Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

A Yale-educated senator just dismantled Boeing's CEO in under 90 seconds using nothing but math. Senator Josh - "What is it that you get paid currently?" Dave - "That's well disclosed in our proxy documents." Senator Josh - "Well, let me help you out. It's $32.8 million this year....

entreprneursonx's profile picture

Entrepreneurs on X

6,339 subscribers

760,744 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политикаФинансы
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

An angry caller confronts Dave Ramsey for calling “Infinite Banking” a scam only to walk directly into a brutal financial reality check. ​Caller: “I am calling in response to a video I saw recently that you claimed infinite banking concept was a scam and actually got quite pissed off about it. I do not agree with that, and certain points that you made in that video. And I have set up a policy for my son when he was 1 years old, he's 5 now. Has a 500 thousand dollar face value. We pay 5,373 dollars a year for 13 years, and it's paid up at that point. There's a few points that I wanted to discuss that I just didn't agree with. One of the main things was that... so you claim that the cash value dies with you, and you only get the face value paid out.” ​Dave: “That's true. That is.” ​Caller: “Well, it's not true if you reinvest the dividends back into the policy.” ​Dave: “Dividend reinvestment is not cash value. Dividend reinvestment is because you have a mutual company, and the policyholders are the owners of the company. And so the profits from the company come to the policyholder, and they use that to buy paid up additions. That is not the same as keeping your cash value. That's buying extra insurance with your overpayment.” ​Caller: “But it still works out to be having a cash value much greater than the $69,849 we put into it.” ​Dave: “But the actual cash value, not the paid up additions... the actual cash value dies with you.” ​Caller: “No, because—” ​Dave: “Yes it does. I think... oh, OK.” ​Caller: “But your death benefit is larger than your cash value, so for me, I looked at it—” ​Dave: “Because you bought more insurance! You know what a paid up addition is? A paid up addition is buying additional insurance. I understand that's why you're getting more at death. Not because you got your cash value, but because you used your policy dividends to buy additional insurance. Right? But that's different than getting your cash value. If you took those policy dividends and went and bought a term insurance policy for 100,000, well, you'd get 100,000. But that's not your cash value.” ​Caller: “Well, I have a term policy.” ​Dave: “I know, but you missed my point. You're talking about... you use the policy dividends. You use the money they send to you because you're in a mutual company to buy additional insurance.” ​Caller: “Yes, paid up additions, yeah.” ​Dave: “Yeah, if you'd buy a term policy on the side for $100,000 instead, with that same money, you would get $100,000 more than your face value. But that's not your cash value, that's additional insurance. They're different.” ​Caller: “But right... they are different. In term, you don't have cash value to borrow again.” ​Dave: “I'm aware of that. But your point was that you don't lose the cash value, and my point is 100% of the time, by definition, you lose the cash value.”
2:49

An angry caller confronts Dave Ramsey for calling “Infinite Banking” a scam only to walk directly into a brutal financial reality check. ​Caller: “I am calling in response to a video I saw recently that you claimed infinite banking concept was a scam and actually got quite pissed off about it. I do not agree with that, and certain points that you made in that video. And I have set up a policy for my son when he was 1 years old, he's 5 now. Has a 500 thousand dollar face value. We pay 5,373 dollars a year for 13 years, and it's paid up at that point. There's a few points that I wanted to discuss that I just didn't agree with. One of the main things was that... so you claim that the cash value dies with you, and you only get the face value paid out.” ​Dave: “That's true. That is.” ​Caller: “Well, it's not true if you reinvest the dividends back into the policy.” ​Dave: “Dividend reinvestment is not cash value. Dividend reinvestment is because you have a mutual company, and the policyholders are the owners of the company. And so the profits from the company come to the policyholder, and they use that to buy paid up additions. That is not the same as keeping your cash value. That's buying extra insurance with your overpayment.” ​Caller: “But it still works out to be having a cash value much greater than the $69,849 we put into it.” ​Dave: “But the actual cash value, not the paid up additions... the actual cash value dies with you.” ​Caller: “No, because—” ​Dave: “Yes it does. I think... oh, OK.” ​Caller: “But your death benefit is larger than your cash value, so for me, I looked at it—” ​Dave: “Because you bought more insurance! You know what a paid up addition is? A paid up addition is buying additional insurance. I understand that's why you're getting more at death. Not because you got your cash value, but because you used your policy dividends to buy additional insurance. Right? But that's different than getting your cash value. If you took those policy dividends and went and bought a term insurance policy for 100,000, well, you'd get 100,000. But that's not your cash value.” ​Caller: “Well, I have a term policy.” ​Dave: “I know, but you missed my point. You're talking about... you use the policy dividends. You use the money they send to you because you're in a mutual company to buy additional insurance.” ​Caller: “Yes, paid up additions, yeah.” ​Dave: “Yeah, if you'd buy a term policy on the side for $100,000 instead, with that same money, you would get $100,000 more than your face value. But that's not your cash value, that's additional insurance. They're different.” ​Caller: “But right... they are different. In term, you don't have cash value to borrow again.” ​Dave: “I'm aware of that. But your point was that you don't lose the cash value, and my point is 100% of the time, by definition, you lose the cash value.”

Mide

65,566 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Kevin O'Leary explains why he avoids hiring workaholics. "I don't hire workaholics. If you look at great managers, great investors, great entrepreneurs, you're going to find a common trait, what they do with their spare time. And you're going to find out it's something in the arts or it's something in sports, something that has nothing to do with business. Because you need the balance in your brain between the chaos of the arts and the discipline of business." PS. We post daily content strictly for dedicated entrepreneurs, so if you’re one of them, make sure to follow us Entrepreneurs on X for more. Like and repost if you found value in this post:
0:22

Kevin O'Leary explains why he avoids hiring workaholics. "I don't hire workaholics. If you look at great managers, great investors, great entrepreneurs, you're going to find a common trait, what they do with their spare time. And you're going to find out it's something in the arts or it's something in sports, something that has nothing to do with business. Because you need the balance in your brain between the chaos of the arts and the discipline of business." PS. We post daily content strictly for dedicated entrepreneurs, so if you’re one of them, make sure to follow us Entrepreneurs on X for more. Like and repost if you found value in this post:

Entrepreneurs on X

33,027 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Jordan Peterson: "If you can't fix your room, you can't fix your life" "Why should you even bother improving yourself? The answer is something like: so you don't suffer anymore stupidly than you have to. And maybe so others don't have to either. It's not some casual self-help doctrine. If you don't organize yourself properly, you'll pay for it. In a big way. And so will the people around you." Peterson continues: "You can say, 'Well, I don't care about that.' But that's actually not true, you do care about it. Because if you're in pain, you will care about it. It's very rare that you can find someone in excruciating pain who would say, 'Well, it would be no better if I was out of this.' Pain brings the idea that it would be better if it didn't exist along with it. It's incontrovertible." On how to start: "Look around for something that bothers you and see if you can fix it. You can do this in a room. Sit in your bedroom and think: 'If I wanted to spend ten minutes making this room better, what would I have to do?' You have to ask yourself that, it's a genuine question. And things will pop out. There's a stack of papers bugging you. Some rubbish behind your computer monitor you haven't attended to for six months. Cables tangled up." He explains why this matters: "If you were coming to see me for psychotherapy, the easiest thing would be to get you to organize your room. You think, is that psychotherapy? It depends on how you conceive the limits of your being. Start where you can start. If something announces itself as in need of repair that you could repair, fix it. Fix a hundred things like that, your life will be a lot different." On fixing what you repeat every day: "People tend to think of their daily routines as trivial. You get up, brush your teeth, have breakfast. Those probably constitute 50% of your life. People think, they're mundane, I don't need to pay attention to them. No, that's exactly wrong. The things you do every day are the most important things you do. Hands down. Just do the arithmetic." On staying within your competence: "Sometimes you don't know how to fix something. Imagine you're walking down the street and there's a guy who's alcoholic and schizophrenic and has been homeless for ten years. That's a problem. It would be good if you could fix it, but you haven't got a clue. You walk around that and go find something you could fix. Just because something announces itself as in need of repair doesn't mean it's you, right then and there, who should repair it. You have to have some humility. You don't walk up to a helicopter that isn't working and just start tinkering away." Peterson shares the key insight: "As soon as you give your mind a genuine aim, it'll reconfigure the world in keeping with that aim. That's actually how you see to begin with. You've all seen the video where you watch basketballs being tossed back and forth, and while you're doing that, a gorilla walks into the middle of the video and you don't see it. If you thought about that experiment for five years, that would be about the right amount of time to spend thinking about it." He explains what it reveals: "What it shows you is that you see what you aim at. If you can get one thing through your head, that would be a good one. You see what you aim at. One inference you might draw from that is: be careful what you aim at. What you aim at determines the way the world manifests itself to you. So if the world is manifesting itself in a very negative way, one thing to ask is: are you aiming at the right thing?"
6:59

