JCal is smart w early stage investing ,
Sacks is smart w SAAS b2b business,
Friedberg is smart w science,
Chamath is smart w social media ,
Any other topic besides those, there is a good chance you can find someone smarter then them including yourself. Don't put any billionaire on a pedestal. This post realistically shouldn't even exist.
That is one of the biggest takeaways for me after listening for around a year. These guys were very lucky, other than that mid at best. Sacks would be a mid corporate attorney if he had not met a couple of brilliant people while at Stanford and rode their coattails.
Huh? Besties are legit and insightful tech analysts and startup commentators. Ezra is equally so in policy & politics. They are both uninteresting (or even misinformed) when they swap topics. People don’t mind learning about politics. But I want to hear it from legit, ingenuous commentators. We hang w/ the Besties to get the morsels from Freidberg and the occasional foray into tech. The rest is gristle & grift.
Actually, Ezra got crypto right and guys like Chamath got it totally wrong because Ezra listened to the arguments crypto people were making and went, “the world doesn’t work that way,” while Chamath was like, IDK, maybe?
Ezra has also been the founder/CEO of a fast-growing startup (Vox). He’s the first to tell you media is a tough business, so he didn’t hit a home run, but it’s still an ongoing concern which is more than you can say for most startups.
That’s silly. We’re 15 years into crypto. It hasn’t mattered at all. Tech cycles go FAST these days. Look at AI. We’re not even two years in and it’s changing basically every everything in tech.
Crypto isn’t early, it’s over. Now that the SEC is actually enforcing securities laws, there won’t be another bubble. If you’ve got any, cash out now.
I will be messaging you in 5 years on [**2029-06-26 23:54:28 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2029-06-26%2023:54:28%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheAllinPodcasts/comments/1dmsm7t/im_starting_to_think_these_guys_arent_smart/lag1ooe/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FTheAllinPodcasts%2Fcomments%2F1dmsm7t%2Fim_starting_to_think_these_guys_arent_smart%2Flag1ooe%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202029-06-26%2023%3A54%3A28%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dmsm7t)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
There's this erroneous assumption made by many that a person who amassed great wealth is an expert in everything. No, they are only experts in how to amass great wealth for themselves. Or in the case of Trump, just lucky to inherit it.
I think the discomfort around the guys and the Pod is actually reflective of reality.
Silicon Valley is super liberal. Politics were secondary concern and 99% left leaning.
But that turned out to be a luxury.
Now a left leaning administration, Bidens, is not tech friendly.
You’re watching the results in real time on the Pod.
Have you looked at Big Tech stock prices over the last four years? Biden not being tech friendly is a wild take.
Source: I’ve worked for one during the entire time.
I get the impression this administration wants to reign in big tech, but their tactics have hilariously had the complete opposite effect. Like Lina Khan blocking M&A (limiting startup exit options), and overstimulating the economy (extremely punitive to startup valuations). Not rolling back parts of Trump's TCJA like section 174 and the SALT cap also hurts startups a lot more than big tech who can more easily move jobs elsewhere, though that might not be possible with a split congress.
This administration seems completely oblivious to the fact that the massive collateral damage to small tech is just going to allow big tech to accrue all that economic value that would have been captured by smaller companies, while also encouraging more offshoring of tech jobs and reducing salaries in the industry.
It's beyond frustrating that our only options are to vote for four more years of this, or vote for a dictatorship.
The Valley isn’t that liberal. Certainly not the business side. It’s pretty libertarian economically and progressive on non-economic things. But there aren’t Marxists running FAANG companies.
You have obviously never worked in “The Valley”. FAANG and a lot of the other tech companies are incredibly far left. I worked for a fintech that had a Young Communists group that was sponsored by the company.
I work as the head of data for a mid sized SaaS company. There are a lot of lefties among engineers and junior folks on the business side (and product people for some reason tend to be very progressive), I don’t think I’ve ever met other leaders at the director level or above who were any flavor of socialist. People are very socially liberal but usually much less so economically, hence libertarian.
A good example is the recent Palestine protests at Google. Definitely had some staff who were faaaar left on the issue and caused a big stink, and…Google fired them all. Because Google’s leadership isn’t all that progressive. Neither is Amazon’s, or Meta’s, etc.
I worked at Google.
You only think they are far left because they give employees long leash to bring specifically liberal politics into the office. But that’s only because the workforce votes progressive in the Bay. The actual founders, executive leadership are consistently much more to the right.
This is a really interesting take. Is it just about the Biden admin being tech unfriendly though? It seems like there’s an element of influence of the sort of cult that Sacks represents. There’s an adjacent element of self-interest, particularly for tax avoidance. And likely some aspect of it related to left public opinion turning anti-business and anti-tech over the past 5+ years. I’m curious what your thoughts are on these additional factors?
I mean, objectively, Biden admin is making big business more difficult. To be patently clear, Im neither defending it nor arguing for it.
But big M&A is difficult. Crypto difficulties are real. General big business scrutiny is real. Throttling AI seems to be gaining momentum. To me it seems clear the government seems generally more interested in the happenings of the Valley.
And on self interest; the unrealized capital gains proposal alone, I think, is enough to turn most VC’s away from Bidens admin.
On the larger picture I think Big Tech is now a long the lines of Too Big To Fail Banks.
They are a unimaginably rich lobby thats sole focus will be maintaining power.
In order to optimize for maintaining power they will drop any political leaning if it means more favourable regulation.
I think Trump may be the easier choice because it should be patently clear that Trump would say and do anything to win. He’s more malleable because he doesn’t care.
I’m not disputing your statement about the Biden admin being business unfriendly. I’m also neither defending nor arguing for it. I asked whether that was the only factor.
The to big to fail VC angle seems irrelevant to your supporting point which was that they are now so big that they will optimize for their own survival. It seems that latter point is sufficient on its own. And that’s a very interesting point as well.
Fair!
In the case of Saks, my personal opinion is that he is genuinely interested in his own political standing and building a position as a King maker and major influencer. So I think there is self interest there.
The other 3 are much more money/business oriented. Less so personally interested in King making and administration level involvement.
Thank you for sharing! Do you have any opinions about how Sacks has seemed to win the battle of wills over political beliefs and everyone has fallen in line, and how it is acceptable to constantly make every conversation political?
In my view, that brings us back full circle. I think the sudden increase in politics is because it’s starting to affect their ability to do business.
Saks is just a willing battering ram and now they’re all realizing their most prized possession of money and lifestyle is on the line.
Saks sold em on a dream of a business friendly administration.
Saks is motivated. He hitched his wagon to DeSantis - which makes me believe his primary motivation is that of King maker behind the scenes especially with his quick pivot to Trump.
The rank and file workers are liberal, but the majority of tech executives, board members and VC’s would probably be in the Conservative Party in Canada or the UK. I’m not sure there would be a single Bernie or Warren supporter among that elite class. Zuckerberg hinted at a town hall that he’d prefer Trump to Warren.
They are liberal on gay marriage, but they don’t care that much about abortion. They definitely want lots of high skilled immigration and probably don’t care that much about undocumented immigrants. But, on economics, the majority would easily be right wing. Low taxes, minimal regulation and very anti union. Google was also a big donor to the Federalist society. There are large VC firms like Andreessen Horowitz where I can’t think of a single partner that is an outspoken liberal and most are definitely right wing. I know Milei from Argentina is beloved by large swaths of the tech elite and I would guess most would have similar political positions as him.
As someone in the Valley, it’s all relative. Sure, the Biden Admin hates big business and the FTC sucks + they really want to reign in social media in terms of “harming kids” and “spreading misinformation” but what’s the alternative?
Trump doesn’t just want social media to “do better” he wants it to shill for Republicans. And he’s not pro-business, he’s openly said he wants to punish businesses that don’t support him. He’s not alone amongst Republicans. Thats the party now.
