Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

BREAKING: David david friedberg on America vs Socialism FULL INTERVIEW Exposing the underlying problems no one wants to talk about. How the bottom 50% got left behind. "I don't blame Americans for finding themselves in the situation that they're in. I blame the bad policy that brought us to...

MollySOShea's profile picture

Molly O’Shea

66,320 subscribers

1,132,089 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag •via X (Twitter)

Nachrichten & Politik
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

David Friedberg: California’s “Billionaire Tax” is a Trojan Horse to Go After the Middle Class's Private Assets david friedberg: “The reason they're calling it a billionaire tax is to make it easier for people to vote for it, and sign up to this entirely new tax system that they're proposing to put on all Americans at some point, and for the first time ever degrading our private property rights.” “Forget about how much wealth you have, forget about how rich you are, forget about the term billionaire, millionaire, whatever it is.” “We're creating, or proposing the creation, of a new tax system that allows the government for the first time ever to come in and audit everything you own.” “All the jewelry your grandma gave you, the value of all the couches in your house, the value of your car, the value of all your stocks and bonds, and the government can come in, and for the first time, look through the veil into your personal property.” “And say, ‘Here's how much all this stuff is worth. I'm charging you a percentage of that. That's what I need to get paid.’ And it doesn't matter that it starts with billionaires. What matters is that we're giving the government the right to look into our private property and take a percentage of it every year.” “The total net worth of billionaires in the US is $8 trillion.” “The net worth of the US, the middle class, and everyone else is $170 trillion, compared to $8 trillion of the billionaires.” Chamath Palihapitiya: “They need a way to open the door so that they can go after the real honey pot.” “The real honeypot is not 200 people.” david friedberg: “Just so everyone understands the real goal of this is not to tax billionaires, because there are other ways to tax billionaires.” “Charge them a capital gains tax if they borrow against their assets that they haven't paid capital gains tax on. Very simple, that can resolve this.” “Another thing you can do, you can raise the capital gains tax rate. Sounds unpopular. I don't agree with that, but that's another way to deal with this, which is to take the capital gains tax rate from 20% to 30%. You could do that.” “The real goal of this is to create, for the first time in American history, a private property asset seizure tax. Because they're going after the $170 trillion, not the $8 trillion that the billionaires have.”
1:51

David Friedberg: California’s “Billionaire Tax” is a Trojan Horse to Go After the Middle Class's Private Assets david friedberg: “The reason they're calling it a billionaire tax is to make it easier for people to vote for it, and sign up to this entirely new tax system that they're proposing to put on all Americans at some point, and for the first time ever degrading our private property rights.” “Forget about how much wealth you have, forget about how rich you are, forget about the term billionaire, millionaire, whatever it is.” “We're creating, or proposing the creation, of a new tax system that allows the government for the first time ever to come in and audit everything you own.” “All the jewelry your grandma gave you, the value of all the couches in your house, the value of your car, the value of all your stocks and bonds, and the government can come in, and for the first time, look through the veil into your personal property.” “And say, ‘Here's how much all this stuff is worth. I'm charging you a percentage of that. That's what I need to get paid.’ And it doesn't matter that it starts with billionaires. What matters is that we're giving the government the right to look into our private property and take a percentage of it every year.” “The total net worth of billionaires in the US is $8 trillion.” “The net worth of the US, the middle class, and everyone else is $170 trillion, compared to $8 trillion of the billionaires.” Chamath Palihapitiya: “They need a way to open the door so that they can go after the real honey pot.” “The real honeypot is not 200 people.” david friedberg: “Just so everyone understands the real goal of this is not to tax billionaires, because there are other ways to tax billionaires.” “Charge them a capital gains tax if they borrow against their assets that they haven't paid capital gains tax on. Very simple, that can resolve this.” “Another thing you can do, you can raise the capital gains tax rate. Sounds unpopular. I don't agree with that, but that's another way to deal with this, which is to take the capital gains tax rate from 20% to 30%. You could do that.” “The real goal of this is to create, for the first time in American history, a private property asset seizure tax. Because they're going after the $170 trillion, not the $8 trillion that the billionaires have.”

The All-In Podcast

1,806,453 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Debt: it’s the political economy, stupid. Even at $30 trillion, America has the wealth to pay off its debt. The real question is whether Americans are willing to be taxed more or have their government spend less. So why aren’t markets spooked that neither of that is really happening yet? In the Season 2 finale of the Marginal Revolution Podcast, Alex Tabarrok and tylercowen dig in: 0:00:00 - Should We Be Worried About the US Debt? 0:08:19 - R vs. G? It's the Political Economy, Stupid 0:16:52 - The Five Ways Out 0:22:21 - AI's Fiscal Paradox 0:30:44 - Hidden Sovereign Wealth Funds 0:34:56 - The Bottom Line
36:56

Debt: it’s the political economy, stupid. Even at $30 trillion, America has the wealth to pay off its debt. The real question is whether Americans are willing to be taxed more or have their government spend less. So why aren’t markets spooked that neither of that is really happening yet? In the Season 2 finale of the Marginal Revolution Podcast, Alex Tabarrok and tylercowen dig in: 0:00:00 - Should We Be Worried About the US Debt? 0:08:19 - R vs. G? It's the Political Economy, Stupid 0:16:52 - The Five Ways Out 0:22:21 - AI's Fiscal Paradox 0:30:44 - Hidden Sovereign Wealth Funds 0:34:56 - The Bottom Line