Jordan Peterson: "If you can't fix your room, you can't fix your life" "Why should you even bother improving yourself? The answer is something like: so you don't suffer anymore stupidly than you have to. And maybe so others don't have to either. It's not some casual self-help doctrine. If you don't organize yourself properly, you'll pay for it. In a big way. And so will the people around you." Peterson continues: "You can say, 'Well, I don't care about that.' But that's actually not true, you do care about it. Because if you're in pain, you will care about it. It's very rare that you can find someone in excruciating pain who would say, 'Well, it would be no better if I was out of this.' Pain brings the idea that it would be better if it didn't exist along with it. It's incontrovertible." On how to start: "Look around for something that bothers you and see if you can fix it. You can do this in a room. Sit in your bedroom and think: 'If I wanted to spend ten minutes making this room better, what would I have to do?' You have to ask yourself that, it's a genuine question. And things will pop out. There's a stack of papers bugging you. Some rubbish behind your computer monitor you haven't attended to for six months. Cables tangled up." He explains why this matters: "If you were coming to see me for psychotherapy, the easiest thing would be to get you to organize your room. You think, is that psychotherapy? It depends on how you conceive the limits of your being. Start where you can start. If something announces itself as in need of repair that you could repair, fix it. Fix a hundred things like that, your life will be a lot different." On fixing what you repeat every day: "People tend to think of their daily routines as trivial. You get up, brush your teeth, have breakfast. Those probably constitute 50% of your life. People think, they're mundane, I don't need to pay attention to them. No, that's exactly wrong. The things you do every day are the most important things you do. Hands down. Just do the arithmetic." On staying within your competence: "Sometimes you don't know how to fix something. Imagine you're walking down the street and there's a guy who's alcoholic and schizophrenic and has been homeless for ten years. That's a problem. It would be good if you could fix it, but you haven't got a clue. You walk around that and go find something you could fix. Just because something announces itself as in need of repair doesn't mean it's you, right then and there, who should repair it. You have to have some humility. You don't walk up to a helicopter that isn't working and just start tinkering away." Peterson shares the key insight: "As soon as you give your mind a genuine aim, it'll reconfigure the world in keeping with that aim. That's actually how you see to begin with. You've all seen the video where you watch basketballs being tossed back and forth, and while you're doing that, a gorilla walks into the middle of the video and you don't see it. If you thought about that experiment for five years, that would be about the right amount of time to spend thinking about it." He explains what it reveals: "What it shows you is that you see what you aim at. If you can get one thing through your head, that would be a good one. You see what you aim at. One inference you might draw from that is: be careful what you aim at. What you aim at determines the way the world manifests itself to you. So if the world is manifesting itself in a very negative way, one thing to ask is: are you aiming at the right thing?"

Jaynit

68,799 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Senator Josh Hawley fires back with epic one-liner after Senator Mark Kelly claimed the Iran conflict is “not going well.” “Does anybody really think these people are ever going to try to make a nuke again? What would they make it with…like charcoal?” WATTERS: “You have one of your colleagues, Senator Kelly, saying the war’s not going well. How could he say that?” HAWLEY: “Well, I would just say this, Jesse. If you look at our overriding priority here, which is to deny nukes to these crazy people, how can you look at what’s happened in the last year…I mean you had Trump taking out the nukes back in June.” “Now you’ve had the last ten days.” “Does anybody really think these people are ever going to try to make a nuke again?” “What would they make it with? Like charcoal?” “I mean this is an overriding success. Our military is astounding the world.” “I agree with what the president said last night. You look at all the success we’ve had in the last ten days. This thing is a victory.” “I think we should be hailing our military as the heroes they are. We ought to be thanking them for their service and we ought to be saying we’ve achieved our objectives here, big time.”
0:47

Senator Josh Hawley fires back with epic one-liner after Senator Mark Kelly claimed the Iran conflict is “not going well.” “Does anybody really think these people are ever going to try to make a nuke again? What would they make it with…like charcoal?” WATTERS: “You have one of your colleagues, Senator Kelly, saying the war’s not going well. How could he say that?” HAWLEY: “Well, I would just say this, Jesse. If you look at our overriding priority here, which is to deny nukes to these crazy people, how can you look at what’s happened in the last year…I mean you had Trump taking out the nukes back in June.” “Now you’ve had the last ten days.” “Does anybody really think these people are ever going to try to make a nuke again?” “What would they make it with? Like charcoal?” “I mean this is an overriding success. Our military is astounding the world.” “I agree with what the president said last night. You look at all the success we’ve had in the last ten days. This thing is a victory.” “I think we should be hailing our military as the heroes they are. We ought to be thanking them for their service and we ought to be saying we’ve achieved our objectives here, big time.”

Overton

307,534 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Dave Ramsey tells a 26-year-old millionaire to skip the prenup and pay off his fiancée's $150,000 debt instead "If I were in your shoes, I would get so comfortable with this lady in order to marry her that I don't need a prenup. You don't have enough net worth to fool with it" The debt: "she will be coming out of school with about 120,000 to 150,000 in debt" The solution: "you got 350,000 in a college account, you can use it for your spouse, and I'd pay off that debt in about 20 seconds" The problem with prenups: "it's kind of got one foot in the boat, one on the dock... I want you to go all in. What it does, it keeps people from going deep" The commitment: "the only chance you have in a culture that hates marriage for your marriage to last is you gotta be willing to die for 'em. You gotta be willing to take a bullet for 'em" "If you can't get $600,000 worth of comfortable with somebody, you don't need to marry them"
2:24

Dave Ramsey tells a 26-year-old millionaire to skip the prenup and pay off his fiancée's $150,000 debt instead "If I were in your shoes, I would get so comfortable with this lady in order to marry her that I don't need a prenup. You don't have enough net worth to fool with it" The debt: "she will be coming out of school with about 120,000 to 150,000 in debt" The solution: "you got 350,000 in a college account, you can use it for your spouse, and I'd pay off that debt in about 20 seconds" The problem with prenups: "it's kind of got one foot in the boat, one on the dock... I want you to go all in. What it does, it keeps people from going deep" The commitment: "the only chance you have in a culture that hates marriage for your marriage to last is you gotta be willing to die for 'em. You gotta be willing to take a bullet for 'em" "If you can't get $600,000 worth of comfortable with somebody, you don't need to marry them"