And Trump would be massively inflationary based on his stated goal of making the Fed political. He is also planning on making the civil service political by purging people who aren’t loyal to him, which will create massive regulatory uncertainty for businesses.
So as much as business people don’t love Bernie, he’s a back bencher who has no real power. Democrats may tax you a bit more and regulate you a bit more, but there’s at least certainty and you can work with that.
Republicans are no longer pro-business, they’re pro-Republican and that is *scary* to businesses that prize stability.
This is why you’re seeing people who were previously Mitt Romney Republicans shift over to being Biden Democrats. Biden may be left of them, but he’s as close as you’re going to get today to a centrist pro-market president, and that’s what businesspeople care about.
> Republicans are no longer pro-business, they’re pro-Republican and that is scary to businesses that prize stability.
They are still very much pro business, it’s just that party leadership is terrified by Trump’s Russian mob handlers and so have let him take over the party.
Standard sell your soul to the devil for the trappings of power then get predictably crossed by said devil once he grants your wish.
“The party really wants. , they just pretend to not want X because their most popular politicians hate X.”
The Reagan Party is dead. When Trump is gone there will be somebody like DeSantis who isn’t as charismatic, but has all the same policies because that’s what the voters want.
Some of school Republicans already get this and have abandoned the party. Anyone who is holding out hope will give up when Trump is gone and it’s clear that it wasn’t just him.
Silicon Valley is about as libertarian as you can get. It’s deeply conservative from an economic perspective, evidenced by the states quasi feudal take on property taxation. They just like their sex and drugs too.
It makes sense they float towards whatever president promises them better portfolio returns.
Wow. Ezra Klein is even worse! He has no background in business or economics and is a massive shill for the left. You’ve gotta be kidding me.
If you’re going to suggest alternative viewpoints, don’t just suggest even more biased sources with no expertise in building businesses. Mark Cuban would have been a good alternative, but definitely not Ezra Klein.
EK is a policy wonk with a center-left bent. Might be center-right in most of the world. It's not a business podcast.
If you care about policy, listen to podcast that focus on that policy domain. There are specialized podcasts for almost every niche you can think of.
Klein isn’t running a business podcasts but for the record, he’s a founder. He co-founded Vox with Matt Yglesias so I’d guess he’s learned a bit about business from that.
I just recommend critically comparing the way these two pods approach the topic of trumps economic policy. Regardless if you hold the same politics as either pod, there is a ton of daylight between the two
I read Ezra Klein's columns on the NYT and have listened to his podcasts before. All his content has a liberal tint just like Krugman. Instead of being actually critical, everything is criticized from the perspective of a leftist.
Ultimately, I agree with the besties' opinions more than Ezra's because they align more with what I believe is effective to bringing prosperity for the American people.
Finally, being a blogger and starting a media company is not the same as starting technology companies requiring lots of engineers to be successful. Media companies are about generating interesting and compelling content. Tech companies are about building innovative solutions to hard problems and understanding markets to be able to sell those solutions.
Ezra makes money from producing content that feeds people who want that content delivered with a certain tint. He doesn’t make money from investing, which requires a deep understanding of economic dynamics and sometimes technology if it’s tech investing.
What am I missing ?? Ezra doesn’t attempt / try ti convey that he is man of knowledge / valid opinions … he interviews ppl who have vast knowledge and experience in the topics discussed for the pod … He podcast host and never tried to be other wise .. don’t put Ezra on the same tier as the All IN guys !!!
Hmmm...I'm not really a regular listener anymore, but EK doesn't not seem like a "leftist". He was super critical of Bernie Sanders and such.
He seems pretty banal politically.
I really don't want to argue semantics, but EK has been super critical of people to this left like Bernie, AOC, etc. (or at least he was when I listened more often).
Now, his temperament is very moderate so he's not going ham or whatever.
But IDK how anyone could listen to him doing a podcast about reforming zoning laws to allow multiuse housing in suburban areas (or something) and conclude that he's a "leftist". Like, if he does a podcast about addressing the trade labor shortage he's not going to conclude that the solution is to give the workers the means of production, or something. He's going to talk about boring stuff like loan forgiveness, recruitment programs, etc. He's not a leftist.
He seems like a totally banal, center-left Democrat.
You're welcome to believe whatever you want, I don't see a point in discussing it any further.
Smart people act in bad faith to try and influence others for their own self interests. These men just act in bad faith because people like JCal are charlatans/grifters.
Like most people, they’re smart in a handful of domains. Exceptionally so. However, their success and influence in those domains has made them Dumbledore-level Dunning-Kruger practitioners outside those realms.
This, combined with their casual notions of integrity offers a new path to Jared Kushner-like gains. Gross, but shame on me for having listened to these guys and expecting more.
Agree on the fact they have expertise in their domains. Apologies for misinterpreting you earlier on that.
Disagree on the rest though. Being really good in business means you understand how the economy works. That gives them an informed opinion about how the government can foster innovation, competition, and economic dynamism. They understand that deregulation is important and they can detect when and where the government is being grossly inefficient, causing us to be uncompetitive against upstarts like China and India.
They may not have much expertise about the military, foreign affairs, and entitlements, but their criticisms of govt spending on all of these is fair. I’d rather our government spend less money on all of these things because our debt is too high and risks the downfall of America as a superpower. Politics isn’t rocket science, medicine, or theoretical physics. You can effect change with your vote without being an expert in specific matters.
Sounds like you think they're not smart because their politics differ from yours.
I listened to that episode and IMO Trump came off sounding significantly more balanced and sane than I went in expecting.
He definitely did. The issue is that I’m more informed now and there were 4-5 times that he just stated blatantly wrong things and I’m only 15 min intro the pod.
Also, when talking about the dollar he said something along the lines of “Ukraine sort of doesn’t exist” which was a wacko thing to say.
This is a microcosm of the internet:
Person doesn’t like something the people they admired did so they take it as a proxy of their overall intelligence or some other thing.
This is the real world bucko. It’s gonna happen again. Deal with it.
They’ve had on a number of presidential candidates and have held fundraisers for a few of them. They’ve also invited Biden on the pod and Chamath has stated he would fundraise for him as well. What is the big deal here?
I used to roll my eyes when people would say “Trump Derangement Syndrome”, but this sub now has me reconsidering.
I’m not referring to them fundraising for him or supporting him. I’m referring to the way they interviewed him. They bill themselves as independent thinkers, but they asked Trump a straightforward question, he simply did not answer and they clapped liked train seals. If they are rich guys who are in it for rich guys and simply want to see a tax cut for rich guys so they support Trump, fine, go for it. But they claim to be concerned about the deficit, trumps agenda is clearly both inflationary and based on increased deficit spending, and they gobble it up. It is either that they aren’t very smart or they are just pretending to be critical, independent advocates for the issues they espouse, and I’m unimpressed by both. I am an open minded listener who actively seeks out new perspectives on things and is interested in having my formerly strongly held belief proven wrong about things. I think Trump derangement syndrome can be a real phenomenon, but it can also be a technique for pro Trump folks to dismiss any legitimate critique of Trump as simply TDS.
Agree that they punted on the deficit (Trump's initial response was actually that "we'll grow our way out of it", but they didn't mention this assertion, which they would normally dismiss as the wishful thinking you here from so many politicians), with one exception: Friedberg did, in the wrap up afterwards, point out that he (Friedberg) had not gotten a full response from Trump on this topic.
Friedberg is often in this position, of having a different, less fawning, response to people or stories (eg, about Elon) than his besties exhibit, and he always does it in a very respectful way.
Exactly. It’s their hypocrisy. That’s the most offputting.