Mercatus Center

15,274 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

🚨Should the US create a Sovereign Wealth Fund? Chamath and Friedberg discuss Chamath: “I think that we should start a sovereign wealth fund right now.” “The great news is that these Trump tariff deals come with huge amounts of capital that these other countries have committed to spending inside the United States.” “We've exceeded $1T of inbound capital on the investment side. We get 90% of the upside.” “A lot of that capital should be the seed capital for a sovereign wealth fund.” Friedberg: “The concern I have is anytime we create a new income stream at the federal government, or we have some sort of growing asset that you mark up on the book, someone tends to invest ahead of the curve on that.” “Meaning someone takes that and they're like, ‘Oh, great, I can spend more now.’ I mean, we even saw this in California (with) Gavin Newsom and the budget skyrocketed as the income went up.” “Rather than take the surplus and book it for a rainy day, they went and spent ahead of it, and then all of a sudden they had a huge deficit.” “Which is what happened with Social Security is, it's like, okay, all these people are providing this income every year to the federal government, which they're supposed to be paying into their Social Security Trust Fund, which is gonna go bankrupt sometime between 2030 and 2033.” “But then what happened is we raided the coffers, we took all that money, and we started spending it on random new programs.” “And the problem is, by giving the government more assets, by giving the government more income, we set ourselves up for a circumstance where the federal government, the Congress says, ‘Great, we got more money to spend. Let's do X, Y, and Z program and let's do this. Let's build a high speed train. Let's do this. These are all good for American people.’” “And all of a sudden, you don't actually solve any real problems. And this is why my argument is that we should use it to fill the hole that we have, for example, in Social Security.” “And that needs to become an asset that's strictly used as an offset on Social Security, because if you don't put it in that box, it just becomes another spending mechanism.”
1:38

🚨Should the US create a Sovereign Wealth Fund? Chamath and Friedberg discuss Chamath: “I think that we should start a sovereign wealth fund right now.” “The great news is that these Trump tariff deals come with huge amounts of capital that these other countries have committed to spending inside the United States.” “We've exceeded $1T of inbound capital on the investment side. We get 90% of the upside.” “A lot of that capital should be the seed capital for a sovereign wealth fund.” Friedberg: “The concern I have is anytime we create a new income stream at the federal government, or we have some sort of growing asset that you mark up on the book, someone tends to invest ahead of the curve on that.” “Meaning someone takes that and they're like, ‘Oh, great, I can spend more now.’ I mean, we even saw this in California (with) Gavin Newsom and the budget skyrocketed as the income went up.” “Rather than take the surplus and book it for a rainy day, they went and spent ahead of it, and then all of a sudden they had a huge deficit.” “Which is what happened with Social Security is, it's like, okay, all these people are providing this income every year to the federal government, which they're supposed to be paying into their Social Security Trust Fund, which is gonna go bankrupt sometime between 2030 and 2033.” “But then what happened is we raided the coffers, we took all that money, and we started spending it on random new programs.” “And the problem is, by giving the government more assets, by giving the government more income, we set ourselves up for a circumstance where the federal government, the Congress says, ‘Great, we got more money to spend. Let's do X, Y, and Z program and let's do this. Let's build a high speed train. Let's do this. These are all good for American people.’” “And all of a sudden, you don't actually solve any real problems. And this is why my argument is that we should use it to fill the hole that we have, for example, in Social Security.” “And that needs to become an asset that's strictly used as an offset on Social Security, because if you don't put it in that box, it just becomes another spending mechanism.”

The All-In Podcast

44,452 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on the Wealth Tax: "It just punishes." "It starts with the billionaires." "Every single person at this table is going to be paying a wealth tax only to punish us." "And the reason for it is—these models have been completely, irresponsibly oversold." " And the sell is, 'It's dangerous for everyone—which is why I can give it to all your adversaries, but I can't give it to the Department of War." "Or, I can't safely give it to an enterprise in this country without being certain that the alpha of that business could transfer to this model tomorrow." "At every single enterprise I deal with, these people are livid." "They're like, 'I'm paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business, and they're creating a wealth tax that does not help the poor." Via CNBC
1:32

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on the Wealth Tax: "It just punishes." "It starts with the billionaires." "Every single person at this table is going to be paying a wealth tax only to punish us." "And the reason for it is—these models have been completely, irresponsibly oversold." " And the sell is, 'It's dangerous for everyone—which is why I can give it to all your adversaries, but I can't give it to the Department of War." "Or, I can't safely give it to an enterprise in this country without being certain that the alpha of that business could transfer to this model tomorrow." "At every single enterprise I deal with, these people are livid." "They're like, 'I'm paying for tokens that create no value. These people are stealing the weights and alpha of my business, and they're creating a wealth tax that does not help the poor." Via CNBC

Jawwwn

308,798 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

Elon Musk has more net worth than the bottom 54% of America. Asset prices at all time highs. Food insecurity at all time highs. At the exact same time. That is the definition of a K-shaped economy. If you're rich right now — you are getting richer. Great restaurants. Humming markets. Life is good. If you're in the bottom half of this country? You are suffering. And that gap is not a rounding error. That is a systemic failure. Now here's the political and investment risk nobody wants to price in. Washington state just passed a 10% wealth tax. California is working on one. You chase out five or six of the wealthiest people in the state and collect nothing. Ray Dalio keeps warning about this and he's right: When inequality gets this wide, historically you get one of two things. Wealth taxes or outright seizure. There is a tax revolution coming. The only question is whether we design it intelligently at the federal level before the pitchforks design it for us.
1:03

Elon Musk has more net worth than the bottom 54% of America. Asset prices at all time highs. Food insecurity at all time highs. At the exact same time. That is the definition of a K-shaped economy. If you're rich right now — you are getting richer. Great restaurants. Humming markets. Life is good. If you're in the bottom half of this country? You are suffering. And that gap is not a rounding error. That is a systemic failure. Now here's the political and investment risk nobody wants to price in. Washington state just passed a 10% wealth tax. California is working on one. You chase out five or six of the wealthiest people in the state and collect nothing. Ray Dalio keeps warning about this and he's right: When inequality gets this wide, historically you get one of two things. Wealth taxes or outright seizure. There is a tax revolution coming. The only question is whether we design it intelligently at the federal level before the pitchforks design it for us.

Anthony Scaramucci

40,742 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

David Friedberg: The datacenter is the new symbol of the wealthy tech class, and Americans are starting to really hate rich people david friedberg explains what he believes is the core issue behind the datacenter pushback “Most people in America are starting to really hate rich people. And there's no physical space that better represents the wealth in America, the wealth creation that's happened that a lot of people feel left behind from, than the datacenter. It is the temple of the wealthy. It is the way that the rich, elite, tech, kind of political, connected billionaires that we're obviously all attached to are taking from the poor, getting themselves ahead, shooting themselves to space, leaving everyone else behind, and the datacenter, I think, is the representation of their progress. And it is a representation of the progress that others don't feel. For a consumer's life to actually be altered in a meaningfully positive way, most people don't feel that yet. The best thing they see is some medical advice they're getting on ChatGPT or something, and that's kind of the end of it for them. So I think there's a lot of this populism that's swollen and that's taken over, not just the US, but probably a good chunk of the West. And the datacenter is the target.”
0:58

David Friedberg: The datacenter is the new symbol of the wealthy tech class, and Americans are starting to really hate rich people david friedberg explains what he believes is the core issue behind the datacenter pushback “Most people in America are starting to really hate rich people. And there's no physical space that better represents the wealth in America, the wealth creation that's happened that a lot of people feel left behind from, than the datacenter. It is the temple of the wealthy. It is the way that the rich, elite, tech, kind of political, connected billionaires that we're obviously all attached to are taking from the poor, getting themselves ahead, shooting themselves to space, leaving everyone else behind, and the datacenter, I think, is the representation of their progress. And it is a representation of the progress that others don't feel. For a consumer's life to actually be altered in a meaningfully positive way, most people don't feel that yet. The best thing they see is some medical advice they're getting on ChatGPT or something, and that's kind of the end of it for them. So I think there's a lot of this populism that's swollen and that's taken over, not just the US, but probably a good chunk of the West. And the datacenter is the target.”

The All-In Podcast

67,017 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

David Friedberg: How to Save Social Security Using Compound Interest david friedberg with an incredible breakdown on E219: "The US Social Security Program is meant to be kind of the retirement program for folks that don't have access to private retirement accounts." "This program was set up in the 1930s after the Great Depression. There's a trust fund, the OASDI, which is the fund that they invest the capital (from)." "So every year we all put money in with our social security taxes out of our paychecks, (which) goes in there." "It gets invested in one thing: US Treasuries." "Which have averaged about 4.8% return per year since the beginning of the program." "Meanwhile, the S&P 500 has been averaging 11%." "So here's the math: if in 1971, which was the year that we went off the gold standard in the US, if we invested the Social Security Trust Fund in the S&P, the balance of the social security trust fund today would be $15T." "That would be roughly one-third of the value of the total S&P 500, which would be jointly owned by all Americans." "Now here's what's f*cked up: the middle class people who had access to private retirement accounts benefited by buying the S&P 500 and the wealthy were able to access it." "So all of the equity value that accrued from American enterprise and the prosperity of the American system accrued to the people that had access to the private accounts." "Meanwhile, the people that only had access to the public accounts got stuck owning treasuries." "Today, the Social Security Trust Fund has a $2.7T balance, and based on the outflows and inflows, it's going to go bankrupt in 2032." "So I did the math: If you assume that the S&P 500 continues to grow at 10.5% per year on average, we could put about $500B in the trust fund today, and it will not go bankrupt again." "And it will continue to grow every year. And then all Americans have participation in American enterprise." "And importantly, this becomes the world's largest sovereign wealth fund ever. You don't need a separate sovereign wealth fund. We already have one." "We've totally mismanaged it. And I went back to try and understand why this is the case. Why have we only ever bought treasuries? " "Early on, the US needed someone to loan money. So they basically forced the citizens to loan the government money in the form of treasuries." "But today, the social security trust fund owns less than 10%, about 8% of the total treasury bonds outstanding." "So why are we forcing all the American citizens to participate?" "Through the social security system, we've created the deep inequity we see in this country." "If instead we had allowed the social security system to invest in the S&P 500 to buy American enterprises to fund American businesses, then every American would be wealthy and that middle class that uniquely participated by basically arbitraging the market where they forced the treasury bond yields on the poor and they got to take access to the equity yields would have not happened."
2:24