3rdeye👁️🇪🇸

42,763 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Caller: We're doing our taxes and last year we had $316,000 in capital losses. We were told that we could only deduct $3,000 a year on our taxes, but I did the math and that would take 115 years Dave Ramsey: So it sounds like the type of losses that you have is what's causing the write-off—the inability to write them off, because you don't have any income that is of similar sources to the losses. ​Caller: Right. Dave Ramsey: It sounds like you need short-term income on investments, not long-term capital gains on investments to offset this. What was this from? What's the loss from? Caller: from trading. From doing trades. ​Dave Ramsey: Jesus. What is your household income? Caller: For last year, it was only, $38,000. This year it's going up. My husband got a new job starting at $50,000 plus. Dave Ramsey: Where did you have $300,000 that you could lose? Caller: We had it in an inherited IRA. I was having problems with my pregnancy, so he started working from home trading because he was doing it and doing well. ​Dave Ramsey: Here's the problem. If we get too nitcy and nuanced and technical in order to get some benefit from this write-off, but it exposes him to the very beast that just about killed him the first time, I don't like that. So your husband being anywhere near a brokerage account sounds like suicide to me. I don't know in your household how you're going to create gains on investments to offset losses on investments to get the benefit of this that is substantial. I don't know how to do that. What I would do if I were in your shoes... but before I put your family at further risk playing with the same snakes that already bit you, I would just say, "Screw it, forget it, it's just gone."
4:22

Caller: We're doing our taxes and last year we had $316,000 in capital losses. We were told that we could only deduct $3,000 a year on our taxes, but I did the math and that would take 115 years Dave Ramsey: So it sounds like the type of losses that you have is what's causing the write-off—the inability to write them off, because you don't have any income that is of similar sources to the losses. ​Caller: Right. Dave Ramsey: It sounds like you need short-term income on investments, not long-term capital gains on investments to offset this. What was this from? What's the loss from? Caller: from trading. From doing trades. ​Dave Ramsey: Jesus. What is your household income? Caller: For last year, it was only, $38,000. This year it's going up. My husband got a new job starting at $50,000 plus. Dave Ramsey: Where did you have $300,000 that you could lose? Caller: We had it in an inherited IRA. I was having problems with my pregnancy, so he started working from home trading because he was doing it and doing well. ​Dave Ramsey: Here's the problem. If we get too nitcy and nuanced and technical in order to get some benefit from this write-off, but it exposes him to the very beast that just about killed him the first time, I don't like that. So your husband being anywhere near a brokerage account sounds like suicide to me. I don't know in your household how you're going to create gains on investments to offset losses on investments to get the benefit of this that is substantial. I don't know how to do that. What I would do if I were in your shoes... but before I put your family at further risk playing with the same snakes that already bit you, I would just say, "Screw it, forget it, it's just gone."

Traeyz ♠️

54,836 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

🚨 WOW! Tucker Carlson carried out a STUNNING takedown of abortion "If you can kill CHILDREN who are in the way, you can kill ELDERLY who are in the way. In the end? They'll be killing US who are in the way!" "Abortion is RITUALISTIC [killing of children]...they had an ABORTION TRUCK outside the Democratic Convention." "It's just like, 'no, abortion is the only right you have. It's all you have. You don't have the right to keep them from jabbing a needle in your arm with some unknown poison made by Pfizer. You don't have that right.'" "'You don't have the right to say what you really think.' The only right you have is to M*RDER your own KIDS? That's dark, dude. Listen to yourself! That's the saddest thing that could ever happen." "All that matters is having children and your children are all that will matter to you. I don't care what you say. I've lived it. I know that's true." "Anyone that's like, oh, just kill your children? [...] It's just GROTESQUE. It's shocking." "I know a million people who've had abortions. I don't know one who's happy about it." 🫳🎤
3:56

🚨 WOW! Tucker Carlson carried out a STUNNING takedown of abortion "If you can kill CHILDREN who are in the way, you can kill ELDERLY who are in the way. In the end? They'll be killing US who are in the way!" "Abortion is RITUALISTIC [killing of children]...they had an ABORTION TRUCK outside the Democratic Convention." "It's just like, 'no, abortion is the only right you have. It's all you have. You don't have the right to keep them from jabbing a needle in your arm with some unknown poison made by Pfizer. You don't have that right.'" "'You don't have the right to say what you really think.' The only right you have is to M*RDER your own KIDS? That's dark, dude. Listen to yourself! That's the saddest thing that could ever happen." "All that matters is having children and your children are all that will matter to you. I don't care what you say. I've lived it. I know that's true." "Anyone that's like, oh, just kill your children? [...] It's just GROTESQUE. It's shocking." "I know a million people who've had abortions. I don't know one who's happy about it." 🫳🎤

Eric Daugherty

147,428 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

George's Post-Race Interview🏁 "Well, I was more frustrated in the race situation. I don't understand how three drivers can cut the first corner and just continue in the position they entered. It's like allowing you to risk everything that you just have to get out of jail, free card, if you get it wrong. So, and then obviously Max and Lewis, when they came together, Lewis got the penalty, rightly so, but Max was off the track, came back on in the wrong place, wrong time for me, and I lost three positions. And obviously I was pretty frustrated, but it all stemmed from that one. Well, I think it holds me down to the circuit. If there is this get out of jail free card, if that was gravel, no one would be there. We've seen it almost every year we've been here. I think last year, Charles the year before, Lewis 10 years ago, it's like a lawnmower racing. So, I don't know, something needs to change there. As I said, if you can just send it down the outside, you can either make it stick, or you just cut the grass and you return in the position you were in before, that's not really how it should be." #F1 #MexicoGP
2:09

George's Post-Race Interview🏁 "Well, I was more frustrated in the race situation. I don't understand how three drivers can cut the first corner and just continue in the position they entered. It's like allowing you to risk everything that you just have to get out of jail, free card, if you get it wrong. So, and then obviously Max and Lewis, when they came together, Lewis got the penalty, rightly so, but Max was off the track, came back on in the wrong place, wrong time for me, and I lost three positions. And obviously I was pretty frustrated, but it all stemmed from that one. Well, I think it holds me down to the circuit. If there is this get out of jail free card, if that was gravel, no one would be there. We've seen it almost every year we've been here. I think last year, Charles the year before, Lewis 10 years ago, it's like a lawnmower racing. So, I don't know, something needs to change there. As I said, if you can just send it down the outside, you can either make it stick, or you just cut the grass and you return in the position you were in before, that's not really how it should be." #F1 #MexicoGP

stas⁶³🏎️ | GR🥇

236,453 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

🚨 JUST IN: Tim Burchett with the HILARIOUS RESPONSE after Bernie Sanders opposed the SAVE America Act by saying, "I don't know how to get my birth certificate!" "If you don't know the Google search, Bernie, that's G double O G L E. If you'll click it and then type in, after you get it up at the top, 'how to get a birth certificate in New York.'" 🤣 "And guess what? It popped right up!" "The vital records department. And then you just scroll down and it says birth certificate, oddly enough. Crazy talk." "And then I clicked on that and it went through what you need to do. And then you can even use your credit card, which I'm sure you as a capitalist will have a credit card." "Or if you don't, I'm sure one of your many staffers will have that. And all you got to do is fill it out. And dadgum, guess what? They'll mail it to you, Bernie. It's crazy talk." "Or they can, I think they can even send one to you online. I mean, it's just incredible. I was perplexed on this whole issue that we were causing great consternation on you." "So I would encourage you to do that, Bernie. If you don't know how to do that, ask one of your many staffers and I'm sure they will assist you." "It's a very simple process, Senator. And there's no reason that you don't get in line with about 85% of your constituents that think you, in fact, should be an American citizen to vote and show proof of that with a birth certificate!"
2:23

🚨 JUST IN: Tim Burchett with the HILARIOUS RESPONSE after Bernie Sanders opposed the SAVE America Act by saying, "I don't know how to get my birth certificate!" "If you don't know the Google search, Bernie, that's G double O G L E. If you'll click it and then type in, after you get it up at the top, 'how to get a birth certificate in New York.'" 🤣 "And guess what? It popped right up!" "The vital records department. And then you just scroll down and it says birth certificate, oddly enough. Crazy talk." "And then I clicked on that and it went through what you need to do. And then you can even use your credit card, which I'm sure you as a capitalist will have a credit card." "Or if you don't, I'm sure one of your many staffers will have that. And all you got to do is fill it out. And dadgum, guess what? They'll mail it to you, Bernie. It's crazy talk." "Or they can, I think they can even send one to you online. I mean, it's just incredible. I was perplexed on this whole issue that we were causing great consternation on you." "So I would encourage you to do that, Bernie. If you don't know how to do that, ask one of your many staffers and I'm sure they will assist you." "It's a very simple process, Senator. And there's no reason that you don't get in line with about 85% of your constituents that think you, in fact, should be an American citizen to vote and show proof of that with a birth certificate!"

Eric Daugherty

746,695 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

🚨 WOW! House Oversight Chair James Comer just WENT OFF on the Senate Republicans who are allowing the SAVE America Act to die "ARE YOU THAT WEAK?! That's my question to ANY Republican senator — to where if you vote for a valid ID to vote, you're gonna get beat in your home state? IF YOU'RE THAT WEAK, you don't need to BE a US senator!" "I hope the Senate gets it together and figure out something we can pass to give the American people confidence in the integrity of our elections!" Be a Leader, John Thune, and GET THE VOTES!
1:15

🚨 WOW! House Oversight Chair James Comer just WENT OFF on the Senate Republicans who are allowing the SAVE America Act to die "ARE YOU THAT WEAK?! That's my question to ANY Republican senator — to where if you vote for a valid ID to vote, you're gonna get beat in your home state? IF YOU'RE THAT WEAK, you don't need to BE a US senator!" "I hope the Senate gets it together and figure out something we can pass to give the American people confidence in the integrity of our elections!" Be a Leader, John Thune, and GET THE VOTES!

Eric Daugherty

288,000 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Important: Who is Opposing the UAPDA? "It's staff! And it's like, who elected you? You were not elected!" ~Burlison "I cannot believe that I am sponsoring the language that Senator Schumer also is sponsoring." ~Burlison ~ Burlison: "We're trying to get UAP Disclosure Acts put on the National Defense Authorization Act. We are facing difficulties, and I mean, it's so frustrating, because it's not members [of Congress]. I don't, at least, if it is members, they're not coming to me and saying, 'Hey, I'm not allowing your amendment.' "It's staff! And it's like, who elected you? You were not elected!' I mean, for you to be able to deny an elected official whose...my job is to answer to the people, and you're gonna deny me the ability to get this amendment, at least even offered, is unacceptable. "And so, right now we're trying to get that made in order, so that when it comes to the floor, at least we get an opportunity to have a vote on the UAP Disclosure Act! And then you'll know who supports it and who doesn't. "But I've gotta get the Intelligence Committee to approve that. And, so any help, André Carson, would be greatly appreciated. If you could lean on our chairman and others, that would be fantastic, but we've gotta get it made in order. And if we get out of the House, I think that we're halfway there. "And then we'll...I think we've got allies in the Senate, whether it'. And I cannot believe that I am sponsoring the language that Senator Schumer also is sponsoring (laughter and applause). But what's right is right, and truth is truth. And we're all Americans, and that's why this is such a common-sense thing. And the only thing that's gonna stop it is these staffers who are killing things behind the scenes in the cover of darkness. And so, that's what we're facing right now, so your help getting vocal on this is probably the only way we're going to get it done."
2:06

Important: Who is Opposing the UAPDA? "It's staff! And it's like, who elected you? You were not elected!" ~Burlison "I cannot believe that I am sponsoring the language that Senator Schumer also is sponsoring." ~Burlison ~ Burlison: "We're trying to get UAP Disclosure Acts put on the National Defense Authorization Act. We are facing difficulties, and I mean, it's so frustrating, because it's not members [of Congress]. I don't, at least, if it is members, they're not coming to me and saying, 'Hey, I'm not allowing your amendment.' "It's staff! And it's like, who elected you? You were not elected!' I mean, for you to be able to deny an elected official whose...my job is to answer to the people, and you're gonna deny me the ability to get this amendment, at least even offered, is unacceptable. "And so, right now we're trying to get that made in order, so that when it comes to the floor, at least we get an opportunity to have a vote on the UAP Disclosure Act! And then you'll know who supports it and who doesn't. "But I've gotta get the Intelligence Committee to approve that. And, so any help, André Carson, would be greatly appreciated. If you could lean on our chairman and others, that would be fantastic, but we've gotta get it made in order. And if we get out of the House, I think that we're halfway there. "And then we'll...I think we've got allies in the Senate, whether it'. And I cannot believe that I am sponsoring the language that Senator Schumer also is sponsoring (laughter and applause). But what's right is right, and truth is truth. And we're all Americans, and that's why this is such a common-sense thing. And the only thing that's gonna stop it is these staffers who are killing things behind the scenes in the cover of darkness. And so, that's what we're facing right now, so your help getting vocal on this is probably the only way we're going to get it done."

Joe Murgia

11,652 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

UFO Revolution: S2E3 - 2027 and the Approaching Craft. Is it a Lie? "You're gonna be told that there is a craft on its way to Earth. That 100 f**king percent is the lie you are going to be told." ~Corbell (Well, I was not expecting this. And right now, I don't know what to think. But we all know it's been hinted at by various folks, including Lue Elizondo. So what's going on?) ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Your government now wants you to know one truth, and that truth is that UFOs are real. They've already done told you. Sometimes, when you want somebody to know a truth, it's so you can set them up to believe a lie, and that's coming. I have zero doubt that lie is coming." Producer: "What is the lie?" Corbell: "Specifically, you want me to say it right now, for real, real? On camera, to be put in the show?" Producer: "Yes." Corbell: "Okay. Problem with that: If we tell the lie before it's told, they can adapt. That wouldn't be wise. I'll tell you privately, but I would really think about if you want to put this in your show. For real. That's a real thing I'm telling you. So, will you think about it before putting it in your show?" Producer: "Absolutely." Corbell: "Okay. So UFOs are real, and they've been here a long time, and that's the truth. But the lie is coming. All indications, like ALL of them, is that that lie is going to be that there is a craft slowly making its way to us here on Earth. And that is the lie they're gonna want you to believe. "It's nuanced, how they explain that, the nature of that threat. But that 100 f**king percent is the lie you are going to be told. You even got a date. People been whispering a date for a long time now. I know where that lie comes from. I know, specifically, what document from the 70s initiated the idea of that lie. A classified document. That is the lie you will be told. You're gonna be told that there is a craft on its way to Earth. That's the lie. "Maybe I'm wrong. Hope I'm wrong. I sent you two texts today with a year (Messages showing 2027 are shown on a cell phone). Not from me. Nope, I'm not gonna propagate that lie. I'm not gonna be part of it, I'm not going to say it to the camera. Everybody knows. Just start paying attention. And they'll change the date - especially if they see this - things will change. Because maybe I'm trustworthy, maybe I'm worthy of your trust, maybe I've told you the truth the whole way through it and now and you can verify it. If that's the case, then I'm f**king dangerous. "You've been told the truth about UFOs for a long time now. It's been pretty orchestrated, it's been pretty clear, and it's using people that are telling the truth and wanna tell the truth. Ultimately, they want you to know something. They want you to know UFOs are real. Thank God, we're finally there, we're all there now. They want you to know the truth. But why [do] they want you to know that truth now. I hope I'm wrong, but it's terrifying. Think about it "Maybe it's good to get ahead of it, call it out now, before they do it. I'll be called crazy. That's okay."
3:47