They say for example that they are very pro reducing the deficit, yet when their interests were at risk (see Silicon Valley Bank collapse), they begged the government for a comprehensive bailout (to cover all losses exceeding the FDIC insured amount), which the gov obliged to via the BTFP. It’s like ranting about excessive gov spending while being on welfare yourself.
I see why they’ve shifted the focus of their pod to politics, the tech/investing community is much more familiar with their past and can spot the numerous inconsistencies
I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. I don't love the democrats and I have no problem supporting Republicans. But Donald Trump is a buffoon who not only ran up the debt and clowned his way through Covid (when this country badly needed leadership) but also tried overthrow the government and overturn an election.
If you want conservative justices and Republican policy I guess vote for him but don't act like it's not a bitch decision. Your voting for a bitch who did a crappy job and is now a convicted felon bc he f'd a porn star while married and got caught paying her off. The guy is a 6 times bankrupted, seditionist, loser and somehow people are surprised that he causes revulsion.
That's the big deal.
People could come up with a list like that about anyone though. That doesn't really answer why it's a big deal to interview the person they invited that actually responded. Regardless of his literal rap sheet, he's still probably going to be the republican candidate, and interviewing presidential candidates should be seen as a great thing for media to do.
Name another person about whom you could come up w a list that includes trying to overthrow the government and overturn an election? Name another person who added more than 2 trillion dollars per year to the national debt.
It's a big deal because he is a uniquely horrible person.
I'm not saying they shouldn't have him on if they want (i guess)- I'm just explaining that it's not surprising that people are revolted by him.
I said a list like that, not that list. I get that he sucks, but everyone sucks in their own ways. People disliking the media talking to presidential candidates should be the big deal, not that the media talks to presidential candidates.
Yes, TDS is when people like Sacks repeatedly bend over backwards for trumps ridiculous lies and to justify all the crazy shit he says and does. It’s a big problem and should be addressed by people like this sub.
No joke, it’s insane to hear how people responded to this interview. If you have listened to their podcast for a while, this wasn’t even that biased or bad… anyone remember the shit with SBF?
I think the gap is that we don’t know the real inner reasons why they talk or vote for someone. They make money from their choices and who they vote for, so they are not super transparent about them. They are business owners at the end of the day, and the podcast is a perspective of what business owners and VCs think. Keep that in mind. It’s not a consumer podcast and what normal consumers think.
They have had to update the definition of sycophant to include the way the all-in-billionaires put together this bit of heavily edited puff piece to make Trump seem coherent. I am embarrassed for you. All you need to know is that when people this rich are going all in for Trump, they have something to gain that the rest of us don't. And don't be fooled. This is a zero-sum game. Their Ws are your Ls. Just look at how the tax system is already engineered to transfer wealth from you to them.
These posts are getting ridiculous and bring absolutely nothing to the conversation. Obviously these guys are smart which is proved by their net worths, network and business acumen.
Just because they are more for a president which will compel capitalism, aka making venture investment easier, rather than a president that is making their jobs harder, doesn’t mean they are trumpers or dumb or whatever else you think. If they were for a president that would make their jobs/lives worse, I would say that isn’t smart.
What is either dumb or disingenuous (you can decide) is constantly talking about their concerns about deficit, then interviewing a candidate whose stated policy involves deficit spending, and being completely uncritical. IMO this disqualifies you from being taken seriously on economic matters
Out of curiosity, for who is Trump's policies making investment easier? What kind of capitalism is being compelled here? From my perspective (lower middle income single male), it seems like the Trump era is specifically catered to the corporate elite elite society. The old idea that the free market knows best how to manage the economy has been proven false time and time again. Everyone's a hypocrite in politics and it's particularly distasteful to hear wealthy people complain about government assistance for people, but then cry and have the power to get government assistance when they are the ones in trouble.
The only difference is that their money allows them to convince decision makers that their personal interests along with "the economy".
The real menace is the wealth gap in this country. Everything else is a distraction.
This was a response to OP’s point. It would make their jobs in VC easier. Trump is for EV’s, M&A, Crypto, tax cuts, etc.
I understand your point with the elite, but that is my point. These guys are in that category which means it would be smart to be for a guy that caters to you.
I think the real menace of society is the two party system that both play into so that there are only two choices in a very complex economic, social and political country.
> who is Trump's policies making investment easier?
Let's start with anyone who buys groceries, buys gas, pays rent, wants to buy a house to have their own appreciating capital investment.
I agree they're full of lies but ezra Klein's take on inflation doesn't really mean a pile of beans to me either. He's a hack as much as anyone. Just look at the CPI over the last 15 years and draw your own conclusions. https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/
Ezra Klein is the furthest thing from a hack in media today. He’s extremely well versed in policy, has an unbelievable range of topics where he can dive deep on, and is one of the strongest interviewers around.
Well take this opinion he's put forth that trumps tariffs are going to raise prices. He made a totally standard libertarian-esque argument that tarrifs would make the markets less efficient and raise prices. But the same logic applies to taxes in general. The only difference is whether you're taxing American companies or foreign companies... the rest of the logic is pretty much the same. Framed in terms of domestic taxes, I don't think I've ever heard Ezra Klein make the case that raising taxes would be a bad idea because it could raise prices.
Similarly they go on and on about how a secure border would lower the labor supply. Yet I've never seen them fret over an increase in the minimum wage or welfare support in a similar way, even though that has a largely similar effect.
In other words, he does the exact same sort of strategic hypocrisy that I agree is so annoying from the all-in besties.
I'm not anti-tarrif per se, but at least in the short term if we replace low cost imports with goods made either less efficiently or wih higher labor costs, obviously the costs are going to rise. Personally I think that's a price we should pay to keep a vibrabt manufacturing base...within reason. I think EK views that issue as well as the immigrant labor issue as something that people talk about without actually thinking through what the consequences will be. I'm going off memory but I think he specifically talked about how a ton of farming just isn't viable without that immigrant workforce.
Yeah I'm not saying he's wrong that those policies can have inflation as a knock-on effect. They probably would to be honest. I just find it revealing that he does a whole podcast about the possible inflationary effects of Trump's policies when he never did the same thing for all of Biden's policies that *actually did cause inflation* and he remains convinced that Biden will be better for inflation than trump.
Except it's not 2020-2021. It's 2021-2024. And it's no surprise. Inject trillions of dollars into the economy while ratcheting up various regulations& prohibitions... It's a rather obvious outcome.
People are justifiably disappointed that the podcast has gone from a mostly tech-vc focused podcast that had value for people interested in that field to one that is overwhelmingly political. If i wanted politics from shills I’d watch CNN/FOX.
If you look at the numbers Trump was a much better President than Biden to Obama. Jamie Dimon even admitted that Trump was more effective than Biden.
You may not like him, but that isn’t a reason to say people are unintelligent for supporting him.
I didn’t say someone is unintelligent for supporting Trump. I said they proved their unintelligence by the way they conducted themselves in that interview.
And I’m curious what you mean by “the numbers”
How? They were critical. Do you think that ending the war in Europe and Middle East isn’t a good thing? Do you not agree we should decrease spending? Or do you think that Joe and the democrat open border policy is better than Trump’s?
Which part do you think they agree with that is unintelligent? Or at least you don’t exactly agree with?
I’m interested in why they didn’t point out that deficit spending was higher under Trump than under both Biden and Obama.
Also interested in which policies Trump pointed out that Biden instituted to open the border? Because the border is actually arresting and stopping more border crossings than under Trump.
They addressed that, it was the pandemic. Trump also mentioned they were negotiating why US are contributing way more in institutions like WHO or NATO compared to to other memebers.
Have you not been watching the news? There are literal holes at the border which encourage “asylum seekers” to exploit it which are coming from all over the world.
Now tell me, which issues they talked about that you think make them “unintelligent” for supporting trump’s?
Paying the least amount of money to be in the World Health Organization is not an accomplishment. It’s not like getting a cheap tv on Black Friday. We should want these organizations to have the wherewithal to be effective. Anything worth doing is worth doing right.
Agree on all points. But accomplishing all of these with less money is also an actual accomplishment. We can’t be spending just money for the sake of it. Effective and efficient is the goal.
Oh it was the pandemic. Glad we cleared up why we gave huge permanent tax cuts to wealthy people and PPP loans that didn’t need to be repaid to companies who didn’t even have employees.
The news? Trump told me the news was lying to me, now I don’t know what to believe! There were no holes at the border under Trump! They only opened up after Biden was inaugurated. Got it!
lol just by this response I can almost tell what your positions are on every other political issues. If you’re actually listening to the pod, critical-thinking is what is missing in today’s political discussion. You have to think beyond rhetoric.
Yup listening to 4 mega rich people “question” a billionaire who has made it clear he’s for sale to stay out of trouble, and just taking everything the 5 of them say at face value is definitely critical thinking.
Politically, I left the GOP in 2016 when I saw every single stance and value they held for my 30 years on this earth betrayed and then got on their knees for the con artist that betrayed them.
The GOP isn’t about policy or running the country. Its main goal is to keep Trump out of jail and help the wealthy if there’s any time left.
Yea, because you would rather listen to 4 unsuccessful homeless people right? Again, which policies exactly you don’t agree with which you think is stupid to support? You’re full of rhetoric.
I can't find the numbers, but I'm guessing that support for the WHO is probably like 0.02% of the federal budget.
We aren't getting big budget cuts unless we want to cut the size of the military or programs for the elderly.
Seriously, go look up the budget. It's publically available.
It's been the same damn debate for 30-40 years. Lots of handwringing about the WHO, or support for some AIDS program in Africa, or scientific funding, or arts grants, and politicians and pundits just won't be honest with us and tell us we are going to have to give up the things we like if we are ever going to really have big federal spending cuts.
A year from now it will be something else. It never ends. Some small budget line item gets blown up the pundit class. It's something new every year or two.
Someone needs to look us in the eye and say we will have a lot less military and the old people will suffer if we really want these big cuts. We need to stop pretending and man up.
Yea I agree that the defense budget is the significant one that needs a bigger oversight and critical cutting that is why I support Trump's foreign policy (ie reduce NATO expansion to stop the war and Abraham Accords).
In regards with the WHO, I dont care what % of the federal budget it is, the real question is why are we significantly contributing way more than the other members? Same with NATO. As an American, this is a concern. You cant help drowning people when you yourself is drowning.
Right, but Trump explained that reducing the US contribution to the WHO would reduce the deficit. The impact is miminal. It's the equivalent of you or I skipping the 25 cent sauce packet once a month to pay off the 100k we owe on our BMW.
Remember, Trump has been bankrupt multiple times. The guy does not have good numeracy or quantitative literacy. He doesn't get numbers. He might legit think that cutting WHO support will really, really close the deficit, but he likely struggles with basic numeracy.
But it would albeit small. But again, it's not about the contribution % per se, it is about the principle of fairness. Why are we acting like a lap dog to EU countries? Did you actually listen to the episode?
This conversation just isn't worth it. Trump said that reducing the contribution to the WHO would reduce the deficit. That's kinda true, but only incrementally so. Again, he's just not a numerate or quantatively literate guy. No man who can interpret numbers files for bankruptcy that many times.
So the years Trump was better were before he passed his tax plan that exploded the deficit?
That’s one of my issues with him. He took the economy from Obama, the. Passed a massive tax cut for the wealthy and did nothing to replace those funds or decrease spending.
There's no open border, bro.
And, honestly, if you're for small government and reduced spending, you gotta support relatively lax immigration. Not saying open borders, but it's just inconsistent to support deregulating business but not deregulating people.
tight border control= increased spending, increased government control. That's regulation of the most intense kind.
If you support free markets, you gotta support free people. Or, to put it another way, there's no free markets without the (relative) free movement of people.
Ill correct you and say free movement of competent and productive citizens. If you actually listen to the pod, Trump is in support of H1B visas for skilled workers.
Lax border policy is just plain stupid. Random people coming from all over the world with little to no criteria to enter can just walk into the country is just plain dangerous. Also, how do you know these people wouldn't need social programs to get started? We barely support our own citizens. My family and I are immigrants and one of the hoops we have to go over when is to prove to USCIS that we wouldnt be a financial burden to the country. Im not sure why people like you cant see this.
Man, all I'm saying is that you are inconsistent. If we want small government, we have to give up some security. It's just the way it works. We don't get to feel totally safe and live in this very controlled environment and also cut state, local, and federal government down to the barebones.
Thanks for sharing your perspective. I strongly encourage you to be a bit more reflective and consider your positions a bit more carefully, and recognize places where your preferences may be inconsistent.
The border is an essential part of every state and therefore a fundamental part of the budget even for a small government. Why do we even have labeled maps if we dont?
Thanks for sharing yours as well. I encourage you to do so too.
That link doesn't work for me, but I did wanna shout out Ezra Klein's most recent podcast episode with Matt. It's a super interesting discussion about Trump's policies and their impact on the economy.
Yea I listened to that episode this weekend and found it to be super interesting. Nice to actually understand the real implications of Trump's policies
It's not that they're not smart. Is that they're trying their best to kiss future president's ass. Kiss ass = special privileges. Sacks did this for a year now, others joined in this year.
I'm starting to think Redditors aren't smart... I thought they held different opinions than me but gave them the benefit of the doubt that they were smart. But listening to the constant TDS and whining and bitching about anything outside DNC narratives, that illusion came tumbling down.
JCal is smart w early stage investing , Sacks is smart w SAAS b2b business, Friedberg is smart w science, Chamath is smart w social media , Any other topic besides those, there is a good chance you can find someone smarter then them including yourself. Don't put any billionaire on a pedestal. This post realistically shouldn't even exist.
These guys speak on a wide range of topics on which they are in no way experts because they believe wealth makes them right about everything.
💯
That is one of the biggest takeaways for me after listening for around a year. These guys were very lucky, other than that mid at best. Sacks would be a mid corporate attorney if he had not met a couple of brilliant people while at Stanford and rode their coattails.
Chamath was addicted to TikTok and only deleted it because he thought it was listening to him
Why do you think this subreddit’s opinion on politics makes it “smart”
How is Zenefits doing?
You must have read the handout.
That’s a good take. Thanks
This subs hate the political aspect of the show so you recommend Ezra Klien?
Huh? Besties are legit and insightful tech analysts and startup commentators. Ezra is equally so in policy & politics. They are both uninteresting (or even misinformed) when they swap topics. People don’t mind learning about politics. But I want to hear it from legit, ingenuous commentators. We hang w/ the Besties to get the morsels from Freidberg and the occasional foray into tech. The rest is gristle & grift.
Actually, Ezra got crypto right and guys like Chamath got it totally wrong because Ezra listened to the arguments crypto people were making and went, “the world doesn’t work that way,” while Chamath was like, IDK, maybe? Ezra has also been the founder/CEO of a fast-growing startup (Vox). He’s the first to tell you media is a tough business, so he didn’t hit a home run, but it’s still an ongoing concern which is more than you can say for most startups.
The crypto debate is far from settled. Basically in its infancy
That’s silly. We’re 15 years into crypto. It hasn’t mattered at all. Tech cycles go FAST these days. Look at AI. We’re not even two years in and it’s changing basically every everything in tech. Crypto isn’t early, it’s over. Now that the SEC is actually enforcing securities laws, there won’t be another bubble. If you’ve got any, cash out now.
RemindMe! 5 years
I will be messaging you in 5 years on [**2029-06-26 23:54:28 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2029-06-26%2023:54:28%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/TheAllinPodcasts/comments/1dmsm7t/im_starting_to_think_these_guys_arent_smart/lag1ooe/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FTheAllinPodcasts%2Fcomments%2F1dmsm7t%2Fim_starting_to_think_these_guys_arent_smart%2Flag1ooe%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202029-06-26%2023%3A54%3A28%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dmsm7t) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Got any recs for podcasts are more interesting (and more informed) than either All In or Ezra Klein?
The ones that come up often are BG2, Acquired, Pivot (in that order).
Thanks, I'll check those out!
+1 to acquired. My first million is good too.
Prof G Markets
Try what OP suggests and listen to both episodes.
Ezra is smart, informed, and intellectually honest. Many people who like politics as a topic just hate ignorant buffoons discussing it.
I know right? Absolutely hilarious!!
There's this erroneous assumption made by many that a person who amassed great wealth is an expert in everything. No, they are only experts in how to amass great wealth for themselves. Or in the case of Trump, just lucky to inherit it.
C’mon. They’re probably not geniuses on every single topic the podcast covers. But they’re certainly smart people.
Yeah, I think it’s that they are out of their depths and quite disingenuous
It’s that they act like they are geniuses on every topic. But if actually know anything about topics they go on about, they are sooo wrong.
I think the discomfort around the guys and the Pod is actually reflective of reality. Silicon Valley is super liberal. Politics were secondary concern and 99% left leaning. But that turned out to be a luxury. Now a left leaning administration, Bidens, is not tech friendly. You’re watching the results in real time on the Pod.
Have you looked at Big Tech stock prices over the last four years? Biden not being tech friendly is a wild take. Source: I’ve worked for one during the entire time.
I get the impression this administration wants to reign in big tech, but their tactics have hilariously had the complete opposite effect. Like Lina Khan blocking M&A (limiting startup exit options), and overstimulating the economy (extremely punitive to startup valuations). Not rolling back parts of Trump's TCJA like section 174 and the SALT cap also hurts startups a lot more than big tech who can more easily move jobs elsewhere, though that might not be possible with a split congress. This administration seems completely oblivious to the fact that the massive collateral damage to small tech is just going to allow big tech to accrue all that economic value that would have been captured by smaller companies, while also encouraging more offshoring of tech jobs and reducing salaries in the industry. It's beyond frustrating that our only options are to vote for four more years of this, or vote for a dictatorship.
Just look at all the FAANG stock prices. They’re at all time highs. NVIDIA too. I think that easily proves you wrong.
Nobody has stopped the AI hype train yet
The Valley isn’t that liberal. Certainly not the business side. It’s pretty libertarian economically and progressive on non-economic things. But there aren’t Marxists running FAANG companies.
You have obviously never worked in “The Valley”. FAANG and a lot of the other tech companies are incredibly far left. I worked for a fintech that had a Young Communists group that was sponsored by the company.
I work as the head of data for a mid sized SaaS company. There are a lot of lefties among engineers and junior folks on the business side (and product people for some reason tend to be very progressive), I don’t think I’ve ever met other leaders at the director level or above who were any flavor of socialist. People are very socially liberal but usually much less so economically, hence libertarian. A good example is the recent Palestine protests at Google. Definitely had some staff who were faaaar left on the issue and caused a big stink, and…Google fired them all. Because Google’s leadership isn’t all that progressive. Neither is Amazon’s, or Meta’s, etc.
I worked at Google. You only think they are far left because they give employees long leash to bring specifically liberal politics into the office. But that’s only because the workforce votes progressive in the Bay. The actual founders, executive leadership are consistently much more to the right.
This is a really interesting take. Is it just about the Biden admin being tech unfriendly though? It seems like there’s an element of influence of the sort of cult that Sacks represents. There’s an adjacent element of self-interest, particularly for tax avoidance. And likely some aspect of it related to left public opinion turning anti-business and anti-tech over the past 5+ years. I’m curious what your thoughts are on these additional factors?
I mean, objectively, Biden admin is making big business more difficult. To be patently clear, Im neither defending it nor arguing for it. But big M&A is difficult. Crypto difficulties are real. General big business scrutiny is real. Throttling AI seems to be gaining momentum. To me it seems clear the government seems generally more interested in the happenings of the Valley. And on self interest; the unrealized capital gains proposal alone, I think, is enough to turn most VC’s away from Bidens admin. On the larger picture I think Big Tech is now a long the lines of Too Big To Fail Banks. They are a unimaginably rich lobby thats sole focus will be maintaining power. In order to optimize for maintaining power they will drop any political leaning if it means more favourable regulation. I think Trump may be the easier choice because it should be patently clear that Trump would say and do anything to win. He’s more malleable because he doesn’t care.
I’m not disputing your statement about the Biden admin being business unfriendly. I’m also neither defending nor arguing for it. I asked whether that was the only factor. The to big to fail VC angle seems irrelevant to your supporting point which was that they are now so big that they will optimize for their own survival. It seems that latter point is sufficient on its own. And that’s a very interesting point as well.
Fair! In the case of Saks, my personal opinion is that he is genuinely interested in his own political standing and building a position as a King maker and major influencer. So I think there is self interest there. The other 3 are much more money/business oriented. Less so personally interested in King making and administration level involvement.
Thank you for sharing! Do you have any opinions about how Sacks has seemed to win the battle of wills over political beliefs and everyone has fallen in line, and how it is acceptable to constantly make every conversation political?
In my view, that brings us back full circle. I think the sudden increase in politics is because it’s starting to affect their ability to do business. Saks is just a willing battering ram and now they’re all realizing their most prized possession of money and lifestyle is on the line. Saks sold em on a dream of a business friendly administration. Saks is motivated. He hitched his wagon to DeSantis - which makes me believe his primary motivation is that of King maker behind the scenes especially with his quick pivot to Trump.
The rank and file workers are liberal, but the majority of tech executives, board members and VC’s would probably be in the Conservative Party in Canada or the UK. I’m not sure there would be a single Bernie or Warren supporter among that elite class. Zuckerberg hinted at a town hall that he’d prefer Trump to Warren. They are liberal on gay marriage, but they don’t care that much about abortion. They definitely want lots of high skilled immigration and probably don’t care that much about undocumented immigrants. But, on economics, the majority would easily be right wing. Low taxes, minimal regulation and very anti union. Google was also a big donor to the Federalist society. There are large VC firms like Andreessen Horowitz where I can’t think of a single partner that is an outspoken liberal and most are definitely right wing. I know Milei from Argentina is beloved by large swaths of the tech elite and I would guess most would have similar political positions as him.
As someone in the Valley, it’s all relative. Sure, the Biden Admin hates big business and the FTC sucks + they really want to reign in social media in terms of “harming kids” and “spreading misinformation” but what’s the alternative? Trump doesn’t just want social media to “do better” he wants it to shill for Republicans. And he’s not pro-business, he’s openly said he wants to punish businesses that don’t support him. He’s not alone amongst Republicans. Thats the party now. And Trump would be massively inflationary based on his stated goal of making the Fed political. He is also planning on making the civil service political by purging people who aren’t loyal to him, which will create massive regulatory uncertainty for businesses. So as much as business people don’t love Bernie, he’s a back bencher who has no real power. Democrats may tax you a bit more and regulate you a bit more, but there’s at least certainty and you can work with that. Republicans are no longer pro-business, they’re pro-Republican and that is *scary* to businesses that prize stability. This is why you’re seeing people who were previously Mitt Romney Republicans shift over to being Biden Democrats. Biden may be left of them, but he’s as close as you’re going to get today to a centrist pro-market president, and that’s what businesspeople care about.
I think thats a pretty fair framing.
> Republicans are no longer pro-business, they’re pro-Republican and that is scary to businesses that prize stability. They are still very much pro business, it’s just that party leadership is terrified by Trump’s Russian mob handlers and so have let him take over the party. Standard sell your soul to the devil for the trappings of power then get predictably crossed by said devil once he grants your wish.
“The party really wants. , they just pretend to not want X because their most popular politicians hate X.” The Reagan Party is dead. When Trump is gone there will be somebody like DeSantis who isn’t as charismatic, but has all the same policies because that’s what the voters want. Some of school Republicans already get this and have abandoned the party. Anyone who is holding out hope will give up when Trump is gone and it’s clear that it wasn’t just him.
Silicon Valley is about as libertarian as you can get. It’s deeply conservative from an economic perspective, evidenced by the states quasi feudal take on property taxation. They just like their sex and drugs too. It makes sense they float towards whatever president promises them better portfolio returns.
Wow. Ezra Klein is even worse! He has no background in business or economics and is a massive shill for the left. You’ve gotta be kidding me. If you’re going to suggest alternative viewpoints, don’t just suggest even more biased sources with no expertise in building businesses. Mark Cuban would have been a good alternative, but definitely not Ezra Klein.
EK is a policy wonk with a center-left bent. Might be center-right in most of the world. It's not a business podcast. If you care about policy, listen to podcast that focus on that policy domain. There are specialized podcasts for almost every niche you can think of.
Klein isn’t running a business podcasts but for the record, he’s a founder. He co-founded Vox with Matt Yglesias so I’d guess he’s learned a bit about business from that.
I just recommend critically comparing the way these two pods approach the topic of trumps economic policy. Regardless if you hold the same politics as either pod, there is a ton of daylight between the two
I read Ezra Klein's columns on the NYT and have listened to his podcasts before. All his content has a liberal tint just like Krugman. Instead of being actually critical, everything is criticized from the perspective of a leftist. Ultimately, I agree with the besties' opinions more than Ezra's because they align more with what I believe is effective to bringing prosperity for the American people. Finally, being a blogger and starting a media company is not the same as starting technology companies requiring lots of engineers to be successful. Media companies are about generating interesting and compelling content. Tech companies are about building innovative solutions to hard problems and understanding markets to be able to sell those solutions. Ezra makes money from producing content that feeds people who want that content delivered with a certain tint. He doesn’t make money from investing, which requires a deep understanding of economic dynamics and sometimes technology if it’s tech investing.
What am I missing ?? Ezra doesn’t attempt / try ti convey that he is man of knowledge / valid opinions … he interviews ppl who have vast knowledge and experience in the topics discussed for the pod … He podcast host and never tried to be other wise .. don’t put Ezra on the same tier as the All IN guys !!!
Hmmm...I'm not really a regular listener anymore, but EK doesn't not seem like a "leftist". He was super critical of Bernie Sanders and such. He seems pretty banal politically.
He is definitely leftist. He tries to brand himself similar to David Brooks, who is moderate, but doesn’t have any legit right-leaning positions.
I really don't want to argue semantics, but EK has been super critical of people to this left like Bernie, AOC, etc. (or at least he was when I listened more often). Now, his temperament is very moderate so he's not going ham or whatever. But IDK how anyone could listen to him doing a podcast about reforming zoning laws to allow multiuse housing in suburban areas (or something) and conclude that he's a "leftist". Like, if he does a podcast about addressing the trade labor shortage he's not going to conclude that the solution is to give the workers the means of production, or something. He's going to talk about boring stuff like loan forgiveness, recruitment programs, etc. He's not a leftist. He seems like a totally banal, center-left Democrat. You're welcome to believe whatever you want, I don't see a point in discussing it any further.
They are smart / they are just grifting shit bags, and in it for the money. Fuck the country, fuck the general public.
Smart people act in bad faith to try and influence others for their own self interests. These men just act in bad faith because people like JCal are charlatans/grifters.
Like most people, they’re smart in a handful of domains. Exceptionally so. However, their success and influence in those domains has made them Dumbledore-level Dunning-Kruger practitioners outside those realms. This, combined with their casual notions of integrity offers a new path to Jared Kushner-like gains. Gross, but shame on me for having listened to these guys and expecting more.
Well said. Your comment better captures what I believe. Thanks, and agreed, Shane on me for putting them on a pedestal
Lol the besties do not have Dunning-Kruger levels of expertise. Each of them have built and invested in multi-billion dollar businesses.
[удалено]
Agree on the fact they have expertise in their domains. Apologies for misinterpreting you earlier on that. Disagree on the rest though. Being really good in business means you understand how the economy works. That gives them an informed opinion about how the government can foster innovation, competition, and economic dynamism. They understand that deregulation is important and they can detect when and where the government is being grossly inefficient, causing us to be uncompetitive against upstarts like China and India. They may not have much expertise about the military, foreign affairs, and entitlements, but their criticisms of govt spending on all of these is fair. I’d rather our government spend less money on all of these things because our debt is too high and risks the downfall of America as a superpower. Politics isn’t rocket science, medicine, or theoretical physics. You can effect change with your vote without being an expert in specific matters.
Sounds like you think they're not smart because their politics differ from yours. I listened to that episode and IMO Trump came off sounding significantly more balanced and sane than I went in expecting.
He definitely did. The issue is that I’m more informed now and there were 4-5 times that he just stated blatantly wrong things and I’m only 15 min intro the pod. Also, when talking about the dollar he said something along the lines of “Ukraine sort of doesn’t exist” which was a wacko thing to say.
This is a microcosm of the internet: Person doesn’t like something the people they admired did so they take it as a proxy of their overall intelligence or some other thing. This is the real world bucko. It’s gonna happen again. Deal with it.
They’ve had on a number of presidential candidates and have held fundraisers for a few of them. They’ve also invited Biden on the pod and Chamath has stated he would fundraise for him as well. What is the big deal here? I used to roll my eyes when people would say “Trump Derangement Syndrome”, but this sub now has me reconsidering.
I’m not referring to them fundraising for him or supporting him. I’m referring to the way they interviewed him. They bill themselves as independent thinkers, but they asked Trump a straightforward question, he simply did not answer and they clapped liked train seals. If they are rich guys who are in it for rich guys and simply want to see a tax cut for rich guys so they support Trump, fine, go for it. But they claim to be concerned about the deficit, trumps agenda is clearly both inflationary and based on increased deficit spending, and they gobble it up. It is either that they aren’t very smart or they are just pretending to be critical, independent advocates for the issues they espouse, and I’m unimpressed by both. I am an open minded listener who actively seeks out new perspectives on things and is interested in having my formerly strongly held belief proven wrong about things. I think Trump derangement syndrome can be a real phenomenon, but it can also be a technique for pro Trump folks to dismiss any legitimate critique of Trump as simply TDS.
Agree that they punted on the deficit (Trump's initial response was actually that "we'll grow our way out of it", but they didn't mention this assertion, which they would normally dismiss as the wishful thinking you here from so many politicians), with one exception: Friedberg did, in the wrap up afterwards, point out that he (Friedberg) had not gotten a full response from Trump on this topic. Friedberg is often in this position, of having a different, less fawning, response to people or stories (eg, about Elon) than his besties exhibit, and he always does it in a very respectful way.
Exactly. It’s their hypocrisy. That’s the most offputting. They say for example that they are very pro reducing the deficit, yet when their interests were at risk (see Silicon Valley Bank collapse), they begged the government for a comprehensive bailout (to cover all losses exceeding the FDIC insured amount), which the gov obliged to via the BTFP. It’s like ranting about excessive gov spending while being on welfare yourself. I see why they’ve shifted the focus of their pod to politics, the tech/investing community is much more familiar with their past and can spot the numerous inconsistencies
I feel like I'm living in the twilight zone. I don't love the democrats and I have no problem supporting Republicans. But Donald Trump is a buffoon who not only ran up the debt and clowned his way through Covid (when this country badly needed leadership) but also tried overthrow the government and overturn an election. If you want conservative justices and Republican policy I guess vote for him but don't act like it's not a bitch decision. Your voting for a bitch who did a crappy job and is now a convicted felon bc he f'd a porn star while married and got caught paying her off. The guy is a 6 times bankrupted, seditionist, loser and somehow people are surprised that he causes revulsion. That's the big deal.