David Friedberg: How to Save Social Security Using Compound Interest david friedberg with an incredible breakdown on E219: "The US Social Security Program is meant to be kind of the retirement program for folks that don't have access to private retirement accounts." "This program was set up in the 1930s after the Great Depression. There's a trust fund, the OASDI, which is the fund that they invest the capital (from)." "So every year we all put money in with our social security taxes out of our paychecks, (which) goes in there." "It gets invested in one thing: US Treasuries." "Which have averaged about 4.8% return per year since the beginning of the program." "Meanwhile, the S&P 500 has been averaging 11%." "So here's the math: if in 1971, which was the year that we went off the gold standard in the US, if we invested the Social Security Trust Fund in the S&P, the balance of the social security trust fund today would be $15T." "That would be roughly one-third of the value of the total S&P 500, which would be jointly owned by all Americans." "Now here's what's f*cked up: the middle class people who had access to private retirement accounts benefited by buying the S&P 500 and the wealthy were able to access it." "So all of the equity value that accrued from American enterprise and the prosperity of the American system accrued to the people that had access to the private accounts." "Meanwhile, the people that only had access to the public accounts got stuck owning treasuries." "Today, the Social Security Trust Fund has a $2.7T balance, and based on the outflows and inflows, it's going to go bankrupt in 2032." "So I did the math: If you assume that the S&P 500 continues to grow at 10.5% per year on average, we could put about $500B in the trust fund today, and it will not go bankrupt again." "And it will continue to grow every year. And then all Americans have participation in American enterprise." "And importantly, this becomes the world's largest sovereign wealth fund ever. You don't need a separate sovereign wealth fund. We already have one." "We've totally mismanaged it. And I went back to try and understand why this is the case. Why have we only ever bought treasuries? " "Early on, the US needed someone to loan money. So they basically forced the citizens to loan the government money in the form of treasuries." "But today, the social security trust fund owns less than 10%, about 8% of the total treasury bonds outstanding." "So why are we forcing all the American citizens to participate?" "Through the social security system, we've created the deep inequity we see in this country." "If instead we had allowed the social security system to invest in the S&P 500 to buy American enterprises to fund American businesses, then every American would be wealthy and that middle class that uniquely participated by basically arbitraging the market where they forced the treasury bond yields on the poor and they got to take access to the equity yields would have not happened."

The All-In Podcast

166,519 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

David Friedberg Explains The Slow Spiral of Socialism “Government programs create an anchor. They are a shackle.” “This is the spiral of socialism.” “The government programs that are meant to provide support to people require an increase in taxation. That revenue has to come from somewhere.” “That taxation ultimately leads to an attrition of economic value in that region.” “Then you have to increase taxation more, and you end up in the spiral.” “And we're seeing this now, not just in New York where Mamdani’s proposing to increase taxes, but across the entire West Coast.” “We talked about the 5% billionaire tax. So yes, that's a problem for rich people. Great. No one gives a sh*t about us.” “But where does this go?” “In the proposed billionaire tax, it actually gives power and authority to the California State Legislature that they can actually redo this wealth tax at a different level and a different rate in the future.” “Think about what that does. It now gives property seizure rights to the California State Legislature to set a value level, so anyone now that's got over $100M net worth, and then it becomes over $10M, and then anyone with $1M net worth, and the state can take 5% of your assets every year.” “Very quickly it becomes the process by which socialism and the socialization of assets that get seized by the government is realized.” “Once you're hooked on the government for some sort of benefit, it's very hard to unhook yourself.” “And it definitionally becomes a spiral. That's what leads to socialism.” “And we have seen it time and again. It's not a big revolution. Socialism emerges slowly.” “Gavin Newsom yesterday on stage at DealBook, talked about redistributing wealth. Ro Khanna is talking about redistributing wealth.” “This is becoming the Democrat party line, and they're going to end up trying to seize this moment to take these socialist principles.”
1:34

David Friedberg Explains The Slow Spiral of Socialism “Government programs create an anchor. They are a shackle.” “This is the spiral of socialism.” “The government programs that are meant to provide support to people require an increase in taxation. That revenue has to come from somewhere.” “That taxation ultimately leads to an attrition of economic value in that region.” “Then you have to increase taxation more, and you end up in the spiral.” “And we're seeing this now, not just in New York where Mamdani’s proposing to increase taxes, but across the entire West Coast.” “We talked about the 5% billionaire tax. So yes, that's a problem for rich people. Great. No one gives a sh*t about us.” “But where does this go?” “In the proposed billionaire tax, it actually gives power and authority to the California State Legislature that they can actually redo this wealth tax at a different level and a different rate in the future.” “Think about what that does. It now gives property seizure rights to the California State Legislature to set a value level, so anyone now that's got over $100M net worth, and then it becomes over $10M, and then anyone with $1M net worth, and the state can take 5% of your assets every year.” “Very quickly it becomes the process by which socialism and the socialization of assets that get seized by the government is realized.” “Once you're hooked on the government for some sort of benefit, it's very hard to unhook yourself.” “And it definitionally becomes a spiral. That's what leads to socialism.” “And we have seen it time and again. It's not a big revolution. Socialism emerges slowly.” “Gavin Newsom yesterday on stage at DealBook, talked about redistributing wealth. Ro Khanna is talking about redistributing wealth.” “This is becoming the Democrat party line, and they're going to end up trying to seize this moment to take these socialist principles.”

The All-In Podcast

201,934 Aufrufe • vor 7 Monaten

BREAKING: Inside Marc & Ben's Multi-Family Office — a16z Perennial Chief Investment Officer, Michel Del Buono Why wealth management is broken & how to financially prepare for a SpaceX IPO This is a closer look at how $50M–$1B+ personal portfolios are actually constructed & managed Important: Michel also explains why many founders make critical mistakes immediately after their first liquidity event, & how to avoid them. We cover: • The “no man’s land” between wealth managers & asset managers • How founders should handle liquidity events ($50M–$1B+) • Diversifying concentrated stock without killing upside • Venture returns & why manager selection matters more than exposure • Real estate, taxes, & after-tax alpha • Why volatility is an opportunity, not a risk • How to actually choose (and not get trapped by) a wealth manager Special thank you to Dave Maloney 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐒 (00:00) Michel Del Buono, CIO a16z Perennial (01:25) The idea behind a16z Perennial (03:38) What’s broken in wealth management (09:05) How wealth has changed over time (11:57) How fee structures shape portfolios (15:26) Why single family offices are hard to run (19:47) Who wealth management is really for (23:26) What makes Perennial different (22:21) Preparing for massive liquidity events: SpaceX, OpenAI... (24:01) How to choose the right wealth manager (26:39) Why switching firms is so hard (28:01) How portfolios are actually built (31:29) Why volatility is an opportunity (32:47) Why real estate is so powerful (34:55) Taxes and the Billionaire Tax debate (38:46) Should you move to save taxes? (40:59) Chamath : SPAC losses & how they affect taxes (42:21) Secondary deals, fake Anduril SPVs & the risks (46:16) What drives returns in Venture Capital (49:42) Biggest Lesson from Marc Andreessen & Ben Horowitz (51:27) The biggest mistake founders make with money (52:53) How to invest after a big exit (54:16) Concerns around private credit (56:38) What big IPOs mean for markets (58:08) Keeping up with markets (59:35) What’s the focus this year at a16z
1:00:59

BREAKING: Inside Marc & Ben's Multi-Family Office — a16z Perennial Chief Investment Officer, Michel Del Buono Why wealth management is broken & how to financially prepare for a SpaceX IPO This is a closer look at how $50M–$1B+ personal portfolios are actually constructed & managed Important: Michel also explains why many founders make critical mistakes immediately after their first liquidity event, & how to avoid them. We cover: • The “no man’s land” between wealth managers & asset managers • How founders should handle liquidity events ($50M–$1B+) • Diversifying concentrated stock without killing upside • Venture returns & why manager selection matters more than exposure • Real estate, taxes, & after-tax alpha • Why volatility is an opportunity, not a risk • How to actually choose (and not get trapped by) a wealth manager Special thank you to Dave Maloney 𝐓𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐌𝐏𝐒 (00:00) Michel Del Buono, CIO a16z Perennial (01:25) The idea behind a16z Perennial (03:38) What’s broken in wealth management (09:05) How wealth has changed over time (11:57) How fee structures shape portfolios (15:26) Why single family offices are hard to run (19:47) Who wealth management is really for (23:26) What makes Perennial different (22:21) Preparing for massive liquidity events: SpaceX, OpenAI... (24:01) How to choose the right wealth manager (26:39) Why switching firms is so hard (28:01) How portfolios are actually built (31:29) Why volatility is an opportunity (32:47) Why real estate is so powerful (34:55) Taxes and the Billionaire Tax debate (38:46) Should you move to save taxes? (40:59) Chamath : SPAC losses & how they affect taxes (42:21) Secondary deals, fake Anduril SPVs & the risks (46:16) What drives returns in Venture Capital (49:42) Biggest Lesson from Marc Andreessen & Ben Horowitz (51:27) The biggest mistake founders make with money (52:53) How to invest after a big exit (54:16) Concerns around private credit (56:38) What big IPOs mean for markets (58:08) Keeping up with markets (59:35) What’s the focus this year at a16z

Molly O’Shea

384,244 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Elon Musk: The U.S. is going bankrupt without AI and robotics. “I came to the conclusion that the only way to get us out of the debt crisis and to prevent America from going bankrupt is AI and robotics. We need to grow the economy at a rate that allows us to pay off our debt. I guess people just generally don't appreciate the degree to which the government overspending is a problem. But even the Social Security website, this is under the Biden administration, on the website it would say, like, based on current demographic trends and how much money Social Security is bringing in versus how many Social Security recipients there are, because we have an aging population, relatively speaking, the average age is increasing, Social Security will not be able to maintain its full payments, I think by 2032. So Social Security will have to stop or start reducing the amount of money that's been paid to people in about seven years. You've got to basically massively increase the economic output. And the only way to do that is AI and robotics. So, basically, we're going bankrupt without AI and robotics.” The Joe Rogan Experience, October 31, 2025
1:04

Elon Musk: The U.S. is going bankrupt without AI and robotics. “I came to the conclusion that the only way to get us out of the debt crisis and to prevent America from going bankrupt is AI and robotics. We need to grow the economy at a rate that allows us to pay off our debt. I guess people just generally don't appreciate the degree to which the government overspending is a problem. But even the Social Security website, this is under the Biden administration, on the website it would say, like, based on current demographic trends and how much money Social Security is bringing in versus how many Social Security recipients there are, because we have an aging population, relatively speaking, the average age is increasing, Social Security will not be able to maintain its full payments, I think by 2032. So Social Security will have to stop or start reducing the amount of money that's been paid to people in about seven years. You've got to basically massively increase the economic output. And the only way to do that is AI and robotics. So, basically, we're going bankrupt without AI and robotics.” The Joe Rogan Experience, October 31, 2025

ELON CLIPS

73,531 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

Graham Platner: “We should never tax someone into poverty. We should also still raise taxes on billionaires and corporations. Bezos wants us to think if you raise his individual taxes, that money isn’t going to pay for all the things you want. That’s why we’re not raising it just on you. We’re raising it on all 930 billionaires in the US. It’s why we’re also not just going after your income, but the wealth as well. The wealth they sit on, the wealth they never actually bring into the real world so they never pay capital gains on it, but they borrow against it so they can have liquidity. Of course Jeff Bezos is gonna tell us if we raise his taxes things won’t get better. He doesn’t want us to raise his taxes. He’s a greedy person. That makes perfect sense to me that he would say that. He’s just entirely wrong and self-serving”
1:12

Graham Platner: “We should never tax someone into poverty. We should also still raise taxes on billionaires and corporations. Bezos wants us to think if you raise his individual taxes, that money isn’t going to pay for all the things you want. That’s why we’re not raising it just on you. We’re raising it on all 930 billionaires in the US. It’s why we’re also not just going after your income, but the wealth as well. The wealth they sit on, the wealth they never actually bring into the real world so they never pay capital gains on it, but they borrow against it so they can have liquidity. Of course Jeff Bezos is gonna tell us if we raise his taxes things won’t get better. He doesn’t want us to raise his taxes. He’s a greedy person. That makes perfect sense to me that he would say that. He’s just entirely wrong and self-serving”

Marco Foster

685,685 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Kevin O'Leary says California must replace Democrat leaders to survive “The better question for all of this stuff is, why is California rotting like this? The whole place. What happened to California in the last 20 years?” “It's policy. It's incredibly bad policy at the municipal level, at the state level. It's a long period of, of, you know, degradation and just collapse of just all kinds of social norms. It's a mess.” “Gavin Newsom's taking these issues and saying, "Let's talk about masks," when the whole place is on fire — and he has an interest in becoming president of the United States? Everybody's just gonna point at California saying, "What? Are you gonna do this to the whole country?" “You should ask yourself, "What happened to this, this place? What, why is it like that? And who can fix it?" 'Cause if it's not the mayor of Los Angeles or it's not Gavin Newsom as a governor, then why don't they get better managers?”
1:39

Kevin O'Leary says California must replace Democrat leaders to survive “The better question for all of this stuff is, why is California rotting like this? The whole place. What happened to California in the last 20 years?” “It's policy. It's incredibly bad policy at the municipal level, at the state level. It's a long period of, of, you know, degradation and just collapse of just all kinds of social norms. It's a mess.” “Gavin Newsom's taking these issues and saying, "Let's talk about masks," when the whole place is on fire — and he has an interest in becoming president of the United States? Everybody's just gonna point at California saying, "What? Are you gonna do this to the whole country?" “You should ask yourself, "What happened to this, this place? What, why is it like that? And who can fix it?" 'Cause if it's not the mayor of Los Angeles or it's not Gavin Newsom as a governor, then why don't they get better managers?”

Wall Street Apes

521,511 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

Caleb Hammer schooled a guest on how taxes work in America, explaining that the U.S. has one of the most progressive tax systems. Caleb: Question, what percent does the top 1% pay in federal income taxes? Guest: None. (Brief silence) Caleb: Think it's about 40 to 50 percent? No, I think it's about... I believe it's about 35%. Then the top 10% pays 50 to 60%. Top 50% pays 99%. The bottom 50% of earners only pay 1%. Did you know we actually have the most progressive income tax system in the entire Western world? Did you know that? Guest: I did not. Caleb: Oh, we do. Of course you didn't know that. Why know anything before having an opinion? What the fuck is wrong with you?
3:15

Caleb Hammer schooled a guest on how taxes work in America, explaining that the U.S. has one of the most progressive tax systems. Caleb: Question, what percent does the top 1% pay in federal income taxes? Guest: None. (Brief silence) Caleb: Think it's about 40 to 50 percent? No, I think it's about... I believe it's about 35%. Then the top 10% pays 50 to 60%. Top 50% pays 99%. The bottom 50% of earners only pay 1%. Did you know we actually have the most progressive income tax system in the entire Western world? Did you know that? Guest: I did not. Caleb: Oh, we do. Of course you didn't know that. Why know anything before having an opinion? What the fuck is wrong with you?

Ruzy.hl

1,632,880 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

The Joe Biden Administration Has Proposed $4.5 TRILLION In New Taxes But Plans On Letting Social Security Run Out “In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed —not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security.” Everyone On Social Security Will Suffer A 24% Decrease In Their Checks In 9 Years. These People DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU 🚨 “The president keeps saying he does not wish to have cuts in social. Is he aware that under current law, when the program goes broke in nine years, that there will be a 24 percent benefit cut for those who are current recipients? Is he aware of that? Well, it's clear that Social Security... But is he... I apologize for interruption, but I have limited time. Is the president aware that when social goes broke in nine years, under current law, there's a 24 percent cut in benefits for people who are currently receiving. If we don't do anything about it, I think that's about right. Okay, let me ask. But the president will want, wants to strengthen social security and make sure that doesn't happen. In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed, are any of those taxes going to shore up social security? I actually know that answer. The answer is of the $4.5 trillion in taxes he has proposed not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security. Does the president know personally anybody who is dependent upon Social Security, and if their benefits are cut by 24%, they will slide into poverty? It's hard for you to know, so I'll give you a pass on that. I assure you that the president knows many people on Social Security. Then why doesn't the president care? He cares very deeply. Then where is his plan? He stands ready to work with Congress to address... That's a lie, because when a bipartisan group of senators has repeatedly requested to meet with him about social, so that somebody who is a current beneficiary will not see her benefits cut by 24%, we have not heard anything on our request. And we've made multiple requests to meet with the president. Now you can't comment on that, I realize that, but that is a fact and if you've been told to say he stands ready to meet, I will tell you there's absolutely no evidence because we have not gotten our meeting.”
2:03

The Joe Biden Administration Has Proposed $4.5 TRILLION In New Taxes But Plans On Letting Social Security Run Out “In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed —not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security.” Everyone On Social Security Will Suffer A 24% Decrease In Their Checks In 9 Years. These People DO NOT CARE ABOUT YOU 🚨 “The president keeps saying he does not wish to have cuts in social. Is he aware that under current law, when the program goes broke in nine years, that there will be a 24 percent benefit cut for those who are current recipients? Is he aware of that? Well, it's clear that Social Security... But is he... I apologize for interruption, but I have limited time. Is the president aware that when social goes broke in nine years, under current law, there's a 24 percent cut in benefits for people who are currently receiving. If we don't do anything about it, I think that's about right. Okay, let me ask. But the president will want, wants to strengthen social security and make sure that doesn't happen. In the $4.5 trillion of taxes the president has proposed, are any of those taxes going to shore up social security? I actually know that answer. The answer is of the $4.5 trillion in taxes he has proposed not a dime, is going to shore up Social Security. Does the president know personally anybody who is dependent upon Social Security, and if their benefits are cut by 24%, they will slide into poverty? It's hard for you to know, so I'll give you a pass on that. I assure you that the president knows many people on Social Security. Then why doesn't the president care? He cares very deeply. Then where is his plan? He stands ready to work with Congress to address... That's a lie, because when a bipartisan group of senators has repeatedly requested to meet with him about social, so that somebody who is a current beneficiary will not see her benefits cut by 24%, we have not heard anything on our request. And we've made multiple requests to meet with the president. Now you can't comment on that, I realize that, but that is a fact and if you've been told to say he stands ready to meet, I will tell you there's absolutely no evidence because we have not gotten our meeting.”

Wall Street Apes

571,870 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

🚨ZUCK: We had organizations looking into us that weren't even involved in Social Media. We had the CFPB looking after us. I didn't even know what that is. It's some financial institution that Elizabeth Warren set up. We're not a bank, what does Meta have to do with this? They came up with some theory and were trying really hard to make it work. I don't know how this stuff works -- is it a directive? A quiet consensus? It's tough to be at the other end of that. The US Government should be defending its companies, not at the tip of the spear attacking its companies. The EU has fined the tech companies more thsn $30B over the last 10-20 years. This is a EU wide policy for how they want to deal with tech, it's kind of like a tariff. The US Government led the attacks against their companies which gave permission for the EU and other countries to go after US companies as well. I think that the American tech industry is a bright spot in the US economy, it's a strategic advantage, and it should be part of the US' strategy going forward to defend that. I am optimistic about that with Trump, I think he just wants the US to win. At least in the US we have rule of law, you get your day in court, and we usually win, but other countries don't have that. If the US wants to remain strong, the US has to have a role in defending their tech."
4:06

🚨ZUCK: We had organizations looking into us that weren't even involved in Social Media. We had the CFPB looking after us. I didn't even know what that is. It's some financial institution that Elizabeth Warren set up. We're not a bank, what does Meta have to do with this? They came up with some theory and were trying really hard to make it work. I don't know how this stuff works -- is it a directive? A quiet consensus? It's tough to be at the other end of that. The US Government should be defending its companies, not at the tip of the spear attacking its companies. The EU has fined the tech companies more thsn $30B over the last 10-20 years. This is a EU wide policy for how they want to deal with tech, it's kind of like a tariff. The US Government led the attacks against their companies which gave permission for the EU and other countries to go after US companies as well. I think that the American tech industry is a bright spot in the US economy, it's a strategic advantage, and it should be part of the US' strategy going forward to defend that. I am optimistic about that with Trump, I think he just wants the US to win. At least in the US we have rule of law, you get your day in court, and we usually win, but other countries don't have that. If the US wants to remain strong, the US has to have a role in defending their tech."

Autism Capital 🧩

1,842,936 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Listen up because a president who was elected to lower costs,has just put taxes up for EVERY AMERICAN. So why is he elated? Because it’s a flat tax. Rich people buy groceries just the same as low wage workers. The problem is they will both be paying the same tax for the same goods. This is going to cost the average family around $5000 a year. THAT IS A TAX. The billionaires will pay the same price as the Amazon driver. The difference is, the billionaire can afford it. The Amazon driver’s kids may well go hungry. To Add insult to injury. The $5000 paid by the Amazon driver, will be handed to the billionaire as a tax cut. How does that make America Great? It just makes Americans Poor Again, while the rich get even richer. This is the biggest economic mistake in modern American history. I feel so sorry for the millions of people this is going to hurt. This is NOT FEAR-MONGERING, this is for real. 🎥 TikTok -
1:06

Listen up because a president who was elected to lower costs,has just put taxes up for EVERY AMERICAN. So why is he elated? Because it’s a flat tax. Rich people buy groceries just the same as low wage workers. The problem is they will both be paying the same tax for the same goods. This is going to cost the average family around $5000 a year. THAT IS A TAX. The billionaires will pay the same price as the Amazon driver. The difference is, the billionaire can afford it. The Amazon driver’s kids may well go hungry. To Add insult to injury. The $5000 paid by the Amazon driver, will be handed to the billionaire as a tax cut. How does that make America Great? It just makes Americans Poor Again, while the rich get even richer. This is the biggest economic mistake in modern American history. I feel so sorry for the millions of people this is going to hurt. This is NOT FEAR-MONGERING, this is for real. 🎥 TikTok -