UFO Revolution: S2E3 - 2027 and the Approaching Craft. Is it a Lie? "You're gonna be told that there is a craft on its way to Earth. That 100 f**king percent is the lie you are going to be told." ~Corbell (Well, I was not expecting this. And right now, I don't know what to think. But we all know it's been hinted at by various folks, including Lue Elizondo. So what's going on?) ~ Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell: "Your government now wants you to know one truth, and that truth is that UFOs are real. They've already done told you. Sometimes, when you want somebody to know a truth, it's so you can set them up to believe a lie, and that's coming. I have zero doubt that lie is coming." Producer: "What is the lie?" Corbell: "Specifically, you want me to say it right now, for real, real? On camera, to be put in the show?" Producer: "Yes." Corbell: "Okay. Problem with that: If we tell the lie before it's told, they can adapt. That wouldn't be wise. I'll tell you privately, but I would really think about if you want to put this in your show. For real. That's a real thing I'm telling you. So, will you think about it before putting it in your show?" Producer: "Absolutely." Corbell: "Okay. So UFOs are real, and they've been here a long time, and that's the truth. But the lie is coming. All indications, like ALL of them, is that that lie is going to be that there is a craft slowly making its way to us here on Earth. And that is the lie they're gonna want you to believe. "It's nuanced, how they explain that, the nature of that threat. But that 100 f**king percent is the lie you are going to be told. You even got a date. People been whispering a date for a long time now. I know where that lie comes from. I know, specifically, what document from the 70s initiated the idea of that lie. A classified document. That is the lie you will be told. You're gonna be told that there is a craft on its way to Earth. That's the lie. "Maybe I'm wrong. Hope I'm wrong. I sent you two texts today with a year (Messages showing 2027 are shown on a cell phone). Not from me. Nope, I'm not gonna propagate that lie. I'm not gonna be part of it, I'm not going to say it to the camera. Everybody knows. Just start paying attention. And they'll change the date - especially if they see this - things will change. Because maybe I'm trustworthy, maybe I'm worthy of your trust, maybe I've told you the truth the whole way through it and now and you can verify it. If that's the case, then I'm f**king dangerous. "You've been told the truth about UFOs for a long time now. It's been pretty orchestrated, it's been pretty clear, and it's using people that are telling the truth and wanna tell the truth. Ultimately, they want you to know something. They want you to know UFOs are real. Thank God, we're finally there, we're all there now. They want you to know the truth. But why [do] they want you to know that truth now. I hope I'm wrong, but it's terrifying. Think about it "Maybe it's good to get ahead of it, call it out now, before they do it. I'll be called crazy. That's okay."

Joe Murgia

763,279 просмотров • 1 год назад

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.
13:04

The most epic 13 minute AI rant I've heard in 2026 PS: My parent's heard this when I was playing it in the car and thought Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin went OFF like Stephen A Smith does on first take PPS: Full transcript below [17:00] Harry Stebbings: I I just wanted to ask Jason, if the people that we want are fundamentally different, the developers that we used to hire, we don't because AI writes the code for us. The marketers we don't want, the sales people we don't want—who who do we want genuinely? Like what is the attractive profile? Because your Anthropic’s and your OpenAIs are hiring, so so what are the people that we want in the companies of the future? [17:18] Jason Lemkin: Look, I know it sounds trite, but but the answer is simple. It's just the expression each year changes. We want folks that are genuinely AI fluent. It's pretty simple. Now you know, maybe last year we called them prompt engineers, right? That used to be a job. I don't know if you remember that actually used to be the hottest job on planet earth. Now no one needs a prompt engineer because it's pretty easy to prompt all these tools. That job died. Okay. Um and now we need go-to-market engineers. Um I think that job's going to die. We need—everyone needs so many forward deployed engineers. Like you can't hire enough forward deployed engineers. But uh you know um but Palantir just announced in whatever their their big their big event—they've gotten their deployment times down over 90% with forward deployed engineers. So that may become—so the this wave of disruption for the titles and the specificity, it's also exhaustingly accelerating. But it's really simple. You meet anyone for any role—sales, marketing, engineering, product, QA—they're they're either they're either they can't keep all of the ways they use AI to accelerate their job from spewing out of their mouth, or they're staring at you. It's there's nowhere in the middle. Like, and the person that comes in and says—it's it's it sounds Captain Obvious—but like, you know, you just had the whatever from Lovable, the the marketing head that was super popular on the show, right? She's just spewing AI-native insights into Lovable, right? It's not that complicated. You hire her, Elena, or whatever it is. You just hire her. It doesn't matter whether she's still in college or a junior or a senior or a middler, a left or right. And honestly, if you interview people, I would say of all even of the best startups I've invested in, maybe 30% of the management team meets this standard at best. 30%. Maybe less. And of the interviews I do in general, it's single-digit percents. It's just and in in that sense, it's the same as ever. Like you either lower the bar in hiring or you hire someone that's actually great. And someone that's actually great is so far ahead of you in how to apply to to employ the efficiencies of AI in their role, your jaw falls on the table. The difference is we used to need warm bodies. That's what's changing. We used to need warm bodies to answer the call, to do QA, to do code review, to to get the blue pixel to go from the upper left to the lower right. You laugh, but you need you literally needed to brute force this with humans. With AI, every day that goes by, the AI—you do not need brute force human beings on your team. And that's another reason they're shrinking. Why are all these new companies so efficient? They're just not brute forcing things with humans. They're just not. They're choosing not to. And so these team—all the brute forcers out there—everyone talks about how bloated teams got in 2021. I don't agree with that. I think they got as big as they needed to be when growth was high and you needed humans to do everything. All you look at these teams that that doubled—well if growth continued at 60% like the rate in early 2021 for 5 years or can help me do the math and every single thing a software company did required a human. You were understaffed by your 2021 headcount. You'd be sitting here in 2026. You every office in SoMa would be triple packed and you there wouldn't be enough humans to staff your company. It's just the world changed. [20:33] Harry Stebbings: Jason, you live on the bleeding edge. I think me and Rory see that and I think the world sees that when they hear you every week in terms of how you run SaaS. For all of the CEOs and execs who listen to the show, what would you advise them in terms of determining whether someone is AI fluent when they meet them for jobs, for talent? [20:51] Jason Lemkin: Here's I realized I was just asked this. I just did a review with a super fast startup growing just crossing 100 million and I was asked this question. And one of my favorite executives, I thought his answer was pretty dated and because he gave me an answer that was about 6 months old. The answer 6 months old is: "I look for folks in my team, I look for you know at what tools they play with." Okay, that was a great answer in like summer of 2025. Okay, I tried Lovable last week. Okay, the answer in 2026 is: "What commercial AI tool have you brought into your organization this month?" That's the test. Anyone that is on the bleeding edge that you would want to hire—now there are so many great products in the market. Okay, there is no excuse in any role to have not brought one tool a month into your organization. Okay, there—now there's going to be better and better tools and better and better products as the year goes on. What's the one you did? And you will see folks with their deer in the headlights to this question. What what sales tool? What marketing tool? What product tool? What engineering tool? What did you bring in? Why did you pick it? How does it working? Because if you're at remotely at the cutting edge, you're all over this. You're looking for the next agentic tools that will radically improve how you do business. This is—you think everyone thinks SaaS is at the bleeding edge, right? You know, you know, all we do is we're just looking for the tools and trying them. Okay? Okay, we're one year ahead of everybody else because we did the simplest thing in the world. Like we tried the tools early and we trained them. We trained them for a month. Okay, I'll give you—want hear a horrible example from this week? Super hot AI company valued at 6 billion. Okay, I'm not going to name it. Um, this week yesterday told us we had to quadruple what we spent on their product. Okay, their agent told us, right? And why did this happen? Okay. Well, at this $6 billion company, no one had trained the agent on its pricing properly. No one had tested it. They said, "Well, well, we've been in beta." And we said, "Well, when did the beta launch? A year ago." Okay, these are people asleep at at the wheel. You want somebody who the instant this comes up, they exactly know what the issue is. And "Hey, when I was at Lovable Replit, we trained the agent. This is how we did it. I brought in this tool. I brought in this tool that that Rory invested in last week. It solved all these issues." That's what you want to hear. And if they haven't brought in a tool in the last 30 days, at least deeply evaluated it. I don't really care whether they bought it, but gone so far down the funnel they can tell you—pick whatever tool: Fixie, Regie, GC, AIGC—I don't care how you went through it, you looked at it, you can tell me the eight ways it would improve the productivity of your business and three you didn't. Just don't hire that person because they're going to run your company to the ground. This is the job today. The job today is not to screw around on ChatGPT and to be a prompt engineer. The job today is to bring the best AI and agentic products into your organization and leverage all the hard work that the engineers have done building those products. That's your job. You don't have to screw around. You don't have to be a prompt engineer anymore. You have to be an agent deployment expert. A—this is the new job we're making up today. An Agentic Deployment Expert. That's your job from C-level to junior. Agentic Deployment Expert. Don't hire anybody else. You're going to regret it. They're going to stare at the camera. He's good. Stare at the camera. He's honorable. We could probably just I could slip away, get a coffee, and come back. No. And I I sound exasperated, Rory. And I—but the reason I am is I can just see I can see my best companies doing it. And I can see some companies I've invested in not doing it. And I want to cry. I just want to cry when they have no ADs on their team. I just—like you're flushing your years of your life down the toilet by not approaching your how you're building this company this way. [24:33] Rory: Yes. And at the risk of being positive, it's worth pointing out two things he didn't say. Well, something implicit why he said—Jason didn't do the only hire, you know, he didn't commit the um employment law, I think it's a civil penalty of saying only employ people below X who get the new new thing because he implicitly said anyone can do it provided you're willing to learn. And I think that's the big aha that's one of the positive statements to make here right? Look and I think it applies—I'm always wary of being "Hey, coming across, hey this this is the things that you all have to do." I think it applies to everyone including investors right? I mean I will say I have found that unless you're willing to invest the time learning these tools you actually shouldn't be investing in them. One of my partners Andy had this expression: "You know, if you decide you want to stop learning new things you probably should retire within 6 to 12 months and never write another check again." Maybe that's down to 3 to 6 months at this stage, right? And I think, you know, it's— [25:27] Harry Stebbings: Yeah, I actually I actually had a meeting with mine and Jason's biggest investor the other day and I—pretend he's not here—I said I think he's the most equipped investor for this generation of investing because I don't think anyone quite sits at the bleeding edge like he does on the investor side. [25:42] Harry Stebbings: Why in terms of using the equip stuff? Yeah. Yeah. In terms of using the stuff, understanding understanding bottlenecks, constraints. For sure. [25:51] Jason Lemkin: But can I just add one point? We can just cuz it's so important if it helps people. Okay, we are—and thank you Harry. We're going through these phases. Okay, and when AI started to blow up for real for us, uh call it early 2024, right? Maybe late '23, I wasn't equipped. It was too technical. I wasn't going to go in and figure out—I wasn't smart enough to figure out how to deal with a massively hallucinating LLM API and turn that and turn that into something magical. Kudos to investors and others that that got it in early '23, '22. I mean I remember I—I guess it was maybe SaaStr Annual '23. I was with David Sacks and I did a Q&A and I said, "How you thinking about AI at Craft?" He's like, "Well we're all in. We want 80% of '23 of investments to be AI." I'm like, "Great but like show me the show me the great ones in market." He's like, "They're all prototypes. We're all they're all they're all proof of concepts but we're all in anyway." That's where you kind of had to be in '23 if you weren't investing at like the LLM level. Okay, I wasn't smart enough. Then we went through this weird-ass prompt engineer era where like you you could torture these products to do something good, right? But you had to torture them. You had to like craft these crazy things that made no sense. Now we are in the era where mere ordinarily smart generalists can make these tools do magical things. And literally I go to these meetings and people be like, "I don't know how to like this is so scary. I don't know how to do this." And we show them our backends. Do you know how to do a workflow generator? Do you know how to do a a decision tree? Like we've been building these since software in the '90s. Okay, if you—I can show you all of our agents. The how they work is novel. They do have to be trained. You can't be lazy and have these agents work. But honestly, the the UI, the UX, the way we interact with them, it's just software. And so my point is: Pick yourself off the ground. This is your time now. If you felt lost in AI era, if you felt like you're behind, you don't understand what all these people are saying on X and Twitter and their Claude and and their and talking about all the 4.6 point Nano point and it's over—like you just it's not your world. This is your time. This is your time for the generalist that knows how to use software tools really really well. And I—this is my last point but it's so important. If ever in your recent life—and this is why you could be all you need to be is young at heart to Rory's point—if in the last three to five years you have successfully deployed a piece of enterprise software of any sort you yourself, not some agency you hired, but if you have deployed it, you can deploy any agentic tool. Any. And you can become the hero in your company and you can become the hero in your functional area. But I watch folks—I'm literally helping a company now that they're adding hundreds of sales folks this year with a new pre-IPO COO—he's not hasn't brought in a single tool, totally scared of it. Okay, it's not that hard. Did you use SalesLoft? Did you use Outreach? Did you use HubSpot? Do you know these tools? If you can deploy these tools, you can deploy a world-changing AI agent. And so this is the time for people like the folks that that were shut out of the AI revolution right now. The generalist folks that are not that know how to deploy software that don't even know how to build software. Like vibe coding for me was folks who knew how to build software, but you didn't have to be an engineer. Now, you just need to know how to deploy software to win with AI agents. That's all you need to know. So many people have these skills and they're petrified of AI. "How did you do that? How did you deploy an AI BDR?" Well, we bought a piece of software, we figured out how it worked for a day, we set it up in an afternoon, and then and then we did spend 30 months training it, which you didn't do with this old software because in the old days, we just had to manually upload all the data, right? And there was no training. The the only non-intuitive part is training these things. And it's it's it's just work. So that's why when I see folks on the management team not doing this, there's no excuse. You do not need to be technical to win with AI agents in Q2 of '26. You do not need to be even 1% technical. Not at all. So it's your time. Or you're going to get laid off. Or you're going to get laid off because you're not going to matter.

