"] R3["具身通用机器人"] end Hardware --> Boom MissingPiece --> Boom ``` --- ### [40:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2413s) 阳光乐观派：月球、火星与数百万高端新岗位 Kevin O'Leary 对此表现出极度乐观的态度。他直接反驳称，整天在流水线上“摇香水瓶”从来就不是什么值得留恋的好工作。他以最新公布的宏大太空计划为例：埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）若想拿到巨额股权激励，前提之一是必须在火星上安置 100 万人口；而就在 6 小时前，美国国家航空航天局（NASA）刚宣布将在月球建立永久基地。Kevin 情绪激昂地反问，大家能否想象仅仅为了执行这两大人类工程，将会创造出数十万甚至数百万个高薪就业岗位？这些前所未有的历史机遇涵盖了工程师、数据分析师、软件架构师，以及制造运往月球和火星专用设施的产业工人。 在 Kevin 看来，人们不应该把目光死死盯在那个“失去摇香水瓶工作的工人”身上，而完全无视 24 个月前人类甚至无法想象的数百万高端新职位。他形容那些散布恐慌情绪的人是认定世界末日降临、自由世界终结、大家迟早要被机器人吃掉的悲观主义者；而他自己则属于另一阵营，借用经典歌词调侃道：“未来太光明了，我得戴墨镜，甚至得买更多副太阳镜才能挡住这耀眼的光芒。”他坚信人类不会消灭工作，而是将劳动力转移到诸如火星探索、太空数据中心搭建以及星链（Starlink）通信网络扩建等既高端又极其有趣的尖端领域，坚称“天生摇香水的人肯定更愿意换一份把人类送上月球的工作”。 - **前沿太空工程需求**：火星百万人口定居设想与 NASA 刚宣布的月球永久基地计划，正催生庞大的高薪工程与制造供应链。 - **产业转移的逻辑**：淘汰的是枯燥低效的重复劳动（如流水线装配与香水摇匀），诞生的是太空基建、轨道计算节点及全球卫星通信网络等高附加值产业。 --- ### [42:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2526s) 现实的残酷断层：61岁的蓝领工人无法一夜之间去造火箭 针对 Kevin 的宏大愿景，Steven 迅速指出了逻辑漏洞：马斯克的巨额激励方案中其实明确包含了极短时间内造出 100 万台人形机器人的指标，而从大气压强和生理耐受度来看，送高智能人形机器人上火星远比送活生生的生物人类要容易得多；若马斯克的预言成真，去火星开荒的恐怕首先是机器人本身。接着 Steven 追问 Kevin，能否换位思考指出自己可能在什么情况下看走眼。Kevin 毫不犹豫、极为斩钉截铁地回答：“不可能，我不可能错！”引来全场一阵哄笑与轻叹。 Cenk Uygur 随即加入辩论，一针见血地指出了 Kevin 理论中最致命的漏洞——所谓的“过渡期（Interregnum）”完全被无视了。Cenk 指出，就算抛开“机器人吃小孩”的极端末日论，完全采纳 Kevin 那套“机器人接管一切、人类闲暇富足、整天琢磨着去天王星（Uranus）或金星旅游”的超级阳光远景，这种理想状态从现在算起起码也需要 20 年才能达成。然而，在通往未来的这 20 年残酷过渡期里，卡车司机、车间装配工等庞大群体已经实打实地下岗了。一个在克利夫兰装配线上干了大半辈子、现年 61 岁的失业产业工人，绝不可能在短时间内重新进修成为带领人类登上火星的顶尖航天工程师。 Cenk 进一步揭露了华尔街的冷血狂欢：资本分析师们每天都在为各大公司裁员 25%、通过“降本增效（Synergies）”解雇员工而兴奋叫好、高喊“买入、买入、买入”，企业高管竞相攀比谁砍人手砍得更快，却从来没有一个人思考过最基本的经济学问题：“如果工人都被裁掉了，未来谁还有钱来购买这些公司生产的产品？”Cenk 强调自己绝非末日论者，他在《The Young Turks》节目中发起过名为“希望行动（Operation Hope）”的公益活动，座右铭始终是“敢于尝试（Get caught trying）”，但如果整个社会面对即将来临的数千万人失业大潮连正视和尝试解决的意愿都没有，眼下等待全社会的只能是一场前所未有的经济与民生剧震。 --- ### [45:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2732s) Uber 总裁的私下坦白：数百万司机将被自动驾驶取代 为了印证大规模失业绝非空穴来风，Steven 透露了他与全球最大出行平台 Uber 的首席执行官达拉·科斯罗萨希（Dara Khosrowshahi）的私下对话。驾驶行业是全球吸纳就业人数最多的行业之一，而当 Steven 询问 Dara 是否会极快地部署自动驾驶汽车以全面替代平台旗下的 940 万名专职与兼职司机时，Dara 给出了肯定的回答。紧接着 Steven 追问这 940 万被技术淘汰的司机未来该去何处谋生，Dara 竟直截了当地回答：“我不知道。” Steven 补充道，Dara 在私底下非常坦白地承认：“AI 必将替代 Uber 的 940 万个岗位。科技高管们在 AI 问题上对公众并不坦诚；他们在紧闭的会议室大门背后热烈讨论着即将来临的颠覆风暴有多么恐怖，却从不敢在公众面前吐露实情。” - **全球规模最大的就业池面临瓦解**：仅 Uber 一家平台就维系着约 940 万名司机的生计，自动化将彻底抽空底层服务业的基本盘。 - **硅谷高层的认知错位**：台前对公众描绘技术乌托邦，台后在闭门会议中对数以百万计从业者的生计去向毫无应对方案。 --- ### [46:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2787s) 中场商业赞助与政治民调风向切入 在激烈辩论的间隙，Steven 带来了两则个人投资与推荐品牌的赞助内容： 首先是创作者经济辅助平台 **Stan** 及其全新推出的 AI 工具 **Stanley**。Steven 分析称，绝大多数人之所以无法建立个人品牌或持续发布社交内容，是因为面对空白界面时常陷入“别人会怎么看我”、“我讲的内容会不会太蠢”的心理瘫痪状态。作为投资人，他推荐用户尝试通过 AI 工具分析账号调性、历史数据和爆款内容，自动生成内容灵感或文案以突破创作瓶颈。 紧接着是来自伦敦办公室团队极为推崇的 **Cometeer** 冻干浓缩咖啡。Steven 讲述了创始人 Matt 将大批采用极速冷冻（Flash-freeze）锁鲜技术的冰块状咖啡原液送至其伦敦团队的趣事，整个团队在 Slack 频道中对其浓郁风味赞不绝口，用户早晨只需轻按胶囊底部将冷冻咖啡块挤出，倒入热水即可快速调制出一杯高品质黑咖啡。 赞助播报结束后，Steven 重新将讨论拉回大局层面，指出妨碍美国全力推进 AI 战略技术的最重大潜在政治变数，正是眼下急剧动荡的美国总统支持率走势，并随即展示了最新的支持率暴跌图表，引发了两位嘉宾对白宫执政危机的新一轮交锋。 ### [48:52](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2932s) 迷雾重重的中东局势与特朗普民调的崩塌 主持人史蒂芬·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）首先抛出了眼前的政治乱象：民调显示特朗普总统的支持率正经历断崖式暴跌，即将在 11 月打响的美国中期选举局势岌岌可危。然而，普通公众却彻底被自相矛盾的官方叙事搞糊涂了——前一天还在宣传与伊朗达成了停火协议，第二天就以“防御性打击”为由重新投下炸弹；刚宣称和平协议指日可待，霍尔木兹海峡的航道又旋即封锁，随之而来的又是一轮轰炸。面对史蒂芬关于“这起冲突的底层真相究竟是什么”的提问，森克·维古尔（Cenk Uygur）直言不讳地指出，特朗普的政治基本盘正在被这场战争全面吞噬。原本就因爱泼斯坦档案（Epstein files）丑闻以及无视普通人生活成本、只顾给富豪阶层大幅减税而风雨飘摇的执政根基，如今在自身选民内部引发了毁灭性反噬。 森克列举了一系列惨烈的民意数据：曾投票支持特朗普的非“MAGA”（让美国再次伟大）共和党人中，如今仅剩 53% 勉强表示支持，甚至连最铁杆的 MAGA 核心盘也流失了整整 20%。全美有高达 68% 的民众认为国家正驶入错误轨道，76% 的人对当前经济现状极度不满。其核心根源就在于战火阻断了霍尔木兹海峡，不仅引爆油价飞涨，更截断了关键的化肥运输链，从而在全产业链掀起恶性通胀。这种地缘能源危机在欧洲和亚洲尤为刺痛——韩国甚至不得不强制全民节约燃气以度日，印度也面临严重的资源短缺。全人类几乎没有谁希望看到这场冲突，其背后的唯一推手和获益方只有以色列。 - **特朗普民调受挫数据**：非 MAGA 共和党选民支持率仅剩 53%，流失约 20% 的硬核 MAGA 支持者； - **全美民意大盘**：68% 的受访者认为国家处于错误发展方向，76% 对经济现状极度不满； - **全球供应链受创**：霍尔木兹海峡受阻导致石油与化肥出口受阻，亚洲（如韩国配额节气、印度化肥荒）与欧洲承受沉重的外溢通胀。 --- ### [51:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3073s) 合法化的政治献金：超级政治行动委员会与外国游说集团 森克将美国陷入地缘泥潭的制度根源归结为“合法化受贿”。在现行的竞选财务体制下，企业、游说集团与超级富豪可以通过超级政治行动委员会（Super PAC）向政客无上限地注资。森克举出典型范例：仅谢尔登·阿德尔森（Sheldon Adelson）与米里亚姆·阿德尔森（Miriam Adelson）这一个家族，就向特朗普提供了超过 3.17 亿美元的政治献金。特朗普在私底下甚至会“极其诚实”地公开承认阿德尔森“更在乎以色列而非美国”，并在对方的要求下直接将美国驻以色列大使馆迁往耶路撒冷。在森克看来，这种赤裸裸出卖国家外交政策的行为，在华盛顿政界早已成为常态。 这种游说力量不仅限于国防承包商或坐拥 350 亿美元政府补贴的大型石油公司，以色列游说集团（AIPAC 等）更是深度渗透了整个体制。森克指出，全美 94% 的国会议员都接受过该游说团体的政治献金，但媒体与体制对待以色列问题却存在极端的双重标准：公众可以自由抨击大型制药公司阻碍医保议价、批评石油巨头榨取纳税人血汗钱，但只要将同样的逻辑套用在以色列游说势力上，主流舆论便会立即扣上“反犹主义”的帽子，将发声者彻底封杀并剥夺工作机会。正是这种绝对的政治免责特权，纵容了中东盟友的肆意妄为。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 美国中东政策金钱游说与经济连锁反应链路 accDescr: 展示政治献金如何掌控华盛顿决策并最终导致地缘冲突与本土通胀 subgraph CapitalLobby ["政治献金与利益游说"] L1["巨额政治献金 / Super PAC"] L2["以色列游说集团与财阀资金"] L1 & L2 --> P["俘获 94% 国会议员及两党总统候选人"] end subgraph ForeignAction ["海外军事冒险"] P --> M["无底线支持中东军事打击"] M --> W["中东战火蔓延 & 封锁霍尔木兹海峡"] end subgraph EconomicFallout ["本土经济反噬与政治危机"] W --> E1["石油暴涨与化肥断供"] E1 --> E2["本土恶性通胀 & 物价飞涨"] E2 --> R["执政支持率暴跌 & 选民剧烈反弹"] end ``` --- ### [53:49](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3229s) 美国利益与以色列野心的彻底背离 在剖析战略核心时，森克强调，美国的国家利益与以色列的地区目标存在本质冲突。从美国的利益出发，当务之急是重新打通霍尔木兹海峡、遏制能源危机并平抑国内通胀；在美军击毙伊朗政权 49 名高层核心人员并重创其海空力量后，伊朗已多次表示愿意在国际核查员监督下承诺不制造核武器，美国本应立即达成和平协议抽身回国。然而，以色列内塔尼亚胡当局的真实意图是消灭中东的一切区域对手，使以色列成为该地区唯一的超级大国。从“9·11”之后向美国提交的“七国打击清单”开始，如今清单上的最后一个目标——伊朗——也已被拉入战火。 与此同时，战火也成为吞并领土的掩护。森克痛批以色列借美伊战局掩护入侵黎巴嫩南部，企图将其领土推进至利塔尼河（Litani River），并导致上百万黎巴嫩平民流离失所；内塔尼亚胡甚至在录像中公开炫耀战后将对加沙的控制范围从 53% 扩大到 60% 以上。面对史蒂芬关于“伊朗距离拥有核武器仅剩数周”的官方战争借口，森克讥讽道，内塔尼亚胡从 20 世纪 90 年代开始就一直在兜售所谓“只差几周就造出核弹”的谎言，兜售了整整 30 年。美国历年来向以色列注入了超过 3200 亿美元的援助，换来的却是被绑架在长达数十年、耗资高达 8 万亿美元的漫长反恐战争泥潭中，甚至以色列国防军士兵将洗劫黎巴嫩穆斯林与基督徒家庭的视频大肆发上网并宣布吞并其领土，主流媒体却仍将其包装为所谓“自卫”。 - **对伊军事行动战果**：已击毙伊朗政权内部 49 名核心高层指挥官，重创其海军与空军力量； - **战后土地扩张**：内塔尼亚胡在录音中证实以色列对加沙的占领控制比例从战前的 53% 攀升至 60% 以上； - **历史资金与战争账单**：美国历年累计向以色列提供 3200 亿美元直接援助，在中东反恐战争中消耗了高达 8 万亿美元纳税人资金； - **跨两党资金控制链**：AIPAC 及以色列游说组织在唐纳德·特朗普、乔·拜登、哈基姆·杰弗里斯（Hakeem Jeffries）、查克·舒默（Chuck Schumer）及迈克·约翰逊（Mike Johnson）的政治生涯中，均位列头号终身政治献金来源。 ### [58:07](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3487s) 谁在渴望战争？援助以色列引发的全球反弹 Cenk Uygur 严厉抨击了美国对以色列的外交与财政支持，直言美国正在向一个实施国家恐怖主义的国家输送数千亿美元。他强调，这种盲目的资助非但没有真正保护以色列，反而是在纵容其最恶劣的冲动，导致整个国际社会对以色列产生强烈的反感与敌意。全世界因为这场冲突被迫承受物价飙升和无休止的动荡，而以色列政府为了自身私利不断激化局势，“按常理来看，地球上除以色列之外，没有任何一个国家希望这场针对伊朗的战争继续打下去”。 主持人随后将话题转向 Kevin O'Leary，询问他对特朗普此前发动的军事打击以及更广泛军事行动效果的看法。Kevin 首先声明自己绝不是任何政客的说客，作为投资人，他始终关注的是政策而非个人，因为政客来来去去，唯有政策会长期遗留并影响市场。 ### [58:57](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3537s) 霍尔木兹海峡困局与伊朗政权的经济软肋 Kevin 从波斯历史与地缘战略切入展开剖析。他指出，波斯人拥有极其灿烂的历史文明，在数学、诗歌、艺术等领域成就斐然；然而近半个世纪以来，这片土地被他称之为“极其糟糕的管理层”所劫持。在这个近亿人口的国家里，仅有约 15 万人的精英统治核心与一支由他们掌管的百万大军，而这支军队和庞大的代理人网络纯粹依靠能源出口收入来发饷维持。邻国阿联酋、巴林、卡塔尔和沙特过去几十年之所以保持克制，是因为只要胡塞武装等代理人每半年炸一次油轮、推高 30% 保险费，局势尚属可控；然而随着局势彻底失控，封锁海峡直接重创了包括中国在内极其依赖该航道的亚洲经济体——中国约有 48% 的能源运输需经此海峡。 Kevin 认为，无论如何都绝不能让这样由少数激进分子把持的政权掌握射程覆盖各地的弹道导弹与 90% 丰度的武器级浓缩铀。军事打击会持续进行，直到德黑兰的高层被打到清醒并意识到自身统治岌岌可危。他提出了一个商业解决路径：该区域最终可能会效仿苏伊士运河或巴拿马运河的管理模式，由海湾多国出资（哪怕每月耗费 50 亿美元巡逻也是九牛一毛）共同管理霍尔木兹海峡，使其脱离单一国家控制，恢复正常通航。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 霍尔木兹海峡经济制衡机制 accDescr: 展示伊朗海峡封锁导致的资金枯竭及其对政权发饷维稳链条的连锁影响。 subgraph Blockade["海峡危机与能源命脉"] A["封锁霍尔木兹海峡"] --> B["波及中国48%能源航道<br/>国际航运保险暴增"] A --> C["伊朗每日损失2.1亿美元"] end subgraph RegimePressure["统治成本与内外博弈"] C --> D["能源收入锐减<br/>无法按时发放军饷"] D --> E["15万统治阶级动摇<br/>内线面临失控风险"] E --> F["迫使高层让步谈判<br/>放弃核武与海峡控制"] end ``` - **海峡经济损失**：因海峡航运受阻，伊朗政权每 24 小时损失约 2.1 亿美元的外汇收入。 - **能源与政治连锁**：若油价回落至 70 美元附近，美国国内围绕能源负担能力的政治叙事将大幅降温，但无论如何，海湾各邻国已对伊朗导弹袭击忍无可忍，旧有的平衡已被彻底打破。 ### [01:05:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=3916s) 虚构的核威胁与被媒体掩盖的中东现实 对于 Kevin 的乐观研判，Cenk 连连摇头表示强烈反对。他坦言自己身为无神论者，同样痛恨任何形式的宗教原教旨主义与腐败体制，伊朗政权的残暴毋庸置疑，但内塔尼亚胡身上的腐败指控以及以色列极右翼定居者“奉神之名剥夺巴勒斯坦人土地”的原教旨狂热同样危险，且美国政府还在源源不断向其提供数十亿美元的军费。 Cenk 进一步驳斥了所谓“伊朗洲际核打击威胁”的言论。他直指美国主流媒体几乎成了以色列的传声筒，完全掩盖了基本的技术事实：伊朗根本没有能够将核弹头打到美国本土的运载工具，过去三十年没有，今天同样没有；伊朗从未将铀浓缩提纯到 90% 的武器级水平，最高只达到过 60% 左右，且主要设施已在打击下深埋地底。此外，伊朗已故最高领袖曾正式发布过禁止制造核武器的最高宗教法令（Fatwa），但在西方舆论场中，哈马斯党章的内容被奉为圭臬，而最高宗教领袖的禁核法令却被完全无视。Cenk 反问，伊朗一旦真正动用核武就会招致美以反击导致全境 9,000 万人陪葬，没有任何一个正常政权会这么做。他总结道，把伊朗塑造成疯狂暴徒只是认知战，现实中未主动侵略邻国的是伊朗，反而是以色列在不断四处轰炸周围七个邻国，并无休止地掏空美国纳税人的钱包。 ### [01:07:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4065s) 岑克痛斥以军平民伤亡率与“大以色列”领土扩张野心 岑克·维古尔（Cenk Uygur）情绪激动地指出，以色列国防军（IDF）的平民致死率高达 83%，也就是说他们杀害的人群中绝大多数都是平民。他强调，这个数字比哈马斯、真主党或世界上任何被定义的恐怖组织都要高，而且以军杀害的平民总数大约是哈马斯杀害人数的一百倍。岑克直言，如果哈马斯被认定为恐怖分子，那么以色列政府无疑也是一个恐怖主义政权。令人愤慨的是，美国本身财政捉襟见肘，却没有全民医保、没有免费大学、没有带薪育儿假，而以色列拥有这一切福利，美国纳税人却被迫出资去支持以色列的战争与种族灭绝。他痛批贪婪且腐败的美国政客和主流媒体，不断向公众灌输“美国欠以色列更多战争”的谎言。 岑克进一步揭露，和平谈判屡屡破裂的根源在于内塔尼亚胡。每当和平曙光浮现，内塔尼亚胡就会给唐纳德·特朗普打电话，通话一结束，特朗普立刻态度逆转并重新开始鼓吹战争。就在最近一次通话后，美国轰炸了伊朗，以色列也对黎巴嫩展开了猛烈轰炸。特朗普随后抛出了三项根本不可能实现的霸王条款：其一，要求伊朗第一天就交出所有高浓缩铀，然而这些材料深埋地下，挖掘取出至少需要数月；其二，要求全面加入《亚伯拉罕协议》（Abraham Accords）。岑克指出，美国媒体把该协议美化为和平方案，但实际上这完全是在出卖巴勒斯坦人，让阿拉伯国家在以色列不承诺结束占领的情况下恢复关系并通商，默认以色列永久占领巴勒斯坦领土；其三，以色列在《青年土耳其人》（The Young Turks）密切跟踪的以色列本土媒体中公开鼓吹“大以色列”（Greater Israel）设想，甚至曾窃取美国的核机密、核扳机与铀原料，根本算不上真正的盟友。最荒唐的是内塔尼亚胡公开要求所有敌对势力停火，唯独以色列保有继续袭击、入侵并占领黎巴嫩南部的特权。这种单方面霸权条款没有任何国家会签署，意味着即便美伊达成和平，以色列也会在第一天将其撕毁。 - 以色列国防军致死人员中平民占比高达 83%，远高于全球各类武装组织。 - 以色列享有全民医保、免费高等教育和带薪产假，而为其战争买单的美国本土却缺乏这些基本社会福利。 - 特朗普在与内塔尼亚胡通话后提出的三大苛刻前提：首日清空深埋地下的高浓缩铀、全面加入出卖巴勒斯坦权益的《亚伯拉罕协议》、允许以色列保留单方面轰炸黎巴嫩南部的特权。 - 岑克主张的脱身方案：美国单独与伊朗达成和平协议并将以色列剔除在外，“以色列想打仗就自己去和伊朗打，与美国无关”。 ### [01:10:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4244s) 岑克预言中东危机走向“全面灾难”与全球经济萧条 主持人史蒂文·巴特利特询问岑克对局势发展的具体预测，岑克断言未来必将是一场“彻头彻尾的灾难”。因为以色列的底线是必须保留继续轰炸黎巴嫩的权力，而在这一前提下伊朗绝不可能妥协达成和平。灾难的具体体现首先是美军重新卷入轰炸行动。美国有 5 万名地面部队驻扎在战区舰艇上，岑克讽刺道，在听从游说的美国政客眼里，以色列人的命显然比美国士兵更金贵，因此送上前线送死的永远是美军士兵。 一旦美军对伊朗展开更具灾难性的轰炸，伊朗必然会以牙还牙，直接打击海湾国家的石油与天然气田设施。这不仅会导致全球天然气和原油价格彻底失控、飙升至天际，引发全球性的深度经济衰退甚至大萧条，而且被摧毁的能源基础设施至少需要 5 到 10 年的时间才能完成重建。岑克愤怒地表示，这一切破坏的根本原因，仅仅是因为以色列想要掠夺更多土地，美国必须立刻停止向其输送战争资金。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 岑克预测的冲突升级链条 accDescr: 描述以色列拒绝停止轰炸黎巴嫩如何引发美伊冲突升级，并最终摧毁海湾能源设施及重创全球经济的恶性循环。 subgraph 以色列军事行动 A["以方坚持轰炸黎巴嫩"] --> B["美伊和平协议彻底破裂"] end subgraph 军事升级与反制 B --> C["美军驻海湾部队介入轰炸伊朗"] C --> D["伊朗导弹反击海湾油气田"] end subgraph 全球经济冲击 D --> E["关键能源基础设施损毁<br>需5至10年重建"] D --> F["油气价格暴涨失控"] F --> G["全球性深度衰退与经济萧条"] end ``` ### [01:12:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4320s) 凯文·奥利里解析“首场高科技无人机战争”与防御成本倒挂 史蒂文转向凯文·奥利里（Kevin O'Leary），质问特朗普是否完全误判了战争周期。特朗普最初宣称会在短时间内速战速决，仿佛像委内瑞拉政权更迭那样简单迅速，但如今战事早已超出预期窗口期。凯文对此给出了不同的商业与军事观察视角，他认为这场战争是人类历史上“第一场真正意义上的科技战争”，其运作逻辑与传统战争截然不同。战场上大量使用了依托太空卫星定位系统控制的先进制导武器，作战模式发生了根本蜕变。 凯文分享了来自自己在阿布扎比和迪拜员工的一线见闻：在开战的前四周，伊朗每天清晨都会发动一波波无人机攻势。令人震惊的是，这些无人机本质上只是“碳纤维机翼装上割草机发动机”，单架造价极其低廉，仅约 35,000 美元；然而，阿联酋军方使用美国制造的防空导弹进行拦截，单枚导弹成本在 120 万至 300 万美元之间。用数百万美元的精密导弹拦截 3.5 万美元的土制无人机，暴露出西方在防御成本上的极度不对称与严重倒挂。 - 伊朗自制无人机采用低廉的碳纤维骨架与割草机级别发动机，单架造价仅约 3.5 万美元。 - 美制拦截防空导弹单枚成本介于 120 万美元至 300 万美元之间，双方资金损耗比高达数十甚至上百倍。 - 凯文警告五角大楼必须掌控足够的算力基础设施，绝不能在 AI 算力竞赛中输给中国。 ### [01:13:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4417s) 凯文预测“无人机去势战”将逼停各方，北美能源自足无虞 凯文并不认同岑克关于美军将大规模派出地面部队入侵的推测。他认为未来不会演变成惨烈的地面巷战，战局会继续呈现为持续的“肉质软化”（tenderizing）空袭消耗战：通过源源不断的高精度打击精准摧毁伊朗的基础设施，直至统治该国的 15 万名核心权力阶层意识到政权统治已难以为继。凯文透露，从他所接触的创投交易来看，未来 24 个月内将涌现出大量全新的反无人机电磁阻断技术，以及性能远超割草机水平的高性价比反制无人机。 凯文认为该地区最终会走向稳定，并由富裕的邻国出资完成重建，而关键的外部停火推手将是中国。中国根本无法承受中东战火引发的长期原油断供之痛，其海运在途与陆地储备的原油库存正在急剧枯竭；中国高层很可能会直接向伊朗施压，迫使其坐到谈判桌前结束冲突。至于北美本土，凯文指出美国拥有极其丰富的本土能源储备，加上最大能源进口国加拿大的稳定供应，美国根本不存在能源断供危机。真正的挑战仅在于原油作为以美元计价的全球大宗商品，其价格会受国际盘面波动（此前一度攀升至 106 美元，随后回落至 97 美元左右），但北美自身具备完整的能源安全护城河。 ### [01:15:47](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4547s) 赞助商时段：Pipedrive 销售管理 CRM 在讨论间隙，主持人史蒂文·巴特利特插入了播客赞助商 Pipedrive 的推介内容。他坦言，每一位创业者在企业扩张过程中，都会面临角色转换的关键节点——从亲自处理所有业务执行细节的操作者，转变为统筹全局的掌舵人。要实现这一跨越，核心在于建立脱离个人干预也能稳定运转的系统。Pipedrive 正是一款专为高成长销售团队打造的智能化 CRM 工具，史蒂文团队已连续使用超过十年。该系统通过单一可视化看板展现每笔交易的实时进度与潜在阻碍，全球已有超过 10 万家企业借此实现规范化运营。收听观众可通过专属链接获取 30 天免费试用权益（常规试用为 14 天），且无需预先绑定信用卡。 ### [01:16:55](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4615s) 脆弱连接与对话卡片：Steven 的反思 在激烈的辩论间隙，主持人 Steven Bartlett 分享了自己在主持近 700 场深度访谈中所领悟到的人生体验。他坦言，与世界上各领域顶尖人物对谈最出人意料的收获，就是发现“脆弱性其实是建立人际深度连接的门户”。每当与嘉宾对坐两三个小时后，彼此之间都会产生极为真挚的情感共鸣，而在离别之际，他总会邀请嘉宾在《首席执行官日记》（The Diary of a CEO）中留下一道深刻的问题。Steven 将这些问题汇编成了实体对话卡片，并透露自己无论是在家中与未婚妻相处，还是在公司与同事交流，都会抽空玩这套卡片，以此在数字时代重新寻回人与人之间面对面、模拟式的真实温情与连结。 --- ### [01:18:05](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4685s) 耐心赤字：伊朗的拖延战术与中国的能源命门 回到地缘冲突的议题上，Steven Bartlett 敏锐地指出，美国当前面临的最大系统性风险不是军事实力，而是公众耐心与支持度的急剧流失。从民调数据来看，特朗普的不支持率节节攀升，而支持率却一路走低。Steven 设身处地分析道，如果自己是伊朗最高领袖或体制内的核心决策者，面对即将到来的美国中期选举以及 2028 年大选，就会意识到特朗普的谈判时间窗口“实际上只剩下几个月”。既然深知谈判对手几个月后就可能因选票而被赶下台，伊朗政权完全有理由选择死扛到底、静观其变，因为德黑兰对民众的压迫早已毫无道德负担，他们自认掌握了所有拖延的筹码。 Kevin O'Leary 承认 Steven 的逻辑极具穿透力，但他随即反驳称，伊朗在棋局中需要面对的绝不仅仅是特朗普这位“大人物”，而是同时在侍奉两个“最高领袖”——除了伊朗内部随时轮替的掌舵者，还有大洋彼岸的中国领导人。Kevin 强调，中国最高领导层维系执政合法性的基石在于老百姓有饭吃、有工作、经济保持繁荣，而中国有高达 48% 的能源必须穿过霍尔木兹海峡。Kevin 断言，在 11 月之前，如果咽喉要道受阻威胁到自身经济，中方就会像“挤十几岁少年的青春痘”一样狠狠捏紧伊朗政权的脑袋，迫使其就范。 与此相对，Steven 抛出了令外界极为担忧的另一个谈判死结：特朗普与副总统 JD·万斯（JD Vance）多次公开夸耀美军已经彻底铲除了伊朗各层级的领导结构，但参议员马可·卢比奥（Marco Rubio）等人也不得不承认，现在的尴尬局面在于甚至连信鸽都无法送达那些仍在各自为战、持续发射导弹的基层伊朗士兵手中。这种建制的粉碎反倒导致了极度的无序，让美方根本找不到能够拍板履约的有效谈判对象。 --- ### [01:20:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4843s) 谁在操控战争？战情室黑幕与政权更迭的幻象 针对“能否达成和平协议”的疑问，Cenk Uygur 情绪激动地披露，其实就在刚过去的周末，各方几乎已经敲定了一份清晰直接的停火协议：伊朗重新开放霍尔木兹海峡，美方解除海上封锁；伊朗方面交出高浓缩铀，承诺不发展核武计划，并接受国际社会对其民用能源级浓缩铀进行全程监测。然而，这份协议再次被扼杀，Cenk 直指幕后黑手正是以色列。当 Kevin 追问凭据何在时，Cenk 援引《纽约时报》的深度报道揭露，在军事打击发起前，以色列总理内塔尼亚胡亲赴白宫战情室，摩萨德负责人则通过保密视频连线同时接入，两人联手向特朗普极力施压，最终促成其下达开战指令。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 停战协议破裂与地缘施压机制 accDescr: 展示原本清晰的和平协议如何因为以色列对白宫战情室的游说施压而反复破裂的机制 subgraph Deal["本已接近成型的协议方案"] D1["伊朗承诺：交出高浓缩铀<br/>放弃核武 + 接受民用核监测"] D2["美国承诺：解除封锁<br/>霍尔木兹海峡全面复航"] end subgraph Intervention["外部地缘干预"] I1["内塔尼亚胡亲临战情室<br/>摩萨德主管视频连线施压"] I2["国会两党议员集体阻挠<br/>游说集团注入巨额政治献金"] end subgraph Outcome["美方政策反复与僵局"] R1["特朗普推翻和平承诺<br/>提出不切实际的新苛求"] R2["陷入泥潭：消灭顶层首脑后<br/>15万人体制持续派生新节点"] end Deal --> Intervention Intervention --> R1 R1 --> R2 ``` Cenk 讽刺说，现实中已经发生了至少六次同样的戏码：特朗普前脚刚对外宣称“和平即将来临”，后脚只要与内塔尼亚胡通完电话，立刻就变脸宣称“和平绝无可能”，并随即开出一连串不可实现的苛刻条件。Cenk 怒斥以色列之所以不断阻挠停火，是因为其战略野心在于彻底吞并黎巴嫩南部并将伊朗全面炸烂砸碎。他批评 Kevin 和美国主流社会沉溺在“伊朗政权会主动投降”的脱离现实的幻象中，指出美国当年推行“政权更迭”就已惨败，伊朗有着深达 15 万核心骨干的官僚与准军事组织体系，无论美军定点清除了多少顶层首脑，体制底层的人才梯队马上就会层层填补，根本无法根除。 - **破裂的协议条件**：伊朗交出高浓缩铀，放弃核武制造，接受国际核查员对其仅保留在民用能源级别的浓缩活动进行监控；美方相应解除封锁并放行海峡。 - **战情室幕后游说**：内塔尼亚胡与摩萨德负责人在关键节点双向施压白宫，导致特朗普在和平与开战表态之间反复横跳至少半打次数。 - **庞大的深层网络**：伊朗体制并非几个人说了算，拥有多达 15 万人的政治与军事骨干网络支撑运转，斩首战术无法瓦解其抵抗意志。 --- ### [01:22:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4962s) 大国棋局、虚假的能源独立与 AI 监控战 谈及 Kevin 提出的“中国施压论”，Cenk 认为这并非天方夜谭，但指出了更深层的大国战略反差：在中国看来，俄罗斯在乌克兰泥潭中耗尽了军力与国力，美国如今又在伊朗战场挥霍巨量军事资源与纳税人金钱，两个大国“犹如两个傻瓜一样不停地挥拳痛击自己的脸颊”。相比之下，中国没有挑起任何战争，没有背负战争的沉重财政负担与国际公关包袱；当中国带着公路和桥梁等基建方案走向非洲或拉美时，当地国家自然更愿意与不诉诸武力的中国合作。Cenk 感叹这是一套在商业和经济逻辑上远胜于美国的战略，但美国却因为以色列游说集团的绑架，连最基本的明智算盘都打不出来——国会中跳出来公开阻挠和平协议的民主与共和两党政客，几乎人人都收受了以色列游说组织超过 100 万美元的巨额政治捐款。 在经济与科技安全层面，Cenk 进一步粉碎了 Kevin 所谓的“美国能源独立”神话。他直言，开采出的石油会直接进入全球市场并受全球统一价格支配，所谓的国内原油根本不归美国人民所有，而是掌握在埃克森美孚（ExxonMobil）和雪佛龙（Chevron）这些私营跨国巨头手里。跨国公司会为了利润在全世界自由倒卖，除非推行社会主义立法禁止原油出口，否则美国的加油站价格就必然被全球油价死死绑架。 随后，辩论的焦点转向了令人毛骨悚然的军事科技化滥用。Cenk 揭露，以色列在加沙战事中利用名为“爸爸在哪里”（Where's Daddy）的 AI 人工智能目标识别系统：算法依靠极其模糊的间接通话记录给目标打上关联标签，并在目标返回家中后才引导导弹精准打击房屋，将目标连同其整个家庭彻底炸死。Cenk 警告，如果这就是军事 AI 的未来，全人类都将走向毁灭。他特别提到科技巨头拉里·埃里森（Larry Ellison）公开鼓吹“我们现在能够追踪所有公民的一举一动并将该技术引入美国本土”，对此 Cenk 表达了极度强烈的愤慨：“我不想要他们的全面监控国家，我不想和以色列有任何瓜葛，美军应该立即撤回家园，全心全意服务于美国人民自己的利益。” ### [01:25:35](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5135s) 民意逆转：美国选民对以色列立场的转变与中东战争代价 Cenk Uygur 援引民调数据指出，美国普通民众的政治立场正在发生剧变。目前高达 80% 的民主党选民对以色列持负面看法，并明确呼吁政府“应优先照顾美国选民自身的利益”。在所有党派的 50 岁以下年轻人群体中，以色列的净支持率更是跌至创纪录的负 45 分（-45）。Cenk 直言，如今在整个美国，唯一还在全心全意为以色列效劳的就只剩下建制派政客和主流媒体，而绝大多数民众已经对这些不断将美国拖入无休止战争、榨取海量纳税人资金的干预行径忍无可忍。 Cenk 转向站在商人视角的 Kevin O'Leary 发问：为什么美国要任由一个人口规模仅相当于巴布亚新几内亚的小国牵着鼻子走，陷入一场又一场没有尽头的海外泥潭？他强调，当前针对伊朗的战争对美国自身没有任何益处。如果战火继续蔓延并彻底炸毁伊朗和海湾国家的关键基础设施，战后重建至少需要 5 到 10 年，这将对全球经济造成灾难性打击。Cenk 主张美国必须果断摆脱以色列游说集团对外交政策的绑架——“我不是指物理层面的消灭，而是将他们的游说势力彻底从我们的政府决策中剥离”，让美国完全基于自身利益做决定，唯有如此才能立刻终结战火，让美国处境变好万倍。 - 民意数据：80% 民主党人对以色列持负面看法；全美 50 岁以下选民中以色列净好感度为 -45。 - 人口对比：Cenk 将以色列的人口体量比作巴布亚新几内亚（Papua New Guinea）。 - 经济隐患：中东及海湾地区基础设施若遭大规模轰炸，重建周期预计长达 5 至 10 年，引发全球经济海啸。 ### [01:26:37](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5197s) 消费主义视角：Kevin O'Leary 眼中的中东和平红利 Kevin O'Leary 从实用主义商人的角度作出了回应。他认为中东若能达成持久和平，将释放全球最大、最具潜力的消费市场之一。单单伊朗一国就拥有 1 亿人口，具备极大的消费购买力，埃及、约旦、苏丹、沙特阿拉伯等国同样构成了庞大的需求网络，渴望购买西方制造的产品。Kevin 透露，这正是包括他在内的许多投资人长期在阿联酋（UAE）保留业务版图的核心原因——在战火升级前，阿联酋一直是中东乃至全球的“资本之都”（Capital of capital），未来也必将重拾这一地位。 尽管本周未能促成停火协议令他深感失望，但 Kevin 坚信自己依然是一个乐观主义者。他指出，褪去宗教信仰、地缘背景和国家边界的差异，人类的本性是相通的：99% 的普通人最底层的愿望不过是组建家庭、拥有一份稳定工作、享受生活，作为消费者购买商品，没人愿意每天生活在被炸飞的恐惧中。对于那些嗜杀成性的极端狂热领袖，历史证明他们往往无法长久立足（例如在伊朗的强硬派领导层目前也面临巨大挑战）。从纯粹的商业逻辑来看，实现和平、恢复稳定才是对所有人最划算的交易。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: Middle East Peace Dividend accDescr: 展现从地缘和平走向中东消费市场繁荣的商业逻辑链路 subgraph Geopolitics ["地缘政治前提"] A["达成全面和平协议"] --> B["中东局势恢复稳定"] end subgraph Markets ["核心消费市场潜力"] B --> C["伊朗 1 亿人口消费需求"] B --> D["埃及 / 约旦 / 苏丹 / 沙特"] B --> E["阿联酋 UAE 资本中心复苏"] end subgraph Outcome ["终极商业价值"] C --> F["对美欧商品形成海量需求"] D --> F E --> F F --> G["全球贸易繁荣与经济正循环"] end ``` ### [01:29:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5349s) 社会主义在西方抬头？首张工资单与资本主义现实 主持人 Steven Bartlett 将话题引向国内思潮，指出伴随反战情绪、AI 冲击以及贫富分化加剧，西方正掀起一场社会主义浪潮。Gallup 最新民调显示，全美对资本主义的好感度跌至历史最低点，近 70% 的民主党人对社会主义持积极态度，而支持资本主义的仅有约 40%；在全美年轻人群体中，有 62% 的人支持社会主义。纽约甚至选出了像 Zohran Mamdani 这样的民主社会主义者，美国似乎正不可逆转地滑向社会主义。 Kevin O'Leary 对此断然否认，他以“历史迷”的身份分析，指出每隔 17 到 20 年，美国社会就会周期性地重温一次对社会主义甚至共产主义的浪漫幻想——早在上世纪四五十年代，纽约布鲁克林就曾有人狂热憧憬苏联或全盛时期的古巴，但历史经验无一例外地证明“这一套根本行不通”。针对 AOC（Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez）、伯尼·桑德斯（Bernie Sanders）和伊丽莎白·沃伦（Elizabeth Warren），Kevin 承认他们是极具天赋的政客，特别赞赏 AOC 擅长通过制造煽动性言论每次筹集 5 美元的社交媒体策略，但他坚信他们绝不可能赢得总统大选。高额税收的恶果显而易见：例如马萨诸塞州征收的“富人超级税”（Millionaires Tax）导致初创企业无法融资，连他自己的儿子都被迫离开。 Kevin 幽默地分享了他在大学教授 23 岁商科与工程学生时的经典观察：“在我教这帮学生时，他们全都是彻头彻尾的社会主义者——直到领到人生第一份工资单。”当年轻人亲眼看到扣税一栏，惊呼“等等，我辛辛苦苦挣的工资怎么被扣掉了一半？这是什么鬼？”Kevin 就会平静地告诉他们：“这就是税。如果你继续坚持之前的社会主义乌托邦，税率就是 80%。”被现实当头棒喝的学生随即表示自己绝不能承受 50% 的税负，Kevin 便会建议他们像成千上万的企业家一样搬去奥斯汀、田纳西或佛罗里达，享受仅 16% 左右的极低税负。他笑着总结，这种“领到第一张工资单就从社会主义者蜕变为资本主义者”的过程，正是美国制度的奇妙之处。 ### [01:33:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5601s) 2028 大选预测与两党政治钟摆效应 当主持人追问 Kevin 2028 年白宫大选究竟会由亲资本主义候选人还是民主党/社会主义者获胜，并要求他给出一个非黑即白的明确预测时，Kevin 拒绝草率下注。他阐释了美国政治著名的“钟摆理论”（Pendulum Swing）：拜登政府在政策上向左走得太远，导致政治钟摆剧烈向右回弹；如今右翼如果矫枉过正，钟摆同样会再次回荡。数月后的中期选举将成为最关键的“嗅觉测试”（Smell test），提前揭示选民的真实风向，但在当前阶段，谁也无法断言未来脱颖而出的领袖会是谁。 尽管无法预测具体胜者，Kevin 尖锐地批评了民主党当前的迷茫处境。他认为民主党已经彻底迷失了方向，必须选出一位更务实、聚焦创造就业的中间派温和领袖，因为“靠兜售极左社会主义言论绝不可能赢下全国大选”。他以自己经常出差的加利福尼亚州为例，怒斥洛杉矶等大城市治理彻底失控，已沦为“没有法律的荒芜废土”（Lawless wasteland）——治安败坏到“大白天在街上走甚至都不敢戴手表”。政客们毫无执行力与管理才能，加州甚至可能破天荒选出一位共和党市长。Kevin 总结道，选民对糟糕治理和极端意识形态的容忍正在逼近极限。 ### [01:35:08](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5708s) 权贵资本主义与“民主资本主义”之辩 在被问及社会主义是否会在期中选举或 2028 年席卷美国时，岑克·维古尔（Cenk Uygur）首先驳斥了有关大城市犯罪失控的过度恐慌。他直言自己并不是洛杉矶市长卡伦·巴斯（Karen Bass）的拥趸，甚至之前和未来的选票都不会投给她，批评民主党人常常陷入官僚主义泥潭而缺乏变革魄力。但他强调，所谓“在洛杉矶走在街上手表就会被抢”完全是夸大其词，他和家人经常出门，当地治安非常安全。尽管 2019 至 2023 年间大城市的犯罪率确实有所上升，《青年土耳其人》（The Young Turks）当时也顶着左翼的批评直言不讳地报道过，但在 2024 和 2025 年犯罪率已大幅回落，这已不再是真正的核心危机。 谈及美国的经济体制，岑克指出公众对“社会主义”一词存在严重误解。美国当下的体制根本谈不上真正的资本主义或自由市场，而是彻头彻尾的“法团主义”（corporatism）或“权贵资本主义”（crony capitalism）。各行各业的巨头已经彻底俘获了政府，用政治献金收买政客，致使政府甚至无法就药价等基本民生支出进行议价——这种体制本质上是“大企业的社会主义”。岑克激动地强调，只要不切断金钱与政治的利益链条，美国就只能在腐败的跑步机上原地踏步，而像拜登和特朗普这种声称要“抽干沼泽”的政客，上台后只会把沼泽填得更满以喂饱幕后金主。 岑克认为，放眼全球，几乎所有国家都是混合经济体。与其动辄拿古巴来妖魔化社会主义，不如参照荷兰或北欧模式。他主张美国应当走向“民主资本主义”（Democratic Capitalism）：既允许企业追求利润，又必须受到民主体制的有效制约。CEO 和股东负责为企业谋利，而总统、总理与立法者则必须代表普通公民监督企业，防止资本野蛮生长。在他看来，加州民主党众议员罗·康纳（Ro Khanna）是目前美国政坛中最接近这种理念的人选；而任何深陷身份政治（Identity politics）的极左翼政客只会进一步撕裂国家，绝不可能赢得全国性大选。 - **城市安全趋势**：2019 至 2023 年大城市犯罪率出现短暂上升，但 2024 与 2025 年已显著回落。 - **体制核心病灶**：美国缺乏真正的自由竞争，大企业游说与政治献金造成事实上的“权贵法团主义”。 - **经济治理倡议**：倡导北欧式的“民主资本主义”，通过民选政府有力制约大企业，取代极端的身份政治。