𝔗𝔯𝔲𝔱𝔥 𝔐𝔞𝔱𝔱𝔢𝔯𝔰

45,373 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

So many Americans have to be feeling this same way “Why is no one talking about how serious the cost of living actually is? — My husband is working three jobs right now. We buy absolutely nothing, nothing that we don't need, and we actually go without a lot of things that we actually do need. I feel like if you're able to do anything that's not just surviving, then you got it good. I feel so sad that I didn't appreciate the times where we were able to actually have fun at this point. So much has changed in the past few years. Like, what? I just really, really want to know. How's everyone surviving? Is everyone working, like, 24/7? Because that's what my husband does, and I'm just home with my little kids all the time. It's kind of, like, depressing that we're never together as a family. So I don't know. I hope one day we can be, but it sucks.”
1:19

So many Americans have to be feeling this same way “Why is no one talking about how serious the cost of living actually is? — My husband is working three jobs right now. We buy absolutely nothing, nothing that we don't need, and we actually go without a lot of things that we actually do need. I feel like if you're able to do anything that's not just surviving, then you got it good. I feel so sad that I didn't appreciate the times where we were able to actually have fun at this point. So much has changed in the past few years. Like, what? I just really, really want to know. How's everyone surviving? Is everyone working, like, 24/7? Because that's what my husband does, and I'm just home with my little kids all the time. It's kind of, like, depressing that we're never together as a family. So I don't know. I hope one day we can be, but it sucks.”

Wall Street Apes

916,140 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

David Friedberg: Through Zero-Based Budgeting, DOGE is Compelling Americans to Ask the Fundamental Question of Government On E214, david friedberg broke down the impact Department of Government Efficiency and Elon Musk are having: "If you zoom out on what DOGE is doing, I think the best way to describe it is zero-based budgeting." " In organizations that go through zero-based budgeting, you do a cycle, typically annually, where you take all of your OpEx, all of your expenses in running a company down to the studs." "You take it down to zero, and you rebuild it up..." " They're doing a zero-based budgeting on the federal government." "They're looking at every line item and they're asking the fundamental question, which I don't think we talk about in the public discourse enough, which is, 'What is the essential role of government?'" "And there is a great debate to be had around that point." "Should the government be providing humanitarian aid in international markets?" "Should the government be providing security to nations that can't provide security for themselves?" "Should the government be providing loans for people to go to sh*tty universities?" " Should the government be providing loans for people to buy homes that are overpriced?" "And as we start to ask the questions of how we're spending money, I think it ends up leading to the most important questions, which is what is the essential role of government?" "Which I think is the debate that needs to be had in order for the democracy to last."
1:10

David Friedberg: Through Zero-Based Budgeting, DOGE is Compelling Americans to Ask the Fundamental Question of Government On E214, david friedberg broke down the impact Department of Government Efficiency and Elon Musk are having: "If you zoom out on what DOGE is doing, I think the best way to describe it is zero-based budgeting." " In organizations that go through zero-based budgeting, you do a cycle, typically annually, where you take all of your OpEx, all of your expenses in running a company down to the studs." "You take it down to zero, and you rebuild it up..." " They're doing a zero-based budgeting on the federal government." "They're looking at every line item and they're asking the fundamental question, which I don't think we talk about in the public discourse enough, which is, 'What is the essential role of government?'" "And there is a great debate to be had around that point." "Should the government be providing humanitarian aid in international markets?" "Should the government be providing security to nations that can't provide security for themselves?" "Should the government be providing loans for people to go to sh*tty universities?" " Should the government be providing loans for people to buy homes that are overpriced?" "And as we start to ask the questions of how we're spending money, I think it ends up leading to the most important questions, which is what is the essential role of government?" "Which I think is the debate that needs to be had in order for the democracy to last."

The All-In Podcast

260,998 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Why do we have inflation? The Fed tries to force 2% inflation. It wasn’t always this way. “The natural tendency for prices is to go down. If you look at the CPI in 1900 and you look at it in 1800, it was down by 50%. So for a hundred years in America, prices went down. And during that time, we had the Industrial Revolution.” “We had the most rapid period of economic growth in the history of America, which was after the Civil War and into the early 1900s. All the time prices were coming down.” “Today, the Federal Reserve says that we need to have 2 % inflation. Prices have to go up 2 % a year. Why? I mean, why does the cost of living have to go up? Why can't it go down or at least remain the same? And what is the answer to that? What's the rationale for that?” “Well, they have a bunch of BS explanations and it's all to justify the fact that the government wants inflation. It's not that it's good for us. The government needs it.” “It's the way the government raises revenue and repudiates its debts.” Peter Schiff
3:36

Why do we have inflation? The Fed tries to force 2% inflation. It wasn’t always this way. “The natural tendency for prices is to go down. If you look at the CPI in 1900 and you look at it in 1800, it was down by 50%. So for a hundred years in America, prices went down. And during that time, we had the Industrial Revolution.” “We had the most rapid period of economic growth in the history of America, which was after the Civil War and into the early 1900s. All the time prices were coming down.” “Today, the Federal Reserve says that we need to have 2 % inflation. Prices have to go up 2 % a year. Why? I mean, why does the cost of living have to go up? Why can't it go down or at least remain the same? And what is the answer to that? What's the rationale for that?” “Well, they have a bunch of BS explanations and it's all to justify the fact that the government wants inflation. It's not that it's good for us. The government needs it.” “It's the way the government raises revenue and repudiates its debts.” Peter Schiff

Wall Street Mav

98,990 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten