Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

🚨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.”show more

The All-In Podcast

578,891 subscribers

44,452 views • 11 months ago •via X (Twitter)

News & Politics Education Finance

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

David Friedberg on the Nonprofit Scam: 90% Are Bullsh*t “ The definition of exempt activities is charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literacy, public safety, or fostering amateur sports competition, or preventing cruelty to children or animals. You tell me how the f**k 90% of what we call nonprofits today fall under that definition. We have completely f**king closed our eyes to the fact that organizations, regardless of political affiliation or social interest, have fundamental commercial and probably not aligned interests with the definition of a 501(c)(3), and we've allowed them all to get away with it for far too long. I don't think that this is a blue or red thing. I think that this is a thing where we let these organizations make it easy to get money, to hide the money, and to do whatever the hell they want with the money, and we need to stop it. And I think that it's an amazing opportunity right now for everyone to kind of reset the decks by cleaning all the sh*t up, and getting all of these organizations flushed, and make sure that any organization that wants to do whatever bullsh*t, nefarious things they want to do, by all means do it. But it's not a nonprofit and you shouldn't get a charitable donation deduction, and the government should not be putting money into these sorts of things. This is an entirely different sort of activity in the social order. And as a libertarian, I'm all for it, but I don't think that they should be tax exempt, and I don't think they should be getting government money, and I don't think that individuals should be benefiting from giving them money. And if we could fix all that shit up, I think a lot of these problems are going to go away.”

David Friedberg on the Nonprofit Scam: 90% Are Bullsht “ The definition of exempt activities is charitable, religious, educational, scientific, literacy, public safety, or fostering amateur sports competition, or preventing cruelty to children or animals. You tell me how the fk 90% of what we call nonprofits today fall under that definition. We have completely fking closed our eyes to the fact that organizations, regardless of political affiliation or social interest, have fundamental commercial and probably not aligned interests with the definition of a 501(c)(3), and we've allowed them all to get away with it for far too long. I don't think that this is a blue or red thing. I think that this is a thing where we let these organizations make it easy to get money, to hide the money, and to do whatever the hell they want with the money, and we need to stop it. And I think that it's an amazing opportunity right now for everyone to kind of reset the decks by cleaning all the sht up, and getting all of these organizations flushed, and make sure that any organization that wants to do whatever bullsh*t, nefarious things they want to do, by all means do it. But it's not a nonprofit and you shouldn't get a charitable donation deduction, and the government should not be putting money into these sorts of things. This is an entirely different sort of activity in the social order. And as a libertarian, I'm all for it, but I don't think that they should be tax exempt, and I don't think they should be getting government money, and I don't think that individuals should be benefiting from giving them money. And if we could fix all that shit up, I think a lot of these problems are going to go away.”

The All-In Podcast

575,013 views • 3 months ago

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."

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

166,742 views • 1 year ago

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."

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 views • 1 year ago

Victoria Derbyshire, "You want to spend a lot of public services and welfare, is the wealth tax a panacea, is that fair?" Zack Polanski, "I don't present it as a panacea. It's not close to a panacea, it's just the start of the things we need to do" "We need to bring Capital Gains Tax in line with Income Tax" "Right now, if you're a cleaner, you could be paying more than than the person who owns the building you're working in" "We need to tax unearned wealth as much as we tax earned income" Victoria Derbyshire, "When you look at other countries around Europe who spend more on public services and have better public services as a result, they tend to tax the income of everyone, including lower and middle income earners. Maybe you have to say to people we all have to pay for this" Zack Polanski, "It's right that we start our focus on the super wealthy. Once we start to move to a better footing as a society where we have better infrastructure and services, it is legitimate to say paying tax is patriotic" "We should be proud of contributing to this country. making sure we have an NHS that works. Public transport that works" "Yes, everyone will have to pay for that, but ultimately this is about where is the biggest burden, and that should be on the people with the broadest shoulders"

Victoria Derbyshire, "You want to spend a lot of public services and welfare, is the wealth tax a panacea, is that fair?" Zack Polanski, "I don't present it as a panacea. It's not close to a panacea, it's just the start of the things we need to do" "We need to bring Capital Gains Tax in line with Income Tax" "Right now, if you're a cleaner, you could be paying more than than the person who owns the building you're working in" "We need to tax unearned wealth as much as we tax earned income" Victoria Derbyshire, "When you look at other countries around Europe who spend more on public services and have better public services as a result, they tend to tax the income of everyone, including lower and middle income earners. Maybe you have to say to people we all have to pay for this" Zack Polanski, "It's right that we start our focus on the super wealthy. Once we start to move to a better footing as a society where we have better infrastructure and services, it is legitimate to say paying tax is patriotic" "We should be proud of contributing to this country. making sure we have an NHS that works. Public transport that works" "Yes, everyone will have to pay for that, but ultimately this is about where is the biggest burden, and that should be on the people with the broadest shoulders"