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 资本主义体制对比 accDescr: 对比权贵资本主义与民主资本主义的权力与监管逻辑 subgraph Crony["权贵资本主义 / 法团主义（现状）"] A1["大企业与财阀金主"] -->|"政治献金 / 游说捕获"| B1["两党建制派政客"] B1 -->|"政策倾斜 / 限制议价"| C1["普通公民与劳工利益受损"] end subgraph Democratic["民主资本主义（倡导方向）"] A2["私营企业与自由市场"] B2["民选政府与司法制度"] C2["全体公民利益"] B2 -->|"强力监管与制衡"| A2 C2 -->|"民主选举与问责"| B2 A2 -.->|"创造财富与就业"| C2 end ``` --- ### [01:37:44](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5864s) 2028大选预测：民粹主义崛起与塔克·卡尔森的可能性 展望未来的政治格局，岑克对共和党的选情给出了极其悲观的断言。他直言在特朗普对国家造成的一系列破坏之后，共和党在即将到来的期中选举中毫无胜算，选民的热情已经被彻底摧毁。而到了 2028 年，战争引发的经济灾难加上 AI 带来的大规模失业潮全面爆发，建制派政客将面临彻底崩溃。在岑克看来，共和党阵营中唯一有可能力挽狂澜并赢得大选的人，正是前福克斯新闻主播塔克·卡尔森（Tucker Carlson）。 岑克断言，一旦卡尔森参选共和党总统初选，他必将横扫对手拿下提名。面对现场凯文·奥利里（Kevin O'Leary）发出的笑声，岑克回忆道，2016 年民主党全国代表大会刚结束、希拉里在民调中领先 10 个百分点时，他在 ABC 电视台乔治·斯蒂芬诺伯罗斯（George Stephanopoulos）主持的《本周》（This Week）节目中是全场唯一断言特朗普将获胜的嘉宾，当时整个专家团同样哄堂大笑。事实证明，选民最终一定会选择民粹主义者，而那些追逐以色列游说集团或大型制药公司（Big Pharma）捐助的建制派注定被抛弃。卡玛拉·哈里斯（Kamala Harris）在大选中惨败，很大程度上就是因为她还在沾沾自喜地吹嘘自己获得了 90 位企业 CEO 的背书，却完全没意识到普通选民早已对企业高管厌恶透顶。 - **期中选举与 2028 预判**：共和党在期中选举中面临选民投票热情枯竭；2028 年选情将受制于对外冲突后果与 AI 失业危机。 - **历史对照经验**：2016 年主流精英曾集体嘲笑特朗普获胜的可能性，印证了脱离金主的民粹路线往往具备被低估的号召力。 - **哈里斯败选教训**：大肆宣传 90 位企业高管的站台背书，暴露出与普通民众对企业精英反感情绪的严重脱节。 --- ### [01:39:38](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5978s) 凯文的反思与终局展望：跨党派民粹对决的未来 原本发笑的凯文在冷静思考后，态度发生了明显转变。凯文透露，自己这周刚刚与卡尔森进行过交流与辩论，卡尔森目前在 AI 议题上持有非常激烈且具争议的保守怀疑态度，并且政治重心已明显从单纯的“亲特朗普”转向了更独立的立场。凯文坦言，越琢磨岑克的判断越觉得不无可能：卡尔森坐拥极其庞大的受众基本盘，还构建了独立于传统媒体的自有网络平台，这正是当下打赢七大关键摇摆州选战必不可少的社交媒体动员工具。 凯文分析指出，接下来的大选核心议题除了长期的生活成本可负担性（Affordability）和边境危机外，AI 对就业市场的剧烈冲击极可能在未来爆发为压倒性的政治风暴。岑克在总结陈词中呼应道，美国选民已经彻底厌倦了那些当面一套背后一套、对幕后金主俯首帖耳的伪君子。他设想了一种最具变革性的政治图景：如果 2028 年能上演一场“诚实的民粹右翼对决诚实的民粹左翼”，例如加州进步派罗·康纳对阵肯塔基州自由意志派托马斯·马西（Thomas Massie），甚至是两人跨党派联手，整个美国政坛的腐败格局才可能真正被打破。 节目尾声，主持人史蒂文·巴特利特（Steven Bartlett）向两位嘉宾致以诚挚敬意。史蒂文动情地提到，自己从 19 岁创业初期、初入职场时，就几乎每天雷打不动地收看岑克的《青年土耳其人》，而凯文更是他过去 15 年来在《创智赢家》（Shark Tank）中最喜爱的投资人。在 AI、地缘政治与经济危机的巨大不确定性中，这场充满火药味却诚恳深刻的交锋落下了帷幕，史蒂文也向观众推荐了下期算法推荐内容，期待未来形势明朗后与两位嘉宾再度对谈。 - **卡尔森的竞选资产**：独立的媒体传播渠道、庞大的忠诚选民基本盘，以及对 AI 冲击和传统建制派的民粹批判立场。 - **大选三大关键议题**：日常可负担性（通胀）、边境安全问题，以及在未来数年由 AI 引发的劳动力市场重构与失业恐慌。 - **国会诚实政客名单**：岑克公开点名高度认可的三位议员为罗·康纳（民主党）、托马斯·马西（共和党）和伯尼·桑德斯（Bernie Sanders，独立派）。 ## Notable quotes > [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=0s) 未来的光明程度甚至需要多买几副太阳镜 — Kevin O'Leary > [11:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=662s) 所有人都会被机器人取代，然后机器人还会把小孩吃掉？我根本不买账。 — Kevin O'Leary > [18:27](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1107s) 我可从没听任何人说过‘机器人要吃掉小孩’，感谢凯文发明了这个话术来树立假想敌。 — Cenk Uygur > [24:28](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1468s) 如果你们继续坚持‘我拿走一切，你们一无所获’，拿着草叉的底层民众迟早会找上门来。 — Cenk Uygur > [29:24](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1764s) 社会主义和共产主义的死穴，就在于你很快会把别人的钱给花光，因为富人会直接拔腿走人 — Kevin O'Leary > [32:12](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=1932s) 别拿这种好事来威胁我（Don't threaten me with a good time） — Cenk Uygur > [42:06](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2526s) 不可能，我不可能错！ — Kevin O'Leary > [45:32](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=2732s) AI 必将替代 Uber 的 940 万个岗位。科技高管们在 AI 问题上对公众并不坦诚；他们在紧闭的会议室大门背后热烈讨论着即将来临的颠覆风暴有多么恐怖，却从不敢在公众面前吐露实情。 — Dara Khosrowshahi (引用自 Steven Bartlett) > [01:29:09](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=5349s) 在我教这帮学生时，他们全都是彻头彻尾的社会主义者——直到领到人生第一份工资单。 — Kevin O'Leary > [01:22:42](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU&t=4962s) 我不想要他们的全面监控国家，我不想和以色列有任何瓜葛，美军应该立即撤回家园，全心全意服务于美国人民自己的利益。 — Cenk Uygur ## Mentioned Kevin O'Leary, Cenk Uygur, Steven Bartlett, OpenAI, Sam Altman, Worldcoin, Ro Khanna, Arabella, Neville Roy Singham, Alliance for a Better Utah, DeepSeek, Dario Amodei, Anthropic, Elon Musk, Palantir, Nick Hanauer, Citizens United, Howard Schultz, Starbucks, Google, Claude, Figure AI, Figure 01, Thirdweb, NASA, Starlink, Dara Khosrowshahi, Uber, Waymo, Stan, Stanley, Cometeer, Pipedrive, Donald Trump, JD Vance, Marco Rubio, Sheldon Adelson, Miriam Adelson, AIPAC, Benjamin Netanyahu, Hakeem Jeffries, Chuck Schumer, Mike Johnson, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Larry Ellison, Where's Daddy, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Zohran Mamdani, Karen Bass, Tucker Carlson, George Stephanopoulos, Kamala Harris, Thomas Massie, The Young Turks, Shark Tank ## Video description Shark Tank's Kevin O'Leary and political commentator Cenk Uygur go head to head on whether AI will save or destroy the economy, why American politicians are being bought by AI companies, whether Israel is the real force driving America's war with Iran, and why Cenk believes Tucker Carlson is the only person who can save America in 2028. Kevin O'Leary is an entrepreneur, investor, and one of the most recognisable faces on Shark Tank. He is also the founder and chairman of O'Leary Ventures and bestselling author of ‘Cold Hard Truth’. Cenk Uygur is a Turkish-American political commentator and co-founder of The Young Turks, the the longest-running daily online stream in internet history. He is also the bestselling author of 'Justice Is Coming'. They explain: ◼ Whether AI will transform the economy or trigger an unemployment crisis ◼ Why Trump's approval rating has collapsed and whether he can survive the midterms ◼ Whether the US stock market is heading for a crash and what it means for your money ◼ Why the US strikes on Iran are raising the price of everything you buy ◼ How Russia and China are quietly strengthening their alliance and what it means for the West 00:00 Intro 02:35 Why 7 Out Of 10 Americans Now Oppose AI Data Centers 07:24 Why AI Could Trigger A Collapse And UBI Crisis 15:30 Are AI Founders Hiding The Real Risks From The Public? 23:55 Can AI Ever Be Built Responsibly Or Is That Impossible? 32:11 How AI Is Quietly Destroying Jobs 37:35 Why Massive Unemployment Could Arrive Faster Than Expected 46:32 Ads 48:40 What’s Really Happening Between Israel, Iran, And The Middle East 1:11:59 Did Trump Miscalculate How Long This Conflict Would Last? 1:15:47 Ads 1:18:08 Why America Is Rapidly Losing Its Patience 1:29:08 Are We Watching The Rise Of Socialism In Real Time? 1:34:06 Who Actually Has The Edge In The Next Presidential Election? You can follow Kevin, here: Instagram - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/4dc0x5p YouTube - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/DCE3vgv X - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/8irQNO6 You can purchase Kevin’s book, ‘Cold Hard Truth: On Family, Kids and Money’, here: https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/23ZO5Ki You can follow Cenk, here: YouTube - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/3nx7gGY X - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/G8cqEC7 Instagram - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/FFIza3k You can purchase Cenk’s book, ‘Justice Is Coming: How Progressives Are Going to Take Over the Country and America Is Going to Love It’, here: https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/BJHknnM The Young Turks is live 6pm Eastern weekdays on YouTube and get your copy of Justice is Coming on https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/1UqbchE The Diary Of A CEO: ◼ Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/ ◼ Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://smarturl.it/DOACbook ◼ The 1% Diary is back - limited time only: https://bit.ly/3YFbJbt ◼ The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards (Second Edition): https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb ◼ Get email updates - https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt ◼ Follow Steven - https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb Sponsors: Stan - Visit https://coach.stan.store/?ref=stevenbartlett&utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=episode8 Pipedrive - https://pipedrive.com/CEO Cometeer - https://cometeer.com/steven for $30 off your first order [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-8NrKFQKhU)

[0:00] Kevin O'Leary: 未来的光明程度甚至需要多买几副太阳镜 [11:02] Kevin O'Leary: 所有人都会被机器人取代，然后机器人还会把小孩吃掉？我根本不买账。 [18:27] Cenk Uygur: 我可从没听任何人说过‘机器人要吃掉小孩’，感谢凯文发明了这个话术来树立假想敌。 [24:28] Cenk Uygur: 如果你们继续坚持‘我拿走一切，你们一无所获’，拿着草叉的底层民众迟早会找上门来。 [29:24] Kevin O'Leary: 社会主义和共产主义的死穴，就在于你很快会把别人的钱给花光，因为富人会直接拔腿走人 [32:12] Cenk Uygur: 别拿这种好事来威胁我（Don't threaten me with a good time） [42:06] Kevin O'Leary: 不可能，我不可能错！ [45:32] Dara Khosrowshahi (引用自 Steven Bartlett): AI 必将替代 Uber 的 940 万个岗位。科技高管们在 AI 问题上对公众并不坦诚；他们在紧闭的会议室大门背后热烈讨论着即将来临的颠覆风暴有多么恐怖，却从不敢在公众面前吐露实情。 [89:09] Kevin O'Leary: 在我教这帮学生时，他们全都是彻头彻尾的社会主义者——直到领到人生第一份工资单。 [82:42] Cenk Uygur: 我不想要他们的全面监控国家，我不想和以色列有任何瓜葛，美军应该立即撤回家园，全心全意服务于美国人民自己的利益。

[37:15] Kevin O'Leary: The opportunity is so bright I got to wear shades [42:58] Dara Khosrowshahi: I don’t know [54:08] Cenk Uygur: Israel gives to 94% of Congress... If you say the same exact thing about Israel, we'll call you an anti-Semite, cancel you, and you're never going to ever get another job again. [58:33] Kevin O'Leary: By blocking that strait for the last 60 days, the amount of money they're losing is 210 million US per 24 hours. So at some point, whoever's running the show there is going to say, 'If we can't pay our soldiers to kill our people, we're going to be screwed.' [78:05] Kevin O'Leary: I think before November, El Supremo in China squeezes Iranian heads like teenage pimples. That's what... [86:37] Kevin O'Leary: At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what religion you are or what country you're in... 99% want to raise a family, have a job, and enjoy life. They don't want to get blown up. [101:31] Cenk Uygur: We are so tired of these fake politicians in America. They never do what they say they're going to do. They always back the donors.

[0:00] Everybody is in a rush to fire 10 to 25% [0:03] of their workforce, but 10% unemployment [0:05] would be worse than anything that's ever [0:07] happened in our lifetimes. We are going [0:08] to have a depression like we've never [0:10] seen in our lives. [0:11] >> Wow. Jake's a real Debbie Downer today. [0:14] I mean, this is an unbelievable [0:16] opportunity we're talking about. I got [0:18] to buy more sunglasses for how bright [0:20] the future is. [0:21] >> If you notice, Kevin actually didn't [0:22] address the wave of unemployment at all [0:24] because there's no question that it's [0:26] going to happen. And when we hit the [0:28] iceberg, we're not going to be ready. [0:29] And it is going to be an epic disaster. [0:32] >> Change is disruptive and it's [0:34] uncomfortable. But the scare factor of [0:37] saying that everybody loses their job [0:39] and the robots eat the children. I just [0:41] don't buy it. [0:42] >> I I don't know anyone saying that the [0:44] robots are going to eat the children. [0:45] And I understand that change happens, [0:47] but we have to be careful with change [0:49] because by 2028, we're going to have [0:51] disaster from AI, unemployment, and [0:54] disaster from the war. The only hope is [0:56] electing a smart person who's prepared [0:58] in 2028. Republicans, I have one thing [1:00] to tell you. [1:05] There's no way. Nobody's showing up to [1:08] vote. Their voter enthusiasm is [1:10] obliterated. [1:11] >> But the Democrats have also lost their [1:13] way. [1:13] >> And the Republicans only have one guy [1:15] who could win. And I'm worried about it. [1:17] Tucker Carlson. So, as we head towards [1:19] the midterms, but also the elections, [1:20] which aren't actually that far away now, [1:22] do you agree that we're heading towards [1:24] a more socialist America? [1:26] >> So, let me just say this. [1:30] How about that for an answer? [laughter] [1:36] >> This is super interesting to me. My team [1:37] given me this report to show me how many [1:39] of you that watch the show subscribe. [1:40] And some of you have told us according [1:42] to this that you are unsubscribed from [1:44] the channel randomly. So, favor to ask [1:46] all of you. Please could you check right [1:47] now if you've hit the subscribe button [1:49] if you are a regular viewer of this show [1:50] and you like what we do here. We're [1:51] approaching quite a significant landmark [1:53] on this show in terms of a subscriber [1:55] number. So, if there was one simple free [1:57] thing that you could do to help us, my [1:59] team, everyone here to keep this show [2:01] free, to keep it improving year over [2:03] year and week over week, it is just to [2:05] hit that subscribe button and to double [2:06] check if you've hit it. Only thing I'll [2:08] ever ask of you, do we have a deal? If [2:10] you do it, I'll tell you what I'll do. [2:11] I'll make sure every single week, every [2:14] single month, we fight harder and harder [2:15] and harder and harder to bring you the [2:16] guests and conversations that you want [2:17] to hear. I've stayed true to that [2:19] promise since the very beginning of the [2:20] D of Sio and I will not let you down. [2:23] Please help us. Really appreciate it. [2:25] Let's get on with the show. [2:30] [music] [2:33] Jenk, [2:35] thank you so much for being here with [2:37] me. Um, there's so much going on in the [2:38] world that I have so many questions and [2:40] you both have very different [2:42] perspectives on all of the issues that I [2:43] care about the most. So, I thought I'd [2:44] bring us together to try and pass [2:46] through what is true. Unlike a lot of [2:48] shows, I I don't expect a shouting [2:50] match. What I'm trying to get is to [2:52] truth. And I'm hoping that seeing the [2:53] collision of your ideas on some of the [2:56] big issues that are front of mind for me [2:57] like artificial intelligence, like [2:59] geopolitics, like what's going on in [3:01] America now that I live there, I think [3:03] will be incredibly beneficial to me and [3:04] hopefully therefore my audience. I have [3:06] this graph here that says seven in 10 [3:09] Americans oppose local construction of [3:12] AI data centers. [3:14] >> If you go back in time, any new [3:16] technology is extremely disruptive. [3:19] Change is disruptive and it's [3:22] uncomfortable [3:24] and it always is that way and yet it [3:27] always proves within the context of the [3:29] American economy to create a lot of [3:31] productivity and opportunity. And I [3:33] would argue today if we're going to find [3:35] a cure for cancer, it's going to be [3:37] through AI. If we're going to [3:39] democratize education, it'll be through [3:41] AI. If we're going to do some advances [3:44] on space research and travel, it'll be [3:47] through AI. Productivity in the S&P 500 [3:50] and it's all small companies, AI. And [3:53] you can't have it without data centers. [3:55] You actually need the underpinnings, the [3:58] infrastructure. And so that debate, that [4:00] narrative is going on, but there's a [4:02] dark side to this that I've only started [4:05] to bring forward in the last couple of [4:06] weeks. I discovered this in Utah [4:10] that there are some nefarious forces. [4:12] Um, Arabella is the name of it. I didn't [4:15] know anything about it, but I was [4:17] wondering who was spending all the money [4:18] in Utah with all that misinformation [4:21] about what the data center was going to [4:23] be talking about using water we weren't [4:26] or using power we had no intention to or [4:29] 40,000 acres that's complete BS. It was [4:32] all lies. And I said, who could afford [4:35] that? So I hired a bunch of forensic [4:38] auditors and lo and behold it took me [4:40] back to the Chinese through Arabellum uh [4:44] Neville Singum is his name. He's funding [4:46] all these organizations in Utah and I [4:48] caught him through the IRS 990 filings [4:51] and I handed it over the White House and [4:53] to a bunch of special agents and I just [4:56] wonder what's going to happen next. I'm [4:58] loving this now. This is so interesting [5:01] and it's a national debate and the poo [5:03] poo's hit the fan. But I'm not debating [5:06] this. I'm not suggesting it. I have [5:08] irrefutable evidence the Chinese are [5:10] meddling in every place where new power [5:14] is being proposed in America, every [5:16] state, every city. And it all goes back [5:19] to the Chinese through this Arabellum. [5:22] And just look at the IRS filings. Don't [5:25] shoot the messenger. I'm just providing [5:28] the truth. [5:29] >> Kevin, so just just for context here, [5:31] there was a proposal to build some data [5:32] centers in Utah, and you're saying that [5:34] the push back and the negative reaction [5:36] that has been seen is being encouraged [5:39] or sponsored by the Chinese who are [5:42] driving misinformation through bots. Is [5:45] that what you're proposing? [5:47] >> No, it's not through bots. It's actually [5:48] through contributions that are shown [5:51] through a a wide network of different [5:54] entities. It's very it's very well um [5:57] cloaked, but through forensic audit and [6:00] IP address scraping uh with some really [6:03] strong data scientists that I hired and [6:05] I'm working with, we were able to [6:07] provide 90 pages of IP addresses from [6:10] foreigners uh to various agents and [6:13] various entities within the US [6:15] government. And we're going to keep [6:16] doing it. We're we're providing it every [6:18] four hours. where cuz one thing I have [6:21] that I guess they hadn't thought through [6:22] is I have 12 million followers on social [6:24] media. No, no uh data center developer [6:28] has 4 million followers. This all showed [6:30] up on my feeds with bots on on Twitter [6:35] which is now X and on Instagram and then [6:37] onto LinkedIn. So we just provided the [6:40] data to the government and where the [6:42] chips fall I have no idea. And we had [6:45] death threats uh to our executives. I [6:49] provided that to the FBI and they [6:51] visited the woman who did it in Denver. [6:53] I think scared the pee peee right out of [6:55] her, but she won't be doing that again. [6:58] So, I mean, it's Listen, bring it. Don't [7:01] mess with me. I'm just going to provide [7:02] the data back to the government. I'm I'm [7:05] I'm just telling the truth. I'm not [7:07] debating it. I'm not suggesting it. I'm [7:09] providing the IRS filings of the cash [7:12] coming from Marabella right into the [7:16] Alliance for a Better Utah [7:19] >> and the story. I mean, that's Listen, I [7:22] didn't ask for this fight. I'm just [7:23] providing the data. [7:24] >> Is that how you see things? Are you [7:27] seeing the push back in terms of AI? Um, [7:30] do you think it's coming from Chinese [7:33] sponsored actors or do you think it's [7:35] something else? [laughter] [7:37] No, I I don't think China has anything [7:38] to do with it. Uh, so first off, there's [7:41] a lot of things Kevin and I share. Uh, [7:43] I'm also an entrepreneur. I'm a [7:45] capitalist and went to Wharton Business [7:47] School. So, I love America. I love the [7:49] opportunity that America provides. I [7:51] wanted to provide opportunity for all [7:53] sorts of new businesses. So, that's not [7:56] remotely the issue. Okay. So, the [7:58] question is, are we going to pay our own [8:00] uh costs? So now on the AI data centers [8:05] um in the beginning I started reading [8:06] these stories about how the data centers [8:08] are driving up the energy cost for [8:10] everybody [snorts] in that community [8:11] that they're based in and I couldn't [8:12] believe it. But then I thought okay [8:14] since we have basically legalized [8:16] bribery in America that probably is true [8:18] they probably you know given enough [8:21] campaign contributions to make this [8:22] happen and it turns out they have. No, [8:24] if you're going to do a data center you [8:26] have to pay for it and you have to pay [8:28] for all of its costs. None of this [8:30] subsidizing your costs to the average [8:32] taxpayer who's not getting anything out [8:34] of it. So, we have to be absolutely [8:36] meticulous about who's paying for the [8:39] cost of the data centers. And it should [8:40] be the businesses that profit from it. [8:42] Unless you'd like to take have the [8:45] American people take some equity in your [8:46] business because if we're going to pay [8:47] your costs, obviously we should have [8:49] equity in it. When we bailed out the [8:51] bankers back in 2008, it was an absolute [8:53] crime. We should have taken equity in [8:55] those companies and then sold it later [8:56] for a profit. I don't want the [8:58] government to run banks, but I do want [9:00] us to [snorts] not be suckers. Uh we [9:02] constantly pay for the research of the [9:04] drug companies and never get any equity. [9:06] So, um if you going to be capitalists, [9:08] let's be capitalists. Now, the real [9:10] reason why people are most angry about [9:12] AI is not even the data centers. And [9:13] they have every right to be livid about [9:16] their energy costs being higher uh so [9:18] somebody else can make a buck. Uh but [9:21] the bigger issue is the unemployment [9:22] that we're all worried is coming and it [9:24] most definitely is. So, there's a lot of [9:27] uh happy talk about, oh, 10 years from [9:29] now, 20 years from now, robots are going [9:30] to be cooking our salmon. Or two years [9:33] from now, I don't really care. I don't [9:35] need my salmon cooked by a robot. What I [9:37] care about is, are we going to have [9:40] massive unemployment? And right now, and [9:42] I'm curious what Kevin's going to say [9:44] about this because it's kind of [9:45] indisputable if you're in the business [9:46] community, everybody is in a rush uh to [9:49] fire 10 to 25% of their workforce. and [9:52] whoever gets there first gets a [9:53] competitive advantage and the market's [9:55] rewarded and their stock uh price goes [9:57] up. Well, if everybody goes to fire 10 [10:00] to 25% of their employees, we are going [10:02] to have u not just a recession but a [10:05] depression like we've never seen in our [10:07] lives. And everybody's whistling past [10:09] the graveyard here. Uh so, do we have a [10:12] plan? Does the government have a plan? [10:14] The only guy I've ever heard of working [10:15] on a plan to deal with this tsunami of [10:18] unemployment is Roana. other than him [10:21] it's crickets and I think we're going to [10:23] hit the iceberg really hard. [10:25] >> Interestingly Jenk, the other person [10:27] that I've heard talk about the [10:28] unemployment wave coming has actually [10:30] been some of the big AI CEOs. And if you [10:32] go back and look look at their quotes [10:34] through time, people like Sam Alman [10:36] predicted that there will need to be [10:37] some kind of UBI scheme. And I think [10:39] Worldcoin, which is his other startup [10:41] that uses um retina scanning to be able [10:44] to distribute value to people to check [10:46] their humans. One of the principles of [10:48] the foundation of that company was to [10:50] distribute UBI, universal basic income [10:53] to everybody. So on this point, Kevin, [10:55] do you do you disagree that there there [10:57] will be a widespread unemployment [11:00] apocalypse, as Jenk has called it on his [11:01] Twitter feed. [11:02] >> So So let's go through Jack's shopping [11:04] list of disaster. I think it's fair to [11:06] address them one at a time. Let's talk [11:08] with the energy. I totally agree with [11:09] him. You can't build a data center [11:11] anywhere and tap into the grid because [11:14] he's right. the price of energy would go [11:16] up at the library, the church, and the [11:19] community center by 30%. And that's what [11:21] happened in Virginia. So that is no [11:24] longer a possibility. In Utah, for [11:26] example, I have to bring my own power. [11:28] But the idea would be if we produce this [11:31] energy because there's no data centers [11:34] without energy. We'll put it back into [11:36] the grid, not just for Utah, but for the [11:39] whole country. Because I think he's [11:40] right. Anybody that's building a new [11:42] data center should have the [11:44] responsibility to provide the power and [11:46] put some of it back into the grid. That [11:49] would solve two problems at once. The [11:51] grid is tapped out. The library has no [11:54] more power. We'll solve that problem for [11:56] Utah and the country. So that's the [11:58] first falsehood I run into fueled by the [12:00] Chinese propaganda that came into Utah [12:03] or whoever they are at Arabella, the CP [12:07] C the CPP or the U you know who whoever [12:10] this agency is because you have to [12:12] follow it through all these nefarious [12:14] holdings. But at the end of the day [12:16] that's number one. Number two, the idea [12:18] that everybody gets replaced by robots [12:21] and then they eat the children, I don't [12:22] buy that at all. Every new technology in [12:25] American history for over 200 years has [12:28] created vast opportunity, productivity, [12:31] and fueled the economy to lead all [12:34] economies on Earth by 20%. Which is [12:37] still the case today. Now, it's an [12:40] uncomfortable reality. The market hit [12:42] new highs today. And that is an index of [12:44] how great American companies are. And [12:47] the smaller companies that are 5 to 500 [12:50] employees also hitting on all cylinders [12:53] now using AI tools for productivity, [12:55] customer acquisition, maintenance. So [12:58] the scare factor of saying that [13:00] everybody loses their job and the robots [13:02] eat the children. I just don't buy it. [13:05] And so I think we should have that [13:07] debate. But you don't know yet what [13:09] opportunities there are in the economy [13:12] driven by this new technology. So I [13:15] think what I know there's fear and [13:17] loathing and I think it's important to [13:19] have that narrative. I think it's great [13:21] to debate it but I think we should deal [13:23] with fact. It's very very uncomfortable [13:26] when chain hit change hits anywhere and [13:29] yet it's proven itself within the [13:31] context of the American economy to rise [13:34] it above all challenges and still lead [13:37] the world. Unfortunately, [13:40] there's the issue of defense and the [13:43] economy against China. They're our big [13:45] adversary. In this last conflict in the [13:48] Middle East where very few boots hit the [13:52] ground, it was the technology that [13:54] provided the ordinance precision that's [13:57] been used. In the future, wars will be [14:02] conducted using AI. And unfortunately, [14:04] the country with the best AI technology [14:07] will win those wars. I would certainly [14:09] not want China to be ahead of us. Yet, I [14:13] think they're the ones that would like [14:15] to stop us building power and developing [14:17] our AI platforms because they have [14:20] something called deepseek. I just want [14:21] to put a fact out there because we're [14:24] talking about this. While we were [14:26] stymied in building any new power, [14:28] forget about data centers, just new [14:30] power. The Chinese in the last 19 months [14:34] built 400 gawatt of power off burning [14:39] coal. They don't care about the [14:41] environment. They don't have any policy [14:44] about that. They have a supreme leader [14:47] who points his finger at the ground and [14:49] says, "Build a coal burning plant here. [14:52] Put a data center behind it or you'll [14:54] disappear in 18 months." And the people [14:57] involved say, "Chop chop, Supreme [14:59] Leader. We will make it happen." We [15:01] can't do that in America. And he knows [15:05] that. So he's spending as much money as [15:07] he can making sure he styies the efforts [15:09] of every entrepreneur in every state to [15:12] do the same. So that's what I think is [15:15] happening and I'm happy to provide the [15:16] data as I mentioned earlier and let the [15:19] government and their special agents in [15:21] all of these different departments I'm [15:22] working with now. I'm proud to be [15:25] providing this information. I think I've [15:27] kicked the door open on something very [15:29] very nasty. [15:31] >> Um Kevin, I would like to take a look at [15:32] that information as well. So we I'll [15:34] pick pick up that pick up with you about [15:36] that off camera. Um, what I wanted to [15:38] ask you is a lot of this sort of [15:40] doomerism around unemployment that we're [15:41] talking about comes from the CEOs [15:44] building the AI companies. And this is [15:46] something that that's always caused me a [15:48] bit of cognitive dissonance, which is I [15:50] think if you go back to I've got some [15:52] quotes here from March 2021. Sam Alman [15:55] said, and he's the for anyone that [15:56] doesn't know the CEO co-founder of [15:58] OpenAI, which is the maker of ChatgBT, [16:00] AI will probably replace most of the [16:02] jobs people do today. entire job [16:04] categories will be totally totally gone. [16:07] And then Elon Musk said in May 24, [16:10] probably none of us will have a job. If [16:12] you want to do a job that job, it's kind [16:14] of like a hobby. You can do a job, but [16:16] otherwise AI and robots will provide any [16:18] goods and services that you want. And [16:20] Dario, who's the founder of Claude, [16:22] which is the other major leading AI [16:24] model, said this was in 2025, AI could [16:27] eliminate half of all entry-level white [16:29] collar jobs within 5 years. a shift that [16:31] could push unemployment up to 20%. The [16:34] public is being sugarcoated on what is [16:36] coming. These are the people that are [16:39] most wellplaced and arguably [laughter] [16:42] I mean depends how you look at it have [16:44] the least incentive to say that their [16:45] companies are going to cause societal [16:47] harm and they're saying that their [16:49] companies are going to cause massive [16:51] massive unemployment. Do we do we assume [16:54] that they're not telling the truth or [16:56] that they don't know what they're [16:57] talking about? [16:59] I think that's a very selective um bunch [17:02] of sound bites. Dario also said the CEO [17:05] of Ananthropic, if we don't build more [17:08] compute capacity in the next 6 months, [17:10] the Chinese will catch up with us with [17:13] deepseek. [17:14] That's an ominous warning because, you [17:17] know, let's say you decide, look, it's [17:20] too scary. Let's shut down the US's [17:22] ability to advance compute. Let's just [17:25] shut it all down as the Chinese want and [17:28] let's all sit around the campfire and go [17:30] kumbaya. Do you think the Chinese are [17:32] gonna stop? I don't think so. I think [17:35] they're going to continue to do this and [17:37] they'll invade Taiwan using no boots. [17:40] They'll just use AI to shut down their [17:42] power. [17:44] I mean, I'm just telling you that the [17:46] Kumbaya stuff I totally agree with. I [17:49] love it. But it's not reality. Should we [17:52] compete? Should we advance our [17:54] technology? Should we be the best in the [17:56] world advancing research on AI to solve [17:59] for cancer? Yes. Or do you want the [18:01] Chinese to do that for you? And in 20 [18:04] years, they'll tell your children what [18:05] to eat when they're sitting at their [18:07] table in New York City for breakfast. [18:09] I'm the in the camp that says, "We know [18:12] who our adversary is. We know that why [18:14] they want to stop us." And Dario himself [18:17] said, "Hey everybody, we better build [18:19] some data centers real fast or in 6 [18:22] months, Deepseek is now number one on [18:24] Earth." I don't want that outcome. [18:27] >> Jen, it appears to me that, you know, [18:29] there's the CEOs are acknowledging that [18:30] there could be a mass wave of [18:32] unemployment that's going to cause a [18:34] bunch of problems that I don't think [18:35] people are thinking about. But also what [18:37] Kevin's saying about it, you know, there [18:39] being this this sort of global race [18:41] between countries also appears to me to [18:42] be true that if we just sit back and [18:45] relax and put our fingers in our ear, [18:46] then there's going to be a huge [18:48] competitive advantage with this [18:49] transformational technology that falls [18:51] into the hands of China and um and we'll [18:54] miss out as the West. What's your [18:56] perspective? [18:57] >> First to address a lot of things that [18:58] have been said. First, I I don't know [19:00] anyone saying that the robots are going [19:02] to eat the children. So, I want to thank [19:03] Kevin for educating me on a talking [19:05] point there. Uh, I'm less concerned [19:08] about that. A lot less concerned. Uh, [19:10] but I am concerned about some level of [19:12] death with AI, and that has already [19:14] begun to happen. There are reports that [19:16] we use AI in targeting that girl school [19:19] in Tehran where we killed over 160 [19:22] innocent school girls. Uh, so if that's [19:24] what AI is going to bring us in [19:26] precision, as Kevin pulled it, called [19:29] it, uh, no thank you. I'm not interested [19:31] in that kind of non-precision. Um, and [19:34] and I would much rather have human [19:35] beings involved in life and death [19:37] decisions. And I'm super worried that AI [19:40] is going to be used more in the military [19:42] and uh, no, I do not trust Palanteer. [19:45] Um, so now in terms of universal basic [19:48] income, I mean, think about it, guys. If [19:50] a coder is making $120,000, you know, I [19:53] I don't know where that puts him in two [19:55] years in, seven years in, uh, it's a [19:58] healthy salary. It's not the world's [19:59] greatest salary, but it's a good good [20:01] salary for a middle class person in [20:02] America. Then you switch to UBI, you'd [20:05] be lucky to get 3,000 a month. That's [20:07] 36,000 a year. You're going to go from [20:09] 120,000 to 36,000. That is going to be [20:12] devastating. Even if you magically got [20:15] universal basic income passed in America [20:18] immediately as the wave of unemployment [20:20] hit, but [snorts] I don't think that's [20:21] going to happen either. So, is the wave [20:23] of unemployment going to hit? Well, if [20:25] you notice, Kevin actually didn't [20:26] address that at all. uh because there's [20:28] no question that it's going to happen. [20:30] That is why literally every CEO of the [20:33] AI companies is saying, well, you know, [20:35] our product is great and you should [20:37] value us at a trillion dollars or so. Uh [20:39] but yeah, you're all going to be fired. [20:41] And and that's inescapable. It's already [20:43] begun. The coders have already started [20:46] getting fired, especially young coders. [20:48] Uh they feel totally betrayed. They have [20:51] to find a new line of work. But maybe [20:53] that's a little bit easier for them [20:54] because they're young and they're smart [20:56] and they're professionals, etc. Uh, and [20:58] there's a lot of smart folks, but [21:00] getting a new profession at the age of [21:01] 58, 62, what if you're a truck driver? [21:04] Um, and so I'm not saying that the [21:06] Whimos don't work better. I actually [21:08] would trust a Whimo more than I would [21:10] trust a human driver. But nevertheless, [21:13] that car no longer has a driver that it [21:15] did when it was a taxi or an Uber or a [21:17] lift. And I understand that change [21:19] happens. And look, I'm a progressive. [21:22] for change politically, for massive [21:24] change. I thought Obama did comically [21:26] little change. Um, but we have to be [21:29] careful with change. So, which direction [21:31] is it going to go and how are we going [21:32] to handle it? Right now, I think Wall [21:34] Street has lost its mind. How could we [21:38] be at record numbers? Who do you think's [21:40] going to buy your products? So, this guy [21:43] named Nick Hanower, there's a lot of [21:44] folks who believe in this, but he's a [21:45] big advocate of it. really smart guy up [21:47] in Seattle, also an entrepreneur, also [21:49] sold his business and has done well, and [21:52] he talks about middle out economics. If [21:54] we give more advantages to the middle [21:56] class, they immediately spend their [21:58] money. If you give it to the rich, which [22:00] is what we've done all our lives with [22:01] this neoliberal nonsense that we've been [22:03] doing, uh, and trickle down economics, [22:06] well, they barely spend any of it. So, [22:08] giving to the middle is a much better [22:10] way to go. And of course, the question [22:12] is, how are you going to do that? And [22:14] you don't just want to give away money. [22:16] Uh, on the other hand, we give away [22:17] money to oil companies and big drug [22:19] companies and every one who's got [22:21] excellent army of lobbyists in DC, but [22:26] we're not ready. And no one on earth has [22:30] given me a plan for, "Oh, Jen, don't [22:32] worry. When 10% unemployment hits, which [22:34] is at this point almost baked in, [22:36] completely inevitable, right? Um, what [22:39] are we going to do? 10% unemployment [22:41] would be worse than anything that's ever [22:43] happened in our lifetimes, let alone if [22:45] you get to 25%. Zero plans for it. None. [22:48] When that when we hit the iceberg, we're [22:50] not going to be ready and it is going to [22:52] be an epic disaster. There isn't going [22:54] to be anyone to buy your goods because [22:58] employees are also customers and you're [23:01] going to lose a massive amount of [23:03] customers and it is going to absolutely [23:05] torpedo our economy. I can't believe how [23:08] shortsighted Wall Street is. Now, does [23:11] that mean we stop AI in its tracks and [23:13] we stop change? No, we can't stop [23:16] because it's it's true that China is [23:18] also going, Russia is, North Korea is, [23:20] Israel is. [23:22] Now, the problem is if we get it first, [23:24] then very very likely the Israelis will [23:26] also have it and God help the world if [23:28] that's true. Uh they have not been [23:30] restrained in how they use their power [23:32] and I wouldn't want them anywhere near [23:34] that kind of power. But nevertheless, [23:36] there is a race. So [sighs] [23:39] we can't just stop. So can we do the [23:42] race in a way that is responsible and [23:44] actually serves the American voters and [23:46] citizens instead of just serving the [23:49] executives of the AI companies and the [23:51] shareholders of the AI companies? I hope [23:54] we can, but we've taken absolutely zero [23:56] steps in that direction. [23:58] >> So let's get specific, Jenk. What might [24:00] that look like to to continue developing [24:02] this technology but do it in a way [24:04] that's responsible and benefits [24:06] everybody? Because this is kind of what [24:07] I hear a lot of. I hear from one side [24:09] people saying we need to carry on going [24:11] or you know the robots and the kids [24:13] thing. On the other hand I hear we need [24:15] to be responsible but either side don't [24:18] tend to be very specific about what [24:20] their definition of responsible or a [24:23] race a responsible race might look like. [24:25] So does anyone have any specifics? Jenk. [24:28] >> Yeah. So look, it's a it's a tough uh [24:31] industry to regulate. I get it. You have [24:34] to move fast and regulation usually [24:36] involves some degree of bureaucracy. Um [24:38] but if you have no regulation at all, [24:41] you will have it run a muck. That's [24:43] pretty much guaranteed. And all the [24:44] leaders of the AI companies say [24:46] likewise. So um we've got to the problem [24:50] here in America is that it's nearly [24:52] unsolvable in the window of time that [24:54] we're talking about because we've lost [24:56] our democracy in America. But we've [24:58] legalized bribery that happened back in [25:00] Supreme Court decisions in 1976 78 and [25:03] then of course Citizens United. And so [25:06] since we have legalized bribery in this [25:08] country, there's no way they're going to [25:09] serve the voters. So whichever AI [25:11] companies are giving them more money, [25:13] they're going to serve them. And that's [25:14] already begun to happen. And the AI [25:16] companies have already started getting [25:17] involved in primaries and eliminating [25:19] their opponents through money and [25:21] politics. So, our politicians are deeply [25:24] deeply corrupt in America. Republicans [25:26] and Democrats, they almost all serve the [25:28] donor class. So, we we won't make it. [25:31] We'll I'm telling you right now, uh [25:34] we're going to run into the iceberg and [25:36] it's going to be an epic disaster. The [25:38] only hope is electing a smart person [25:40] who's prepared in 2028. Uh that that can [25:43] begin to get us on the road. So now when [25:45] the disaster hits, the AI shareholders [25:49] and executives aren't going to like it [25:50] either because the reaction will likely [25:53] be tremendous anger. And then someone [25:55] like me is going to say, "Hey, you know [25:57] what? Uh why do they get to keep all the [26:00] money and you're all broke and out of a [26:02] job? They created this cost which is [26:05] unemployment. Why don't they pay for it? [26:08] So why don't we take some of the [26:10] billions and billions and billions of [26:11] dollars that these AI companies have [26:13] made and put it towards their costs, [26:15] which is the unemployment of the [26:16] American people. So they could at a [26:18] minimum fund unemployment insurance and [26:21] we could make sure that that's very [26:22] healthy. Uh and we they could begin to [26:24] fund other things that might actually [26:25] help other human beings. I know heaven [26:28] forend that a millionaire or a [26:30] billionaire should ever help another [26:32] human being. But if you don't, the [26:34] pitchforks are coming. I'm not a [26:35] pitchfork guy. I'm [snorts] I believe in [26:37] nonviolence and I always will. Uh but I [26:40] don't think people get the level of [26:42] anger that's happening. I'll try to stop [26:44] it, but the [snorts] pitchforks will be [26:46] significant. And this whole thing of no, [26:48] I get all the money and you get nothing. [26:51] Will not play well. You can try it, but [26:54] it will end in disaster. [26:55] >> Kevin, the pitchforks are coming. We're [26:57] going to hit an iceberg. And it also [26:58] sounded like AI is going to ultimately [27:01] lead to a rise in what sounded like [27:03] socialism. [27:04] >> Wow. Jake's a real Debbie Downer today. [27:07] You know, this has been forecast in the [27:09] American economy. Every 20 years, it's [27:11] the end of the free world as we know it. [27:13] And that's not what happens. Let's go [27:15] back and do a little factchecking on [27:17] Jakester here. First of all, AI [27:19] companies lose billions. They don't make [27:21] any money right now. They're in a race, [27:24] as we talked about earlier, against [27:25] China primarily. They're raising a ton [27:28] of capital and losing billions every [27:30] year. We don't know yet how they're [27:33] going to monetize it, but the market's [27:35] willing to provide it because they see [27:37] the productivity opportunity and the [27:39] cure for cancer and the democracy around [27:41] education and productivity for the [27:44] nation already been proven by record [27:46] earnings in the S&P of which all 11 [27:48] sectors have adopted the first wave of [27:51] AI to enhance productivity and reduce [27:53] costs. We don't know yet what new jobs [27:56] are going to be created. I'll just talk [27:59] about the ones I'm creating in Utah. [28:02] 4,000 construction jobs for about nine [28:04] and a half years highpaying. And another [28:07] 2,000 engineering and support jobs, [28:10] extremely highpaying, because what's now [28:12] a desert will be a data center. not near [28:16] anybody's backyard, not replacing [28:19] farmland, not using any of the water the [28:21] way the people have been talking about, [28:23] not taking any energy from Utah, but in [28:26] fact contributing to it, not polluting [28:28] the air because we can't do that without [28:31] air permits. All of this stuff is a [28:33] falsehood. So, what we don't know, and [28:36] Jake's right about this, is no one ever [28:39] predicts with a new technology what the [28:42] outcome is. So, I'm not a doomer on this [28:45] stuff. My job here is to maintain a [28:49] direct focus on entrepreneurship, [28:52] hire as many people as I can because [28:55] that's what I do. And I take a lot of [28:57] flak. I mean, Jake's hitting me hard [28:59] today and he and I appreciate he's an [29:01] intelligent guy and he's got an opinion [29:03] and I'm glad we're in this narrative and [29:06] having this discourse. It's important, [29:08] but let's deal with fact, [29:11] not rhetoric and not hysteria. Because I [29:15] still go back to the robots eating the [29:17] babies, cuz that's all I all I listen to [29:19] every day. It's just ludicrous. And I [29:22] don't think robots are actually going to [29:24] do as much as people think or look the [29:27] way they think. They're not going to be [29:28] humanoid walking around taking out your [29:30] garbage. That's not how it's going to [29:32] work. Robots have been building cars for [29:34] decades now and doing other things in [29:37] medical research and robotics have been [29:39] used in all kinds of technologies and [29:41] chipm and everything else but they don't [29:43] they don't look like people walking [29:45] around. So, you know, I I say to myself, [29:48] we don't know what we don't know, and [29:50] that's fair. But to say that all of [29:52] these AI companies are making billions [29:55] of dollars and something else, and Jake [29:58] knows this, most of the taxes in America [30:03] are paid by the rich people. They pay [30:06] their fair share now. So if you take it [30:09] past 50% [30:12] like California, like New York, like New [30:15] Jersey, like Massachusetts in the [30:18] Constitution of America with the [30:20] forethought of the founding fathers, [30:22] they believed in the competition of [30:24] states. And so you have people moving [30:28] Schultz to Florida, you know, the Google [30:31] guys to Florida, some have gone to [30:34] Texas. If you want to steal rich [30:36] people's money, go ahead. They'll just [30:38] move. And if you really make it [30:41] difficult for them in every state in [30:42] America, they'll do what they did in [30:44] England. They'll find a new America. [30:46] That's what made America great to over [30:48] 200 years ago. Taxation. [30:51] It doesn't work. The thing about [30:53] socialism and communism is you run out [30:55] of other people's money very quickly [30:58] because they simply leave. The French [31:01] figured that out. That's what happened [31:03] any in England when they raised 90% tax [31:05] rates. Monaco, I mean, it only exists [31:09] because the French screwed the rich [31:10] French guys and they all move four miles [31:12] across the border. It's very simple. You [31:15] want to support entrepreneurship and job [31:18] creation. Only onethird of the [31:20] population in America can be [31:22] entrepreneurs and they employ the other [31:24] twothirds. That's the way it's been for [31:27] 200 years and it's a great thing. And I [31:31] don't see anybody else investing money [31:33] anywhere else except America 52% of the [31:36] time. 52 cents of every dollar on earth [31:40] from sovereign wealth comes to America [31:43] because it has the opportunity. No other [31:45] country. I don't see a lot of people [31:47] saying boy would I like to invest in [31:49] North Korea. Hey, can you get me into [31:51] Russia? Is there a Russian fund I can [31:54] invest in? Oh, can I invest in Cuba? I [31:57] don't think so. I don't want to put my [31:59] money there for retirement. That's why [32:01] I'm talking about this. The facts are [32:03] the facts. Get over it. Inhale. [32:07] Everybody chillax and let's keep the [32:09] American dream going. [32:12] Jen, I'll get your response to that. [32:14] Many things said there. I mean, the core [32:15] argument there is if you try and tax [32:17] rich people, they're going to leave and [32:18] go somewhere else and, you know, we [32:19] might end up like Cuba. [32:21] >> Yeah. So, I did I miss this meme about [32:25] the robots eating the kids because [32:27] [laughter] I don't know why they [32:29] >> I love the robots eating the kids. I [32:30] just don't think it's going to happen. [32:33] >> I don't think anybody thinks it's going [32:34] to happen. It sounds like it was made [32:36] up. Um, okay. So, there's some [32:38] fear-mongering about robots eating kids [32:40] and how America's going to turn [32:42] communist or something. No, no, no. [32:44] Look, as I said, we're capitalists. [32:46] We're just trying to figure out what's [32:47] the best way to do this. Capitalism [32:50] isn't supposed to be let's crush the [32:52] average guy and make sure the corporate [32:53] CEOs get everything. I'm a corporate [32:55] CEO, but it's not right and it's not [32:57] balanced and it's not American. The [32:59] American way is to make sure that we [33:01] build a super strong middle class that [33:04] are great, productive citizens, voters, [33:07] and by the way, consumers, right? And so [33:10] if we lose track of that, then we're all [33:14] going to be doomed. So, like Kevin's so [33:17] worried that somebody's going to take [33:18] his money. And it's not just Kevin. They [33:20] always like threaten us like, "Oh, oh [33:22] yeah, we'll leave. I mean, don't [33:24] threaten me with a good time." Uh, but [33:26] but [laughter] beyond that, [33:29] okay, but beyond that, Kevin, that's not [33:32] going to be your main problem. When you [33:33] don't have any consumers, that's going [33:35] to be your main problem. You have to [33:38] protect the American middle class. That, [33:40] you know, you could argue that's the [33:42] goose that lays the golden eggs. And you [33:44] guys keep chipping away and chipping [33:46] away at that middle class. And so right [33:48] now, Stephen, this late into the [33:50] conversation, still no plans on what to [33:53] do with inevitable massive unemployment. [33:57] And what I'm telling you is we're not [33:58] going to go necessarily to communism, [34:00] but we are going to wonder, wait, why is [34:03] everyone unemployed and and only a [34:06] couple of people have reaped billions or [34:08] trillions of dollars? So, and and and [34:10] come on, Kevin. You know, you know how [34:12] uh the economy works and the markets [34:14] work. Yes, you invest into it in the [34:16] beginning and that's why right now [34:17] they're theoretically losing billions of [34:19] dollars. Same exact thing that happened [34:20] to Amazon. And then later you make [34:22] billions and maybe even trillions. [34:23] That's why their stock prices are so [34:25] high. And so they're powered by that [34:28] investment and later they'll reap the [34:30] rewards. And when they reap those [34:31] rewards, it's fair to ask who got you [34:34] those rewards. It's not to say that the [34:36] entrepreneurs didn't and the employees [34:38] and the shareholders of those companies [34:39] didn't, but there were other factors [34:41] involved, including all the American [34:43] government and the American people that [34:45] supported the infrastructure that made [34:47] that happen. That conversation is going [34:49] to be inevitable when we [snorts] have [34:51] tens of millions of people unemployed. [34:53] And and guys, there's one other factor [34:55] that's involved there. When you have a [34:57] lot of unemployed young men sitting [35:00] around, usually what happens is nothing [35:03] good. Wars happen, crime goes up. We [35:07] have to be prepared. And all I'm hearing [35:10] from the AI industry is like, as Kevin [35:12] said, chillax. Don't sweat it, bro. [35:16] Don't worry. We're going to have all the [35:17] money and then you guys, I don't know, [35:19] you'll figure it out and I'll be in [35:20] Monaco. Monaco. That was hilarious. [35:22] Monaco. [laughter] [35:26] So maybe that's where the child eating [35:27] robots are. Uh, so Kevin, be careful. [35:30] >> Kevin, your thoughts on that? No. No. [35:32] there's, you know, saying there's no [35:34] answers and we're we're being asked to [35:35] just chillax. I think Kevin, you do [35:37] acknowledge that there will be a change [35:39] in the occupation mix in America, right? [35:42] Even as a a founder and CEO myself and [35:44] as a business owner that employs [35:45] hundreds of people, I am thinking [35:47] differently about especially entry- [35:49] level positions in a way that I wasn't [35:52] honestly 6 months ago before some of the [35:53] models got more advanced, especially as [35:55] it relates to things like coding. But [35:57] I'm thinking very, very differently [35:58] about who to hire. And actually, one of [36:00] the things I find myself naturally doing [36:01] is the person that still is on the [36:03] coldface of hiring in my company is when [36:05] I see entry- level positions, the first [36:07] thing I'm looking for is if they have an [36:08] AI proficiency. And there are candidates [36:11] now, even for me at entry- level [36:12] positions that I'm not selecting for [36:14] because I realize that someone with an [36:15] AI proficiency in that exact same role [36:18] is now like a five or 10x person. And so [36:22] I I'm just experiencing myself making [36:24] different hiring decisions as a founder. [36:26] And I'm I'm sure you are as well. People [36:29] think that engineers are going to be [36:31] replaced by AI codew writing. Uh claude [36:35] is one of the tools being used right [36:36] now. But actually most engineers aren't [36:40] hired to write code. They're hired to [36:43] solve problems. They use code to try and [36:46] solve those problems. So you know [36:48] companies that have been firing people, [36:51] everybody's attributing it to AI. It's [36:53] not true. There's been a lot of fat in a [36:56] lot of these companies that hired trying [36:58] to assume what would happen next. They [36:59] got it wrong. So I don't think we've yet [37:01] seen what the outcome's going to be. I [37:04] tend to be the optimist as I talked [37:06] about other technologies in the past [37:09] being loathed for the fact that they [37:11] cause disruption. There is no question [37:13] AI is disruptive. [37:15] Um [37:16] >> Kevin, did you see this week Figure AI, [37:18] which is one of the humanoid robot [37:19] companies, did a live stream for I think [37:21] it was four days where they just showed [37:23] a robot um on a sort of factory floor [37:27] sorting out parcels for four straight [37:29] days and it it did it better and faster [37:31] than humans doing it. This was a [37:33] humanoid robot. And so the one of the [37:35] things I think about is if you listen to [37:37] someone like Elon Musk who's made a [37:38] prediction, this is a direct quote from [37:40] him. My prediction is that there will be [37:42] far far more robots like intelligent [37:44] robots in the world than there will be [37:46] people. Long term I think the ratio of [37:48] humanoid robots will be more like 2:1. [37:52] There might be two humanoid robots or [37:55] more for every one human. And when you [37:58] when you think about Elon Musk's [37:59] predictions over time, to his credit, [38:01] sometimes his time frames are wrong. But [38:04] when he says the rocket is going to land [38:06] on the chopsticks, the rocket eventually [38:08] lands on the chopsticks. when he says, [38:10] "My car in LA, my Tesla, will eventually [38:12] drive itself without me interfering," [38:14] the car eventually drives itself. So, [38:16] with Elon's track record in predicting [38:18] what he'll be able to do with [38:19] technology, I think he's got a pretty [38:21] solid track record. So, when he says [38:23] these humanoid robots are going to be [38:25] better at surgery or cleaning or [38:28] whatever than humans in short order, [38:31] sometimes predicting, you know, time [38:33] frames of 2027, 2028, I tend to believe [38:37] him. Is he lying? Because if he's [38:39] telling the truth, what we're seeing is [38:41] both the disruption of intelligence, but [38:43] also, one could say, the disruption of [38:44] our muscles at the same time. And I [38:47] can't think of a comparable like the [38:48] industrial revolution where humans like [38:51] two real um sort of professional [38:54] productivity driving forces of their [38:56] brains and their their physicality are [38:59] being disrupted at the same time. And [39:01] just to give you another story to [39:02] overlay onto this, my co-founder and my [39:04] company called Third Webb, big company, [39:05] we've raised 30 odd million dollars. [39:07] It's out in San Francisco. I went down [39:09] to his his uh entrepreneurship [39:11] accelerator. I've not been there in 2 [39:13] years. And I I arrived and I was like, [39:14] "Why is everyone building robotics?" And [39:16] he said to me, he goes, "Stephen, the [39:18] robot pieces have been here for decades. [39:20] We've always had them. What we've been [39:21] missing and the expensive part was the [39:23] intelligence." And he tooured me through [39:25] this 40,000 square ft um building called [39:28] Ethink down in San Francisco. And I [39:30] [snorts] saw a robot cooking with a [39:33] robot arm making food. I saw a robot [39:36] making perfume for you. Whatever perfume [39:38] you wanted, this big machine that just [39:40] makes it for you. And he says, because [39:41] we've got intelligence and we've always [39:43] had the machinery, there's going to be [39:44] this huge explosion of robotics that [39:47] we've always been waiting for. [39:48] Intelligence was the missing piece. And [39:50] now he says it costs pennies and [39:52] everyone there is building, not software [39:54] anymore. They're all building robotics. [39:56] And so for me, I was like, wow, [39:58] the future's going to look very, very [40:00] different, I think, in short order than [40:02] the past. And I'm just a realist. So, [40:03] I'm not trying to be pessimistic or [40:05] optimistic. I think there's truth on [40:06] both sides. But Kevin, do you [40:08] acknowledge that the jobs that we have [40:10] today in large part are going to go [40:12] away. [40:13] >> Yeah. You know, I don't think um shaking [40:16] a perfume bottle is a great job for [40:18] anybody, but I do think, and I'll give [40:20] you two examples, cuz maybe you're right [40:22] about Elon, he doesn't get a big chunk [40:25] of his stock unless he populates Mars [40:27] with a million people. NASA announced 6 [40:30] hours ago that they're going to put a [40:32] permanent [40:34] plant there on the moon, an established [40:37] base on the moon. Can you imagine the [40:41] hundreds of thousands of jobs just those [40:45] two activities are going to create to [40:48] actually execute on that highpaying jobs [40:53] engineers analysts coders everything the [40:56] manufacturing of facilities to take to [40:58] Mars to take to the moon I mean [41:00] everybody wants to talk about the guy [41:02] shaking perfume bottles losing his job [41:05] when you're talking about millions of [41:07] jobs on new opportunities for mankind [41:10] that no one even could think about 24 [41:13] months ago that have been announced [41:14] today. So, you either have to be a [41:18] jaker, a doomser, like you know, it's [41:21] the end of the free world as we know it [41:22] and we're all going to be eaten by [41:23] robots or you're in my camp saying the [41:26] opportunity is so bright I got to wear [41:29] shades. I got to buy more sunglasses for [41:32] how bright the future is. This is an [41:34] unbelievable opportunity we're talking [41:36] about. And we're not wiping out jobs. [41:40] We're creating new jobs that are very [41:42] highpaying and really interesting for [41:45] people to do. Imagine somebody working [41:47] on the Mars project or putting data [41:50] centers in space or expanding the [41:54] telecommunications on Starlink. I mean, [41:57] these are the future jobs. No, you know, [42:00] I think the person that was born to [42:02] shake perfume would rather have a job [42:05] getting people onto the moon. [42:06] >> Just on this point, Elon, you mentioned [42:08] Elon's pay packet. Part of that is he [42:10] gets that big payout if there are a [42:11] hundred uh sorry, a million humanoid [42:14] robots um in very short order. And when [42:17] we think about who you might want to [42:18] send to Mars, a super intelligent [42:21] humanoid robot is probably much easier [42:23] to send than a biological human being [42:26] for v various reasons to do with [42:27] atmospheric pressure. But if if he's [42:30] right on both counts on both this [42:32] journey to Mars and humanoid robots, [42:34] presumably it'll be the humanoid robots [42:35] going. I just wanted Kevin, can you tell [42:37] me how you might be wrong? I think [42:40] that's quite important because I think [42:41] it it it shows your ability to see both [42:43] sides of the argument. Is there a case [42:45] where you could be wrong about this [42:47] about this unemployment issue? [42:49] >> No. How about that for an answer, [42:52] [laughter] [42:54] >> Jen? [42:58] >> [gasps] [42:58] >> Yeah. So, look, I shouldn't laugh too [43:00] hard because I'm trying to answer that [43:03] same question in my head. And Stephen, [43:05] it's hard to uh answer it from my [43:08] perspective because the interregnum is [43:12] just unaccounted for. So, here's what I [43:15] mean by that. So, even if we have [43:17] Kevin's beautiful uh sunshine scenario, [43:21] none of the robots ever eat the [43:22] children. I don't know why that keeps [43:24] coming back in, but anyway. Um so and [43:28] and we create all these wonderful jobs [43:30] in in some uh distant future. Well, [43:33] okay. Yes. But the nevertheless, the [43:35] truck driver and the assembly line guy [43:37] and all those folks already lost their [43:39] jobs. And the guy who lost his job on an [43:42] assembly line in Cleveland is not going [43:44] to be able to become the engineer who [43:47] figures out how to get on Mars. So, it's [43:50] not that he's not capable of it. he's [43:52] just 61 years old and he he can't learn [43:55] a whole new profession. So this is an [43:57] unrealistic conversation. So even if all [44:01] of the wonderful scenarios about AI are [44:03] true, it would take minimum 20 years to [44:06] get to this place where the robots are [44:09] running everything, we all have leisure [44:11] time and we just can't figure out what [44:12] to do with ourselves and we decide how [44:14] to get to Venus and and Uranus and [44:17] wherever else you want to go. Okay. [44:19] [laughter] [44:20] But in the meanwhile, in those 20 years, [44:23] we had massive waves of unemployment. It [44:26] is indisputable. Even as Kevin explains [44:28] it, he says, "Well, you know, you're not [44:30] going to be doing doing the perfume [44:31] shaking, you're not doing the assembly [44:33] line, you're not doing the driving, [44:34] you're not doing this, you're not doing [44:35] that. All those jobs are going to go." [44:38] And in fact, if you actually just listen [44:40] to folks on Wall Street, they brag about [44:42] it nonstop. Oh, we're going to get to, [44:45] you know, cut 25%. We're going to have [44:47] synergies. we're going to have cost [44:49] cutting. And then when people say that, [44:51] everybody gets the analysts get excited [44:52] and they're like, "Oh, bye, bye." [44:54] They're going to fire all their [44:55] employees. And then the other guy goes, [44:56] "No, no, no. I'm going to fire them even [44:58] quicker." And they go, "Bye, bye bye." [45:00] And not once have they thought, "Who's [45:01] going to buy the actual products?" And [45:04] they just don't have an answer for that. [45:06] So into into there is going to be [45:09] upheaval, massive upheaval. And it [45:11] doesn't And I'm not a doomsday guy. My [45:14] god, we have a thing called Operation [45:16] Hope on on the Young Turks. Um, we our [45:20] slogan is get caught trying. No, no, I'm [45:22] an enormously optimistic guy and I think [45:24] we can solve these issues, but we got to [45:26] try to solve them. And I don't see [45:28] anyone even trying to solve them now [45:30] again outside of Roana. [45:32] >> Kevin, I spoke to Dra, the CEO of Uber, [45:35] and I think I'm right in saying that [45:36] driving is the biggest employer in the [45:38] world. And when I asked Dra, who's the [45:40] CEO of Uber, if they're going to um [45:43] create autonomous vehicles very very [45:45] quickly to automate the 9.4 million [45:49] drivers that they have. He said that [45:51] they are. And then I asked him the [45:52] question, what will those 9.4 million [45:54] people do? And his response to me, the [45:56] direct quote is he said, I don't know. [46:00] Which is pretty pretty shocking. He also [46:04] noted that privately he said, "I have to [46:07] be honest. AI will replace 9.4 million [46:10] jobs at Uber. Tech executives are not [46:13] being transparent about AI. They talk [46:15] behind closed doors about the sheer [46:16] amount of disruption they anticipate, [46:18] but they don't talk about it publicly. [46:22] Look, I don't think we're going to make [46:23] any progress, more progress on this [46:24] issue." So, um, because [46:27] >> well, I think I think you're bringing a [46:28] great point, but the fact is we don't [46:30] know what comes next. Much of the reason [46:33] most people haven't posted content or [46:35] built their personal brand is because [46:37] it's hard and it's timeconuming and [46:39] we're all very very busy and if you've [46:41] never posted something before there's so [46:44] many factors in your psychology that [46:46] stop you wanting to post what people [46:48] will think of you am I doing this right [46:50] is the thing I'm saying absolutely [46:51] stupid all of these result in paralysis [46:54] which means you don't post and your feed [46:56] goes bare I'm an investor in a company [46:59] called Stanto which you've probably [47:01] heard me talk about and what they've [47:02] been building is this new tool called [47:03] Stanley that uses AI, looks at your [47:06] feed, looks at your tone of voice, looks [47:07] at your history, looks at your best [47:08] performing posts, and tells you what you [47:11] should post, makes those posts for you. [47:13] You can also just use it for [47:14] inspiration. And sometimes what we need [47:16] when we're thinking about doing a post [47:18] for our social media channels is [47:19] inspiration. Building an audience has [47:21] fundamentally changed my life, and I [47:23] think it could change yours, too. So, [47:25] I'm inviting you to give this new tool a [47:27] shot and let me know what you think. All [47:29] you have to do is search [47:30] coach.stand.sto. store now to get [47:32] started. [47:35] >> Steve, what are you doing? [47:36] >> Uh, just making myself a delicious [47:38] coffee [47:39] >> from the freezer. [47:40] >> From the freezer? Have you not heard [47:41] about CompTIA? [47:42] >> No. [47:43] >> Oh my gosh, this is going to change your [47:44] life. Couple of months ago, the founder [47:47] of this business called Matt sent a big [47:48] shipment of this coffee to our office in [47:52] London. What most people don't know is [47:53] that the processing of coffee takes out [47:54] a lot of the taste. So, what they do is [47:56] they flash freeze it at the optimal [47:59] moment when it's most tasty and they [48:02] send you in the post the coffee in these [48:04] little frozen ice cubes. Now, Matt sent [48:06] a big shipment to my office. I moved it [48:08] to the kitchen. I said to the team, [48:09] "Knock yourselves out." And then I saw [48:11] so many messages in our Slack channel of [48:12] people going, "Oh my god, what the hell [48:15] is that? It's so delicious." All I have [48:17] to do is pop it out in the morning using [48:19] the little button on the back of this [48:20] thing. I pour my hot water in and I mix [48:23] it and that is done. You can get $30 off [48:27] your first order of Cometier coffee if [48:30] you go to cometier.com/stephven. [48:33] Try it and please Instagram DM me, [48:35] LinkedIn me and let me know if you love [48:37] it as much as I do. [48:40] One of the things that's probably going [48:41] to be a disruptor to [48:44] AI's so I should say America's ability [48:46] to pursue these technologies is what's [48:48] going on with president approval ratings [48:50] at the moment. I've got this uh graph [48:52] here in front of me which you you know [48:53] you don't need to be able to zoom in to [48:55] see which shows that President Trump's [48:57] approval rating is declining rapidly in [48:59] part because of what's going on in the [49:00] Middle East. I wanted to get um Jenk [49:03] your opinion on what all of this stuff [49:05] is. As someone like me I don't really [49:06] know much about politics. I know that [49:08] there's these midterms coming up in [49:09] November time in the US, um, which is [49:12] going to be consequential, but from a [49:14] 30,000 foot perspective, how do I how do [49:17] I pass out the truth of this war? [49:19] Because Trump seems to be saying [49:20] different things. Every day there's a [49:21] ceasefire with Iran, and then there's [49:23] and then they're bombing again. I think [49:25] 2 days ago, they started bombing again, [49:26] which they call defensive strikes, and [49:28] then there's a ceasefire, and he says [49:29] there's a deal about to be done, and [49:31] then there's some bombing again. The [49:32] straight straight of Hormuse is open, [49:34] then it's closed, then it's I just don't [49:35] know what the truth is. Chank, in your [49:37] opinion, what is the truth? What's going [49:38] on? [49:40] >> Yeah. So, first let's start with uh the [49:42] president's polling numbers. Yeah. [49:43] They've been uh decimated by this war. [49:46] They were already in trouble because the [49:47] Epstein files and he didn't do anything [49:48] about affordability. Just gave a massive [49:51] tax cut for the rich as usual. Did [49:53] whatever Israel wants as usual. Uh and [49:56] so now, uh you know, he's eaten into his [49:59] own base. So, he's barely hanging on to [50:02] a majority of non-MAGA Republicans that [50:06] voted for him. Only 53% still support [50:08] him. He's lost about 20% of hardcore [50:11] MAGA. Uh his disapproval numbers are at [50:14] record numbers now. Um 68% of the [50:17] country thinks we're going in the wrong [50:18] direction. Uh he they about 76% of the [50:22] country is dissatisfied with how the [50:24] economy is going. And a lot of that is [50:27] because of the war. And so the war is [50:29] obviously driving up gas prices which is [50:31] then uh leading to uh inflation in other [50:34] areas. Of course a lot of things uh use [50:37] not just oil and gas but fertilizer [50:40] which has also been blocked uh through [50:42] the straight of hormuz. So we're we're [50:44] having an energy crisis um actually [50:46] mainly in Asia and Europe uh more so [50:49] than than even America. So that's why [50:51] the South Koreans are livid at the [50:53] Israelis that they're having to cons, [50:55] you know, conserve gas and go through [50:58] lean times because Israel wanted this [51:00] war and literally no one else on planet [51:02] Earth did. And so shortages in India and [51:06] this is all before we re-engage and [51:09] restart the war, which is what I'm [51:10] afraid is going to come next. So now [51:13] it's some folks have a hard time [51:16] believing this, but we we have to go [51:17] back to a conversation we had earlier. [51:19] Remember in America we legalize bribery. [51:23] So um one uh corporation can give to an [51:27] infinite amount to a super PAC [51:29] >> [snorts] [51:29] >> uh corporate interest, lobbyists, [51:31] individuals. To give you a sense of the [51:33] scale of the problem, one family alone [51:35] uh the Aden family, Miriam and Sheldon [51:37] Adlesen have given Donald Trump over [51:40] $317 [51:42] million in campaign contributions. We [51:44] used to have a word for that. It was [51:46] called a bribe. And Trump is so [51:49] accidentally honest on this stuff, he [51:51] just can't keep anything in his head uh [51:53] from going outside his mouth. So he has [51:56] said, "Oh, Miriam, she cares more about [51:58] Israel than America, right?" I'm like, [52:00] "No, that's super awkward." And then he [52:02] says, "Oh, Sheldon Adlesen used to come [52:04] in here and tell me what to do all the [52:05] time." And then I did it, you know, and [52:07] I moved the embassy for the Adles, our [52:09] embassy in Israel. He's just, you know, [52:12] basically selling off our foreign [52:13] policy. To be fair to him, almost all of [52:15] our politicians do that. uh Israel gives [52:17] to 94% of Congress. So there Israel is [52:21] not some unique lobbyist that uh [52:23] community that is unseen in the world. [52:26] No, all the lobbyists do this. That's [52:28] why we give $35 billion in uh oil [52:31] subsidies which they're profitable [52:33] companies. That makes no sense. Why does [52:35] an average person have to give money to [52:36] Exon Mobile? That's insanity. Because [52:39] big pharma's lobby is so strong, we [52:41] can't negotiate prices. Now, when it [52:43] comes to Israel, that's when people lose [52:45] their minds. And mainstream media goes, [52:46] "Okay, you're right about big farmer. [52:48] You're right about big oil and defense [52:49] contractors and every other lobby. But [52:51] if you say the same exact thing about [52:53] Israel, we'll call you an anti-semite, [52:55] cancel you, and you're never going to [52:57] ever get another job again. No criticism [53:00] of Israel is allowed without us doing [53:02] massive oppression inside this country." [53:05] So, we've now got Israel that is totally [53:08] empowered to go, you know, rogue. They [53:11] don't follow any laws. They don't follow [53:14] the laws of war crimes. They've now [53:16] invaded Lebanon. They say they're going [53:18] to take all the way to the Latani River. [53:19] They're going to own southern Lebanon. [53:22] They've already ethnically [53:24] cleansed southern Lebanon, moved out a [53:27] million people to ethnically cleanse [53:28] Gaza. Netanyahu on tape bragged about, [53:31] oh, we used to have 53% of Gaza after [53:33] the war. Uh, now we have over 60%. So, [53:36] it was to steal land. That's what it was [53:38] about. It wasn't self-defense. Lebanon's [53:40] not self-defense. Israel invaded them. [53:42] Iran's not self-defense. We invaded [53:44] Iran. This war was utterly pointless, [53:47] especially from an American perspective. [53:49] Let me tell you what American interests [53:51] are and what Israeli interests are. And [53:52] they're very, very different. And in [53:54] America right now, because of we started [53:56] this war, we need the straight of Hormuz [53:57] open. That's what's hurting our gas [53:59] prices and all of our other prices and [54:01] affordability, inflation, all of that is [54:02] connected to the straight of horm. We [54:04] didn't have that problem before the war, [54:06] but now we have it. We've got to open it [54:08] back up. In order to do that, Iran has [54:10] an enormous amount of leverage. We've [54:11] got to make a reasonable peace deal. [54:13] Good news. We were about to have one [54:14] over this weekend. And all we want [54:18] theoretically is for them to take out [54:20] their to not make nuclear weapons. And [54:22] they've already promised 18 different [54:24] times that they wouldn't do that. They [54:25] did it under the Obama deal. They've [54:26] offered it before the war. They've [54:28] offered it during the war. So, that is [54:30] not an issue. And them promising it [54:32] doesn't mean anything. It has to be [54:33] verified. So what they're saying is yes, [54:35] we will have international monitors [54:36] verify that we will not have a weapon. [54:39] So that's the only thing that America [54:40] said they cared about before the war. So [54:42] then we're done. And we just killed 49 [54:45] of their top regime leaders. Trump says [54:48] we destroyed their navy, their air [54:49] force, and everything else. We're done. [54:52] We have no American interest in there. [54:53] The only interest left is leave, open up [54:56] the straight of Hormuz so we can get our [54:57] economy back on track. [snorts] Israel, [54:59] on the other hand, has said they would [55:01] like, and again, this is on tape. [55:02] Netanyahu said it. They would like to be [55:04] the only regional superpower in the [55:07] Middle East. In order to do that, they [55:08] have to destroy every other power in the [55:11] Middle East. Now, good news for them. [55:13] They completely control our Congress and [55:15] our presidents. So, uh they got us to [55:17] they literally gave us a list after 9/11 [55:20] of seven countries they wanted us to [55:22] attack on their behalf. We have attacked [55:25] all seven. Iran was the last one on that [55:28] list. So they want them destroyed so [55:31] that they can't fight back when Israel [55:33] takes more land as they are doing today. [55:35] They don't want anyone to be able to [55:37] defend themselves. They're going to kill [55:40] and take land as much as humanly [55:42] possible. And they want us Americans to [55:44] pay the bill. They say, "You owe us a [55:47] genocide. You owe us endless string of [55:49] wars. You owe us a global war on [55:51] terror." No, that was a global war on [55:53] Israel's neighbors. That cost us $8 [55:55] trillion. [55:57] We gave $320 billion to Israel so far [56:00] already. Lifetime. Why? Why? Why don't [56:03] they give us the money back? No. They [56:04] say, "You owe us. You owe us. You owe [56:06] us. That's why we're in this war." And [56:09] by the way, the last thing, Stephen, [56:10] [snorts] is while we're all distracted [56:12] in Iran, Israel has taken southern [56:14] Lebanon. And now they're saying they're [56:15] going to keep it forever. So that was [56:18] the point of this war. 100% Israeli [56:21] interest, 0% American interest. Let's [56:24] get out of there. Let's stop fighting [56:26] Israel's wars for them and come back [56:28] home. [56:29] >> What about nuclear weapons? One of the [56:30] pretenses is that they were weeks away [56:33] from enriching uranium to a point where [56:34] that weapon could be used. [56:36] >> Yeah. So that's what Netanyahu has been [56:38] saying for the last 30 years in back in [56:40] the 1990s. Oh, they're weeks away. [56:42] They're weeks away. Do you know and you [56:44] probably don't know because American [56:46] media pretty much works for Israel. And [56:48] now when I say that guys, those are not [56:49] hyperbole. [56:51] Uh the Israeli lobby donate donates I [56:54] would say legally bribes like the other [56:55] lobbies do. 94% [56:59] of Congress. Number one lifetime donor [57:01] to Donald Trump is Israel. Number one [57:02] lifetime donor to Joe Biden. Number one [57:04] lifetime donor to Hakee Jeff, Chuck [57:06] Schumer, Mike Johnson. All of our [57:08] leaders, their number one lifetime donor [57:10] is Apac and the Israeli lobby. They [57:12] completely control our government. And [57:13] then our media comes and lies to us and [57:15] says, "Oh, they're the victims." Well, [57:17] we have eyes. We saw Gaza. Gaza is [57:20] utterly destroyed and Israel did that [57:22] with our money. That's insane. So, no, [57:26] we look, is I don't even think Israel is [57:29] an ally. I I don't know why in the world [57:31] we would ever serve a foreign nation. [57:34] They're treading all over us. They've [57:35] taken our sovereignty away. They've [57:37] taken our freedom away. And all we have [57:39] is these dupes in mainstream media [57:41] telling us about how they're doing [57:43] self-defense. Well, part of self-defense [57:45] is I take your land. Currently, they're [57:48] taping themselves [57:50] going into IDF soldiers are going into [57:52] Lebanese homes, Muslims and Christians, [57:55] stealing all their property. Then they [57:57] put it on online, go a look, we stole [57:59] other things. Then they destroy the [58:01] homes and they say, "Now this is Israeli [58:03] territory." That's not self-defense. [58:04] That's terrorism. It we are supporting a [58:07] terrorist nation and we're giving them [58:10] hundreds of billions of dollars and this [58:12] isn't even helping Israel. were enabling [58:14] their worst instincts and they're [58:16] getting the whole world to hate them. [58:18] How does that help Israel to have the [58:20] whole world despise you because you're [58:22] so selfishly driving up everyone's [58:25] prices and creating endless wars? [58:27] Literally, no other country on earth [58:29] wants this war in Iran to continue other [58:32] than Israel. [58:33] >> Kevin, you have a different perspective [58:35] on the um effectiveness and purpose of [58:38] the the original strikes that Trump did. [58:40] Are you supportive of this military [58:42] operation at large? [58:44] >> Well, you know, I'm not a show for uh [58:46] any politician. I focus on policy [58:49] because that's ultimately what survives. [58:51] Politicians come and go. Policy lingers. [58:53] I've always said that and that's as an [58:55] investor what you have to worry about. [58:57] So, um let's talk about the situation in [59:00] the Middle East for about 49 years. Um [59:05] some people would say 60. It depends [59:07] what you believed in the early years. [59:09] The Persians are were a very advanced [59:12] society in mathematics, poetry, art, you [59:14] name it. Uh they're very famous. And [59:17] then you have this small um [59:20] I I'm going to call it bad management. I [59:23] don't know what else to call it. that [59:25] took this society, brutalized the people [59:28] there, created a million um man army run [59:33] by 150,000 people, a super militia [59:38] um that caused a lot of chaos in that [59:41] region with proxies uh as people have [59:43] been talking about. Um and and the this [59:46] militia is is paid with cash that's [59:50] gotten from um the sales of of energy [59:53] and they would stop killing their own [59:56] people if they didn't get paid. So that [59:58] the the 150,000 that run that country [60:01] that brutalize the almost 100 million [60:03] others. I mean it's a really strange [60:06] platform that hasn't worked for the [60:07] people there for 60 years. But it it was [60:11] tolerated by all the neighbors until 6 [60:13] months ago. the United Arab Emirates, [60:16] Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, they they [60:21] wanted to stay out of it because it was, [60:23] you know, it was relatively calm. Every [60:25] 6 months the hoodies or one of the [60:28] uranium proxies would blow up an oil [60:30] ship kept the insurance premiums 30% [60:32] higher and then the proverbial poo poo [60:35] hit the fan. Now, China, let's get down [60:38] to business, gets 48% of its energy [60:41] through that straight, as does many [60:44] other Asian countries. So, they, as Jake [60:47] pointed out, um, [60:50] uh, you know, basically are underwater. [60:54] They don't have energy, Jack, I should [60:56] say. So, you know, at the end of the day [60:58] here, um, there's a problem. And so, [61:01] what's going to happen when this is [61:02] over? Um, forget about Look, you can't [61:06] let a You can't let a society that 150 [61:09] people there say, "Let's kill [61:12] everybody." I mean, they're on a [61:14] different kind of mandate. They they [61:16] they're a little a little strange. You [61:18] don't want to give those people a [61:19] nuclear bomb. I don't care who you are. [61:22] They're just offside. And they they're [61:24] happy to kill their own people, but I [61:25] don't want them killing everybody else [61:26] with interbolistic missiles. So, no, [61:28] they can't have 90 pounds of rich [61:30] uranium. and they're not going to get it [61:33] and they're going to keep getting bombed [61:35] until they give it up. And at some [61:37] point, somebody in there is going to [61:38] say, "Whoa, uh, they're really we're [61:41] getting tenderized in here and we got to [61:42] stop this and we got to get the best [61:44] deal we can." We want to stay in power [61:46] to keep killing our people as long as we [61:48] can because we're the 150,000 guys that [61:51] live very well and everybody else lives [61:54] like crap. And that's just the way that [61:56] society works. And if the people want to [61:58] rise up and kill the 150 that are [62:00] killing them, they will one day. I don't [62:02] know. But here's what I think. I think [62:04] the actual countries around there are [62:08] going to end up in the same boat that we [62:11] have in the Suez and Panama canals where [62:14] there's a fee to go through, but it's [62:16] managed so that no country, including [62:18] China, gets to run it. And so that has [62:21] already found peace and all the shipping [62:24] lanes are open and the insurance rates [62:25] are normal there. So, if you're Saudi [62:27] Arabia, you got let's let's say it costs [62:29] five billion a month to police the [62:33] strait. Okay, that's a good number [62:35] because I'm probably right, pretty close [62:37] to it. That's nothing for the UAE and [62:40] for Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Bahrain. [62:43] They're going to need it open. So, if [62:45] they have to be like the United Nations [62:47] for that region and keep it open, that's [62:49] great. Now, I'm staying long the UAE [62:52] because I've invested there in in ADGM. [62:55] I have a company there. I've got [62:56] employees there. I talk to them every [62:58] day. I think this is going to end soon. [63:01] But I would like to see it in a way that [63:04] Iran is isolated. Maybe, you know, [63:07] they're not they can't control the [63:08] strait and they can't have the nukes. [63:10] Those are the two things that I think [63:12] have to be resolved. And then if they [63:14] want to brutalize their people forever, [63:17] okay, you know, they're going to do [63:18] that. It's a horrible outcome for those [63:20] people. I feel terrible for them. But [63:23] this outcome is a good one. If we [63:25] resolve those two things, new policing [63:27] of the strait, that would be great [63:29] because the Chinese need that, they want [63:31] that. And at some point, they're going [63:34] to squeeze the heads of these Iranian [63:36] leaders, whoever they are. They keep [63:37] getting killed and a new one pops up [63:39] like whack-a-ole. But that's just the [63:41] way that regime works. And nobody's [63:43] willing to to say, "Look, I I want to [63:45] take them over because you got the army [63:47] still being paid." But by blocking that [63:50] straight for the last 60 days, the the [63:54] amount of money they're losing is 210 [63:58] million US per 24 hours. So at some [64:03] point, whoever's running the show there [64:05] is going to say, "If we can't pay our [64:07] soldiers to kill our people, we're going [64:09] to be screwed. They're going to come up [64:11] to the top of the castle and take [64:13] Frankenstein out." So we got to make [64:15] sure we cut a deal. That's why I'm [64:17] optimistic. The price of oil is down [64:19] almost 16%. It'll get back near 70. I [64:23] don't know what that's going to do for [64:24] the midterms because, you know, yeah, [64:27] the numbers are terrible, but every [64:28] incumbent gets screwed in the midterms. [64:30] It's it's just the nature of how it [64:32] works. Now, whether they lose the [64:33] Senate, I don't know. Are they going to [64:35] lose the House? Who knows? But if [64:36] gasoline's back to 70 bucks, we won't be [64:40] having this narrative about [64:41] unaffordability around energy in the [64:43] United States. And you just don't know. [64:46] But I do know that the status quo [64:50] because the UAE and Qatar and Bahrain [64:56] left those Iranians alone until they [64:58] rained missiles on them. Now they're [65:00] pissed. And so it's not business as [65:03] usual. And so I think the the winds of [65:07] change are going to blow through there. [65:09] And maybe the upside is the great [65:11] Persian people get better leadership [65:14] because boy, their leaders suck. [65:16] >> Jenk, it sounds like an optimistic um [65:18] outcome is being forecasted by Kevin and [65:21] I can see you nodding your head there in [65:23] a disagreement, shaking your head. [65:26] >> Yeah. So, look, again, I'm normally an [65:28] optimist here, but we've gotten [65:29] ourselves uh in some significant ruts [65:32] here. So, uh first of all, u you know, [65:36] this whole idea of the Iranian regime is [65:37] bad. Okay. Yeah, it is. Uh, it's Muslim [65:40] fundamentalist. I don't like [65:40] fundamentalists of any religion. I'm an [65:42] atheist. Uh, you know, they abuse their [65:45] people and they're corrupt. No question [65:46] about it. Netanyahu is corrupt. He's up [65:49] on corruption charges that seem to never [65:50] come. Uh, the Israeli settlers are [65:53] religious fundamentalists, biggest [65:55] lunatics on earth. They think that God [65:57] said to kill the Palestinians and take [65:59] their land, and we fund them. We give [66:01] them billions of dollars. So, I'm not in [66:03] favor of any of these uh [66:05] fundamentalists, no matter what religion [66:06] they're from. Now, on the issue of [66:08] nukes, uh, that you asked about earlier, [66:10] Stephen, you know that the reason I [66:12] brought up American media is because [66:13] they pretty much do nothing but Israeli [66:15] propaganda, they never clarified to [66:17] anyone. You know that Iran doesn't have [66:19] a missile that can deliver any warhead [66:22] to America. It just doesn't. It's that [66:25] it's never had it. It didn't have it 30 [66:27] years ago when Netanyahu started saying [66:29] it. It doesn't have it today. So, and [66:31] they never enriched uranium up to 90%, [66:33] which is where you would have to get it [66:34] for weapons grade. They get up to about [66:36] 60% and then we destroy their nuclear [66:38] facilities and Trump bragged about it [66:39] and now all that's buried underneath. So [66:42] where's the question? They're not even [66:43] close. And and again they've promised [66:46] not only to this repeatedly in [66:49] negotiations, but the former Grand [66:50] Ayatoll, the one we murdered, uh had [66:53] done a fatwa, the most important [66:54] religious edict in Shia Islam, when he [66:57] said we are to never build nukes. So [66:59] when they Hamas has something in their [67:01] charter, the Israelis say oh the charter [67:02] is the most important thing. Then the [67:04] grand ayatollah does a f way import more [67:06] important than a charter and they go [67:08] ignore that. Ignore that. No, no, don't [67:10] ignore that. And why would Iran ever use [67:12] a nuke? If they use a nuke then we [67:14] either Israel or us would strike back [67:16] and would kill 90 million Iranians. [67:18] Nobody wants that. They they want you to [67:20] believe that the Iranians are irrational [67:22] psychotic terrorists. Boo. They're [67:25] Muslims. Oh, that's super scary, right? [67:27] No, there is an irrational government in [67:29] the Middle East. It's it's Israel. [67:32] They're the Iran did not attack a single [67:34] neighbor. Israel has attacked seven [67:36] neighbors. Iran hasn't asked us for a [67:38] single dollar. Israel asked us for [67:40] hundreds of billions of dollars. So [67:43] there's one country that is constantly [67:45] attacking their neighbors and taking [67:47] land. And by the way, the ter the [67:49] civilian kill ratio of the IDF is 83%. [67:53] 83% of the people that they kill are [67:54] civilians. That is higher than Hamas or [67:57] Hezblah or any terrorist group on earth. [68:00] and they kill about a hundred times the [68:02] civilians of Hamas. So if Hamas is [68:05] terrorist, it is absolutely indisputable [68:08] that Israel is a terrorist government. [68:10] And yet we're forced to fund that when [68:12] we don't have any money. They have [68:14] universal healthcare. They have free [68:15] college. They have paid family leave. We [68:17] don't have any of that. And then our [68:20] greedy and corrupt politicians and media [68:22] tell us that we owe the Israelis more [68:24] war and more genocide. The reason why I [68:27] think we're in a lot of trouble here and [68:28] it's not going to be easy to resolve is [68:30] every time we get close to peace. [68:32] Netanyahu calls Trump literally happened [68:34] this weekend. Right after the call, [68:36] Trump then goes back to wararm [68:38] mongering. After the call, we bombed [68:41] Iran. Israel started heavy bombing of [68:43] Lebanon. And then Trump came up with [68:46] three new totally impossible things. [68:48] Give me all the highly arrange enriched [68:50] uranium on day one. Well, it's buried [68:52] under the ground. It's going to take [68:53] months to take out. Uh, number two, uh, [68:56] you all have to join the Abraham [68:57] Accords. The Abraham Accords, again, [68:59] American media paints it as, oh, this [69:01] wonderful peace plan. It's no such [69:03] thing. It's to normalize relations with [69:05] Israel and start doing trade with Israel [69:07] without getting a promise back that [69:09] they're going to end the occupation. It [69:11] is betraying the Palestinians and saying [69:13] the Israelis can permanently occupy [69:14] them. By the way, again, never talked [69:17] about in American media, but I we read a [69:19] lot of this in the Israeli press and [69:21] that's why we get a lot of our [69:22] information on the Young Turks from them [69:24] because they actually do pretty good [69:25] reporting in Israel. And so, uh, one of [69:27] the things is they believe in Greater [69:29] Israel. They talk about it all the time. [69:31] Our press never talks about it, but they [69:32] do. They know they stole our nuclear [69:34] secrets. They know they stole our [69:36] nuclear triggers and our uranium. What [69:38] kind of an ally steals all of our [69:40] material? And and so but last thing, [69:43] Stephen, the most important impossible [69:45] thing was Netanyahu demanded, he made [69:47] this public, that everyone else stop [69:50] fighting except Israel, that they have a [69:52] right to keep attacking and invading and [69:54] taking southern Lebanon. Well, that's [69:56] not a peace deal. Nobody's going to sign [69:59] on to that. So, and and Israel has said [70:02] no matter what happens, they're going to [70:04] keep attacking Lebanon. That means even [70:06] if Iran and America make a peace deal, [70:08] Israel will literally ruin it on a first [70:11] day. So we can't ever get to peace as [70:14] long as we're allies with Israel. It's [70:16] literally impossible. They're massive [70:18] wararm mongers. And they say we need [70:20] endless wars. And by the way, it makes [70:22] sense because they're a settler colony. [70:24] In order for a settle settler colony to [70:26] expand, you need permanent war so they [70:30] can keep taking more land. We shouldn't [70:32] be funding these terrorists. We have a [70:34] way of getting out. This is what you do. [70:36] You just say, "Hey, we make a peace deal [70:38] with Iran. We take Israel out of it. [70:40] Israel, you want peace, you have peace. [70:41] If you want war, have war with Iran. [70:43] It's not our business." [70:44] >> So, what's what what are you predicting, [70:46] Jenk, is going to happen? What is your [70:48] prediction? [70:48] >> Disaster. A positive disaster. So, [70:52] there's no way we're going to get to [70:53] peace because Israel says their line in [70:54] the sand is they're going to keep [70:56] attacking Lebanon. As long as they keep [70:58] attacking Lebanon, Iran is not going to [71:00] get to a peace deal. [71:01] >> What does disaster mean specifically? [71:03] Oh, disaster means we re-engage in the [71:06] bombing. We have 50,000 ground troops on [71:08] those ships. People forgot that we're [71:09] there. Of course, it has to be American [71:11] ground troops. It can't be precious [71:13] Israeli ground troops because Israeli [71:15] lives are apparently worth more than [71:16] American lives if you listen to American [71:18] politicians. So, we have the ground [71:20] troops there. We're going to very likely [71:22] do more disastrous bombing of Iran. And [71:25] then Iran is going to bomb the oil and [71:27] gas fields in of the Gulf countries. And [71:29] then not only will gas prices go [71:32] absolutely through the roof and cause a [71:34] massive economic recession, perhaps [71:36] depression worldwide, but on top of [71:39] that, then uh they're going to say, [71:42] "Well, it's not enough. We want more." [71:45] And the infrastructure is already [71:47] destroyed. It's going to take 5 to 10 [71:49] years to rebuild that infrastructure. [71:51] They're going to do permanent damage to [71:53] our economy. Why? They want more land. [71:56] Enough. enough with supporting the [71:59] terrorists. [71:59] >> Kevin, is it fair to say if you look at [72:02] what Trump said over since the start of [72:03] this war that he miscalculated this [72:06] because he gave us a window of time when [72:07] it would be over and that window of time [72:09] is now long gone. And it appears to me [72:11] like he thought it would be similar to [72:13] Venezuela where you could just go in [72:14] there, boom, boom, boom, regime change, [72:17] you control the country. But that's [72:19] clearly, I mean, just like a logical [72:20] impartial person, that's kind of like [72:21] how it looks. [72:23] This is different because this war is [72:26] what I would call the first tech war um [72:30] ever. A lot of the ordinance being used [72:33] um is with very advanced GPS systems [72:36] controlled from space. We've learned [72:38] something else uh which is rather [72:41] interesting. The I learned this from my [72:43] own employees that are sitting in Abu [72:44] Dhabi and Dubai. The drones that came [72:47] over in the first four weeks, those [72:50] waves every morning were basically [72:52] carbon fiber wings with lawnmower [72:56] engines on them and and very inexpensive [73:00] to make about $35,000. and we shot them [73:03] down or at least the UAE did with [73:05] American ordinance between a million2 [73:08] and $3 million per missile on a $35,000 [73:14] homemade drone. And so it goes back to [73:19] um wow I hope the Pentagon has enough [73:21] compute power because I wouldn't want [73:24] that in the hands of the Chinese cuz I I [73:27] what I've learned from this conflict and [73:29] look that you know people dying is [73:32] horrible period wherever they are it's [73:35] just horrible but this is not a [73:37] traditional war. I don't know if there's [73:39] going to be boots on the ground by the [73:41] time this is over. If there's another [73:42] wave of conflict, it's just going to be [73:45] more ordinance taking out more [73:46] infrastructure until the 150,000 people [73:50] running the show there say, "Wow, [73:53] this is really hurting us in terms of [73:56] maintaining control." I don't see uh a [73:59] boots on the ground invasion. I just see [74:01] more tenderizing and more tenderizing. [74:04] It's expensive because we're on the [74:05] wrong side of defense. We need the cheap [74:08] drones. And I think in two years from [74:10] now, from what I see in the development, [74:12] because I I see these deals all over the [74:14] place, there's a whole bunch of new tech [74:17] being developed around drone blocking [74:19] technology and very inexpensive versions [74:22] of what those Iranians built, better [74:24] than lawnmower engines, though. So, it's [74:27] it's going to be pretty interesting in [74:30] 24 months. I'm not a fan of war, but I [74:34] have a different view of the outcome [74:35] here. And I think that part of the [74:37] world's going to be stabilized and [74:39] funded by the neighbors there, and [74:42] probably everybody's better off because [74:44] the Chinese can't take the pain much [74:46] longer. Their oil supplies, both on the [74:49] water and in storage, are starting to [74:53] really dwindle. And if I'm the big [74:55] supreme leader there, I'm thinking to [74:57] myself, I'm going to call those guys in [75:00] Iran, say, "Okay, big boys, time to [75:02] settle. We've had enough." Cuz that that [75:05] is actually [75:07] a different view of that policy over [75:09] there. Because every Asian country is [75:11] hurting. And by the way, in North [75:13] America, [75:14] we actually don't have any problems with [75:17] energy. We have an abundance of it, [75:19] including the stuff coming from Canada, [75:21] the number one import. The problem we [75:24] have is the price of oil is determined [75:26] by world markets. It's a commodity in US [75:29] dollars. You know, it was 106. Now it's [75:32] 9712, whatever it is trading right now. [75:35] Um [75:37] it's but we're not going to run out of [75:39] energy in America. That's not going to [75:41] happen. It's it's the rest of the world [75:43] to the extent that we care about them. [75:45] Um we got to resolve this issue. For [75:48] every founder, there comes a point in [75:50] building a company where your job shifts [75:51] from being the person inside your [75:52] business, actioning everything to the [75:54] person responsible for absolutely [75:56] everything. The only way I've been able [75:58] to make this shift across the different [75:59] companies and teams I'm responsible for [76:01] is by knowing that the right systems are [76:03] in place to manage everything. Systems [76:05] that don't need me in order for them to [76:07] work. Our sponsor Pipe Drive is one of [76:09] those systems, an easy to use, [76:11] intelligent CRM tool for growing sales [76:13] teams. My teams use it and have for the [76:15] last decade because it's genuinely the [76:17] most effective way to run a sales [76:18] operation. Through one dashboard, you [76:20] get every deal visible and every stage [76:23] of the sales process is clear and what [76:25] needs to happen next is all there in [76:27] real time. When a system like this [76:29] works, you don't need to be in every [76:31] conversation to know exactly if your [76:33] business is moving forward, where, and [76:35] what the blockers are. Over a 100,000 [76:37] companies are already running their [76:39] sales on it. So, if you'd like to join [76:41] them, sign up at piperive.com/ceeo, [76:45] where you'll get an exclusive 30-day [76:47] free trial instead of the usual 14 days. [76:50] No credit card is needed. That's [76:52] pipedive.com/ceo. [76:55] I've done almost 700 interviews with [76:58] some of the most interesting people in [76:59] the world. And one of the things you [77:00] learn, which is unexpected, is that [77:02] vulnerability is the doorway to [77:04] connection. And after sitting here for 2 [77:06] three hours with a guest, I feel a deep [77:09] sense of connection to them. And as they [77:11] leave, what I get them to do is to write [77:13] a question in the diary of a CEO. We've [77:16] taken all of the questions from the [77:18] diary of a CEO. We have put the question [77:22] here on this card with the name of the [77:24] person that wrote it. So you can sit at [77:26] home as I do with my fiance and my [77:28] colleagues at work and other people in [77:29] my life. Whenever we get a minute, we [77:31] play the Duracio conversation cards. And [77:34] it is incredible what happens. These are [77:37] great if you're in a romantic [77:38] relationship and you want to connect [77:39] your partner more. These are also great [77:41] if you're in a team and you want to bond [77:43] your team together. And I have to say [77:44] they're also great for families that [77:46] want to learn more about each other and [77:47] that need a good excuse to spend some [77:49] time in a digital world in the analog [77:52] environment connecting human to human. [77:54] It is remarkable what the right question [77:57] at the right time can do. Go to the [77:59] diary.com [78:01] and you [clears throat] can get these [78:02] conversation cards right now. [78:05] The thing that I think America's at risk [78:07] of running out of Kevin though is is is [78:09] patience and uh support. And if you [78:13] think about the sort of existential risk [78:14] to Trump, he you know, if you looking at [78:17] these numbers, so this this first line [78:18] you see is his disapproval going up and [78:20] his approval going down. If I'm the [78:22] supreme leader in Iran, I go listen, [78:25] this guy has got I mean there's an [78:27] election in 2028 in the United States, [78:30] this guy has got months. So in terms of [78:33] you talk about, you know, the art of a [78:34] deal and doing a good deal. If you know [78:36] your counterparty in the deal [78:37] negotiation literally has months to do a [78:40] deal or they are going to be thrown out [78:42] of power, if I'm one of those 150,000 [78:45] people or the supreme leader, honestly, [78:46] I'm going to wait it out. I think I have [78:48] all the cards. if you have almost no, [78:51] you know, they can survive. Again, you [78:52] said they oppress their people. They [78:54] don't seem to have much morality [78:55] surrounding that. Could they wait it out [78:57] a couple of months knowing that Trump [78:59] can't because the midterms are coming [79:01] and then the election's coming. I [79:03] >> think you're making a good point on that [79:05] one. But I, you know, the one thing I [79:06] would say, Stephen, is that it's not [79:09] just Trump you're waiting out. You got [79:11] Chi, it's it's not just Trump, the big [79:15] guy. You got two supreme leaders. You [79:17] got whoever is running the show this [79:19] week in Iran [79:22] and you've got the Chinese leader, the [79:25] supreme leader. And the only way he gets [79:27] to say the supreme leader is people eat, [79:30] people have jobs there and his economy [79:33] stays buoyant. That's the only way he [79:36] stays in power. So [79:39] you're you're serving two masters. [79:41] You're you're trying to time the 28 [79:44] decision you talked about versus how [79:46] pissed off the big guy is going to get [79:47] in China. He has no choice. 48% of his [79:51] energy comes through that straight at [79:54] some point. I think before November, [79:58] Elsa primo in China squeezes Iranian [80:01] heads like teenage pimples. That's what [80:03] I think is going to happen. The other [80:04] thing just to give you the other thought [80:06] that's been spiraling in my head since [80:08] I've interviewed all these people on [80:09] this subject is that Trump and JD Vance [80:11] repeatedly say they don't even know who [80:12] they're negotiating with because they've [80:14] knocked out every layer it seems of [80:16] leadership. They on one hand brag about [80:17] that but then I would also suggest that [80:20] that makes negotiation hard. I think JD [80:23] Vance actually talked about or Marco [80:25] Rubio talked about the fact that they [80:26] can't get the carrier pigeon to the um [80:30] Iranian soldiers that are still shooting [80:31] the missiles. And this talk this speaks [80:34] to the um lack of organization in Iran [80:36] because you've wiped out all the [80:37] leadership. So I even wonder if you can [80:39] really do a deal at this point with [80:41] Iran, Jenk. [80:43] >> No, we can remember we almost had a deal [80:45] this weekend. Uh and the deal is [80:47] actually kind of obvious. Open up the [80:48] straight of Hormuz. We lift a blockade. [80:51] Iran says uh we'll find the [80:53] highlyenriched uranium and hand it over. [80:55] We won't have a weapons program and [80:57] we'll have international monitors for [80:59] the uranium that we enrich to just [81:02] energy levels, not weapons levels. Boom. [81:04] Done. Easy. Though, but as I explained [81:07] before, we can't get it done because [81:09] Israel says, "No, I want permanent." [81:10] >> How do you know it's Israel? How do you [81:12] know it's Israel, Jenk? [81:14] >> Yeah, there's no question. So first of [81:15] all in the before the invasion New York [81:18] Times with a rare good article that [81:20] explained uh that Netanyahu and the head [81:22] of MSAD came into the situation room [81:25] Netanyahu physically and head of Mossad [81:27] uh through a teleconference and they uh [81:30] told Trump you got to attack you got to [81:32] attack now and they to they at least as [81:35] the New York Times describes it they [81:37] convinced them. Whether they actually [81:38] convinced him through language or [81:40] through money or through blackmail is a [81:43] whole different question. But uh another [81:45] thing that's absolutely clear is that [81:46] after every call with Netanyahu, Trump [81:49] goes from saying we're going to have [81:50] peace to saying we're not going to have [81:52] peace and we're have these new [81:53] impossible standards. It's happened [81:55] about half a dozen times so far. It's [81:57] super clear that Israel is driving the [81:59] bus. Plus, you could see it based on the [82:01] facts on the ground. We have no interest [82:03] there. We have a deal ready to make for [82:05] American interests. Israel says, "No, [82:07] we're not done because we need southern [82:09] Lebanon and we need Iran to be [82:12] completely decimated." This idea that [82:14] Kevin's talking about, to be fair to [82:15] Kevin, almost everybody in in America [82:17] thinks in this, [laughter] well, now to [82:19] be unfair to Kevin, this fantasy world [82:21] where the regime in Iran is just going [82:23] to give up. It's never going to happen. [82:26] We already tried to regime change it. It [82:28] it didn't work at all. They have an [82:30] enormous infrastructure set up so it [82:33] doesn't really matter how many people [82:35] you knock off at the top, somebody else [82:36] rises up, somebody else rises up out of [82:38] that 150,000 people that that Kevin's [82:41] talking about. Now, China, he's got a [82:43] theory that maybe China puts pressure on [82:45] him. That's not a crazy theory. I get [82:47] it. At the same time, China's looking at [82:49] Russia and America and going, "Look at [82:50] these schmucks. Russia is wasting their [82:52] entire military and resources in [82:54] Ukraine. And now America's totally [82:56] wasting their military and resources in [82:59] Iran. And these two other knuckleheads [83:02] keep punching themselves in the face. [83:04] Meanwhile, we haven't started any wars [83:06] if you're China. And so we haven't had [83:08] any of those costs. We haven't had any [83:09] of those troubles. We don't have that PR [83:11] problem. So when we go into Africa or [83:13] Latin America and we say, "Hey, you know [83:14] what? We're going to build roads and [83:15] bridges for you guys and America's going [83:17] to come and bomb you. So which one do [83:19] you want to do a deal with?" Now a lot [83:21] of them are saying, "No, we want to do a [83:23] deal with China." because they don't do [83:25] war. Uh instead they build [83:26] infrastructure. Look, it just is a [83:28] business strategy, an economic strategy [83:30] that is much much smarter. But we can't [83:33] go into a smart strategy because Israel [83:34] won't let us. Every time we go towards [83:37] peace, Israel blocks it. And today, this [83:40] weekend, we had both Republicans and [83:43] Democrats go out and say we shouldn't do [83:45] the peace deal. You want to know what [83:46] the one connective tissue? Every one of [83:49] those politicians had over a million [83:51] dollars given to them by the Israeli [83:53] lobby. So that's just the stone cold [83:55] reality of it. And so in terms of energy [83:58] here at home, Kevin says we're not going [84:00] to run out. But he also acknowledged [84:01] that no, wait a minute, that has nothing [84:03] to do with anything. We oil goes into a [84:06] world market and it is controlled by [84:08] world prices. So the fact that we are [84:10] so-called energy independent means [84:12] nothing. That's not even our oil or gas. [84:15] It's Exon Mobile and Chevrons. So they [84:17] could sell it anywhere they want and [84:19] they do sell it anywhere they want. The [84:20] only way to get them to sell it [84:22] exclusively in America is to do [84:24] socialism and say you're not allowed to [84:26] sell that oil anywhere else. I don't [84:28] think Kevin wants that. So that means we [84:31] are definitely not energyindependent. We [84:34] are definitely tied to global oil prices [84:36] and that means again more disaster. When [84:39] you get to tech, oh my god, the Israelis [84:42] used AI in Gaza. They did this uh [84:44] program called Where's Daddy. AI would [84:47] pick a target uh that was maybe [84:51] connected to someone in Hamas at some [84:52] point, but they did, you know, he called [84:55] this guy and the other guy called other [84:56] guy and that lady now has a cell phone. [84:58] Good enough. But they would wait till [85:00] their target went home so they would [85:03] bomb the house and kill their entire [85:05] family. If that's the future of tech in [85:08] the military, we're all doomed. So, [85:10] they've been testing all of this stuff [85:12] in Gaza and now they're doing in Iran. [85:15] What I'm worried about is what Larry [85:16] Ellison said. He said, "Oh, we now can [85:19] track all citizens anywhere and we're [85:22] going to bring that technology to [85:23] America." I don't want their [85:25] surveillance state. I don't want [85:26] anything to do with the Israelis. Let's [85:28] just come home and serve American [85:31] interest. That's what I keep. That's But [85:33] the good news, Stephen, is almost all [85:35] the voters agree. 80% of Democrats now [85:37] have a negative view of Israel and say, [85:38] "No, take care of American voters first. [85:41] When you get to under 50 years old in [85:44] all parties, Israel now has a negative [85:46] 45 rating." The only people left in this [85:49] country who still want to serve Israel [85:51] are our politicians and our media. [85:53] That's it. The rest of us can't stand [85:55] them anymore and the endless wars they [85:57] drag us into and all the money they take [85:59] from us. And Kevin, as a businessman, [86:02] what are we doing? Why are we letting [86:04] this country the size of their [86:06] population is the equivalent of Papa New [86:08] Guinea lead us around by the nose and [86:10] get us into endless wars? You know, this [86:11] war in Iran isn't helping us. And and if [86:14] they continue and they bomb the [86:15] infrastructure in Iran and the Gulf [86:17] countries, you know, it's going to take [86:18] 5 to 10 years to rebuild and it is going [86:20] to be a global economic disaster. What [86:24] are we doing? We got to get rid of the [86:25] Israelis. I don't mean that in a [86:27] physical way. Just get them out of our [86:29] government and make decisions based on [86:31] what's good for America. will be 10,000 [86:34] times better off and then we could end [86:36] the war. [86:37] >> I think if there was a path to peace in [86:39] the Middle East, it's one of the largest [86:41] consumer markets on earth. Just Iran [86:44] itself has 100 million people. They buy [86:47] stuff. And you know, I think about the [86:50] future of a global economy. If there was [86:53] stability there, uh including peace with [86:55] Israel and their neighbors, that would [86:58] be an amazing market, a huge market. And [87:01] one of the reasons that people like me [87:03] keep a foothold or a footprint in the [87:06] UAE, it is and was the capital of [87:09] capital until nine weeks ago. And I [87:12] think it'll return at some point. That's [87:15] a the size of the market in Egypt, [87:19] Jordan, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, I mean, and [87:24] Iran are they're just huge. And those [87:27] people want stuff that we make. I mean, [87:30] you know, it's that pragmatic. It's that [87:32] So, if you could have peace and [87:35] stabilize and you want to sell stuff, [87:38] that's a massive market. And and I, you [87:40] know, that's why I remain an optimist on [87:43] how this gets resolved because at the [87:45] end of the day, it doesn't matter what [87:46] religion you are or, you know, what [87:49] country you're in or what geography you [87:51] came from. Most people, and I would say [87:54] 99% want to raise a family, have a job, [87:57] and enjoy life. they don't want to get [87:59] blown up. And so I'm I'm kind of an [88:01] optimist that it's in everybody's [88:05] interest to solve this. It's kind of [88:06] like the the human condition is I'd like [88:10] to get, you know, I'd like to form a [88:12] family unit and I'd like to live a [88:13] peaceful life and I'd like to buy stuff. [88:15] I want to be a consumer. So I'm uh in [88:18] the camp that says, look, I don't know [88:19] how this thing gets resolved. Nobody [88:21] does. I'm disappointed that there's no [88:24] peace deal this weekend, but hopefully [88:27] there'll be one soon. But in the end, [88:29] most people want peace, period. Unless [88:32] you're, you know, you're crazed as a [88:35] crazed leader and you just want to kill [88:37] everybody. Those people don't last that [88:40] long. They don't seem to, well, they're [88:42] certainly not lasting that long in Iran [88:44] right now, but you're right. They keep [88:45] popping up. But at some point, I don't [88:48] know. I think uh peace is a better deal [88:50] for everybody. There should be a button [88:52] just down below here. And if it says [88:54] subscribed, you're already subscribed. [88:56] If it says subscriber, that means you're [88:58] not yet. And if you're not subscribed, [89:00] please could you do us a favor and hit [89:01] that button? It helps the show more than [89:02] you know. And according to the [89:04] algorithm, you're someone that watches [89:05] our show, but you haven't yet hit that [89:07] button. Thank you so much, Kevin. Um, [89:09] based on that, based on both our [89:11] conversation on AI and also how [89:13] unpopular this war is, what we're seeing [89:16] across the world at the moment is this [89:17] rise in socialism in Western markets. [89:20] We're seeing it in the UK. We're seeing [89:21] it around Europe. And we're also seeing [89:22] it in the United States. Positive views [89:24] of capitalism amongst all Americans has [89:27] dropped to an all-time low according to [89:30] a poll done by Gallup. Um, a massive [89:32] almost 70% of Democrats now view [89:34] socialism positively with only 40% [89:36] roughly view capitalism favorably. And [89:39] again, this was at the end of last year, [89:41] so these stats aren't even factoring in [89:43] the war. And a staggering 62% of young [89:46] Americans hold a favorable view of [89:48] socialism as well. So, as we head [89:49] towards the midterms, but also the [89:51] elections, which I'm not actually that [89:52] far away now. It's quite clear to me, as [89:54] someone that, you know, I I'm an [89:56] entrepreneur in the United States. I I [89:57] live in Los Angeles, as you know. Um I [89:59] build businesses. It's quite clear to me [90:01] that we're on the verge of a very [90:03] different type of America. And we've [90:04] seen, you know, um Zhan Mandani be [90:07] elected in New York, and we're seeing [90:08] this sort of socialistic nar narrative [90:10] spread like wildfire. I think heavily [90:12] fueled by both wars, but also by [90:14] technology, AI, and sort of wealth [90:16] inequality. Do you agree that if things [90:19] continue on this trajectory, we're [90:21] heading towards a more socialist [90:23] America? [90:25] >> No. What I agree on is I'm I'm a history [90:28] buff. Um you can go back into the uh 40s [90:31] and 50s. It seems every 17 to 20 years [90:35] we take um a dip back into socialism and [90:38] back in those days communism even in New [90:41] York in Brooklyn longing for what the [90:44] Soviet Union had or Cuba had in its [90:48] heyday. Um and then the outcome is [90:52] always the same. It doesn't work. And so [90:56] it it really you have all these [90:58] different ideas about how a country [90:59] should run and what works best for all [91:02] the faults that US has now and the [91:05] debates we have and you know AOC and [91:08] Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and [91:11] all this rhetoric and I get it. I mean [91:13] they're they're very successful [91:14] politicians. I love AOC. She just spews [91:18] out stuff and raises five bucks at a [91:20] time. You know it's smart. It's a great [91:23] social media strategy. And same with [91:24] Bernie. I mean, the guy But will she be [91:27] president of the United States? I don't [91:29] think so. And will Bernie get there? No. [91:32] Why does everybody leave Massachusetts, [91:34] including my son, because you can't [91:36] raise any money there to start a [91:38] company? The super tax is stupid. And [91:41] so, it it's sort of it's it's a it's a [91:44] it's a mixing pot of ideas and [91:46] competition. But in the end, and I [91:50] always say this to my students because I [91:51] I what I find so interesting about, you [91:54] know, a 20 a cohort of 23 year olds that [91:56] I teach in in business classes and [91:59] injury classes, they're all socialists, [92:01] all of them, until they get their first [92:04] paycheck. Then they become capitalists [92:07] when they see something called tax. And [92:10] they wonder, "Wait a second, wait a [92:12] second. Where'd half my salary go? [92:14] What's this?" And I say, "That's tax." [92:17] Now, if you want it to be 80% tax, you [92:20] follow that trail that you had before I [92:23] started teaching you, you were a [92:25] socialist. And now, what are you? Well, [92:28] I can't pay 50% tax. No kidding. Well, [92:31] move to Austin, move to Tennessee, you [92:33] move to Florida like everybody else is [92:35] doing, and you'll pay 16%. And so I love [92:39] the fact that everybody's an idealist [92:41] socialist [92:43] until they get their first paycheck. And [92:45] that's how America works. It's a [92:48] wonderful thing. And I say it's good [92:50] because you all everybody has a vote. We [92:53] continue to believe in that. And I think [92:56] the debate rages on and it's great. And [92:59] everybody has an opinion. I have mine, [93:01] others have theirs. And I love to be [93:03] part of this course. You know, one of [93:04] the reasons I keep doing what I do is I [93:06] love to get into the with [93:08] everybody. I like to say the things I [93:10] say cuz I really believe them and I've [93:13] been there before. I'm wise. I've seen [93:17] this movie before. That's what I tell my [93:19] students and it freaks them out. [93:21] >> Just a yes or no answer in this [93:23] question. So in 2028, do you think [93:25] another capitalistic sort of focused [93:27] candidate will win the election [93:29] >> or do you think a Democrat or a [93:30] socialist will? I don't think [93:32] socialism's going to is socialism going [93:34] to make it in America at the uh in the [93:36] office of the White House. I think the [93:38] pendulum always swings. The Biden [93:41] administration went way too far in one [93:43] direction. It snapped back. Now you [93:46] might argue it went too far the other [93:47] way and it snaps back. The whole idea of [93:50] midterm gives you the smell test of the [93:52] direction which is coming up just months [93:54] away and then you'll see who emerges. I [93:57] don't think we know who the next [94:00] president of the United States is going [94:02] to be, him or her. We don't know who's [94:05] going to emerge. [94:05] >> What's your sense though, Kevin? You're [94:07] you're a predict you're a man that makes [94:08] predictions. Is it Democrat or is it [94:10] Republican in your view? Got to give me [94:11] a straight answer here. [94:12] >> I I I wouldn't even make that guess. [94:14] It's It's so difficult. I really don't [94:16] know. I I I really think that in my [94:19] view, the Democrats have lost their way. [94:22] I would like to see them find a new [94:24] leader that's more moderate. [94:26] I don't think you can spew socialism and [94:29] get elected. You got to find somebody [94:31] that is in the middle that is more [94:34] pragmatic about providing jobs. I mean, [94:36] look at California. What a mess that [94:38] place is. It's just they may actually [94:42] they may hire a Republican mayor out [94:44] there. I mean, that's going to be a [94:46] shakaroo for LA. But it's gotten pretty [94:49] bad. I work out there. It's a you can't [94:52] even wear your watch at daytime anymore. [94:54] I mean, it That's true. [94:56] >> It's a mess. It's a mess. It's a a [94:59] lawless wasteland. It has poor [95:01] management, no executional skills with [95:03] the politicians. I mean, you know, [95:05] you're lucky to be You work there. You [95:07] know what I'm talking about. [95:08] >> Jenk, what's your point of view on that [95:09] socialism? Is it coming to America [95:11] midterms 2028? [95:13] It's a lot to talk about there. So, [95:15] look, I I'm not a fan of Karen Bass. I [95:17] voted against her before. I probably [95:18] vote against her again in this mayor's [95:20] race. Uh, and so I think that sometimes [95:23] Democrats, uh, like to get mired in [95:25] their bureaucracy and not push for [95:27] enough change. So, uh, so I'm not a [95:30] person who just, uh, supports Democrats [95:32] no matter what. In fact, I criticize [95:34] Democrats a lot on the Young Turks. Uh, [95:36] but no, you're not going to get your [95:38] watch stolen in LA. Uh, I have a family. [95:41] We go out all the time. It's perfectly [95:42] safe. Uh, so for a little while between [95:45] 2019 and 2023, crime really did rise in [95:47] some of the big cities. We talked about [95:49] on the air. were very honest about it. [95:51] It took some heat from the left on it, [95:53] but crime's gone down significantly in [95:54] 24 and 25. So, I don't think those are [95:56] real issues anymore. In terms of uh our [95:59] economic model, we need a couple of [96:01] clarifications here. So, as I said [96:03] earlier, we we really do corporatism in [96:05] America. And another word for that or [96:07] phrase for it is crony capitalism. So, [96:09] we'd be lucky to get back to capitalism, [96:12] let alone going all the way to socialism [96:14] because right now we don't have [96:15] capitalism. We don't have free markets. [96:17] We have uh every industry has captured [96:20] the government. They've bribed all of [96:21] our politicians. We can't negotiate [96:24] prices. Uh these are the I mean that is [96:26] the most socialist thing I've ever heard [96:28] except socialism for corporations. It's [96:30] mindbending. And that's and that's what [96:32] corporism is. It's totally run a muck [96:34] now. And why is that? Because of money [96:36] and politics. So in order to fix all of [96:38] these problems and to get back to real [96:40] free markets and capitalism, you have [96:43] got to get the money out of politics. If [96:45] you don't do that, you're just on a [96:47] treadmill of corruption and it never [96:49] ends. And you get BS guys like Biden and [96:52] Trump who come in and tell you that [96:53] they're going to drain the swamp and [96:55] then they fill it up even more and even [96:56] more. So they and they serve all their [96:58] donors. So in terms of socialism, we [97:01] never define what it means. The reality [97:03] is most governments are mixed economies. [97:06] Not most governments, almost all [97:07] governments are mixed economies. So when [97:10] we say socialism, are we talking about [97:12] Cuba or are we talking about the [97:14] Netherlands? Because you could argue [97:16] that Northern Europe does socialism. Uh [97:18] they have a lot more things that are [97:20] public rather than private. But do they [97:22] have private businesses? Of course they [97:24] do. Right? So I would argue that [97:26] democratic capitalism is the right way [97:27] to go where we have capitalism, but it [97:29] is checked by democracy. the CEOs and [97:32] the shareholders look out for the [97:34] companies and the legislators and the [97:36] president and the prime ministers are [97:37] supposed to look out for the citizens [97:39] and check the corporations so they don't [97:41] run a muck. I think Northern Europe's [97:43] probably pretty close to that. In terms [97:44] of candidates here in America, [97:47] again, I'd have to say Roana is probably [97:49] the closest one to that. And so if you [97:51] go too far left, um I get it that that's [97:55] hard, especially on identity politics, [97:57] which again we're not a fan of on the [97:59] Young Turks and we don't think that's [98:01] the right direction to go and it just [98:03] divides our country. Uh so I don't think [98:05] that that type of far-left candidate can [98:07] can win a national election. But after [98:09] what Trump does this to this country, [98:12] what he's already done to this country, [98:13] Republicans, I have one thing to tell [98:15] you. N [98:19] there's no way. The the midterms are [98:22] gone. Nobody's showing up to vote. Their [98:24] voter enthusiasm is gone, obliterated. [98:28] And by 2028, we're going to have the [98:30] disaster from the war and disaster from [98:33] AI, unemployment. So they they only have [98:36] one guy who could win, and I'm worried [98:38] about it, and that's Tucker Carlson. If [98:41] Tucker runs in the Republican primary, [98:43] he definitely wins that primary. You can [98:45] quote me on it. And then you could have [98:46] Kevin laughing and you could rerun that [98:48] tape. It'll be great. In fact, [snorts] [98:50] back in 2016, I was on ABC's This Week [98:52] with Stephanopoulos. They asked the [98:54] whole panel who's going to win. At that [98:56] point, they just won the Democratic [98:57] National Convention and Hillary Clinton [98:59] had a 10-point lead. I was the only one [99:01] on the panel to say Donald Trump was [99:02] going to win. And they all laughed out [99:04] loud. Populists win. The people chasing [99:08] after the donors, whether it's Israel or [99:10] Big Farmer or any of the other donors, [99:12] then nobody nobody likes those people. [99:14] Kla Harris lost because she was bragging [99:17] about how she had 90 corporate CEOs on [99:20] her side. I got bad news for her. Nobody [99:21] likes corporate CEOs. Sorry Kevin. Sorry [99:24] me. But the reality is that's what every [99:28] poll shows. It is deeply deeply [99:30] unpopular and these days it's pretty [99:32] merited. So if if you've got someone in [99:34] the right lane, which is Democratic [99:36] capitalism, I think they win. [99:38] >> We just got two minutes left. Kevin, uh [99:40] you laughed there at the suggestion that [99:41] Tucker Carlson might win. [99:44] I know Tucker. I just did a thing with [99:46] him this week. It was really interesting [99:48] because he's taken a a very um uh [99:52] controversial view about AI and that's [99:54] the debate we had. And he has obviously [99:56] shifted his focus uh from being proTrump [100:00] to something else. But you know, I have [100:01] to admit when I think about it, that is [100:04] a possibility if he would uh align [100:07] himself. I'm not sure what party he [100:10] represents anymore. I think he is a [100:12] selfproclaimed Republican, but um that's [100:17] interesting idea. The more I think about [100:18] it, I can't I can't I I know I laughed [100:20] at it, but I've been thinking about it [100:22] for the last couple of minutes. Yeah. I [100:24] mean, the guy has a massive base. Um he [100:27] has a his own network now, which is [100:29] something you kind of need these days [100:31] in. Uh you need a really strong social [100:33] media base to play um in politics and [100:37] and to and to fight the fights in the [100:39] seven states. you really got to have a [100:40] good organization on social. So, I mean, [100:43] I think it's going to be fascinating. [100:44] Um, I think we'll get a pretty good [100:46] indication of what the themes will be in [100:49] November. Uh, affordability obviously [100:52] remains a big one. Um, border remains a [100:56] big one in in the US, but AI could [100:59] emerge as as a big one too. I mean it [101:02] maybe but I I think by then um [101:06] I always look at these big you know AI [101:08] kind of burst on the theme but it's not [101:10] really about data centers and power it's [101:12] about jobs I think is where it's going [101:15] and I don't know if that gets resolved [101:17] by you can always be a fear mongerer [101:20] about the robots eating the babies and [101:22] maybe that is an election issue. I don't [101:24] know. We'll see. It's going to be [101:26] interesting though cuz it it wasn't an [101:28] issue until 6 months ago. Jen, last word [101:31] before we close out. [101:32] >> Yeah. So, look, I don't think that a [101:35] pro-Israel candidate can win. Uh, and [101:38] so, but all of our politicians are [101:40] trained to be pro-Israel. And [101:41] apparently, they have trouble reading [101:43] polls. So, uh, I think that that, you [101:46] know, a populist right versus populist [101:49] left would in a sense be a dream. Um, [101:52] because either way, you hope that they I [101:56] mean, the key has to be that they have [101:57] to be real. I mean, we're so tired of [101:59] these fake politicians in America. They [102:01] never do what they say they're going to [102:03] do. They always back the donors. But if [102:05] you got two honest guys, and by the way, [102:07] maybe it's Kana versus Massie, and that [102:09] would be amazing. Or maybe it's Kana and [102:11] Massie, but there's two guys who were [102:13] clearly honest in Congress, and you [102:16] know, I can name Bernie as my third. I'm [102:18] going to struggle on the fourth one. So, [102:21] there aren't that many choices. So, and [102:24] maybe we go populist, we go independent, [102:26] and we go in a new direction because God [102:28] knows that America needs a new [102:29] direction. [102:31] >> Kevin Jenk, thank you so much for the [102:33] time. Um, I've been a fan of both of you [102:35] for many, many, many years. I was saying [102:36] to Jenk before we started recording that [102:38] I think I've watched The Young Tuck [102:39] since I was 19. And when I say watched, [102:42] I mean really, really watched, not not [102:43] casually saw it, but I would watch it [102:45] almost daily when I was going through uh [102:47] building my businesses and sort of [102:48] coming into the professional world. So, [102:50] thank you so much, Jen. It's a pleasure [102:51] to have spent this time with you and [102:52] Kevin. Again, I've been, you know, my my [102:54] my favorite shark for I think 15 years [102:56] now. Um, for many, many, many reasons. [102:59] Thank you to both of you. Um, I really, [103:01] really appreciate it. And hopefully [103:02] we'll have this discussion again soon [103:03] once all of this plays out because the [103:05] answer to a lot of these questions has [103:07] been I don't know. And we shall see. So, [103:09] we shall see. Thank you. [103:12] >> Thank you. [103:13] >> Thanks a lot. YouTube have this new [103:15] crazy algorithm where they know exactly [103:17] what video you would like to watch next [103:19] based on AI and all of your viewing [103:21] behavior. And the algorithm says that [103:23] this video is the perfect video for you. [103:26] It's different for everybody looking [103:27] right now. Check this video out.