Arjun Mahadevan (Mr. LLC 🇺🇸)

37,744 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

😼🔮💵📈 $GME “Now it's all about the transformation and that cash pile is growing, it seems to be growing, will they raise more money? We'll see, I don't know - I see it. But...if people, if you just change one factor and that's that you don't think Ryan Cohen is a doofus, alright? If you don't think he's a doofus and he's not a fool, if you don't think that - and all of a sudden, suddenly they're sitting on billions of dollars in cash, and you actually think not only is he not a doofus but - he's extremely talented in that he has the capability to turn this around, even if you don't agree with that, even if you don't believe it, that's fine, if you just pause for a moment and think about that - I think it really changes your mindset so that becomes the bet - that becomes the bet.”
0:45

😼🔮💵📈 $GME “Now it's all about the transformation and that cash pile is growing, it seems to be growing, will they raise more money? We'll see, I don't know - I see it. But...if people, if you just change one factor and that's that you don't think Ryan Cohen is a doofus, alright? If you don't think he's a doofus and he's not a fool, if you don't think that - and all of a sudden, suddenly they're sitting on billions of dollars in cash, and you actually think not only is he not a doofus but - he's extremely talented in that he has the capability to turn this around, even if you don't agree with that, even if you don't believe it, that's fine, if you just pause for a moment and think about that - I think it really changes your mindset so that becomes the bet - that becomes the bet.”

The GG Wizard Swami

32,029 просмотров • 1 год назад

Reminder That Absolutely Nothing Has Come From The FBI Admitting On The Record A Document Exists Showing Joe Biden Took A $5 Million Dollar Bribe But They Can’t Release The Information Because The Whistleblower Would Be Killed Josh Hawley: You just started to answer Senator Blackburn's question that not releasing the 1023 are talking about as a matter of life and death question of life and death you said. Explain. FBI: It is potentially a question of life or death for whom regard to the source of the information Josh Hawley: So okay. So now we've confirmed that the document exists. That's progress because the FBI director initially denied that it exists. Why did he do that? FBI: We have already and previously acknowledged the existence of the documents. Josh Hawley: Yeah. After you first denied it. Now when a member of this committee read it Right. The FBI let's just get the record straight. The FBI director initially said it doesn't exist. Josh Hawley: —Why don't you just release it? Is it classified? FBI: The document is not classified. Josh Hawley: K. Will you commit to releasing it? FBI: Senator, we'll take that back, and we will work with you and this committee. Josh Hawley: How about just a yes or no? Will you commit to releasing this unclassified document that alleges that the president of the United States, The president of the United States has taken $5,000,000 or more in bribes from a foreign nation. FBI: The document has already been released Pursuant to a subpoena to the House Oversight Committee Josh Hawley: Has it been released to this committee? FBI: Work with this committee within the parameters that are established Josh Hawley: To me will you release the document to the public? It's unclassified. Don't you think the American people have a right to see it? FBI: Uh, senator, the document, as you know, contains sensitive information That has bearing on the life of the source of the information, potentially.
3:08

Reminder That Absolutely Nothing Has Come From The FBI Admitting On The Record A Document Exists Showing Joe Biden Took A $5 Million Dollar Bribe But They Can’t Release The Information Because The Whistleblower Would Be Killed Josh Hawley: You just started to answer Senator Blackburn's question that not releasing the 1023 are talking about as a matter of life and death question of life and death you said. Explain. FBI: It is potentially a question of life or death for whom regard to the source of the information Josh Hawley: So okay. So now we've confirmed that the document exists. That's progress because the FBI director initially denied that it exists. Why did he do that? FBI: We have already and previously acknowledged the existence of the documents. Josh Hawley: Yeah. After you first denied it. Now when a member of this committee read it Right. The FBI let's just get the record straight. The FBI director initially said it doesn't exist. Josh Hawley: —Why don't you just release it? Is it classified? FBI: The document is not classified. Josh Hawley: K. Will you commit to releasing it? FBI: Senator, we'll take that back, and we will work with you and this committee. Josh Hawley: How about just a yes or no? Will you commit to releasing this unclassified document that alleges that the president of the United States, The president of the United States has taken $5,000,000 or more in bribes from a foreign nation. FBI: The document has already been released Pursuant to a subpoena to the House Oversight Committee Josh Hawley: Has it been released to this committee? FBI: Work with this committee within the parameters that are established Josh Hawley: To me will you release the document to the public? It's unclassified. Don't you think the American people have a right to see it? FBI: Uh, senator, the document, as you know, contains sensitive information That has bearing on the life of the source of the information, potentially.

Wall Street Apes

642,136 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Caller: I'm a 58-year-old single guy, getting tired of working. I'm trying to get to retirement, I make $75,000 and nothing saved. I need to know what I should do to get there. Dave Ramsey: What do you do? ​Caller: I'm a trim carpenter. I trim high-end houses and build some custom cabinets as well. ​Jade Warshaw: Do you have any debt? ​Caller: I've got about $25,000 worth of mortgage and a $20,000 auto loan. ​Dave Ramsey: Why have you saved no money? ​Caller: I was married to a spender, and at the age of 50, got divorced, and I walked away with zero dollars. ​Dave Ramsey: That was eight years ago. Why have you saved no money in the last eight years? ​Caller: Well, getting back on my feet, I ended up buying a house. That's where the mortgage comes in. I've got $25,000 left on that. ​Jade Warshaw: So is that where your extra money was going, paying down that mortgage? What did it start as? ​Caller: Paying down the mortgage. It was a bank-owned property. I got it for a song in a great neighborhood. I put a fair amount of money into it, and that's where most of my money went. ​Dave Ramsey: And you bought a truck? ​Caller: No. I have a truck that's paid for. ​Dave Ramsey: What's the $20,000 vehicle? ​Caller: I know you're into cars, Dave. It's not a car. It's a motorcycle. It's a Harley-Davidson. ​Jade Warshaw: Well, we've got to get rid of that. ​Caller: I knew that was the first thing you were going to tell me to get rid of. ​Dave Ramsey: Yeah, that bike has to go. You did great on the house, but the motorcycle was a mistake. If we get you on an EveryDollar budget and you pick up extra work, you can save $2,000 a month. Over 10 years, that $24,000 a year will grow to about half a million dollars. By age 67, you’ll have $500,000 and a completely paid-for house. ​Caller: Okay. I do have about $23,000 in cash. ​Dave Ramsey: Well, then you've got your emergency fund in place. ​Jade Warshaw: That's great! ​Caller: I do have the emergency fund, right. I also have a term life insurance policy that's $100 a month for half a million dollars. Should I keep that, or is there a way to convert that to something else? ​Dave Ramsey: I wouldn't convert. It's just like, "I have homeowner's insurance and I don't have a home anymore, do I need it?" No, you don't. Because there's no one counting on you, it sounds like, for your income. ​Caller: No. ​Dave Ramsey: And the house is worth more than you owe on it. Do you have children? ​Caller: I've got three. They're grown. ​Dave Ramsey: Okay, so if you die, they sell the house and pay the funeral, right? ​Caller: Correct. ​Jade Warshaw: Let it lapse. ​Dave Ramsey: Yeah, I would close that out because you need that extra $100 a month toward our $2,000 a month goal. ​So, what I'm going to do is sit down and do a budget, and I'm going to come up with $2,000 a month. I'm going to sit down with a SmartVestor Pro, and I'm going to fill up Roth IRAs, Simple IRAs, and whatever else you can do as a self-employed person. The great news is, as a trim carpenter in high-end properties, you are in great demand. You've always had more work than you can take on. ​And so if you want to jack it up and make some extra money for a little while, you can do that. I'm always less tired when I don't feel like a hamster in a wheel, when I'm actually getting traction. Part of what's making you tired is you feel stuck.
4:43

Caller: I'm a 58-year-old single guy, getting tired of working. I'm trying to get to retirement, I make $75,000 and nothing saved. I need to know what I should do to get there. Dave Ramsey: What do you do? ​Caller: I'm a trim carpenter. I trim high-end houses and build some custom cabinets as well. ​Jade Warshaw: Do you have any debt? ​Caller: I've got about $25,000 worth of mortgage and a $20,000 auto loan. ​Dave Ramsey: Why have you saved no money? ​Caller: I was married to a spender, and at the age of 50, got divorced, and I walked away with zero dollars. ​Dave Ramsey: That was eight years ago. Why have you saved no money in the last eight years? ​Caller: Well, getting back on my feet, I ended up buying a house. That's where the mortgage comes in. I've got $25,000 left on that. ​Jade Warshaw: So is that where your extra money was going, paying down that mortgage? What did it start as? ​Caller: Paying down the mortgage. It was a bank-owned property. I got it for a song in a great neighborhood. I put a fair amount of money into it, and that's where most of my money went. ​Dave Ramsey: And you bought a truck? ​Caller: No. I have a truck that's paid for. ​Dave Ramsey: What's the $20,000 vehicle? ​Caller: I know you're into cars, Dave. It's not a car. It's a motorcycle. It's a Harley-Davidson. ​Jade Warshaw: Well, we've got to get rid of that. ​Caller: I knew that was the first thing you were going to tell me to get rid of. ​Dave Ramsey: Yeah, that bike has to go. You did great on the house, but the motorcycle was a mistake. If we get you on an EveryDollar budget and you pick up extra work, you can save $2,000 a month. Over 10 years, that $24,000 a year will grow to about half a million dollars. By age 67, you’ll have $500,000 and a completely paid-for house. ​Caller: Okay. I do have about $23,000 in cash. ​Dave Ramsey: Well, then you've got your emergency fund in place. ​Jade Warshaw: That's great! ​Caller: I do have the emergency fund, right. I also have a term life insurance policy that's $100 a month for half a million dollars. Should I keep that, or is there a way to convert that to something else? ​Dave Ramsey: I wouldn't convert. It's just like, "I have homeowner's insurance and I don't have a home anymore, do I need it?" No, you don't. Because there's no one counting on you, it sounds like, for your income. ​Caller: No. ​Dave Ramsey: And the house is worth more than you owe on it. Do you have children? ​Caller: I've got three. They're grown. ​Dave Ramsey: Okay, so if you die, they sell the house and pay the funeral, right? ​Caller: Correct. ​Jade Warshaw: Let it lapse. ​Dave Ramsey: Yeah, I would close that out because you need that extra $100 a month toward our $2,000 a month goal. ​So, what I'm going to do is sit down and do a budget, and I'm going to come up with $2,000 a month. I'm going to sit down with a SmartVestor Pro, and I'm going to fill up Roth IRAs, Simple IRAs, and whatever else you can do as a self-employed person. The great news is, as a trim carpenter in high-end properties, you are in great demand. You've always had more work than you can take on. ​And so if you want to jack it up and make some extra money for a little while, you can do that. I'm always less tired when I don't feel like a hamster in a wheel, when I'm actually getting traction. Part of what's making you tired is you feel stuck.