Farrukh

80,309 views • 9 months ago

You Heard It Here First: Chamath Predicts US Sovereign Wealth Fund Template On E212 (Jan 24th), the besties discussed Donald J. Trump floating the idea of the US government owning 50% of TikTok in exchange for a permit to operate. Chamath Palihapitiya thought this could be a template for the future: "There's a question that this raises, which is, does it make sense for the American government to be a little bit smarter going forward about how it allocates incentives and resources?" "Wouldn't it make sense where when you create incredible economic incentives and upside for private investors and investment, for some portion of that gain to go back to the American people?" "Is that a bad thing? I don't think so." "Would it enrich America? I think so." "Would it make it easier for people to feel like they're participating in all of these incredible gains? I also think so." "My prediction is that this becomes more of a template for the future." "It'll be more about creating incentives and allocating those incentives for a share of the upside." "And I think that there is a really strong economic argument for America to do that." **Fast forward 10 days** Today, President Donald J. Trump, alongside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Nominee Howard Lutnick, announced plans for a US Sovereign Wealth Fund! Trump: " We're going to have a sovereign wealth fund, which we've never had." Lutnick: "The extraordinary size and scale of the US government and the business it does with companies should create value for American citizens." Trump: "And as an example, TikTok, we're going to be doing something perhaps with TikTok, and perhaps not." "And we might put that in the sovereign wealth fund."

You Heard It Here First: Chamath Predicts US Sovereign Wealth Fund Template On E212 (Jan 24th), the besties discussed Donald J. Trump floating the idea of the US government owning 50% of TikTok in exchange for a permit to operate. Chamath Palihapitiya thought this could be a template for the future: "There's a question that this raises, which is, does it make sense for the American government to be a little bit smarter going forward about how it allocates incentives and resources?" "Wouldn't it make sense where when you create incredible economic incentives and upside for private investors and investment, for some portion of that gain to go back to the American people?" "Is that a bad thing? I don't think so." "Would it enrich America? I think so." "Would it make it easier for people to feel like they're participating in all of these incredible gains? I also think so." "My prediction is that this becomes more of a template for the future." "It'll be more about creating incentives and allocating those incentives for a share of the upside." "And I think that there is a really strong economic argument for America to do that." Fast forward 10 days Today, President Donald J. Trump, alongside Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Nominee Howard Lutnick, announced plans for a US Sovereign Wealth Fund! Trump: " We're going to have a sovereign wealth fund, which we've never had." Lutnick: "The extraordinary size and scale of the US government and the business it does with companies should create value for American citizens." Trump: "And as an example, TikTok, we're going to be doing something perhaps with TikTok, and perhaps not." "And we might put that in the sovereign wealth fund."

The All-In Podcast

355,207 views • 1 year ago

David Friedberg Breaks Down Zohran Mamdani's Win in NYC: The College Debt Crisis Has Led Young People to Socialism "It's really a revolution against the system that brought them to this moment." "Because the promise that we gave in America, the American Dream, was if you go to college, you will graduate, you will have income, you will have stability, you'll be able to buy a home." "And what we did is we increased the government's role in making that dream possible, and in doing so, we created effectively a system where we gave unrestricted access to capital, which inflated the cost of education." " People could go to school like Zohran and major in African studies and graduate with $200-300K of debt and then never get a job. The guy has not had a real job. And this is the truth for 32 million young Americans." " They all have what is called negative capital. They have debt and they will never be able to get out of that cycle." "So where do you turn in that moment? You don't go turn to corporations to solve your problems. You don't go turn to your friends and your siblings and your family, they're not gonna bail you out." "You turn to the voting booth, and you hear a guy like Zohran show up and say, 'There can be a better path forward.' The better path forward is the government can and should do more to help." "And in doing more to help, we will increase government, we will tax the rich, we will tax the corporations. We will take all of that capital and we will redistribute it in the form of services and checks and support for all of the people that find themselves unable to take care of themselves." "And this becomes a tipping point when the majority of the voter base ends up in that situation where they're that deeply in need, where they have negative capital." "And that is the situation America finds itself in today."

David Friedberg Breaks Down Zohran Mamdani's Win in NYC: The College Debt Crisis Has Led Young People to Socialism "It's really a revolution against the system that brought them to this moment." "Because the promise that we gave in America, the American Dream, was if you go to college, you will graduate, you will have income, you will have stability, you'll be able to buy a home." "And what we did is we increased the government's role in making that dream possible, and in doing so, we created effectively a system where we gave unrestricted access to capital, which inflated the cost of education." " People could go to school like Zohran and major in African studies and graduate with $200-300K of debt and then never get a job. The guy has not had a real job. And this is the truth for 32 million young Americans." " They all have what is called negative capital. They have debt and they will never be able to get out of that cycle." "So where do you turn in that moment? You don't go turn to corporations to solve your problems. You don't go turn to your friends and your siblings and your family, they're not gonna bail you out." "You turn to the voting booth, and you hear a guy like Zohran show up and say, 'There can be a better path forward.' The better path forward is the government can and should do more to help." "And in doing more to help, we will increase government, we will tax the rich, we will tax the corporations. We will take all of that capital and we will redistribute it in the form of services and checks and support for all of the people that find themselves unable to take care of themselves." "And this becomes a tipping point when the majority of the voter base ends up in that situation where they're that deeply in need, where they have negative capital." "And that is the situation America finds itself in today."