Unfortunately your very effective comment will get ignored.
What am I missing? I kinda blame the democrats for being such weak opposition but still - what are people looking at?
What does any of that have to do with the comment you replied to?
Answering the question What is the Big Deal - as in, why are people reacting so strongly to trump being on the podcast.
People could come up with a list like that about anyone though. That doesn't really answer why it's a big deal to interview the person they invited that actually responded. Regardless of his literal rap sheet, he's still probably going to be the republican candidate, and interviewing presidential candidates should be seen as a great thing for media to do.
Name another person about whom you could come up w a list that includes trying to overthrow the government and overturn an election? Name another person who added more than 2 trillion dollars per year to the national debt. It's a big deal because he is a uniquely horrible person. I'm not saying they shouldn't have him on if they want (i guess)- I'm just explaining that it's not surprising that people are revolted by him.
I said a list like that, not that list. I get that he sucks, but everyone sucks in their own ways. People disliking the media talking to presidential candidates should be the big deal, not that the media talks to presidential candidates.
Yes, TDS is when people like Sacks repeatedly bend over backwards for trumps ridiculous lies and to justify all the crazy shit he says and does. It’s a big problem and should be addressed by people like this sub.
No joke, it’s insane to hear how people responded to this interview. If you have listened to their podcast for a while, this wasn’t even that biased or bad… anyone remember the shit with SBF?
I think the gap is that we don’t know the real inner reasons why they talk or vote for someone. They make money from their choices and who they vote for, so they are not super transparent about them. They are business owners at the end of the day, and the podcast is a perspective of what business owners and VCs think. Keep that in mind. It’s not a consumer podcast and what normal consumers think.
Ezra Klein?
They have had to update the definition of sycophant to include the way the all-in-billionaires put together this bit of heavily edited puff piece to make Trump seem coherent. I am embarrassed for you. All you need to know is that when people this rich are going all in for Trump, they have something to gain that the rest of us don't. And don't be fooled. This is a zero-sum game. Their Ws are your Ls. Just look at how the tax system is already engineered to transfer wealth from you to them.
I don’t do NYtimes - or fox
Lol Trump broke this sub
Neither are their listeners.
These posts are getting ridiculous and bring absolutely nothing to the conversation. Obviously these guys are smart which is proved by their net worths, network and business acumen. Just because they are more for a president which will compel capitalism, aka making venture investment easier, rather than a president that is making their jobs harder, doesn’t mean they are trumpers or dumb or whatever else you think. If they were for a president that would make their jobs/lives worse, I would say that isn’t smart.
What is either dumb or disingenuous (you can decide) is constantly talking about their concerns about deficit, then interviewing a candidate whose stated policy involves deficit spending, and being completely uncritical. IMO this disqualifies you from being taken seriously on economic matters
Out of curiosity, for who is Trump's policies making investment easier? What kind of capitalism is being compelled here? From my perspective (lower middle income single male), it seems like the Trump era is specifically catered to the corporate elite elite society. The old idea that the free market knows best how to manage the economy has been proven false time and time again. Everyone's a hypocrite in politics and it's particularly distasteful to hear wealthy people complain about government assistance for people, but then cry and have the power to get government assistance when they are the ones in trouble. The only difference is that their money allows them to convince decision makers that their personal interests along with "the economy". The real menace is the wealth gap in this country. Everything else is a distraction.
This was a response to OP’s point. It would make their jobs in VC easier. Trump is for EV’s, M&A, Crypto, tax cuts, etc. I understand your point with the elite, but that is my point. These guys are in that category which means it would be smart to be for a guy that caters to you. I think the real menace of society is the two party system that both play into so that there are only two choices in a very complex economic, social and political country.
Trump is for tax cuts. The rest is pandering to whoever is in front of him that day
Probably fair, but he is gonna make a bunch more policy decisions so you have to take his other policy announcements seriously
> who is Trump's policies making investment easier? Let's start with anyone who buys groceries, buys gas, pays rent, wants to buy a house to have their own appreciating capital investment.
I agree they're full of lies but ezra Klein's take on inflation doesn't really mean a pile of beans to me either. He's a hack as much as anyone. Just look at the CPI over the last 15 years and draw your own conclusions. https://www.usinflationcalculator.com/inflation/current-inflation-rates/
Ezra Klein is the furthest thing from a hack in media today. He’s extremely well versed in policy, has an unbelievable range of topics where he can dive deep on, and is one of the strongest interviewers around.
In my experience he just says whatever his audience wants to hear, just like the all in guys.
Examples?
Well take this opinion he's put forth that trumps tariffs are going to raise prices. He made a totally standard libertarian-esque argument that tarrifs would make the markets less efficient and raise prices. But the same logic applies to taxes in general. The only difference is whether you're taxing American companies or foreign companies... the rest of the logic is pretty much the same. Framed in terms of domestic taxes, I don't think I've ever heard Ezra Klein make the case that raising taxes would be a bad idea because it could raise prices. Similarly they go on and on about how a secure border would lower the labor supply. Yet I've never seen them fret over an increase in the minimum wage or welfare support in a similar way, even though that has a largely similar effect. In other words, he does the exact same sort of strategic hypocrisy that I agree is so annoying from the all-in besties.
I'm not anti-tarrif per se, but at least in the short term if we replace low cost imports with goods made either less efficiently or wih higher labor costs, obviously the costs are going to rise. Personally I think that's a price we should pay to keep a vibrabt manufacturing base...within reason. I think EK views that issue as well as the immigrant labor issue as something that people talk about without actually thinking through what the consequences will be. I'm going off memory but I think he specifically talked about how a ton of farming just isn't viable without that immigrant workforce.
Yeah I'm not saying he's wrong that those policies can have inflation as a knock-on effect. They probably would to be honest. I just find it revealing that he does a whole podcast about the possible inflationary effects of Trump's policies when he never did the same thing for all of Biden's policies that *actually did cause inflation* and he remains convinced that Biden will be better for inflation than trump.
Klein is a biased hack and absolute idiot. He makes Trump look smart.
the spike in 2020-2021 is the COVID effect -- it's fairly complicated but if you're thinking the increase is Biden economics that is not the case.
Except it's not 2020-2021. It's 2021-2024. And it's no surprise. Inject trillions of dollars into the economy while ratcheting up various regulations& prohibitions... It's a rather obvious outcome.
Any discussion of inflation in the US that doesn't take in the inflation rates in other countries is pretty dishonest
Did you listen to his most recent conversation with Matt Y? It’s hard to consider that the analysis of a hack, even if you disagree with his politics
If y’all don’t like the podcast, stop listening and move on. Y’all are really pathetic.
That’s the plan
Agreed!
People are justifiably disappointed that the podcast has gone from a mostly tech-vc focused podcast that had value for people interested in that field to one that is overwhelmingly political. If i wanted politics from shills I’d watch CNN/FOX.
Yep
If you look at the numbers Trump was a much better President than Biden to Obama. Jamie Dimon even admitted that Trump was more effective than Biden. You may not like him, but that isn’t a reason to say people are unintelligent for supporting him.
What numbers? And which numbers can specifically be attributed to Trump and his policies?
Kind of depends on what numbers you look at...
I didn’t say someone is unintelligent for supporting Trump. I said they proved their unintelligence by the way they conducted themselves in that interview. And I’m curious what you mean by “the numbers”
How? They were critical. Do you think that ending the war in Europe and Middle East isn’t a good thing? Do you not agree we should decrease spending? Or do you think that Joe and the democrat open border policy is better than Trump’s? Which part do you think they agree with that is unintelligent? Or at least you don’t exactly agree with?
I’m interested in why they didn’t point out that deficit spending was higher under Trump than under both Biden and Obama. Also interested in which policies Trump pointed out that Biden instituted to open the border? Because the border is actually arresting and stopping more border crossings than under Trump.
They addressed that, it was the pandemic. Trump also mentioned they were negotiating why US are contributing way more in institutions like WHO or NATO compared to to other memebers. Have you not been watching the news? There are literal holes at the border which encourage “asylum seekers” to exploit it which are coming from all over the world. Now tell me, which issues they talked about that you think make them “unintelligent” for supporting trump’s?
Paying the least amount of money to be in the World Health Organization is not an accomplishment. It’s not like getting a cheap tv on Black Friday. We should want these organizations to have the wherewithal to be effective. Anything worth doing is worth doing right.
Agree on all points. But accomplishing all of these with less money is also an actual accomplishment. We can’t be spending just money for the sake of it. Effective and efficient is the goal.
Oh it was the pandemic. Glad we cleared up why we gave huge permanent tax cuts to wealthy people and PPP loans that didn’t need to be repaid to companies who didn’t even have employees. The news? Trump told me the news was lying to me, now I don’t know what to believe! There were no holes at the border under Trump! They only opened up after Biden was inaugurated. Got it!
lol just by this response I can almost tell what your positions are on every other political issues. If you’re actually listening to the pod, critical-thinking is what is missing in today’s political discussion. You have to think beyond rhetoric.
Yup listening to 4 mega rich people “question” a billionaire who has made it clear he’s for sale to stay out of trouble, and just taking everything the 5 of them say at face value is definitely critical thinking. Politically, I left the GOP in 2016 when I saw every single stance and value they held for my 30 years on this earth betrayed and then got on their knees for the con artist that betrayed them. The GOP isn’t about policy or running the country. Its main goal is to keep Trump out of jail and help the wealthy if there’s any time left.
Yea, because you would rather listen to 4 unsuccessful homeless people right? Again, which policies exactly you don’t agree with which you think is stupid to support? You’re full of rhetoric.
Permanent tax loopholes and cuts for ultra wealthy while taxes on those making under $400k/year will go up to pay for them.
I can't find the numbers, but I'm guessing that support for the WHO is probably like 0.02% of the federal budget. We aren't getting big budget cuts unless we want to cut the size of the military or programs for the elderly. Seriously, go look up the budget. It's publically available. It's been the same damn debate for 30-40 years. Lots of handwringing about the WHO, or support for some AIDS program in Africa, or scientific funding, or arts grants, and politicians and pundits just won't be honest with us and tell us we are going to have to give up the things we like if we are ever going to really have big federal spending cuts. A year from now it will be something else. It never ends. Some small budget line item gets blown up the pundit class. It's something new every year or two. Someone needs to look us in the eye and say we will have a lot less military and the old people will suffer if we really want these big cuts. We need to stop pretending and man up.
Yea I agree that the defense budget is the significant one that needs a bigger oversight and critical cutting that is why I support Trump's foreign policy (ie reduce NATO expansion to stop the war and Abraham Accords). In regards with the WHO, I dont care what % of the federal budget it is, the real question is why are we significantly contributing way more than the other members? Same with NATO. As an American, this is a concern. You cant help drowning people when you yourself is drowning.
Right, but Trump explained that reducing the US contribution to the WHO would reduce the deficit. The impact is miminal. It's the equivalent of you or I skipping the 25 cent sauce packet once a month to pay off the 100k we owe on our BMW. Remember, Trump has been bankrupt multiple times. The guy does not have good numeracy or quantitative literacy. He doesn't get numbers. He might legit think that cutting WHO support will really, really close the deficit, but he likely struggles with basic numeracy.
But it would albeit small. But again, it's not about the contribution % per se, it is about the principle of fairness. Why are we acting like a lap dog to EU countries? Did you actually listen to the episode?
This conversation just isn't worth it. Trump said that reducing the contribution to the WHO would reduce the deficit. That's kinda true, but only incrementally so. Again, he's just not a numerate or quantatively literate guy. No man who can interpret numbers files for bankruptcy that many times.
[удалено]
Would love to see your evidence for that
[удалено]
So the years Trump was better were before he passed his tax plan that exploded the deficit? That’s one of my issues with him. He took the economy from Obama, the. Passed a massive tax cut for the wealthy and did nothing to replace those funds or decrease spending.
There's no open border, bro. And, honestly, if you're for small government and reduced spending, you gotta support relatively lax immigration. Not saying open borders, but it's just inconsistent to support deregulating business but not deregulating people.
Why do you have to support a lax immigration if you want to reduce spending? That's exactly the opposite of what you need to do.
tight border control= increased spending, increased government control. That's regulation of the most intense kind. If you support free markets, you gotta support free people. Or, to put it another way, there's no free markets without the (relative) free movement of people.
Ill correct you and say free movement of competent and productive citizens. If you actually listen to the pod, Trump is in support of H1B visas for skilled workers. Lax border policy is just plain stupid. Random people coming from all over the world with little to no criteria to enter can just walk into the country is just plain dangerous. Also, how do you know these people wouldn't need social programs to get started? We barely support our own citizens. My family and I are immigrants and one of the hoops we have to go over when is to prove to USCIS that we wouldnt be a financial burden to the country. Im not sure why people like you cant see this.
Man, all I'm saying is that you are inconsistent. If we want small government, we have to give up some security. It's just the way it works. We don't get to feel totally safe and live in this very controlled environment and also cut state, local, and federal government down to the barebones. Thanks for sharing your perspective. I strongly encourage you to be a bit more reflective and consider your positions a bit more carefully, and recognize places where your preferences may be inconsistent.
The border is an essential part of every state and therefore a fundamental part of the budget even for a small government. Why do we even have labeled maps if we dont? Thanks for sharing yours as well. I encourage you to do so too.
Ending the war in Europe? are you thinking of Truman?
Yes
Number of charges? Number of people sexually abused? Number of lies told? Amount of debt racked up for the country? Number of covid deaths?
Numbers is numbers
That link doesn't work for me, but I did wanna shout out Ezra Klein's most recent podcast episode with Matt. It's a super interesting discussion about Trump's policies and their impact on the economy.
That was the one I tried to link. I’ll edit and fix the link
Yea I listened to that episode this weekend and found it to be super interesting. Nice to actually understand the real implications of Trump's policies
Matt Y is the man
They are smart. We are inconsequential in the game they are playing.
It's not that they're not smart. Is that they're trying their best to kiss future president's ass. Kiss ass = special privileges. Sacks did this for a year now, others joined in this year.
I agree, they are either dumb or disingenuous. Which are both unappealing
I'm starting to think Redditors aren't smart... I thought they held different opinions than me but gave them the benefit of the doubt that they were smart. But listening to the constant TDS and whining and bitching about anything outside DNC narratives, that illusion came tumbling down.
Ezra Klein is a hack who thinks he’s way smarter than he is.
Ezra Klein? Hahahaha
shut up
Good point
Ezra is insufferable
Jfc, y'all just hate-listen to the pod? Define 'not that smart'... like what do think the ave iq of the group is? Its likely closer to 140 than 100.
Average, or total?
Yall talk a great game on reddit. Would love to see how much you'd bet on these convictions
Ya I'm sure you're a regular Einstein 🤤
Liston to what real MAGA Patriots are saying [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg0pO9VG1J8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qg0pO9VG1J8)
If these don't agree with everything MSNBC is telling me they are not smart 🤓. Where is my liberal echo chamber going? I don't feel safe anymore 🤣