Vance Defends Iran Strikes, Pushes $100,000 H-1B Fee Ahead of Midterms

万斯为对伊打击辩护，在中期选举前力推10万美元H-1B签证费 副总统JD·万斯指出，蓝州掩盖了数千亿美元的欺诈性福利支出，而国内能源瓶颈正威胁美国的技术霸权，要求在中期选举前采取果断的行政行动。 副总统JD·万斯回顾了本届政府执政前两年的成果，指出非法移民人口减少了约300万，国内制造业实现了注资重振，同时为针对伊朗的军事打击以及抗击通胀峰值的进展进行了辩护。他呼吁前沿人工智能实验室共享防御性网络安全工具，而非游说推行集权式的全球监管，同时敦促大力推进能源充裕度建设，为数据中心供电并降低民众电费账单。万斯详细介绍了通过征收10万美元H-1B签证费来遏制企业压低工资的行政举措，并声称在SNAP和Medicaid等项目中，因州级层面的包庇掩盖导致了数千亿美元的联邦福利支出流失。他阐述了拒绝将国家利益从属于以色列或北约的“美国优先”外交政策，最后发表了中期选举宣传，重点强调对小费、加班费和社保福利实行免税，以对抗进步派的文化激进主义。 特朗普-万斯政府扭转了数十年的西方边境政策，主动使非法移民人口减少了约300万。 (1:40) 政府正在打破长达40年关于不受约束的全球化的共识，撬动数万亿美元的私人资本用于国内制造业和工业资本重构。 (2:20) 在为针对伊朗的军事打击辩护时，万斯坚称必须采取行动以落实核武器红线，并保护商业航道免受严重的能源冲击。 (3:45) 尽管3.5%的通胀率仍高于预期，但万斯认为这是相比接手时9.5%的峰值取得的实质性进展。 (4:30) 财政部长Scott Bessent的财政计划将追讨欺诈资金与国内经济增长相结合，旨在将联邦赤字从2万亿美元压缩至GDP的3%左右。 (6:37)

Vice President JD Vance argues that the Trump administration is fundamentally breaking with decades of bipartisan orthodoxy by replacing globalist economic management and open-ended foreign commitments with a nationalist, entrepreneurial agenda. Ahead of the midterms, Vance defends the administration's record on domestic re-industrialization, entitlement fraud enforcement, energy expansion, and transactional foreign policy. Protecting Domestic Labor and Rebuilding Industry (1:40) Vance credits the administration with reversing decades of post-war immigration patterns, asserting that the unauthorized population has dropped by approximately 3 million. Alongside southern border enforcement, he highlights domestic re-industrialization, pointing to trillions of dollars in private capital and manufacturing facility construction over the past 18 months as proof of a permanent break from an economy centered purely on services and finance. To protect domestic wages from overseas labor substitution, Vance details aggressive administrative actions on high-skilled immigration, including a $100,000 petition fee for H-1B visas and rules barring corporations that conduct mass domestic layoffs from backfilling positions with foreign guest workers. On the tax front, Vance points to federal exemptions on tips, overtime pay, and Social Security benefits as targeted relief for working-class wage earners. Deficits, Entitlement Waste, and Intergovernmental Friction (6:37) Addressing market anxieties reflected in 30-year Treasury yields near 5.2%, Vance outlines an approach led by Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to reduce an inherited $2 trillion deficit toward 3% of GDP through targeted spending restraint and domestic economic growth. Within his own portfolio overseeing anti-fraud initiatives, Vance notes that executive actions have reclaimed roughly $250 billion from improper payments out of the $7 trillion federal budget. However, Vance argues that structural waste is far larger, citing Elon Musk's estimate of up to 20% ($1.4 trillion) and placing his own projection at over $700 billion annually. He identifies non-cooperation from blue-state administrations as the primary obstacle to reform, citing California's monthly billing of $7 billion to $9 billion for the SNAP program with virtually no federal identity verification, while state officials challenge federal attempts to audit Medicaid and welfare rolls. Energy Abundance and Frontier AI Oversight (9:04) Vance attributes public backlash against energy-intensive AI data centers to structural stagnation in American power generation rather than localized NIMBYism. While China’s electricity output has tripled since matching the United States in 2005, US generation has remained flat, and blue-state regulatory hurdles have contributed to residential utility bills doubling from $290 to $580 per month. Rather than halting technological infrastructure, Vance calls for an abundance agenda designed to produce power 'too cheap to meter.' Concurrently, Vance criticizes frontier AI executives who invoke apocalyptic scenarios while lobbying for centralized, global regulatory regimes. Citing Anthropic's release of autonomous cyber-hacking capabilities without accompanying defensive tools for commercial enterprises, Vance insists developers must either halt dangerous frontier capabilities or equip the wider ecosystem with defensive countermeasures, rejecting regulatory capture disguised as safety concerns. Strategic Realism in Foreign Defense Commitments (3:45) Defending defensive strikes against Iranian nuclear sites and military assets, Vance argues the intervention was critical to enforce non-proliferation red lines and protect global shipping corridors from catastrophic energy price shocks. While acknowledging voter frustration over 3% to 4% inflation and renewed Middle East military entanglements, Vance contrasts current inflation rates with the 9.5% inherited peak. Regarding broader foreign alliances, Vance rejects unquestioning subservience, drawing a direct parallel between the administration's posture on NATO and its relationship with Israel. He claims President Trump has shown an unprecedented willingness to break with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when strategic interests diverge, arguing that durable bilateral security requires grounding all foreign partnerships strictly in American self-interest. While Vance portrays the administration's governance as an entrepreneurial alternative to decades of administrative caretaker leadership, its platform faces unresolved challenges: resolving bond market skepticism regarding long-term deficit reduction, overcoming state-level resistance to federal spending verification, and maintaining voter patience with ongoing inflation and targeted foreign military engagements.

美国副总统JD Vance在访谈中阐述了本届政府执政近两年的政策逻辑，主张通过强化边境执法、推动制造业回流、削减监管与福利欺诈，全面打破长达数十年的全球化共识；同时，他为政府在中东军事护航与应对通胀上的妥协进行了辩护，并将即将到来的中期选举定性为常识治理与激进主义的路线抉择。 边境重塑、制造业回流与H-1B劳动力保护 (1:40) Vance将重掌南部边境与国内再工业化列为本届政府前两年的核心政绩。根据他的说法，在美非法移民人口相较其上任时减少了约300万，扭转了西方战后边境政策只放任或减缓非法入境的惯例。在经济层面，Vance批评过去40年两党沉迷于仅依赖科技、金融和服务的全球化假象，声称在过去18个月中，已有数万亿美元的新增私人资本投入国内工厂建设，使重工业实体经济走向不可逆的复兴。针对高技能移民争议，Vance指出由于国会缺乏立法动力，行政部门直接推行了行政改革，包括增设10万美元的H-1B签证申请费，以防止跨国企业滥用低成本外包劳动力压低国内薪资，并禁止企业在对本土员工进行大规模裁员的同时利用外籍签证替补岗位。 财政赤字治理、打击福利欺诈与通胀博弈 (6:37) 面对30年期美债收益率攀升至5.2%附近的金融市场压力，以及选民对通胀仍徘徊在3%至4%区间的抱怨，Vance进行了多维度回应。他强调当前通胀已较拜登政府时期9.5%的48年峰值显著回落，并透露财政部长Scott Bessent的宏观策略并非无差别缩减支出，而是通过刺激国内实际GDP增长与精准削减开支相结合，计划将2万亿美元的财政赤字压缩至GDP的3%左右的可持续水平。此外，作为行政反欺诈负责人，Vance称政府已从7万亿美元的联邦总支出中追回或阻止了约2500亿美元的不当支付；尽管Elon Musk与政府效率部（DOGE）曾估算欺诈规模或高达联邦开支的20%（约1.4万亿美元），但Vance认为实际损失至少在7000亿美元以上。他特别批评加利福尼亚、纽约及伊利诺伊等深蓝州阻碍联邦身份核查，指出加州每月向联邦报销高达70亿至90亿美元的补充营养援助计划（SNAP）资金，却拒绝进行基础受助资格审计。 突破能源供给瓶颈与重构前沿AI监管立场 (9:04) 针对人工智能数据中心引发的地方抵制，Vance将其根源归结为美国整整一代人在能源建设上的停滞与失败。数据显示，中国在2005年发电量追平美国后，目前发电总量已达到美国的约三倍，而同期美国电力产能基本停滞不前；在蓝州监管障碍下，居民月均电费从290美元暴涨至580美元，导致高耗能AI基础设施落户时招致强烈反弹。对此，Vance主张推行能源丰裕战略，使电力价格大幅降低，而非屈从环保阻力叫停基建。谈及AI安全监管时，Vance公开抨击前沿模型研发机构推卸责任的“科学怪人（Frankenstein）”末日叙事，并直接点名Anthropic首席执行官Dario Amodei，指责开发机构在掌握了高危自主网络攻击能力的同时，却拒绝向产业界提供防御机制。Vance明确表态反对设立中央集权的全球监管机构，强调开发者要么停止制造潜在威胁，要么必须向市场透明释放防御性对抗工具。 基于国家利益的现实主义中东与同盟政策 (3:45) 针对保守派选民对美国卷入中东冲突的疑虑，Vance为近期针对伊朗的军事打击与护航行动展开辩护。他解释称，尽管特朗普致力于避免无休止的对外干预，但阻止伊朗获得核武器是绝对红线；对伊朗核设施与常规军力的打击，以及在红海保护商业航道，是为了防止全球能源供应陷入灾难性休克。在美以关系上，Vance反驳了关于美国受制于以色列的批评，主张特朗普比特朗普前40年内的任何美国总统都更为独立，能够公开指出以色列总理Netanyahu的政策分歧。Vance将这一逻辑类比至NATO等同盟体系，强调所有外交行动必须完全以美国国家利益为核心基准，拒绝被陈旧的历史口号所绑架，合则共赢、违则遏制。 创业型执政风格与中期选举的阶层诉求 (25:19) 在探讨行政团队运转时，Vance将特朗普的决策模式描述为具有高度风险承受力的“创业型领导”，对比了过去数十年执政者如同按部就班的“看守型CEO”，并澄清了他与国务卿Marco Rubio之间存在2028年大选党内竞争的传言。立足即将到来的中期选举，Vance向蓝领选民提出诉求，列举了包括免征小费税、加班费税及社保福利税在内的经济成果，强调政策重心向美国中产家庭倾斜；同时，他尖锐批评现代民主党内部日益极端的意识形态偏离常识，呼吁选民在中期选举中拒绝将权力交还给制造危机与撕裂的激进政治力量。 本期对话全面展现了特朗普-Vance政府以经济民族主义与现实主义为支柱的内政外交构想。然而，在中东军事介入与反干预基本盘意愿之间的深层张力、30年期美债高企反映出的资本市场对长远赤字削减的存疑，以及联邦调查机构与蓝州地方管辖权在福利欺诈核查上的法律僵局，依然是该执政纲领尚未彻底解决的结构性矛盾。

## Background 该视频由知名科技与商业播客频道《All-In Podcast》于 2026 年 9 月 15 日在 YouTube 平台发布。节目简介显示，美国副总统 JD·万斯（JD Vance）再次做客播客，与主持人们就本届特朗普政府执政中期的边境治理、再工业化、高通胀、伊朗冲突与财政赤字展开复盘，并深入探讨了 AI 监管恐慌、打击万亿联邦欺诈、H-1B 签证滥用改革、对以理性外交以及中期选举策略等关键议题。 ## TL;DR 在本次专访中，副总统万斯全面梳理了政府执政两年来在逆转非法移民潮和推动制造业回流方面的实质性成果，并直面了基本盘关于伊朗军事行动与通胀顽疾的质疑。针对科技与经济领域，他批评了科技巨头宣扬的 AI 末日论与“弗兰肯斯坦”叙事，指出数据中心阻力的本质是电力基建滞后，并力挺通过加征 10 万美元费用来整治 H-1B 签证对本土工人的替代。此外，万斯揭露了深蓝州在食品券（SNAP）等联邦福利项目中存在的千亿美元级欺诈黑洞，重申了以“美国利益优先”为核心的独立外交路线，并号召选民在中期选举中支持重视常识与工薪阶层减税的执政团队。 ## Atmosphere & style 访谈氛围在轻松自如与严肃交锋之间切换自然，万斯以对“大房子”（监狱与球场）的俚语幽默破冰，随后迅速展现出成熟政客的从容与思辨力。面对杰森等人就中东战争与高通胀等尖锐问题的步步紧逼，对话没有任何回避或官话套话，反而充斥着务实坦诚的政策推演与直面对峙。整场对话既有分享与特朗普半夜通话细节时的生动诙谐，又有痛斥深蓝州贪腐与极左意识形态时的犀利严辞，节奏紧凑且信息密度极高，给听众带来兼具智识交锋与幕后写实的沉浸式体验。 ## Bulletin - [02:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=122s) 万斯指出本届政府实现了二战后罕见的非法移民逆转，全美非法移民存量较上任之初减少约 300 万人，同时过去 18 个月涌现数万亿美元制造业投资以扭转空心化。 - [06:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=403s) 针对 7 万亿美元联邦预算中的欺诈与浪费，万斯主抓的反欺诈专班已追回 2500 亿美元，但加州、纽约等蓝州在 SNAP 及 Medicaid 等项目上严重缺乏核验配合。 - [10:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=613s) 美国 2005 年后发电量基本停滞，而中国发电量已达美国三倍；万斯强调唯有大规模建设能源基建实现电力充裕，才能化解数据中心引发的电费上涨与邻避阻力。 - [16:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=981s) 政府拟对 H-1B 签证申请征收高达 10 万美元行政规费，并严厉打击一边解雇数千本土员工、一边申请廉价外籍劳工的企业欺诈套利行为。 - [06:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=403s) 财政政策上，政府联手贝森特拒绝休克式减支，计划通过智能削减开支与做大经济增量双轨并行，目标将财政赤字占 GDP 比重压缩至 3% 左右。 ## Key takeaways - [02:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=122s) 边境治理迎来历史性拐点，非法移民存量净减少约 300 万人，打破了二战后西方政府只能放缓而无法逆转边境涌入的恶性循环。 - [02:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=122s) 破除过去 40 年依赖金融与服务业的单边全球化共识，通过数万亿美元新增资本与厂房建设重构本土先进制造业基石。 - [03:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=225s) 美军介入中东局势的战略底线在于绝不容许伊朗拥有核武器，并负责在和平谈判期间护航关键水道以避免全球恶性能源危机。 - [03:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=225s) 通胀率虽从历史高位的 9% 至 12% 降至约 3.5%，但修复工程仍未结束，选民应避免重回造成最初危机的旧路。 - [06:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=403s) 30 年期美债收益率攀升至 5.2% 反映了金融市场的悲观预期，其根源在于国会两党议员长期缺乏削减赤字的集体政治诚意。 - [06:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=403s) 财政重整拒绝一夜削减 2 万亿美元赤字的休克疗法，贝森特路线图强调以做大 GDP 结合精准切除浪费，逐步将赤字率锚定在 3% 可持续红线。 - [10:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=613s) 数据中心面临的邻避阻力本质是美国整整一代人的电力基建停滞，必须树立让电力充裕到“廉价至无法计量”的战略愿景。 - [12:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=738s) 猛烈批评 AI 领袖鼓吹“弗兰肯斯坦”末日论与谋求全球集权监管，强调研发者制造出高攻击性模型后应坦诚开放对等的防御工具。 - [13:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=833s) 万斯透露特朗普展现了罕见的企业家冒险精神，反思政界充斥的“看守型领袖”，强调敢于承担中长期风险才能打破衰退。 - [16:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=981s) H-1B 签证政策面临深度纠偏，拟征收 10 万美元行政费用，严禁企业在裁撤本土员工的同时以廉价外国劳工打压薪资。 - [18:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1095s) 联邦预算欺诈规模保守估计达数千亿美元，加州等深蓝州在食品券（SNAP）每月数十亿美元拨付及医疗救助中存在严重核查真空与抵触。 - [21:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1308s) 对以关系坚持纯粹的“美国利益优先”定盘星，与以色列保持关键防务与情报合作的同时，坚决拒绝美军外交政策被任何盟友附庸化。 - [24:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1474s) 万斯驳斥了与国务卿马尔科·鲁比奥在 2028 年大选中暗中角力的媒体叙事，强调内阁协作高效、配合无间。 - [25:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1516s) 中期选举的核心诉求在于巩固免除加班费、小费及社保税等普惠工薪阶层的减税战果，坚决阻击深陷意识形态泥潭的极左激进路线。 ## Detailed walkthrough ### [00:00](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=0s) 重返播客与“大房子”的幽默误会 在宣誓就职并重申恪守宪法的誓言后，副总统 JD·万斯（JD Vance）作为嘉宾再次做客《All-In Podcast》。节目主持人杰森·卡拉卡尼斯（Jason Calacanis）热情欢迎他的回归，并提到这已经是万斯第三或第四次参与节目。访谈伊始，万斯分享了候场时听到前一场座谈会尾声的一则趣事：杰森当时正询问某位嘉宾在从“大房子”（the big house）出来后生活发生了怎样的变化。万斯笑称，身为俄亥俄州人，他第一反应以为对方指的是密歇根大学那座著名的橄榄球场（The Big House），后来才意识到原来杰森指的是联邦监狱，这个由于俚语认知差带来的反差引得全场莞尔。 在轻松的开场之后，杰森将话题迅速切入严肃政治。此时正值本届政府任期过半、中期选举临近的关键节点，杰森邀请万斯对过去两年的执政表现进行全面盘点，不仅要总结令人自豪的政绩，随后也要正面回应来自本党选民和支持者的质疑与不满。 --- ### [02:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=122s) 两大核心政绩：逆转边境危机与重塑美国制造业基石 谈及就任以来最感自豪的两项成就，万斯首先强调了南部边境管控的根本性转折。他指出，本届政府不仅重新确立了对南部边境的控制权，更实现了非法移民净流向的实质性逆转——目前的非法移民存量相比他们上任之初减少了约 300 万人。万斯直言，二战以后的西方政府往往陷入一种恶性循环：政客们大开国门、纵容甚至变相鼓励边境侵入，事后充其量只能做到放缓涌入速度，却从未有政府能够真正扭转这一趋势。他认为唐纳德·特朗普是自己有生之年首位真正逆转非法移民流向的美国总统，这一历史性突破足以载入史册。 另一项让万斯长期倾注心血的重点则是美国制造业基础的“再工业化与再资本化”（re-industrializing and recapitalizing）。万斯尖锐地抨击了过去数十年两党精英深信不疑的全球化共识——即美国可以完全脱离实业，单纯依靠科技、金融和现代服务业维持长久繁荣。他强调：“要拥有一个真正繁荣的经济体，你终究必须亲手制造实体产品（you still have to make stuff）。”虽然重构国家工业体系无法一蹴而就，但回顾过去 18 个月，全美涌现的数万亿美元新增资本投资、破土动工的基础设施与先进制造厂房，均证明持续 40 年的产业空心化趋势已被彻底逆转。“罗马不是一天建成的”，万斯断言，打破全球化迷思并将美国引回实业立国之路，将是特朗普总统超越边境治理、最为后世所铭记的历史功绩。 - **边境管控数据**：非法移民规模较政府就任时净减少约 300 万人，实现二战后西方政府罕见的净逆转。 - **制造业战略转向**：彻底废除过去 40 年依赖金融与服务业的单边全球化模式，通过数万亿美元新增资本与工厂建设，重塑本土供应链与实体制造业。 --- ### [03:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=225s) 直面选民怒火：伊朗军事介入与通货膨胀顽疾 杰森随即代表基本盘选民发难，毫不避讳地指出支持者当下最为愤怒的两大违背承诺的问题：第一，特朗普曾明确承诺绝不卷入海外战争，尤其是中东战火，但如今美军却深度卷入了针对伊朗的军事冲突；第二，通胀承诺未能完全兑现，当前通胀率依然停留在 3% 至 4% 的高位区间。杰森直言，把票投给本届政府的选民对此感到极其沮丧和愤怒，质问万斯政府将如何破局。 面对尖锐提问，万斯首先表示政府欢迎联盟内部存在不同意见，随后就伊朗局势进行了详尽辩护。他解释称，总统致力于避免美国卷入无休止的外国泥潭，但这与“绝不使用武力捍卫国家核心目标”绝非同一概念；更关键的是，特朗普始终对选民明确承诺——“决不允许伊朗拥有核武器”。美军的行动不仅对伊朗核设施实施了毁灭性打击，重创了其常规军事力量，而且还承担着保护国际航道安全的重任。万斯披露，即便在和平谈判期间，伊朗依然在公海肆意袭击商业油轮。万斯警告称，若美国采取彻底撒手不管的孤立主义立场，听任伊朗扼杀海上航运，必然立即引爆一场席卷全球的能源灾难。总统的举措是在捍卫美国海外资产与稳定全球石油天然气流动之间所采取的负责任平衡。 至于通货膨胀，万斯承认 3.5% 的水平依然过高，但他提醒选民不要遗忘拜登时期的惨状——当时年化通胀率一度飙升至 9% 至 12%，创下近 48 年的历史极值。万斯将这比作漫长的修复工程，呼吁选民在中期选举中作出理性抉择：“你是希望重新选出那些已经取得实质性进展、同时承认仍有大量工作要做的团队，还是想要倒退回去，重新启用最初制造这一灾难的同一拨人？” ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 应对伊朗冲突与能源安全的政策逻辑 accDescr: 展示了应对伊朗核武与航道袭击威胁时，军事打击与全球能源市场稳定的因果闭环。 subgraph Threat["核心安全底线与现实威胁"] A["战略底线：严禁伊朗获取核武器"] B["现实挑衅：和平谈判期间袭扰商业航运"] end subgraph Action["美军采取的战略行动"] C["精确打击：重创伊朗核设施与常规军力"] D["护航护税：保护海外资产与国际关键水道"] end subgraph Alternative["若采取消极不干预方案"] E["美军全面撤出，放任中东自生自灭"] F["国际油运受阻，瞬间引爆全球恶性能源危机"] end A --> C B --> D D --> G["稳定全球油气供给，遏制输入型恶性通胀"] E --> F ``` --- ### [06:43](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=403s) 财政赤字危机、美债收益率与贝森特的去杠杆路径 座谈嘉宾随后转向金融与宏观风险，指出金融市场对美国日益失控的财政赤字深感担忧，这已经对美元的长期信用构成了巨大威胁，30 年期美债收益率更是攀升到了 5.2% 左右。尽管政府成立了政府效率部（DOGE）试图缩减开支，但由于缺乏国会的立法配合，推进极为艰难。嘉宾询问万斯，联邦政府究竟有何切实方案能修正国家的财政航向。 万斯正面承认了这一危机的严峻性。在行政分支层面，万斯主抓的打击联邦福利欺诈行动已为纳税人直接挽回了约 2500 亿美元。他客观评价道，在规模高达 7 万亿美元的联邦预算总盘子中，2500 亿虽不能包治百病，但这证明了对官僚机构长期积累的贪腐与浪费动真格的决心。然而，万斯承认当前金融市场的悲观预期，本质上源于对国会两党议员在赤字削减上“集体缺乏诚意”的深刻失望。 谈及系统性破局之策，万斯提及即将在数小时后与财政部长斯科特·贝森特（Scott Bessent）举行的闭门会议。贝森特与行政团队制定的财政重整路线图强调务实主义：面对继承而来的 2 万亿美元天量年度财政赤字，试图一夜之间从 7 万亿预算中生硬砍掉 2 万亿是脱离现实且会引发经济休克的危险举动。政府的核心战略是“智能削减开支与拉动经济增长双管齐下”，通过做大 GDP 增量并精准切除腐败浪费，将财政赤字占 GDP 的比重逐步压缩至可持续的 3% 左右，从而使美国财政重归稳健轨道。 ```mermaid flowchart LR accTitle: 斯科特·贝森特的赤字治理与财政可持续模型 accDescr: 说明从2万亿美元赤字遗产出发，通过智能减支与经济做大将赤字压降至GDP的3%。 subgraph Inherited["继承的财政困局"] I1["2 万亿美元年度赤字遗产"] I2["7 万亿美元联邦预算总盘子"] end subgraph Execution["过渡期政策组合拳"] E1["精准反欺诈：追回 2500 亿美元流失资金"] E2["智能削减开支：避免盲目休克式大收缩"] E3["实业促增长：做大 GDP 经济体量分母"] end subgraph Target["中长期宏观目标"] T1["财政赤字占 GDP 比重降至约 3%"] T2["重塑资本市场对美债与美元的长期信用"] end I1 & I2 --> Execution E1 & E2 & E3 --> Target ``` - **反欺诈治理成效**：万斯牵头的反欺诈专班已追回并节约约 2500 亿美元的纳税人资金。 - **美债市场警讯**：30 年期美债收益率攀升至约 5.2%，折射出市场对国会两党解决债务决心缺失的焦虑。 - **贝森特路线图**：拒绝不切实际的“一夜削减 2 万亿”激进休克方案，采取精准削减与经济增长并行策略，锚定将赤字率降至 GDP 的 3% 这一可持续红线。 ### [09:04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=544s) 财政赤字与两党责任：唯有靠经济与生产力增长破局 在谈到联邦政府开支与债务难题时，JD Vance 指出，财政部长（Scott Bessent）与特朗普总统都对该问题保持高度关注，但这需要一个长期的解决方案，而且理想状态下必须凝聚两党共识。然而现实非常骨感，国会中不仅是民主党人，绝大多数议员长期以来都缺乏严肃对待财政支出的意愿与决心，这种敷衍态度必须被彻底扭转。 Chamath Palihapitiya 顺势接话并“深入探讨”（double click）该话题。他强调，摆脱财政泥潭最有效、最关键的路径就是依靠经济与生产力的强劲增长。但令人费解的是，美国内部似乎总有一股势力试图给这种增长踩刹车，无论是针对数据中心建设的阻挠，还是四处散播虚假叙事与恐慌情绪。尽管特朗普总统前一天亲自接入通话并与黄仁勋（Jensen Huang）一同澄清事实，Meta 和微软（Microsoft）的高管也纷纷到场辟谣，但想要击碎谣言依然困难重重，宛如陷入了一场永无止境的“打地鼠”（whack-a-mole）困境。 - **财政现状**：国会两党议员长期缺乏削减开支的政治意愿，解决债务必须依托长期策略与两党共识。 - **增长路径**：唯有通过提升生产力与推动经济全面增长，才能从根本上化解债务危机，但这一过程正遭遇各种反向势力的阻碍。 --- ### [10:13](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=613s) 数据中心阻力背后的电力危机：中美发电量对比与“廉价到无法计量”的愿景 JD Vance 对数据中心遭遇的反弹给出了深入剖析。他认为，反建数据中心的现象表面上看是典型的邻避主义（NIMBYism），但其深层根本原因，是美国整整一代人都没有建设足够的电力基础设施。他在竞选走访基层时，常有选民向他诉苦，表示自己一年前的月电费账单还是 290 美元，现在却暴涨到了 580 美元。尤其在那些制定了严苛限制、导致无法新建发电厂的“蓝州”（民主党执政州），电费飙升自然会引发民众对高耗能数据中心的强烈抵制。 针对这种困局，Vance 认为因噎废食地叫停建设是完全错误的应对方式，真正该做的是大规模扩建美国所急需的能源基建。他援引埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）经常提及的数据做对比：在 2005 年左右，中国（PRC）的发电量与美国持平并首次实现超越；自那之后近二十年间，美国的电力生成量基本处于停滞（flatlined）状态，而如今中国的发电量已经达到美国的整整三倍。Vance 批评环保运动在很大程度上束缚了美国的基建能力，并疾呼美国必须重塑一种宏大愿景——让电力充裕到“廉价至无法计量”（too cheap to meter），从源头打破电力短缺对算力及产业发展的制约。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 能源短缺与算力反弹因果链 accDescr: 展示美国长期未扩建电力基建导致电费上涨并引发对AI数据中心反弹的传导逻辑 subgraph Infrastructure["电力基建停滞"] A["一代人未新建足够电力<br/>（2005年后发电量走平）"] B["对比：中国发电量达美国3倍"] end subgraph Impact["民众生活与市场反应"] C["蓝州限制发电设施扩建"] D["居民电费翻倍<br/>（从 $290/月飙升至 $580/月）"] end subgraph Backlash["产业受阻与解决路径"] E["公众产生强烈邻避心理<br/>抵制AI数据中心"] F["政策目标：大规模建设电力<br/>实现'廉价到无法计量'"] end A --> C C --> D D --> E B -. 对照差距.-> A E --> F ``` --- ### [12:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=738s) 摒弃 AI 末日论与“弗兰肯斯坦”叙事：矛与盾的技术自律 谈及更广泛的人工智能发展态势，Vance 直言不讳地批评了行业领袖散播“末日论”的荒谬现象。特朗普总统也对此深感困惑：为何那些站在 AI 经济最前沿的核心开拓者，反而开始甩手宣称自己制造出了无法控制的“弗兰肯斯坦”（Frankenstein），并声称唯一的解决之道是建立一个全球统一的“一世界”AI 治理架构（one world governance structure）？ Vance 对此给出了极其直接的回应：如果你觉得自己正在制造“弗兰肯斯坦”，那就立刻住手；如果猛兽已经出笼（cat is out of the bag），那就全力开发能够抵御它的防御机制。Vance 提及 Anthropic 的 CEO Dario Amodei，承认周围人都评价 Dario 是个真诚、有深厚信念且并非出于监管俘获（regulatory capture）目的的技术人；然而科技界目前的现实极其荒谬——Anthropic 最新模型被曝拥有极强的网络黑客/攻击潜能，大量迫切需要防御工具来抵抗此类攻击的企业却被剥夺了访问这些防御机制的权限。Vance 强调，科技巨头不能一边制造怪物，一边跑去向政府哭求监管，而应该向内反省：停止制造危害，并在其他企业求助时，坦诚交出防御工具以共同应对风险。 - **批评对象**：将前沿 AI 模型比作“弗兰肯斯坦”、鼓吹设立全球集权治理架构的技术巨头。 - **核心逻辑**：安全问题应由研发源头负责。制造出攻击性极强的 AI 模型后，研发者有责任向企业开放对等的防御工具，而非借恐惧之名寻求行政监管庇护。 --- ### [13:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=833s) 与特朗普共事的真实日常：企业家式的冒险精神与反官僚作风 Brad Gerstner 向 Vance 提问：特朗普总统展现出了过去 50 年间极为罕见的创业者心态与冒险精神，不仅关注 AI 议题，还推行了“特朗普账户”（Trump accounts）与“主街议程”（Main Street agenda）等开创性举措，与这样一位极具活力、甘冒政治风险的总统共事究竟是何种体验？ Vance 笑着分享了他与特朗普高强度工作的生动细节。他透露特朗普的睡眠时间比他见过的任何人都少，他和白宫幕僚长/重要官员经常在半夜两点半接到特朗普打来的电话，总统开口第一句就是：“你睡了吗？”面对这样的午夜来电，Vance 只能无奈又幽默地回答：“报告总统，我刚才睡了，但现在彻底醒了，咱们聊正事吧。” 在幽默之余，Vance 严肃地指出，与特朗普共事的最大感受是“永远不会无聊”，并且特朗普总在不断拷问核心团队：我们到底是在选一条轻松的路，还是在选一条正确的路？哪怕这项政策在当下会招致政治反弹，甚至收益要等两年、五年甚至十年后才能显现，他也绝不动摇。Vance 总结道，美国过去几十年的政商界充斥着太多不愿承担责任的“看守型总统”（caretaker presidents）和“看守型 CEO”，导致真正的创业者与官僚经理人脱节；唯有敢于承担风险、推进大型工程的领袖，才能彻底扭转美国的长期衰退趋势。 --- ### [16:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=981s) 打击 H-1B 签证滥用与欺诈：10 万美元费用门槛与保护本土劳工 Jason Calacanis 随后提到了科技圈最为关心的 H-1B 签证改革与系统性欺诈问题。Vance 调侃这个话题是 Jason Calacanis 与 Stephen Miller 政治立场的“极小交集区”（Venn diagram overlap），引发现场笑声。Vance 直言，鉴于国会缺乏足够的政治意愿通过立法来修改移民法，行政团队决定通过行政手段全力整治这一系统中的严重欺诈。 Vance 明确指出，H-1B 设立的初衷是引进真正的顶级天才（actual genius），让那些能显著丰富美国科技生态和经济体量的精英留下来，而不是被某些大公司用来进行成本削减——比如裁掉年薪 6 万美元的美国本土会计师，换成年薪仅 4.5 万美元的低薪外国劳工。为此，政府推行了加征 10 万美元费用的改革措施。 此外，行政部门正严加防范公司在利用 H-1B 的同时大规模裁减本土员工的恶劣行径。Vance 震惊地表示，有些公司一边声称极度缺乏劳动力、在本土招不到人并申请 H-1B 配额，另一边却刚刚解雇了 5,000 名美国员工。他严正指出：“如果你正在裁减美国工人，你就不配去市场上寻找低薪外国劳工来替代他们。”尽管这些强硬行政命令已经遭遇了多起法律诉讼，但 Vance 坚信政府在法律和政策上都站在正义的一方，必须彻底终结将 H-1B 沦为廉价劳动力替代工具的现状。 - **改革手段**：拟对 H-1B 申请征收高达 10 万美元的行政费用，抬高企业滥用廉价外国劳动力的门槛。 - **裁员联动审查**：严厉打击“一边大规模解雇本土员工（如裁员 5,000 人）、一边向政府申请 H-1B 谎称缺人”的企业欺诈套利行为。 - **定位纠偏**：明确重申 H-1B 必须回归服务于顶尖罕见人才，绝非充当打压本土白领薪资的手段。 ### [18:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1095s) 万亿联邦开支中的欺诈黑洞与“蓝州”抵触 主持人将话题转向了日益严峻的财政赤字与联邦开支欺诈问题，并半开玩笑地称副总统万斯如今兼具“反欺诈沙皇”（Fraud Czar）的头衔。主持人提到，随着 Nick Shirley 等独立公民记者的实地暗访曝光，公众每周都能看到大量令人咋舌的腐败黑幕。以加利福尼亚州的高铁项目为例，甚至出现过一名未实质履职的意大利足球俱乐部富豪承包商凭空卷走 5 亿美元的荒谬案例。在高达 7 万亿美元的联邦预算中，究竟有多少资金被这类贪腐与浪费所吞噬？ 万斯指出，埃隆·马斯克此前在政府效率部（DOGE）推进工作时曾估算，联邦支出中的欺诈比例可能高达 20%（即约 1.4 万亿美元）；而即便按保守的 10% 到 20% 之间计算，涉案规模也至少在数千亿美元之巨。万斯直言，打击欺诈最大的死结并不在技术层面，而在于政治阻力——问题最严重的地方往往正是最拒绝配合联邦调查的深蓝州。在加利福尼亚，不仅存在大量利用完全虚构的“空壳身份”套取联邦医保（Medicare）资金的现象，加利福尼亚、纽约和伊利诺伊等州更有数十万甚至更多的非法移民违规挂靠在医疗救助（Medicaid）系统名下，导致纳税人每年平白承受数百亿美元的额外账单。 ```mermaid flowchart TD accTitle: 联邦福利资金拨付与审查断层流程 accDescr: 说明联邦财政向深蓝州拨款过程中由于缺乏基本资格审查而导致的资金流失机制 subgraph Federal["联邦财政层级"] A["联邦财政拨付款项"] --> B["无条件全额电汇<br/>(如加州SNAP每月70-90亿美元)"] end subgraph State["州政府申领层级 (加州/纽约等)"] B --> C["统包式福利项目账单"] C --> D{"联邦要求核实申领人基础资格"} end subgraph Leakage["监管断层与资金流失"] D -- "州政府拒绝配合调查" --> E["虚假身份 / 幽灵人口冒领"] D -- "缺乏合法居留核验" --> F["非法移民占用联邦福利救济"] E & F --> G["每年数千亿美元财政流失"] end ``` 万斯以补充营养援助计划（SNAP，即食品券项目）为例，揭示了其惊人的监管漏洞。保障贫困儿童与低收入家庭的基本温饱本是联邦政府的神圣职责，但目前加州政府每月仅需向联邦出具一份 70 亿至 90 亿美元不等的统包账单，联邦便会全额电汇，期间没有任何前置审核。万斯强调：“我们甚至无法确认名单上的人是否真实存在，或者他们是否是美国合法居民。”当联邦官员要求蓝州配合核实申领者的基本合法身份时，遭遇的却是全盘抵触与不合作。万斯表示，全美若有 7000 亿美元的欺诈漏洞，其中数千亿就潜藏在这些蓝州之中；尽管强推核查面临重重法律障碍，但白宫正在设计全新的倒逼机制，迫使各州落实基本的反欺诈治理。 - 联邦食品券计划（SNAP）每月向加州直接划拨 70 亿至 90 亿美元，中途几乎不进行任何个案核验。 - 蓝州（加州、纽约州、伊利诺伊州等）在非法移民违规参保 Medicaid 以及假身份套取 Medicare 方面缺乏配合意愿。 - 针对 7 万亿美元的联邦预算，保守估计欺诈与浪费规模达数千亿美元，DOGE 评估上限则达 1.4 万亿美元。 --- ### [21:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1308s) 对以关系与基于“美国利益优先”的理性外交 随后，主持人提出了一个极具火药味的地缘政治难题：审视当前的以美关系，以及特朗普与以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡（Bibi Netanyahu）的微妙互动。主持人提到，随着右翼阵营中“美国优先”乃至“仅顾美国”（America only）思潮的壮大，以及舆论场中反犹主义的抬头，部分保守派选民开始质疑美国的对外政策是否受到了以色列或内塔尼亚胡过深的牵制。 万斯给出了非常明确的回应。他强调，以色列在军事科技与情报共享领域固然是美国不可或缺的关键盟友，但这并不意味着双方利益在所有维度上完全绑定。万斯指出，相比过去 40 年间的历任美国总统，唐纳德·特朗普反而是最敢于在国家利益发生分歧时同内塔尼亚胡公开分道扬镳的领导人。万斯直斥某些民主党人的双标言论：“过去 40 年里，只有特朗普敢于当面表态：‘比比确实是优秀的伙伴，但在这件事上我们意见不同；比比在这点上做错了，或者对比色列而言是正确的，但美国人民需要我们走向不同的道路。’” 万斯进一步将这一逻辑延伸至整体国家大战略。他认为，一种成熟、理性的外交政策绝不能建立在过去二三十年陈腐的外交口号或固有同盟契约之上，而必须以纯粹的“美国利益优先”为唯一定盘星。正如白宫在北约（NATO）问题上的鲜明立场一样——美国高度重视北约的同盟架构，但这绝不意味着美国的欧洲战略要全盘屈从于北约条约；同理，美国的中东战略也绝不能无原则地附庸于以色列。“在利益一致时我们携手合作，存在分歧时我们坚持自我。一切为了美国利益，这是拥有理性外交政策的唯一路径。” - 确立以“美国国家利益”为核心的独立外交判断，终结以往数十年同盟捆绑的外交惯性。 - 特朗普政府对以政策坚持双轨制：保持紧密的军工与情报协作，但在战术与地缘目标冲突时勇于说“不”。 - 将处理以美关系的原则同重整北约防务负担相对标，坚决拒绝美国外交政策被任何外部盟友“附庸化”。 --- ### [24:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1474s) 澄清与鲁比奥的竞争传闻：内阁配合无间 在专访进入尾声之际，主持人插话询问万斯如何评价国务卿马尔科·鲁比奥（Marco Rubio）在前两年的执政表现。这一提问巧妙地触及了华盛顿政坛盛传的两人在 2028 年大选中暗中角力的政治传言。 万斯听后爽朗大笑，毫无保留地对鲁比奥表示赞许：“他干得棒极了，我非常喜欢马尔科！”万斯戏谑地拆穿了主流媒体的脑补叙事，称媒体总喜欢描绘他们两个整天无所事事地坐在一起、冥思苦想如何在 2028 年总统大选中斗个你死我活的虚假戏码。万斯低头看了看表，笑着说：“现在几点了？下午两点二十五分。我五分钟后就得和马尔科通电话。查马斯得赶紧把最后一个问题问完，我也得麻利答完，然后我和马尔科就要立刻去处理美国人民的正经国事了。”万斯直言鲁比奥不仅人格极富魅力，在重构美国外交格局的岗位上也交出了极为优异的成绩单。 --- ### [25:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1516s) 中期选举展望：经济民生政绩与对手的激进乱象 查马斯抓紧最后的时间抛出了压轴问题：面对即将到来的关键中期选举，民调结果大相径庭，有的预测共和党人将守住全盘优势，有的则警告会出现全美范围的激进左翼浪潮。一线选民的真实心态究竟如何？白宫又将向选民传递怎样的核心诉求？ 万斯将其总结为两大核心主张： 第一是拿实打实的执政成果说话。在过去 18 个月里，政府推行了力度空前的减税政策，核心受惠面精准覆盖中产与基层工人阶级——取消了加班费税、小费税以及针对社保福利的课税，这些减税实实在在地落在了普通劳动者的口袋里，而非华盛顿或纽约的精英阶层。同时，南部边境管控取得了突破性战果，而针对 H-1B 签证的深水区改革也正在切实保障本土工人的就业优先权。“我们做了大量好事，但前面仍有重任在肩。千万不要把权力交还给当初制造这堆烂摊子的那群人，请再给我们两年时间，让我们把这些卓越的事业推向深入。” 第二是正视政治对手的极端化与荒诞本质。万斯直言，即便选民并非在每一项具体政策上都百分之百认同执政团队，也必须看清如今的民主党已被彻底的疯狂和极左意识形态所绑架。他们任由非法移民与犯罪分子撕裂社区，甚至对自身政策的破坏力沾沾自喜。万斯举了一个极为荒唐的实例：纽约有一位正在参选国会议员的民主党候选人，公开在演说中宣称“7 月 4 日独立日的真正意义在于解放波多黎各和巴勒斯坦”。万斯严厉嘲讽道：“听到这话时我心里在想，这个人该去的是精神病院，而不是国会山！”万斯向全美选民发出强力号召，呼吁大家在 11 月把这些激进政客彻底淘汰出局，因为本届政府的一切决策皆源于常识与美国国家利益，而对手早已被激进游说集团蒙蔽了双眼，绝不可信托以治国大权。 - **民生减税落地**：兑现针对普通工薪阶层的加班费免税、小费免税及退休社保福利免税政策。 - **结构性改革见效**：边境非法越境得到根本扭转，H-1B 签证审核转向保护本土人才基本盘。 - **选战核心攻防**：呼吁中间选民在“常识与国家利益优先”与“深陷意识形态泥潭的极左激进路线”之间做出清醒抉择。 ## Notable quotes > [02:02](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=122s) 要拥有一个真正繁荣的经济体，你终究必须亲手制造实体产品（you still have to make stuff）。 — JD Vance > [03:45](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=225s) 你是希望重新选出那些已经取得实质性进展、同时承认仍有大量工作要做的团队，还是想要倒退回去，重新启用最初制造这一灾难的同一拨人？ — JD Vance > [12:18](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=738s) 如果你觉得自己正在制造“弗兰肯斯坦”，那就立刻住手；如果猛兽已经出笼，那就全力开发能够抵御它的防御机制。 — JD Vance > [13:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=833s) 报告总统，我刚才睡了，但现在彻底醒了，咱们聊正事吧。 — JD Vance > [13:53](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=833s) 我们到底是在选一条轻松的路，还是在选一条正确的路？ — Donald Trump > [16:21](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=981s) 如果你正在裁减美国工人，你就不配去市场上寻找低薪外国劳工来替代他们。 — JD Vance > [18:15](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1095s) 我们甚至无法确认名单上的人是否真实存在，或者他们是否是美国合法居民。 — JD Vance > [21:48](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1308s) 在利益一致时我们携手合作，存在分歧时我们坚持自我。一切为了美国利益，这是拥有理性外交政策的唯一路径。 — JD Vance > [24:34](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1474s) 他干得棒极了，我非常喜欢马尔科！ — JD Vance > [25:16](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU&t=1516s) 听到这话时我心里在想，这个人该去的是精神病院，而不是国会山！ — JD Vance ## Mentioned JD Vance, Jason Calacanis, Donald Trump, Scott Bessent, Chamath Palihapitiya, Jensen Huang, Elon Musk, Dario Amodei, Brad Gerstner, Stephen Miller, Nick Shirley, Benjamin Netanyahu, Marco Rubio, All-In Podcast, DOGE, Anthropic, Meta, Microsoft, SNAP, Medicare, Medicaid, NATO, H-1B ## Video description (0:00) VP JD Vance joins The Besties! (1:40) Assessing the Trump Admin so far: Border control, re-industrialization, inflation, Iran, government debt, anti-fraud (9:28) AI approach: Dealing with Doomerism, "Frankenstein," and AI negativity (16:23) H-1B abuse and the massive $1T+ of fraud in federal spending (21:48) Relationship with Israel, rational foreign policy (25:19) JD Vance's midterms message Thanks to our partners for making this possible! IREN is a vertically integrated AI Cloud platform, delivering data centers, compute and software for AI training and inference. https://iren.com/ Oracle connects the data, applications, and infrastructure that turn AI into business outcomes—with the flexibility, choice, and control to optimize as AI evolves. http://oracle.com/ai EY helps tech innovators scale from startup to exit to megacap. You build the future. We’ll handle the rest. http://www.ey.com Meta believes the future is for everyone. We're focused on giving every person the tools to reach their full potential and making sure the benefits of technology are distributed to all. http://www.meta.com Keel Infrastructure owns the power, land, and connectivity that HPC and AI run on - backed by secured energy assets and established grid interconnections across North America. https://keelinfra.com/ Airwallex - Agentic Global Business Accounts. Open local accounts in 70+ countries to accept payments, earn yield, pay globally, and manage spend. http://airwallex.com PayPal has been revolutionizing commerce globally for more than 25 years. Creating innovative experiences that make moving money, selling, and shopping simple, personalized, and secure, PayPal empowers consumers and businesses in approximately 200 markets to join and thrive in the global economy. For more information, visit https://www.paypal.com Google for Startups connects founders with the right people, products, and best practices to help startups build faster and go further. https://startup.google.com/ Explore ideas, industries, and technologies worth understanding with Chamath every week on Learn with Me: https://research.socialcapital.com/allin Follow Vice President Vance: https://x.com/JDVance Follow the besties: https://x.com/chamath https://x.com/Jason https://x.com/DavidSacks https://x.com/friedberg Follow on X: https://x.com/theallinpod Follow on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theallinpod Follow on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@allin Follow on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/allinpod Intro Music Credit: https://rb.gy/tppkzl https://x.com/yung_spielburg #allin #tech #news [Source](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcooQRy0PU)

[2:02] JD Vance: 要拥有一个真正繁荣的经济体，你终究必须亲手制造实体产品（you still have to make stuff）。 [3:45] JD Vance: 你是希望重新选出那些已经取得实质性进展、同时承认仍有大量工作要做的团队，还是想要倒退回去，重新启用最初制造这一灾难的同一拨人？ [12:18] JD Vance: 如果你觉得自己正在制造“弗兰肯斯坦”，那就立刻住手；如果猛兽已经出笼，那就全力开发能够抵御它的防御机制。 [13:53] JD Vance: 报告总统，我刚才睡了，但现在彻底醒了，咱们聊正事吧。 [13:53] Donald Trump: 我们到底是在选一条轻松的路，还是在选一条正确的路？ [16:21] JD Vance: 如果你正在裁减美国工人，你就不配去市场上寻找低薪外国劳工来替代他们。 [18:15] JD Vance: 我们甚至无法确认名单上的人是否真实存在，或者他们是否是美国合法居民。 [21:48] JD Vance: 在利益一致时我们携手合作，存在分歧时我们坚持自我。一切为了美国利益，这是拥有理性外交政策的唯一路径。 [24:34] JD Vance: 他干得棒极了，我非常喜欢马尔科！ [25:16] JD Vance: 听到这话时我心里在想，这个人该去的是精神病院，而不是国会山！

[0:00] JD Vance: I, James Vance, do solemnly swear... [1:40] JD Vance: Rome wasn't built in a day [12:18] JD Vance: If you're building Frankenstein, stop [13:53] JD Vance: sleeps less than any person that I've ever met. [13:53] JD Vance: No, sir, I wasn't, but I am now. [13:53] Donald Trump: easy path or... the right path [16:21] JD Vance: the Venn diagram overlap of Jason Calacanis and Stephen Miller—it's a very small area. [18:19] JD Vance: no questions asked [21:48] Donald Trump: Bibi's wrong [24:34] JD Vance: the business of the American people. [25:19] liberation of Puerto Rico and Palestine. [25:19] JD Vance: mental hospital, not given a seat in Congress

[0:01] I, James Vance, do solemnly swear that I [0:04] will support and defend the Constitution [0:06] of the United States. So help me God. [0:08] >> Congratulations, Mr. Vice President. [0:11] >> We're the senior partner. We're the [0:13] world's superpower. That's the way that [0:14] it works. [0:15] >> This is not just theft of the American [0:17] people's money. This is also theft of [0:19] critical services that the American [0:21] people rely on. This is a problem that [0:23] has festered in this country for far too [0:25] long. You stop socialism by making [0:27] people's lives better. And that's what [0:29] we're trying to do every single day. [0:31] >> We got to take care of business this [0:32] November, then we'll worry about what [0:33] comes next. [0:36] >> Please welcome Vice President J. D. [0:39] Vance. [0:54] All right. [0:56] Nice to see you, Mr. Vice President. How [0:58] are you? [1:00] >> I'm good. I'm good. I Jason, I I caught [1:02] the very tail end of that panel [1:04] discussion and you you were asking [1:06] somebody about how their life had [1:07] changed. I couldn't see who it was, but [1:09] asking how their life had changed cuz [1:10] they had been in the big house, which it [1:12] appears to me you meant prison, but I I [1:14] thought you were talking about the [1:14] Michigan football team stadium they [1:17] played. So, very different understanding [1:20] of what you were talking about and what [1:21] was actually going on. [1:22] >> Yeah. [1:22] >> Uh, well, it's great it's great to have [1:24] you back. We always appreciate that you [1:26] take the time to join the besties and [1:27] have a very candid, honest discussion. [1:30] This is your, I think, third or fourth [1:32] time on the program. Uh, and it's a [1:34] great time to be on the program because [1:35] you're halfway through uh your term [1:38] approximately and the midterms are [1:39] coming up. maybe you could assess what's [1:42] went really well for and what you're [1:45] proud of with this uh first two years [1:48] and then let's get into some things that [1:50] maybe your own constituents [1:53] um are not happy with and uh let's start [1:56] with the positive. What do you think [1:58] you've accomplished in these first two [2:00] years? [2:02] Well, look, I I think the the two things [2:04] that I'm most proud of are first of all, [2:05] we actually got control of the southern [2:07] border, but started to reverse the flow [2:08] of illegal immigration, which is about 3 [2:10] million lower today than it was when we [2:12] came into office. Obviously, there's a [2:13] lot more to do, but if you look at the [2:15] history of Western governments in the [2:16] post-war era, they open the border. They [2:19] invite border invasions, but they never [2:21] actually reverse it. At best, they slow [2:23] it down. I think President Trump was the [2:25] first president in my lifetime to [2:27] actually reverse that flow of illegal [2:29] immigration. I'm extremely proud of [2:30] that. I'm also proud, as you guys know, [2:33] I've been obsessively focused on this. [2:38] I I I've been obsessively focused on [2:39] this for a long time, which is the idea [2:41] of re-industrializing and recapitalizing [2:44] the the the manufacturing base of the [2:46] United States of America. And, you know, [2:48] this was a bipartisan consensus that [2:50] leaned into globalization that sort of [2:52] bought into this idea that you could [2:53] have a prosperous economy that was built [2:56] entirely around services, tech, and [2:57] finance. And the reality of course is [2:59] that to have a truly prosperous economy, [3:01] you still have to make stuff. And I [3:03] think Donald Trump understood that [3:04] better than anybody else. Obviously, it [3:06] takes a long time uh to rebuild the [3:09] manufacturing base of the country. But [3:10] if you look at the trillions of dollars [3:11] of new investment, the new construction, [3:14] uh the new manufacturing facilities [3:15] being built, I do think that you're [3:16] seeing the obvious signs that over the [3:19] past 18 months, we've reversed a 40-year [3:22] trend. Now, Rome wasn't built in a day. [3:24] going to take longer to fully undo the [3:26] damage wrought by the last 40 years. But [3:28] the fact that we're actually on the [3:30] right pathway is a signature achievement [3:31] of Donald Trump. But I think it's the [3:33] thing that he will be remembered for [3:34] even more than the border. He will be [3:36] remembered for ending the sort of [3:39] consensus around globalization and [3:40] actually enacting policies that get us [3:43] on the on the right track. Again, [3:44] >> I think we we all agree with those two [3:46] and just absolute congratulations on [3:49] that. Uh you guys have crushed it. I [3:51] think we all concur. um your [3:54] constituents, the people who voted for [3:55] you are extremely frustrated about two [3:57] issues. Let's just tackle them head-on. [3:59] The first is you promised us you [4:01] wouldn't start a foreign war. You [4:02] promised us you wouldn't start a foreign [4:04] war in the Middle East specifically. And [4:06] then you promised you would get [4:08] inflation under control. You haven't [4:10] been able to get inflation under [4:12] control. Still 3 or 4% this year. It's [4:14] not looking good. And Americans, [4:16] specifically the people who voted for [4:18] you, Mr. vice president are very upset [4:21] about starting this war. What is your [4:24] message to them? How do these two issues [4:26] get resolved? Because people are very [4:27] unhappy about it. [4:30] >> Yeah. So, so Jason, I understand that [4:31] and I certainly hear from people. And [4:33] what I would say first of all is we [4:35] invite people into the coalition who [4:36] disagree with us. You don't have to [4:38] agree with us on every single issue. But [4:40] on the war specifically, what I I would [4:41] say is look, the president came in and [4:44] yes, he wanted to keep the United States [4:46] out of foreign entanglements. He also [4:48] said that he was committed to Iran not [4:49] having a nuclear weapon. And I think [4:51] that wanting to keep the United States [4:54] out of foreign entanglements does not [4:55] mean that you can never use the military [4:57] in order to accomplish the American [4:59] people's objectives. Now, all that said, [5:01] despite the fact that we did accomplish [5:03] a substantial destruction, not just of [5:05] their nuclear program, but also of the [5:07] Iranian conventional military, we've [5:09] seen the Iranians shooting at commercial [5:11] shipping even in the midst of peace [5:14] negotiations. And I think the president [5:16] has actually done the responsible thing [5:18] here, which is to try to ensure that [5:19] world energy markets, despite Iranian [5:21] terrorism, continue to get that flow of [5:24] oil and gas. And so what I would say to [5:26] anybody who's frustrated right now is [5:28] the alternative here, which is the [5:29] United States effectively says to the [5:32] Middle East, you're on your own, would [5:34] mean necessarily a worldwide energy [5:36] crisis so long as the Iranians keep on [5:38] shooting at shipping, which we know [5:39] that's exactly what they would do. So, I [5:41] think the president is taking the [5:43] responsible course of action. He's [5:45] protecting America's assets in the [5:46] region while also ensuring that world [5:48] energy markets continue to get a supply [5:50] of oil and natural gas. And you on the [5:53] inflation, Jason, I I think we've made a [5:55] lot of progress. To my point earlier, [5:56] Rome was not built in a day, but you [5:59] know, under the Biden administration, we [6:01] had inflation, I think, at 9 12% [6:03] annualized. That's the highest rate in [6:05] about 48 years. You're right. three and [6:07] a half% is still too high, but you've [6:09] seen substantial progress and of course [6:11] we're going to keep on making progress. [6:13] I guess my pitch to the American people [6:15] and to to your listeners certainly would [6:17] be do you want to reelect the people who [6:20] have made substantial progress accepting [6:23] there's still a lot of work to be done [6:25] or do you want to go back to the people [6:26] who caused the problem in the first [6:28] place? And obviously I'm biased but I [6:30] think that you should elect the people [6:31] who have actually made substantial [6:33] progress while recognizing a lot more [6:35] progress needs to happen. Mr. Mr. Vice [6:37] President, the um [6:43] one of the other things many of us were [6:45] excited about with this incoming [6:46] administration was addressing the fiscal [6:49] deficit. Uh it seems to become more [6:52] apparent to markets that this is [6:54] potentially a risk to the to the the US [6:58] um dollar over time. The the 30-year I [7:01] think is around 5.2% now. What's your [7:04] view? And you know, when the [7:04] administration came in, there was an [7:06] effort with Doge. Uh, but it's been very [7:08] hard to get congressional action to take [7:10] the steps necessary to reduce the [7:12] deficit. Maybe you can share the [7:13] administration's view, your view on what [7:16] can we do to write the fiscal course for [7:18] the federal government now and over [7:20] time. [7:22] >> Yeah, look, it's a very important and [7:24] fair question. I mean, I I think that in [7:25] fundamentally the the anti-fraud efforts [7:27] that I've been focused on, we've saved [7:29] about $250 billion of the American [7:32] taxpayers money that would have [7:33] otherwise gone to fraudsters. And in the [7:36] scale of a 7 trillion federal budget, [7:38] obviously $250 billion isn't the whole [7:40] thing, but it's a lot and it's something [7:42] that we're very proud of. I think we [7:43] have to continue to sort of just [7:44] tackling the basic fraud and waste [7:47] that's endemic to our government. And of [7:49] course, we are going to need some real [7:51] bipartisan legislative solutions to give [7:53] markets confidence. Not just that we're [7:56] going to be serious about the deficit, [7:57] but that hopefully the president who [7:59] comes after and the Congress that comes [8:01] after is going to be serious about the [8:02] deficit. I think fundamentally the [8:04] problem here, and I I think what the [8:05] markets are responding to at this moment [8:09] is the perception that neither [8:11] congressional Republicans or Democrats [8:13] are serious about the debt and the [8:14] deficit. Obviously, I think the [8:16] administration, I'm biased. I think that [8:17] we are serious about this issue. If you [8:19] look at what Scott Bassen, who I'm going [8:20] to meet with in a couple of hours, [8:22] actually, uh what Scott Bassen has [8:24] talked about is, you know, let's be [8:25] realistic. We have we we inherited a $2 [8:28] trillion fiscal deficit. And you're not [8:31] going to get back to a balanced budget [8:33] by cutting $2 trillion out of a $7 [8:35] trillion budget overnight. What you can [8:37] do is you can cut smartly but also grow [8:41] and get the economy in a position where [8:43] that fiscal deficit is closer to 3% of [8:45] GDP. Now yes we got to make more [8:48] progress but if you look at what Scott [8:50] has done at the Treasury I think that we [8:52] are on pace to get to a point where we [8:54] can get the fiscal deficit to a [8:56] sustainable level and then of course you [8:57] get it to a sustainable level and you [8:59] can continue to make progress from [9:01] there. But it is certainly a very [9:03] serious problem, something that we're [9:04] very focused on. And I guess what I [9:06] would say to to markets is we've got a [9:08] secretary of the Treasury, but also a [9:09] president who are very focused on the [9:11] problem, but it's going to require a [9:12] long-term solution. Ideally, something [9:14] with some bipartisan consensus, which is [9:16] something we'll have to see about [9:18] because let's be honest, uh, a lot of [9:20] people in Congress, not just Democrats, [9:22] but a lot of people in Congress have not [9:24] shown a willingness to be serious about [9:25] spending. We have to change that. [9:27] >> Let's, um, let's maybe double click on [9:28] that, Mr. Vice President. There's one [9:30] one of the ways that we can get out of [9:31] this is through growth and productivity [9:35] growth. But there is this crazy dynamic [9:38] where it just seems like there are [9:39] forces many inside the United States um [9:42] that try to slow us down whether it's [9:45] data centers and you may have heard [9:47] yesterday but the president called in [9:48] and tried to help debunk it with Jensen [9:50] Meta uh was here debunking uh Microsoft [9:54] was here but it just seems like a [9:56] whack-a-mole problem of trying to [9:58] actually get the truth out. just talk to [10:00] us about [10:02] how we've ended up in this situation [10:04] where there are these forces that are [10:07] trying to effectively [10:09] lie or fear-monger to try to take power. [10:13] >> Yeah. So, this is something I think we [10:15] could spend an hour talking about. I [10:16] know we don't have that much time, [10:17] Chimath, but but fundamentally when I [10:20] see the backlash to data centers, what I [10:22] see is the the the the necessary the [10:25] inevitable consequence of the United [10:27] States not building enough power for a [10:29] generation. And so we've talked about [10:31] this before, but if if when I talk to [10:33] people, I obviously sort of I'm out [10:35] there campaigning a lot. I'm talking to [10:36] people a lot. Uh there there's [10:38] definitely some basic nimiism in the [10:40] anti-data center thing, but there's [10:42] also, you know, you talk to a guy who a [10:44] year ago his power bill was $290 a month [10:47] and now it's $580 a month. And the [10:50] reality is that in blue states where [10:52] we've made it impossible to build [10:55] additional electricity generation, [10:57] you're seeing a backlash when people [10:59] start paying additional power costs. [11:01] Now, my response to that is you can't [11:03] just stop building because of it. What [11:05] you've got to do is build the things [11:07] that you need, specifically power. So, [11:10] you know, Elon talks about this all the [11:11] time, but I talk about it, too. If you [11:13] look at the amount of power generated by [11:16] the PRC, the People's Republic of China, [11:18] and compare it to the amount of power [11:19] generated by the United States of [11:21] America in 2005, they crossed the line, [11:25] meaning they started to generate just a [11:27] little bit more power than we did in [11:29] 2005. And since then, we have [11:31] effectively flatlined. and the PRC now [11:34] generates three times as much [11:36] electricity as the United States of [11:38] America does. I think that a lot of our [11:40] problems um are downstream of that [11:43] fundamental problem and we just have to [11:46] build more. We have to build more power. [11:47] We I mean, you know, I I think we have [11:49] to have this vision in the United States [11:51] of electricity that is too cheap to [11:53] meter. And that's I think the way that [11:55] you push back against some of this [11:57] ridiculous um you know sort of [11:59] anti-building power comes from the [12:03] failure to generate the electricity that [12:05] we need. And I I just I don't understand [12:08] how we ever got here as a country. I [12:10] think the environmental movement [12:11] obviously has a lot to do with it, but [12:13] we've just got to build more power and [12:15] that's how we solve this problem [12:16] fundamentally. And then you know [12:18] obviously some of this gets into the [12:20] broader AI stuff Jamaimoth and you know [12:22] the president I think is very rightly [12:24] asking the question why is it that the [12:27] people who are at the frontier of the AI [12:30] economy are throwing up their hands and [12:33] saying well we've built Frankenstein and [12:36] the solution to Frankenstein apparently [12:38] is to create a one world governance [12:39] structure for artificial intelligence. [12:42] What I would say to those people, if [12:44] you're building Frankenstein, stop. Or [12:46] maybe build, you know, if if the cat is [12:48] out of the bag, then build the defensive [12:51] mechanism against Frankenstein. And, you [12:53] know, I I I I I don't know Daario well. [12:56] I I've read everything that he said over [12:58] the past couple of weeks. Everybody that [13:00] I know tells me that he's very earnest, [13:02] that this is a deeply held belief. It's [13:04] not cynical. It's not about regulatory [13:05] capture, that he genuinely cares about [13:07] this. But at the same time, I talk to [13:10] tech companies. I'm sure you guys talk [13:12] to a lot more tech companies than I do. [13:14] At the same time that you have this sort [13:17] of cyber hacking tool that's come out of [13:20] Anthropic's newest models, you have [13:22] companies that are desperate for the [13:24] defensive mechanisms to defend against [13:26] that cyber hacking tool and they're [13:28] being denied access to it. So if you're [13:30] going to create Frankenstein, don't come [13:32] to the government and say we need [13:34] regulation. look inward and accept that [13:37] if you're building Frankenstein, number [13:38] one, you should stop. And number two, [13:41] when the companies come to you and say, [13:42] "We need the tools to fight back against [13:44] Frankenstein," give them those tools. [13:46] >> Right. Oh, [13:46] >> it's incredibly common sensical. [13:49] Uh Brad and then maybe Sachs. Yep. [13:53] >> Mr. Vice President, great to see you. Um [13:55] you know, the president called in [13:57] yesterday. He's on top of the AI issue. [14:00] you you're working for somebody who's [14:01] the most incredibly entrepreneurial and [14:04] risk-taking president perhaps in the [14:06] last 50 years. I just had a at a you [14:09] know personal level how is it working [14:11] with somebody who is willing to take the [14:14] risk that you know some people you know [14:16] Jason criticized some of the things that [14:18] haven't happened in the first 20 months [14:21] but the fact of the matter is unlike a [14:23] lot of people who occupy that office who [14:25] are just looking to stay the course and [14:28] take the safe path he's taking a lot of [14:30] risks and then you have to help explain [14:32] some of those I would I would put Trump [14:34] accounts in that category the main [14:36] street agenda But, you know, just talk [14:38] to us a little bit at a personal level [14:40] how working with him, how hard it is to [14:42] keep up with his energy, his enthusiasm, [14:44] his entrepreneurialism. [14:47] >> Yeah, Brad, you know him well. He he [14:49] sleeps less than any person that I've [14:51] ever met. I don't sleep that much, but I [14:52] certainly sleep more than him. You know, [14:54] Scott Bassin and I always joke that [14:55] he'll call us at 2:30 in the morning and [14:57] he'll say, "Were you up?" And it's like, [14:59] "No, sir, I wasn't, but I am now. So, [15:01] let's let's talk about what's on your [15:02] mind." Uh, he's working at all hours of [15:04] the day. But but your point, Brad, is is [15:06] very well taken. He is certainly willing [15:10] to take risks. And I I I think, you [15:12] know, you ask what it's like working for [15:13] a guy like that. Well, one, it's never [15:15] boring. But two, he's constantly [15:18] probing, are we taking the easy path or [15:21] are we taking the right path? And yes, [15:23] maybe this thing is going to cause some [15:24] political backlash or maybe the payoff [15:26] is not going to be obvious until, you [15:28] know, two years from now, 5 years from [15:30] now, 10 years from now. But I think it's [15:32] the exact right mindset. You know, one [15:34] one of the frustrations I've had just [15:36] looking at the economy, you know, pretty [15:38] much my entire life is there's there's [15:40] been this division between true [15:42] entrepreneurs and managers, between [15:44] bureaucrats and people who are genuinely [15:46] innovative and willing to take risks. I [15:48] think that we've had way too many [15:49] caretaker presidents during my lifetime. [15:52] Uh, frankly, way too many caretaker CEOs [15:55] and not enough people who are genuinely [15:57] innovative and willing to take risks. [15:59] Obviously, he gets criticized for it [16:00] from time to time, but I'd much rather [16:02] have a president who's willing to take [16:04] those risks, who's willing to take on [16:05] the big projects. It's the only way I [16:08] think you're going to reverse America's [16:10] long-term decline is to be willing to [16:12] take those risks. Thank God for the past [16:14] 18 months, we've had a president willing [16:16] to do just that. [16:21] >> Uh Mr. Vice President, uh Jake forgot to [16:24] ask uh his normal gotcha question on [16:26] H1Bs. So, um, [16:28] >> well, that's because they took my advice [16:30] and they raised the price. You were in [16:31] sync on that one. [16:32] >> Um, it, you know, it's an issue that the [16:34] tech community cares about. At the same [16:36] time, we have learned that the program [16:38] was riddled with fraud. I'm curious what [16:39] can you give us an update on, you know, [16:41] where do those efforts stand? What, you [16:43] know, what's happening with that the [16:44] H-1Bs? [16:47] >> Yeah. No, this is the the vin diagram [16:49] overlap of Jason Calcconis and Steven [16:51] Miller. It's a very small area. [16:54] But but look man, we we we looked at the [16:58] fraud in the system and we said, you [17:00] know, one, Congress is not going to pass [17:02] a law changing this, there just isn't [17:04] the political will to do it. So what are [17:06] the things that we can do [17:06] administratively to ensure that if a [17:09] tech company is going to try to get an [17:10] H-1B visa, it it's an actual genius. [17:13] It's a person that is going to [17:14] significantly enrich the tech ecosystem [17:17] or the American economy. you know, [17:18] you're not just replacing one accountant [17:20] who makes $60,000 with a lower wage [17:23] foreign accountant who makes $45,000 a [17:25] year. That is not what the program [17:27] exists for. And so, we came up with this [17:29] idea to impose $100,000 fee. We're also [17:32] looking at various ways of preventing [17:34] companies that use H-1B visas from [17:37] laying off a bunch of American workers. [17:39] Uh so, you know, one of the the things [17:41] that I find just shocking about this is [17:43] you'll have a company that applies for [17:44] an H-1B and they'll say, "Oh, we're [17:46] desperate for workers. we can't find the [17:48] workers. And then you go and look at [17:50] their history and they've laid off 5,000 [17:52] people. Well, that's ridiculous. If [17:53] you're laying off American workers, you [17:55] shouldn't be going to the market [17:56] searching for foreign workers to replace [17:58] them. So, we're doing a lot within the [18:00] confines, of course, of what we're [18:02] allowed to do legally. We've gotten sued [18:04] on some of this stuff, but I think [18:06] fundamentally we're on the right on both [18:07] the law and the policy. The H1B should [18:10] not exist to replace American workers [18:13] with low-wage foreigners. It should [18:15] exist to enrich the American economy. [18:17] And that's exactly what we're trying to [18:19] make sure it does. [18:19] >> Mr. Vice President, can I can I ask um [18:23] you're you're I I think you're you're [18:25] titled the frauds are now. And just [18:27] going back to the the um the deficit [18:30] question, every week we're seeing these [18:32] videos. You know, we've got Nick Shirley [18:34] here this afternoon. I think he really [18:36] started this trend of some of the [18:37] citizen journalists going out and trying [18:39] to find the fraud in the system [18:40] themselves. And every week there's a new [18:42] story that's being uncovered that's just [18:43] mind-blowing. tens of billions of [18:45] dollars over and over again. How much [18:47] fraud do you think there? And and you [18:49] know this California highspeed rail, [18:50] there was a guy that got paid half a [18:52] billion dollars for not working. Some [18:54] billionaire in Italy who owns a football [18:56] team. I couldn't believe it. I I tracked [18:57] all this stuff and I'm like it just your [19:00] head starts to spin. How much of our $7 [19:02] trillion federal spending do you think [19:04] is tied up in fraud, in this kind of [19:07] system of waste and this corruption? And [19:10] what's your sense of the scale of the [19:12] the problem? [19:14] Yeah. So, to two quick things on that. [19:16] First of all, you know, Elon during the [19:18] height of Doge said that it was 20%, [19:20] that's $1.4 trillion. Uh whether it's [19:23] 10% or 20%, you're talking about [19:25] something on the scale of hundreds and [19:27] hundreds of billions of dollars. The [19:29] biggest problem with finding fraud is is [19:31] actually that the states where it's [19:34] worst are also the states that have the [19:36] least willingness to cooperate with what [19:38] we're doing. So when you look at some of [19:40] the bigger ticket items for fraud, you [19:42] know, you're looking at Medicare fraud [19:43] in California, people who are illegal, [19:46] people who aren't even like human [19:48] beings. They're just like a completely [19:51] madeup, you know, shell of a person. Uh [19:54] but but unfortunately, the the state of [19:56] California is not actually helping us [19:58] fight back against that particular [19:59] fraud. or we know that there are [20:01] hundreds of thousands maybe more illegal [20:04] aliens in Illinois, New York and [20:06] California who are on Medicaid. That [20:09] obviously is billions and billions of [20:11] dollars to provide health care uh to [20:13] those people. So the the the basic fraud [20:16] that exists is the big programs in [20:20] states that have allowed themselves to [20:22] be overrun by illegal immigration. [20:24] Another very good example, and this was [20:26] shocking to me when we came in and [20:28] started doing this work, is the way the [20:31] SNAP program, this is the food stamp [20:32] program that ensures that low-income [20:34] Americans have access to food that they [20:36] need. Obviously, one of the most [20:38] important things that we do in the [20:39] federal government is make sure that, [20:41] you know, poor kids can eat. But that [20:43] program is rife with fraud in part [20:45] because the way it works is, you know, [20:48] California bills us once a month for the [20:52] cost of their SNAP program. It's seven [20:54] or eight or 9 billion depending on the [20:56] month that we're talking about. So what [20:57] happens is the federal government wires [20:59] $9 billion to California, no questions [21:02] asked. So, it's not an exaggeration to [21:05] say that we have no ability to know who [21:07] is even on the SNAP program, whether [21:09] they're a real human being, whether [21:11] they're a legal resident of the United [21:13] States of America. And when we go to the [21:15] big blue states and say, "Why don't you [21:17] help us just confirm basic eligibility?" [21:19] We get totally push back. We we get no [21:22] cooperation on this basic fact of good [21:24] governance, confirming eligibility for [21:27] federal programs. So my guess is that if [21:29] the number is $700 billion, a few [21:32] hundred billion of that is in the blue [21:34] states and we could deal with it just by [21:37] checking eligibility criteria. We're [21:39] working on innovative ways to force [21:40] that. But it's actually legally much [21:43] harder than it should be to force the [21:44] blue states to comply with some basic [21:47] anti-fraud initiatives. [21:48] >> Uh JD, before we wrap here, I want to [21:50] ask you another hard question. Um this [21:52] one about our relationship with the [21:54] state of Israel and the president's [21:55] relationship with BB Netanyahu. Um many [21:58] people in the Republican party, MAGA are [22:01] now moving to a new party, America [22:03] first, America only. There's a rise in [22:06] anti-semitism and there's a persistent [22:09] belief amongst a lot of the people on [22:11] the right that maybe our foreign policy [22:14] is too influenced by the state of Israel [22:16] or BB Netanyahu. Can you take us into [22:19] the relationship right now where it [22:21] stands uh and and and the you know the [22:25] administration's position on [22:27] collaborating with Israel on a lot of [22:29] these military activities? [22:32] >> Yeah. You know what the president has [22:34] said, Jason, is obviously Israel has [22:37] been an important partner when it comes [22:38] to military technology, when it comes to [22:40] intelligence sharing, but also sometimes [22:42] the United States doesn't always agree [22:44] with Israel. And I think that more than [22:45] frankly any president in the last 40 [22:47] years, he has shown a willingness uh to [22:50] actually part ways with BB Netanyahu [22:53] when he feels like the interests of the [22:54] American people are different from the [22:56] interests of of the government of [22:58] Israel. And I find it a little ironic, [23:00] Jason, that you have Democrats [23:02] criticizing Donald Trump for his [23:04] relationship with BB when Donald Trump [23:06] is the one president of the last 40 [23:08] years who's been willing to say, you [23:09] know what, yeah, BB's a good partner, [23:10] but also BB and I have a different [23:12] opinion on this, or BB's wrong about [23:14] this, or maybe BB's right about this [23:16] from the perspective of Israel, but the [23:18] American people need us to go in a [23:20] different direction. So I I I just think [23:22] that rooting this relationship like all [23:25] relationships in America's interest is [23:28] the way to actually have a rational [23:30] conversation here because when you're [23:32] talking about whether a given policy is [23:35] in America's interest and you keep [23:37] yourself laser focused on that, I think [23:39] that's how you make sure that the [23:40] American people know that you're [23:41] fighting for them. But I also think that [23:43] it allows us to actually rationally [23:45] focus and force ourselves to have a [23:48] conversation about when something that [23:50] maybe sounded good or maybe has become a [23:53] cliche or a slogan for the past 20 or 30 [23:55] years. Well, maybe we have to do [23:57] something different now. And I I think [23:58] that that's how we have to approach not [24:00] just this relationship but all [24:02] relationships. By by the way, you you [24:04] see a similar push back when the [24:06] president makes the argument that he's [24:07] made about NATO, which is yes, obviously [24:10] a lot of important relationships, a lot [24:12] of important partnerships in NATO, but [24:14] that doesn't mean that we're going to [24:16] completely make our European foreign [24:18] policy subservient to NATO in the same [24:21] way that we cannot let our Middle [24:22] Eastern foreign policy be subservient to [24:25] the state of Israel. We're going to work [24:26] with people when we work with them. [24:28] We're going to disagree when we [24:29] disagree. And we're going to pursue [24:30] America's interest. That's the only way [24:32] to have a rational foreign policy. [24:34] >> I know Trum wants to get one last [24:35] question in here. Um, just before he [24:38] does, uh, tell us, how's Marco Rubio [24:41] doing in his job so far? Can you rate [24:42] his performance in the first two years? [24:47] >> He's doing great, man. I love Marco. [24:49] Jason, the the funniest media narrative [24:52] is that somehow Marco and I are like [24:53] hyper competitive and we sit around like [24:55] thinking about, you know, how we're [24:57] going to run for president against each [24:58] other in 2028. Like I I literally What [25:01] time is it right now? It's 2:25. I have [25:02] a call with Marco in five minutes. So [25:05] Chimat's got to ask his question first. [25:07] I got to answer it quickly and then [25:08] Marco and I have to go do the business [25:10] of the American people. He's a great [25:12] dude. He's a great human being. He's [25:14] doing a great job, too. [25:16] >> So maybe maybe as we wrap, um there's a [25:19] very consequential midterm coming up. I [25:21] think uh a poll on one day will say that [25:24] the Republicans are going to keep, you [25:26] know, everything as is. the poll on the [25:28] other day say it's going to be a [25:30] socialist sweep of America. It's very [25:32] complicated, but can you just give us [25:34] some insight into what's actually [25:35] happening on the ground and what is the [25:38] message that needs to be delivered so [25:39] that folks can uh come to the right [25:42] conclusion November? [25:44] >> You know, I guess I have two basic [25:46] messages there is a lot of good that [25:49] we've done over the past 18 months. We [25:51] cut taxes bigly. We cut taxes on [25:53] overtime, social security, and tips. [25:55] Those are tax cuts for middle American [25:58] workers, not just for the elites in in [26:00] Washington and New York City. Uh we've [26:03] had an amazing success with the border [26:05] with immigration. We've pursued H-1B [26:07] reform that prioritizes American workers [26:10] over foreign nationals. There's a lot of [26:12] good that's been done, but there's a lot [26:14] of work left to do. Don't give power to [26:16] the people who cause the problems that [26:18] we're fixing. give us another chance or [26:20] give us another couple of years to [26:22] continue to work on the amazing things [26:23] that we've been doing for the past 2 [26:25] years. And the second argument I'd make [26:27] is even if you don't agree with us on [26:29] every issue, the other party is consumed [26:31] by craziness. They're consumed by people [26:35] who want to steal everything, who want [26:37] to give the country over to illegal [26:38] aliens and criminals. They actively brag [26:41] about about it. I mean, I've heard a lot [26:42] of crazy stuff, guys, over the past, you [26:44] know, few years in politics. But when I [26:46] heard somebody running for Congress in [26:48] New York say that July 4th was about the [26:50] liberation of Puerto Rico and Palestine, [26:53] I thought to myself, this person needs [26:55] to be checked into a mental hospital [26:56] hospital, not given a seat in Congress. [26:59] So to the American people, I'd say send [27:01] these people packing. Put them in the [27:02] middle hospital. Do not put them in [27:05] Congress. Because even if you don't [27:06] agree with us on every policy issue, at [27:08] least we're motivated by common sense [27:10] and American interest, they're just [27:12] motivated by left-wing interest groups [27:15] and radicalism, and they're going to do [27:17] a very bad job if we give them power. [27:19] >> All right, ladies and gentlemen, Vice [27:20] President J. [27:22] >> Thank you all. Good to see you guys.