The All-In Podcast

470,884 views • 1 year ago

🚨NEW: David Friedberg has a direct message for Democratic Party "The Democratic party has an opportunity to stand up and say 'We don't want things like regulatory capture, or pork, or inside stuff going on...they can have all that and still align with increasing efficiency in Government. Efficiency in Government should not be a party issue. By allowing the Republicans to say 'We're for efficient government,' it implies that the Democrats are the opposite of that saying, 'We're for *inefficient government.' If the Democrats want to win this they can take this message and say we're for *more* efficient government and the way we're going to do it is by getting rid of regulatory capture, deals, etc. There's an opportunity for the Democrats to stand up and take the country in the direction that we *all* as Americans need it to go to, which is to have a sustainable federal Government. That's going to require some degree of fiscal conservatism and action, but they can take a different point of view on how they do it and have core beliefs around that." david friedberg The All-In Podcast

🚨NEW: David Friedberg has a direct message for Democratic Party "The Democratic party has an opportunity to stand up and say 'We don't want things like regulatory capture, or pork, or inside stuff going on...they can have all that and still align with increasing efficiency in Government. Efficiency in Government should not be a party issue. By allowing the Republicans to say 'We're for efficient government,' it implies that the Democrats are the opposite of that saying, 'We're for inefficient government.' If the Democrats want to win this they can take this message and say we're for more* efficient government and the way we're going to do it is by getting rid of regulatory capture, deals, etc. There's an opportunity for the Democrats to stand up and take the country in the direction that we all as Americans need it to go to, which is to have a sustainable federal Government. That's going to require some degree of fiscal conservatism and action, but they can take a different point of view on how they do it and have core beliefs around that." david friedberg The All-In Podcast

Autism Capital 🧩

93,886 views • 1 year ago

YOKO ONO: ONOCHORD, VENICE, 2004 Yoko: The world is divided in two industries. One is the War Industry and the other is the Peace Industry. The people in the War Industry are totally together. They don't have to talk to each other, even. They know exactly what they want to do. They want to go out there, kill and make money. But the people in the Peace Industry, which are us - we are so idealistic that each one of us criticises the other Peace Person in the Peace Industry. And we are always just arguing and we are wasting our energies doing that. So let's just forgive each other and see that we are in the Peace Industry and that's all that counts. Even if you are not marching for peace, just be yourself, being a florist, being a merchant, being a talior, anything. That way you're contributing to the Peace Industry. People are just concentrating on fear, confusion and anger. And therefore just for a moment, I'd like us to think about Love. In a very magical, straight way, John and I met in London and from then on we stood for Peace and Love. And when I do this kind of event. Well it is... I was inspired to do it, but I still think that I'm still with John in spirit. John and I created the country called Nutopia. Not Utopia, because there was Utopia as a concept already. And we wanted to create a new concept, so we just added N on it - Nutopia - and as a country. Well, that is the concept of a country. And we all are citizens of that country. And in my apartment in the Dakota Building, we put a little plaque on the back door, the kitchen door. It says 'Nutopian Embassy' and even now we have that. (laughs). Nutopia exists in our minds. And because of that, some people want to rebel against it. The reason some want to rebel against it is a good proof that it exists. I think that it was a terrible thing that happened in Chechnya. But we have to still keep our hopes up. And instead of giving up, we have to keep on sending the message of Love to each other. You say that I am the Ambassador of Peace. We are all Ambassadors of Peace. You are too. Everybody in this room are Ambassadors of Peace. Just the fact that we are not participating in War. The fact that we are here, and we are what we are, means that we are in the Peace Industry. All of us. John and I used to say that our apartment in the Dakota is a conceptual monastry, just for the two of us. And when we go out of the Dakota, we get so many people communicating with us, so it's very important that we had silence and quietness. And my apartment is a very small space compared to the world. And I need that for my peace of mind. You should be kind to each other. You should come together, hug each other, love each other, express our love to each other and we should make it work. We should finally create a world that is a totally an Earth for Us. So let's do it. Yoko Ono, OpenAsia Press Conference, whilst exhibiting Onochord, 2004 by Yoko Ono (Nutopia) at the Venice Biennale: OpenAsia 2004, Lido Di Venezia, Venice, Italy, 9 September 2004.

YOKO ONO: ONOCHORD, VENICE, 2004 Yoko: The world is divided in two industries. One is the War Industry and the other is the Peace Industry. The people in the War Industry are totally together. They don't have to talk to each other, even. They know exactly what they want to do. They want to go out there, kill and make money. But the people in the Peace Industry, which are us - we are so idealistic that each one of us criticises the other Peace Person in the Peace Industry. And we are always just arguing and we are wasting our energies doing that. So let's just forgive each other and see that we are in the Peace Industry and that's all that counts. Even if you are not marching for peace, just be yourself, being a florist, being a merchant, being a talior, anything. That way you're contributing to the Peace Industry. People are just concentrating on fear, confusion and anger. And therefore just for a moment, I'd like us to think about Love. In a very magical, straight way, John and I met in London and from then on we stood for Peace and Love. And when I do this kind of event. Well it is... I was inspired to do it, but I still think that I'm still with John in spirit. John and I created the country called Nutopia. Not Utopia, because there was Utopia as a concept already. And we wanted to create a new concept, so we just added N on it - Nutopia - and as a country. Well, that is the concept of a country. And we all are citizens of that country. And in my apartment in the Dakota Building, we put a little plaque on the back door, the kitchen door. It says 'Nutopian Embassy' and even now we have that. (laughs). Nutopia exists in our minds. And because of that, some people want to rebel against it. The reason some want to rebel against it is a good proof that it exists. I think that it was a terrible thing that happened in Chechnya. But we have to still keep our hopes up. And instead of giving up, we have to keep on sending the message of Love to each other. You say that I am the Ambassador of Peace. We are all Ambassadors of Peace. You are too. Everybody in this room are Ambassadors of Peace. Just the fact that we are not participating in War. The fact that we are here, and we are what we are, means that we are in the Peace Industry. All of us. John and I used to say that our apartment in the Dakota is a conceptual monastry, just for the two of us. And when we go out of the Dakota, we get so many people communicating with us, so it's very important that we had silence and quietness. And my apartment is a very small space compared to the world. And I need that for my peace of mind. You should be kind to each other. You should come together, hug each other, love each other, express our love to each other and we should make it work. We should finally create a world that is a totally an Earth for Us. So let's do it. Yoko Ono, OpenAsia Press Conference, whilst exhibiting Onochord, 2004 by Yoko Ono (Nutopia) at the Venice Biennale: OpenAsia 2004, Lido Di Venezia, Venice, Italy, 9 September 2004.

Yoko Ono

35,208 views • 2 years ago

"We have 5 years until Social Security is bankrupt." David david friedberg on why Brad Gerstner's (Brad Gerstner) Trump Accounts for children are great for America: "The idea is right. It's a 401(k) for everyone." "Social Security needs to flip into being a 401(k) for everyone, tomorrow." "When you look at how much is going to get paid out and what the pay-in rate is, Social Security runs out of money in five years." "It's got $2.7T in it today. It's a fucking treasury." "They should sell that treasury, take that cash, and go buy the S&P 500." "And then everyone that has Social Security should get an account, and they should get their money, and it should buy the S&P. And it can also buy private stock, and whatever." "And we should do the same for all government employees and get them off of these pension plans." "These pension plans are poison." "The fundamental problem with these pension plans is that they will ultimately end up bankrupting the states, or become Ponzi schemes where people get screwed because they're expecting retirement benefits and they don't get them, and they're going to get bailed out somehow anyway." "They should all be flipped to retirement accounts. They should all be flipped to 401(k)s." "Everyone in America should get the same thing: 401(k) you own a piece of these equities in America, and we all participate together in the growth of America. And then everyone's incentivized to see businesses succeed."

"We have 5 years until Social Security is bankrupt." David david friedberg on why Brad Gerstner's (Brad Gerstner) Trump Accounts for children are great for America: "The idea is right. It's a 401(k) for everyone." "Social Security needs to flip into being a 401(k) for everyone, tomorrow." "When you look at how much is going to get paid out and what the pay-in rate is, Social Security runs out of money in five years." "It's got $2.7T in it today. It's a fucking treasury." "They should sell that treasury, take that cash, and go buy the S&P 500." "And then everyone that has Social Security should get an account, and they should get their money, and it should buy the S&P. And it can also buy private stock, and whatever." "And we should do the same for all government employees and get them off of these pension plans." "These pension plans are poison." "The fundamental problem with these pension plans is that they will ultimately end up bankrupting the states, or become Ponzi schemes where people get screwed because they're expecting retirement benefits and they don't get them, and they're going to get bailed out somehow anyway." "They should all be flipped to retirement accounts. They should all be flipped to 401(k)s." "Everyone in America should get the same thing: 401(k) you own a piece of these equities in America, and we all participate together in the growth of America. And then everyone's incentivized to see businesses succeed."

Molly O’Shea

42,526 views • 20 days ago

David Friedberg Explains the Hidden Collapse Beneath Record Stock Prices 🔥🪙 “Instead of trading it in US dollars, what if you just look at the US stock market, the total value, in ounces of gold?” “The stock market's up in dollar-denominated terms, but if you look at the stock market relative to gold, it's actually down.” “In a democracy, like we have for the past 250 years, without adequate constitutional constraints, it has always been the case that over time government spending goes up.” “And this is because in a democracy, people ask for their government to do more every year, and as they ask for their government to do more every year, the government agents who are elected say, ‘Okay, here you go,’ and they spend more.” “And eventually, when the borrowing capacity gets unlocked, which is what happened in the United States when we went off the gold standard, you borrow like crazy, you print money to fund those borrowing costs, but eventually the bill comes due.” “And in the United States, the bill is coming due.” “But I just want to tie it back to Minnesota, Donald Trump, and socialism.” “I think it's important for us to just highlight that if you own assets like we do, the four of us, we own stocks, we own real estate, we own other assets.” “As the dollar devalues and everything inflates in value, our asset prices go up and we get wealthier, and wealthier, and wealthier.” “The majority of Americans do not own assets. They are net asset negative.” “As a result, they live off of income and they do not benefit from the de-dollarization like asset holders do.” “And I fundamentally believe that much of the civil unrest and ultimately the divide in this country is driven by the fact that de-dollarization, because of excess government spending, ultimately leads a majority of people in this country to feeling oppressed and left behind because they're seeing a few people in the country accelerate their net worth, like all of us here, and there's no way for them to catch up because they don't actually own assets.”

David Friedberg Explains the Hidden Collapse Beneath Record Stock Prices 🔥🪙 “Instead of trading it in US dollars, what if you just look at the US stock market, the total value, in ounces of gold?” “The stock market's up in dollar-denominated terms, but if you look at the stock market relative to gold, it's actually down.” “In a democracy, like we have for the past 250 years, without adequate constitutional constraints, it has always been the case that over time government spending goes up.” “And this is because in a democracy, people ask for their government to do more every year, and as they ask for their government to do more every year, the government agents who are elected say, ‘Okay, here you go,’ and they spend more.” “And eventually, when the borrowing capacity gets unlocked, which is what happened in the United States when we went off the gold standard, you borrow like crazy, you print money to fund those borrowing costs, but eventually the bill comes due.” “And in the United States, the bill is coming due.” “But I just want to tie it back to Minnesota, Donald Trump, and socialism.” “I think it's important for us to just highlight that if you own assets like we do, the four of us, we own stocks, we own real estate, we own other assets.” “As the dollar devalues and everything inflates in value, our asset prices go up and we get wealthier, and wealthier, and wealthier.” “The majority of Americans do not own assets. They are net asset negative.” “As a result, they live off of income and they do not benefit from the de-dollarization like asset holders do.” “And I fundamentally believe that much of the civil unrest and ultimately the divide in this country is driven by the fact that de-dollarization, because of excess government spending, ultimately leads a majority of people in this country to feeling oppressed and left behind because they're seeing a few people in the country accelerate their net worth, like all of us here, and there's no way for them to catch up because they don't actually own assets.”

The All-In Podcast

189,084 views • 6 months ago

🚨Governor DeSantis pitches Federal Balanced Budget Amendment to Kentucky Legislature. Kentucky will be the 29th of 34 States needed to send the Amendment back to the States for ratification. “We're $38+ TRILLION in debt and it is escalating very quickly every day. We now spend more on interest just to service the debt than we do on national defense, and those numbers are going to escalate as some of these bonds have to be refinance in the future. I'm proud to be a Republican. This is not a Democrat problem, or this is a bipartisan debt problem. So Florida has obviously certified this. 28 States in total have. We've got a couple more that we think will happen relatively soon. Kentucky hopefully would be one of those. The reason I'm here is because I don't think Congress is going to fix itself. I think the incentives up there are such that we're likely to continue more of the same. There's a culture that's developed. There's a muscle memory that's developed. And you can't just say elect new people and all of a sudden they're going to fix it because here's the deal. Even if somehow we did elect new people and they did fix it, the next Congress can come in and undo it. And so unless you have changes, permanent constitutional changes to the incentive structure in Congress, you are not going to solve this problem. And the question is, how much more can you go into debt before we have a major debt crisis? I mean, at some point. Reality is going to bite, and I think the U.S. has been able to get away with this longer just because we're the best bet in town. Whatever problems we have, a lot of these other countries have other problems. But so why would you guys want to be involved at the state level? Because that's what our founding fathers envision. This is America's 250th anniversary of independence, and obviously it took them a decade or so to fashion a Constitution. But when they created the Constitution, they believed that the states were the most important units of government. They were creating a federal government, but it was limited and enumerated to certain tasks. There were local governments created by the state governments, but ultimately was the states that created the federal government and that ratified the Constitution. So they saw the states having a very, very important role. What about with constitutional amendments? Well, I think we just think muscle memory is, well, yeah, Congress proposes these amendments. You need two thirds of each house. They can propose it, and then it goes to the states for ratification. That's one way to propose it. The other way to propose it is via the states with Article V, and you have two thirds of the state certified. A proposal can be fashioned, and then it can go to the states for ratification. The founders knew that Congress could be the problem. So they obviously wanted to provide a mechanism for we, the people working through our states to be able to institute the reforms that would be necessary. We have the power to do it in our states. Many states have stepped up, and obviously I think Kentucky would be a great, great candidate to join the movement to prevent Congress from bankrupting this country. And if we can do that, that'll be one of the best things these states have ever done.”

🚨Governor DeSantis pitches Federal Balanced Budget Amendment to Kentucky Legislature. Kentucky will be the 29th of 34 States needed to send the Amendment back to the States for ratification. “We're $38+ TRILLION in debt and it is escalating very quickly every day. We now spend more on interest just to service the debt than we do on national defense, and those numbers are going to escalate as some of these bonds have to be refinance in the future. I'm proud to be a Republican. This is not a Democrat problem, or this is a bipartisan debt problem. So Florida has obviously certified this. 28 States in total have. We've got a couple more that we think will happen relatively soon. Kentucky hopefully would be one of those. The reason I'm here is because I don't think Congress is going to fix itself. I think the incentives up there are such that we're likely to continue more of the same. There's a culture that's developed. There's a muscle memory that's developed. And you can't just say elect new people and all of a sudden they're going to fix it because here's the deal. Even if somehow we did elect new people and they did fix it, the next Congress can come in and undo it. And so unless you have changes, permanent constitutional changes to the incentive structure in Congress, you are not going to solve this problem. And the question is, how much more can you go into debt before we have a major debt crisis? I mean, at some point. Reality is going to bite, and I think the U.S. has been able to get away with this longer just because we're the best bet in town. Whatever problems we have, a lot of these other countries have other problems. But so why would you guys want to be involved at the state level? Because that's what our founding fathers envision. This is America's 250th anniversary of independence, and obviously it took them a decade or so to fashion a Constitution. But when they created the Constitution, they believed that the states were the most important units of government. They were creating a federal government, but it was limited and enumerated to certain tasks. There were local governments created by the state governments, but ultimately was the states that created the federal government and that ratified the Constitution. So they saw the states having a very, very important role. What about with constitutional amendments? Well, I think we just think muscle memory is, well, yeah, Congress proposes these amendments. You need two thirds of each house. They can propose it, and then it goes to the states for ratification. That's one way to propose it. The other way to propose it is via the states with Article V, and you have two thirds of the state certified. A proposal can be fashioned, and then it can go to the states for ratification. The founders knew that Congress could be the problem. So they obviously wanted to provide a mechanism for we, the people working through our states to be able to institute the reforms that would be necessary. We have the power to do it in our states. Many states have stepped up, and obviously I think Kentucky would be a great, great candidate to join the movement to prevent Congress from bankrupting this country. And if we can do that, that'll be one of the best things these states have ever done.”

Chris Nelson 🏝️🇺🇸

366,069 views • 5 months ago

🚨 NOW: VP JD Vance reveals why crushing fraud is PERSONAL for him. This is why we LOVE JD "I grew up in a family where we sometimes benefited from these programs. The generosity of the American people is one of the most amazing things about our country." "I think all of us, of course, just passed tax day, none of us like paying our taxes, but we do it. And why do we do it? Because we know that it goes to give a bite to a low-income family that can't afford food." "We know that it goes to pay the military who keep us safe. We know that it goes to some essential services, but that trust, that trust in our government, that trust in our institution, it depends on us taking that trust seriously." "How long are people going to pay into programs if they know that that money doesn't go to a low-income kid who needs health care, but that money goes into a fraudster getting rich?" "This doesn't work, and this doesn't make sense unless we take fraud seriously, so I'm proud to be part of an effort in our government." "I'm proud to lead the effort in our government to finally take fraud seriously. We want to protect these programs for the kids and the families who need them." "We want to ensure that the American taxpayer isn't getting fleeced, and I'd say just a few months into it, gentlemen, we have done a very, very good job. Let's keep it up." 🔥

🚨 NOW: VP JD Vance reveals why crushing fraud is PERSONAL for him. This is why we LOVE JD "I grew up in a family where we sometimes benefited from these programs. The generosity of the American people is one of the most amazing things about our country." "I think all of us, of course, just passed tax day, none of us like paying our taxes, but we do it. And why do we do it? Because we know that it goes to give a bite to a low-income family that can't afford food." "We know that it goes to pay the military who keep us safe. We know that it goes to some essential services, but that trust, that trust in our government, that trust in our institution, it depends on us taking that trust seriously." "How long are people going to pay into programs if they know that that money doesn't go to a low-income kid who needs health care, but that money goes into a fraudster getting rich?" "This doesn't work, and this doesn't make sense unless we take fraud seriously, so I'm proud to be part of an effort in our government." "I'm proud to lead the effort in our government to finally take fraud seriously. We want to protect these programs for the kids and the families who need them." "We want to ensure that the American taxpayer isn't getting fleeced, and I'd say just a few months into it, gentlemen, we have done a very, very good job. Let's keep it up." 🔥

Eric Daugherty

74,412 views • 3 months ago

Free electricity for every American? Chamath explains how it’s possible. Chamath Palihapitiya: “I think the president should try to create a $300B-$500B tax equity fund and help eliminate the electricity costs of 50-100M American households.” “If you actually go to solar and storage, for every 15 million homes, you take a terawatt hour of demand off the grid, that's an extra terawatt hour that you don't need to build.” “So the reason why I like solar and storage is you make these folks so self-reliant.” “Now all of a sudden we're actually catching up to China faster than we would've otherwise.” “We actually get a 2-for-1. The consumer homes don't have that anxiety anymore. They don't have the bill. And because they're generating their own power, they're off the grid, and now what that means is that extra terawatt hour can actually go to the commercial and industrial applications, including these datacenters.” “The president preserved the ability to make those kinds of investments and be tax advantaged for doing it in the One Big Beautiful Bill.” @jason: “And if we want to live in the age of abundance, and we want to bring the bottom half of the country up, and we want affordability, where do people spend their money?” “Food, groceries, their rent, and their electricity, and the utilities.” “So it doesn't come out of Americans' pockets and their taxes, it comes out of corporations, which are printing money.” “If you wanna talk about redistribution of wealth, this is a way for the great American Mag 7 corporations to give something back to Americans.” Chamath: “We will look back and I think that we will want to have seen these big companies who are unbelievably profitable, step up on behalf of American homeowners.”

Free electricity for every American? Chamath explains how it’s possible. Chamath Palihapitiya: “I think the president should try to create a $300B-$500B tax equity fund and help eliminate the electricity costs of 50-100M American households.” “If you actually go to solar and storage, for every 15 million homes, you take a terawatt hour of demand off the grid, that's an extra terawatt hour that you don't need to build.” “So the reason why I like solar and storage is you make these folks so self-reliant.” “Now all of a sudden we're actually catching up to China faster than we would've otherwise.” “We actually get a 2-for-1. The consumer homes don't have that anxiety anymore. They don't have the bill. And because they're generating their own power, they're off the grid, and now what that means is that extra terawatt hour can actually go to the commercial and industrial applications, including these datacenters.” “The president preserved the ability to make those kinds of investments and be tax advantaged for doing it in the One Big Beautiful Bill.” @jason: “And if we want to live in the age of abundance, and we want to bring the bottom half of the country up, and we want affordability, where do people spend their money?” “Food, groceries, their rent, and their electricity, and the utilities.” “So it doesn't come out of Americans' pockets and their taxes, it comes out of corporations, which are printing money.” “If you wanna talk about redistribution of wealth, this is a way for the great American Mag 7 corporations to give something back to Americans.” Chamath: “We will look back and I think that we will want to have seen these big companies who are unbelievably profitable, step up on behalf of American homeowners.”

The All-In Podcast

526,669 views • 6 months ago

Arteta: “We know what is at stake and the fact that, as a club, we haven't done it for so long is a reason for that. It talks about the difficulty but I just want to focus on the things that we can control, dominate, and we have done. “It's not that we have to do a lot of new things that we haven't done. No, no, no, let's keep doing a lot of it or almost all the things that we've done for nine months, because that's what has taken us all the way there. “On Wednesday, I saw a lot of them. And today we've gone back so we need to learn, we need to be very critical of ourselves, and then pick ourselves up because on Wednesday we have a big one coming up.”

Arteta: “We know what is at stake and the fact that, as a club, we haven't done it for so long is a reason for that. It talks about the difficulty but I just want to focus on the things that we can control, dominate, and we have done. “It's not that we have to do a lot of new things that we haven't done. No, no, no, let's keep doing a lot of it or almost all the things that we've done for nine months, because that's what has taken us all the way there. “On Wednesday, I saw a lot of them. And today we've gone back so we need to learn, we need to be very critical of ourselves, and then pick ourselves up because on Wednesday we have a big one coming up.”

Connor Humm

21,397 views • 4 months ago

If you confiscated all the wealth of all the billionaires in the country--and let's just pretend you could actually liquidate it for that much--you would cover about ONE YEAR of federal government spending. As Dave Smith points out in his reply to this clip, we're not taxing our way out of this, and the idea that we ever had a Friedmanite government at any point is simply ahistorical. "Which year did Ronald Reagan cut spending? Oh, wait, it increased EVERY year?" We aren't going to fix this country with Hamiltonian economics. We need to embrace a Misesian/Rothbardian understanding of economics, and until the right understands that, they're going to keep losing to the left in the long run because they are fundamentally thinking of government and economics on the left's terms.

If you confiscated all the wealth of all the billionaires in the country--and let's just pretend you could actually liquidate it for that much--you would cover about ONE YEAR of federal government spending. As Dave Smith points out in his reply to this clip, we're not taxing our way out of this, and the idea that we ever had a Friedmanite government at any point is simply ahistorical. "Which year did Ronald Reagan cut spending? Oh, wait, it increased EVERY year?" We aren't going to fix this country with Hamiltonian economics. We need to embrace a Misesian/Rothbardian understanding of economics, and until the right understands that, they're going to keep losing to the left in the long run because they are fundamentally thinking of government and economics on the left's terms.

Captain Ⓐncapistan

51,918 views • 1 month ago

VP VANCE PREDICTED: PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET ANGRY, AND RIGHTFULLY SO "This stuff we can and we should prosecute, and I'm just telling you, this is going to be a real problem, and the people are going to get really pissed at Senate Republicans if we don't have the U.S. attorneys on the ground to actually achieve justice. People are going to get angry, and rightfully so." If you want justice, you've got to empower the President of the United States to actually appoint the officers of justice all over the country. The Democrats are stalling that, and we're going to wake up in a couple of years, if we don't have more U.S. attorneys approved, if we don't have more judges approved, we're going to wake up in a couple of years and realize that we've done a lot of great work at the Trump administration, but justice is not being meted out as it should be because we don't have the people on the ground. That is a big problem, and I know that's somewhat unrelated to Arctic Frost, but it actually is related to Arctic Frost, because you cannot get the justice for the people who are targeted by the Biden administration unless we've got good people, especially in these U.S. attorneys offices, and that's something we've got to pay attention to over the next year. Spying on President Trump, prosecuting him, investigating senators, congressmen, and congressmen who are just aligned with the President of the United States some of this stuff is going to get covered by statute of limitations, but some of this stuff we can and we should prosecute, and I'm just telling you, this is going to be a real problem, and the people who watch your show are going to get really pissed at Senate Republicans, excuse my language, if we don't have the U.S. attorneys on the ground to actually achieve justice, people are going to get angry, and rightfully so. If you want justice, you've got to empower the President of the United States to actually appoint the officers of justice all over the country. The Democrats are stalling that, and we're going to wake up in a couple of years, if we don't have more U.S. attorneys approved, if we don't have more judges approved, we're going to wake up in a couple of years and realize that we've done a lot of great work at the Trump administration, but justice is not being meted out as it should be because we don't have the people on the ground. That is a big problem, and I know that's somewhat unrelated to Arctic Frost, but it actually is related to Arctic Frost, because you cannot get the justice for the people who are targeted by the Biden administration unless we've got good people, especially in these U.S. attorneys offices, and that's something we've got to pay attention to over the next year. Spying on President Trump, prosecuting him, investigating senators, congressmen, and congressmen who are just aligned with the President of the United States some of this stuff is going to get covered by statute of limitations, but some of this stuff we can and we should prosecute, and I'm just telling you, this is going to be a real problem, and the people who watch your show are going to get really pissed at Senate Republicans, excuse my language, if we don't have the U.S. attorneys on the ground to actually achieve justice, people are going to get angry, and rightfully so.

VP VANCE PREDICTED: PEOPLE ARE GOING TO GET ANGRY, AND RIGHTFULLY SO "This stuff we can and we should prosecute, and I'm just telling you, this is going to be a real problem, and the people are going to get really pissed at Senate Republicans if we don't have the U.S. attorneys on the ground to actually achieve justice. People are going to get angry, and rightfully so." If you want justice, you've got to empower the President of the United States to actually appoint the officers of justice all over the country. The Democrats are stalling that, and we're going to wake up in a couple of years, if we don't have more U.S. attorneys approved, if we don't have more judges approved, we're going to wake up in a couple of years and realize that we've done a lot of great work at the Trump administration, but justice is not being meted out as it should be because we don't have the people on the ground. That is a big problem, and I know that's somewhat unrelated to Arctic Frost, but it actually is related to Arctic Frost, because you cannot get the justice for the people who are targeted by the Biden administration unless we've got good people, especially in these U.S. attorneys offices, and that's something we've got to pay attention to over the next year. Spying on President Trump, prosecuting him, investigating senators, congressmen, and congressmen who are just aligned with the President of the United States some of this stuff is going to get covered by statute of limitations, but some of this stuff we can and we should prosecute, and I'm just telling you, this is going to be a real problem, and the people who watch your show are going to get really pissed at Senate Republicans, excuse my language, if we don't have the U.S. attorneys on the ground to actually achieve justice, people are going to get angry, and rightfully so. If you want justice, you've got to empower the President of the United States to actually appoint the officers of justice all over the country. The Democrats are stalling that, and we're going to wake up in a couple of years, if we don't have more U.S. attorneys approved, if we don't have more judges approved, we're going to wake up in a couple of years and realize that we've done a lot of great work at the Trump administration, but justice is not being meted out as it should be because we don't have the people on the ground. That is a big problem, and I know that's somewhat unrelated to Arctic Frost, but it actually is related to Arctic Frost, because you cannot get the justice for the people who are targeted by the Biden administration unless we've got good people, especially in these U.S. attorneys offices, and that's something we've got to pay attention to over the next year. Spying on President Trump, prosecuting him, investigating senators, congressmen, and congressmen who are just aligned with the President of the United States some of this stuff is going to get covered by statute of limitations, but some of this stuff we can and we should prosecute, and I'm just telling you, this is going to be a real problem, and the people who watch your show are going to get really pissed at Senate Republicans, excuse my language, if we don't have the U.S. attorneys on the ground to actually achieve justice, people are going to get angry, and rightfully so.

Svetlana Lokhova

254,325 views • 6 months ago

VIDEO PREMIERE‼️ "[Elon Musk is] discovering something that MMT economists have been saying for at least the last 30 years, which is, yes, sovereign governments like the US federal government do have the power of the purse and they do create money out of thin air...You type the number & you deposit it in somebody's bank account. It doesn't mean that we should be doing this left & right & spending money left & right in infinite amounts of ways. MMT is saying basically, we do have the financial capability to invest strategically in areas in the economy where we need strategic investment. That means we don't have to give tax cuts to the billionaires to beg for their money or permission to invest in a better economy. That means that we need to separate the taxation side of the equation from the spending side of the equation." Fadhel Kaboub فاضل قابوب

VIDEO PREMIERE‼️ "[Elon Musk is] discovering something that MMT economists have been saying for at least the last 30 years, which is, yes, sovereign governments like the US federal government do have the power of the purse and they do create money out of thin air...You type the number & you deposit it in somebody's bank account. It doesn't mean that we should be doing this left & right & spending money left & right in infinite amounts of ways. MMT is saying basically, we do have the financial capability to invest strategically in areas in the economy where we need strategic investment. That means we don't have to give tax cuts to the billionaires to beg for their money or permission to invest in a better economy. That means that we need to separate the taxation side of the equation from the spending side of the equation." Fadhel Kaboub فاضل قابوب

Briahna Joy Gray

10,569 views • 1 year ago