Traeyz ♠️

424,915 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Warren Buffett shares what he would do if he had to start investing again w/ just $1 million Here was his valuable/timeless advice: "With just a million dollars, you could earn 50% a year... I don't know what the equivalent of Moody's manuals or anything would be now, but I would try and know everything about everything small, and I would find [opportunities]. But you have to be in love with the subject. You can't just be in love with the money. You've really got to just find [the opportunity]. People find other things in other fields because they love looking for them. A biologist looks for something because they want to find something. I don't know how the human brain works that much. I don't think anybody understands too well how the human brain works. But there's different people that just find it exciting to expand their knowledge in a given area. I've had the luck of meeting a lot of people that are unbelievably smart in their own arena and do some unbelievably dumb things in other areas. So all I know is the human brain is complicated. But it does its best when you find out what your brain is really suited for, and then you just pound the heII out of it from that point. And that's what I would be doing if I had a small amount of money and I wanted to make 50% a year. But I also wanted to just play the game. And you can't do it if you don't find the game interesting, whether it's bridge or chess or in this case, finding securities that are undervalued."
1:33

Warren Buffett shares what he would do if he had to start investing again w/ just $1 million Here was his valuable/timeless advice: "With just a million dollars, you could earn 50% a year... I don't know what the equivalent of Moody's manuals or anything would be now, but I would try and know everything about everything small, and I would find [opportunities]. But you have to be in love with the subject. You can't just be in love with the money. You've really got to just find [the opportunity]. People find other things in other fields because they love looking for them. A biologist looks for something because they want to find something. I don't know how the human brain works that much. I don't think anybody understands too well how the human brain works. But there's different people that just find it exciting to expand their knowledge in a given area. I've had the luck of meeting a lot of people that are unbelievably smart in their own arena and do some unbelievably dumb things in other areas. So all I know is the human brain is complicated. But it does its best when you find out what your brain is really suited for, and then you just pound the heII out of it from that point. And that's what I would be doing if I had a small amount of money and I wanted to make 50% a year. But I also wanted to just play the game. And you can't do it if you don't find the game interesting, whether it's bridge or chess or in this case, finding securities that are undervalued."

Triple Net Investor

285,541 просмотров • 1 год назад

Caller: I have a gambling addiction. I haven’t filed taxes in five years. About five years ago, I had $200,000 in gambling winnings. After that, I haven’t filed anything. ​Dave Ramsey: Do you still have a career? ​Caller: I'm retired. ​Dave Ramsey: Okay. Do you have any money? Anything? ​Caller: I've got almost $10,000 in my savings account. ​Dave Ramsey: But you don't have a nest egg other than your pension. ​Caller: No. ​Dave Ramsey: Do you own a home? ​Caller: Yes. About $13,000 is remaining on the mortgage. ​Dave Ramsey: What is it worth? ​Caller: About $300,000. ​Dave Ramsey: And how much is your pension income? ​Caller: $95,000 a year. ​Dave Ramsey: That's good. Are you married? ​Caller: No. ​Dave Ramsey: Have you done something about the gambling addiction itself? Have you quit gambling? ​Caller: I have not. ​Dave Ramsey: Okay. So whatever we do is going to be a temporary fix because that is going to cause further problems. Agreed? ​Caller: Yes, absolutely. ​Dave Ramsey: What kind of gambling are you doing? ​Caller: Slot machines. ​Dave Ramsey: Are you lonely? ​Caller: Yeah. I've been single for quite a while. ​Dave Ramsey: How old are you? Caller: 61. Dave Ramsey: From working with people addicted to anything, I know that 100% of addicts eventually have financial problems. The addiction consumes every department of your life, including your financials. ​I can help you with the money parts of it, but it is a temporary fix until you deal with this. It's not bringing you joy. If you were my buddy sitting down over a cup of coffee, here is what I would tell you to do: Step 1: Get in touch with the Gamblers Anonymous folks in your area. ​Step 2: Find a good local church and start developing a personal relationship with a pastor who can walk with you. ​Step 3: Find a one-on-one professional counselor to help dig into what is really going on so you can get to the other side of this.
4:30

Caller: I have a gambling addiction. I haven’t filed taxes in five years. About five years ago, I had $200,000 in gambling winnings. After that, I haven’t filed anything. ​Dave Ramsey: Do you still have a career? ​Caller: I'm retired. ​Dave Ramsey: Okay. Do you have any money? Anything? ​Caller: I've got almost $10,000 in my savings account. ​Dave Ramsey: But you don't have a nest egg other than your pension. ​Caller: No. ​Dave Ramsey: Do you own a home? ​Caller: Yes. About $13,000 is remaining on the mortgage. ​Dave Ramsey: What is it worth? ​Caller: About $300,000. ​Dave Ramsey: And how much is your pension income? ​Caller: $95,000 a year. ​Dave Ramsey: That's good. Are you married? ​Caller: No. ​Dave Ramsey: Have you done something about the gambling addiction itself? Have you quit gambling? ​Caller: I have not. ​Dave Ramsey: Okay. So whatever we do is going to be a temporary fix because that is going to cause further problems. Agreed? ​Caller: Yes, absolutely. ​Dave Ramsey: What kind of gambling are you doing? ​Caller: Slot machines. ​Dave Ramsey: Are you lonely? ​Caller: Yeah. I've been single for quite a while. ​Dave Ramsey: How old are you? Caller: 61. Dave Ramsey: From working with people addicted to anything, I know that 100% of addicts eventually have financial problems. The addiction consumes every department of your life, including your financials. ​I can help you with the money parts of it, but it is a temporary fix until you deal with this. It's not bringing you joy. If you were my buddy sitting down over a cup of coffee, here is what I would tell you to do: Step 1: Get in touch with the Gamblers Anonymous folks in your area. ​Step 2: Find a good local church and start developing a personal relationship with a pastor who can walk with you. ​Step 3: Find a one-on-one professional counselor to help dig into what is really going on so you can get to the other side of this.

Traeyz ♠️

1,051,570 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Scott on why conviction in an idea is dangerous as an investor but required as a founder: "From the investor seat, I don't think you want to be in love with an idea. That's a risky thing because you'll find a way to express that by investing and make some compromises on the team because you know this idea is just so good, its time has come. But if the team isn't there, 90% of the time it doesn't work. Then there's a whole thing can you swap out the team? But the whole Founders Fund thesis was always no, you need the founder to run the company. But on the company side, you have to be in love with the idea. It's not that rational to start a company. There's a lot easier, more comfortable ways to make money if that's the goal. So it's got to be about what the company is doing specifically. If you want to actually start a company, it better be something that you're really passionate about, or you think that the problem is really important."
1:15

Scott on why conviction in an idea is dangerous as an investor but required as a founder: "From the investor seat, I don't think you want to be in love with an idea. That's a risky thing because you'll find a way to express that by investing and make some compromises on the team because you know this idea is just so good, its time has come. But if the team isn't there, 90% of the time it doesn't work. Then there's a whole thing can you swap out the team? But the whole Founders Fund thesis was always no, you need the founder to run the company. But on the company side, you have to be in love with the idea. It's not that rational to start a company. There's a lot easier, more comfortable ways to make money if that's the goal. So it's got to be about what the company is doing specifically. If you want to actually start a company, it better be something that you're really passionate about, or you think that the problem is really important."

Patrick OShaughnessy

33,016 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад