Friendly Fire: Will AI Destroy Us?

[00:00:00] You guys need me here as a community [00:00:02] college dropout with all you Ivy League [00:00:03] nerds. [00:00:04] >> You were just making fun of me because I [00:00:05] brought that up and now you're bringing [00:00:06] [laughter] that up. [00:00:07] >> Well, it's I'm I'm bringing it I'm [00:00:08] bringing it back to the real world. [00:00:09] >> No, no, no. You're reading the study [00:00:11] totally wrong. That's not what the study [00:00:12] says. Okay, now I really want to [music] [00:00:14] move on because Matt's offering a [00:00:15] moderate opinion and Ben is agreeing [00:00:17] with him. Friends like these [music] [00:00:20] enemies and friends like [singing] these [00:00:23] enemies. [00:00:25] >> Everybody, welcome to Friendly Fire. All [00:00:27] DailyWire Plus subscriptions are 50% off [00:00:31] right now. Get them right now. [00:00:33] dailywire.com/subscribe. [00:00:37] Also, stick around because we have the [00:00:38] world premiere of the trailer of Pen [00:00:41] Dragon, the Pen Dragon Cycle, The Rise [00:00:42] of the Merlin. That is coming up at the [00:00:44] end of the show. But before we get to [00:00:46] any of that, speaking of wizardry, I [00:00:48] want to talk about AI and whether AI is [00:00:51] really good like everyone seems to think [00:00:53] it is, like all the financial [00:00:55] speculators have thought, which is why [00:00:56] it boosted the MAG7 stocks until [00:00:58] recently before our impending stock [00:01:00] market collapse, or whether AI is [00:01:03] probably mostly bad for all of us. To [00:01:06] kick it off, the most optimistic person [00:01:08] on the panel, Mr. Walsh. [00:01:11] Uh, yeah. I'm I'm very I'm I become more [00:01:13] anti- AI with each passing day. I I hate [00:01:16] AI. If I could I said before, if I could [00:01:19] commit some sort of anti-AI genocide, I [00:01:22] would totally [laughter] do it. Um, I [00:01:24] think that and here's what here's what [00:01:26] blows my mind about it is that we can [00:01:27] all most of us anyway can see even [00:01:30] people who are behind AI like Elon Musk [00:01:33] can see coming this like potential [00:01:37] civilizational level catastrophe and [00:01:40] basically nothing is being done about it [00:01:42] at all because what is absolutely going [00:01:45] to happen as far as I can tell is AI at [00:01:48] a minimum is going to wipe out many [00:01:50] millions of jobs over the next 5 to 10 [00:01:52] years. How many millions? There's no way [00:01:54] to say for sure. I I did ask by the way [00:01:56] chat GPT before we went on. Uh I asked [00:01:59] Chat GBT to estimate how many jobs it [00:02:01] will take and AI will take from us in [00:02:04] the next 10 years. And I think the [00:02:05] answer I got was 15 million or something [00:02:07] like that. 15 to 25 million. So, who [00:02:10] knows? It's millions of jobs are going [00:02:12] out the window. We know that because of [00:02:13] AI. And they're not going to be replaced [00:02:14] by anything. They're they're just [00:02:15] they're going away. They're not coming [00:02:17] back. Um that's going to happen. We're [00:02:20] going to be we're already we're we're [00:02:21] almost there now, but we will soon be in [00:02:23] a situation online where you just simply [00:02:25] cannot tell reality from fiction at all [00:02:28] where the AI videos are going to be so [00:02:30] good that if anybody wants to smear any [00:02:33] of us here, I can't imagine anyone would [00:02:35] want to smear any of us because we're so [00:02:36] [laughter] we're all so beloved. But if [00:02:38] anyone wanted to do that, they could [00:02:39] just make a video of any of us doing or [00:02:41] saying something horrible and there'd be [00:02:42] no way for us to prove it. [00:02:43] >> That cat video radicalized me. I don't [00:02:45] know if you guys saw the cat playing the [00:02:46] digery do and everything. It was very [00:02:49] good. If I didn't if I didn't know that [00:02:51] most cats don't play digo, I would have [00:02:53] thought that was a 100% real video. [00:02:55] >> Well, that but Michael, that's the other [00:02:57] that's that's the other thing that's [00:02:58] going to happen with AI is that people [00:03:00] are just sitting there looking at this [00:03:02] slop made by an algorithm all day every [00:03:04] day while their minds are melted. And [00:03:07] then on top of all those other things, [00:03:08] it's going to completely destroy every [00:03:10] creative industry uh is all going out [00:03:13] out the window. And so what are we doing [00:03:16] about this? So, we just got to sit back [00:03:17] and let it happen because that seems to [00:03:19] be the kind of defeist attitude that [00:03:21] most people have is like, "Well, we [00:03:22] can't do anything. So, let's just um I [00:03:25] guess you know, we had a good run, human [00:03:26] beings. Let's uh let's pack it in." And [00:03:29] uh I I [00:03:30] >> Matt, I do Matt, I want to ask you [00:03:32] seriously. Do you think that AI is going [00:03:33] to kill all of us or is this kind of [00:03:35] your list of uh because I know that's [00:03:36] the sort of the most catastrophist take [00:03:38] on this is that AI is going to turn [00:03:40] around and do gigantic murder to all of [00:03:42] us like Terminator 2. But yeah, no, like [00:03:45] this is your list of complaints that I [00:03:46] just want to make sure that that's list [00:03:47] of complaints so that I can argue with [00:03:48] them. [00:03:48] >> No, the Terminator thing. I don't that's [00:03:51] like I'd prefer that. I mean, at least [00:03:53] [laughter] that's that you know what if [00:03:55] if if AI becomes Terminator, then that [00:03:57] at least gives us jobs that we could do [00:03:58] cuz we're fighting the AI. Uh so it's [00:04:01] not that at all. I I'm not looking at [00:04:03] any science, you know, sci-fi scenario. [00:04:05] It really is. The main thing is people [00:04:07] will not have much to do because AI is [00:04:10] going to do everything and it's going to [00:04:11] take all of our jobs. And I don't think [00:04:13] that we have the capacity to sustain [00:04:15] that. I don't think we have any plan for [00:04:16] what we do when 20 million people all of [00:04:18] a sudden have no job. That's that's the [00:04:20] main thing. [00:04:21] >> Okay. I'm going to argue with everything [00:04:22] you just said. Okay. So, I'm I'm not a [00:04:24] person who who believes that AI is the [00:04:27] cure for all problems. Uh I also do not [00:04:30] think that what we are in right now is [00:04:32] sustainable economically. I've been [00:04:33] saying this for a while. I've actually [00:04:34] been saying it for for well over a year [00:04:35] is that I think we are in a bubble. I [00:04:37] think pretty clearly we're in an AI [00:04:38] bubble. That doesn't mean AI isn't is is [00:04:40] not important. It just means that the [00:04:42] overinvestment in infrastructure at some [00:04:44] point is going to have to pay off an in [00:04:45] actual earnings or the entire pyramid is [00:04:47] going to crumble at least for for most [00:04:48] of these companies. Uh as far as I'm [00:04:51] hearing kind of three arguments there. [00:04:52] One is the AI is going to take all of [00:04:54] our jobs. Uh two is that if the AI takes [00:04:57] all of our jobs, what are we going to do [00:04:58] with our lives? And three is the quality [00:05:00] of AI is is demeaning to sort of the the [00:05:04] the human being. That what's going to [00:05:06] happen to human art? What's going to [00:05:07] happen to quality? It's all going to [00:05:08] kind of descend into AI slot mediocrity. [00:05:11] So, one at a time. I I will say that AI [00:05:14] is going to cause job dislocation, but [00:05:17] it's not going to take out nearly all of [00:05:19] the jobs. And in the end, [00:05:22] what you will see is a job shift. [00:05:24] Actually, predominantly away from the [00:05:26] white collar industries and more toward [00:05:28] the blue collar industry. So, what [00:05:29] you'll see is all the people who were [00:05:30] telling welders to code 15 years ago, [00:05:33] all those people are now going to have [00:05:34] to go learn to weld. That's actually [00:05:36] what's going to happen. There going to [00:05:36] be a lot of people who are going to have [00:05:37] have to be in sort of more physical [00:05:39] industries. They're going to have to do [00:05:40] more nursing, for example. Like there's [00:05:42] certain things human beings want from [00:05:43] other human beings that AI isn't going [00:05:44] to provide. It's going to be more of an [00:05:46] aid than anything else. And it's going [00:05:48] to take slower to to work its way into [00:05:50] the market than everybody thinks. [00:05:51] Everybody always thinks it's going to be [00:05:52] transitional boom like tomorrow all jobs [00:05:54] replaced by AI. And and it's not true. [00:05:56] The people who it's first going to [00:05:57] replace are the coders. You've already [00:05:58] started to see some of this happen at [00:06:00] Google. And I know people uh friends and [00:06:02] family to to whom this has happened. But [00:06:04] it's going to take a while for it to [00:06:05] filter into all business. And there will [00:06:07] be transitional job loss and then it [00:06:09] will move into other areas. This is what [00:06:11] happened with the internet. This is what [00:06:12] happens with every you know kind of [00:06:14] great industrial age invention is that [00:06:16] there's tremendous job dislocation at [00:06:17] the beginning and then the job market [00:06:19] moves. And I don't think AI is going to [00:06:21] destroy wholesale all of these jobs. But [00:06:24] let's let's move to part number two [00:06:25] which is sort of the idea that it will [00:06:27] destroy all the jobs. Let's take that as [00:06:28] an assumption. So here's my thing. I I [00:06:31] was actually at a conference with a [00:06:32] bunch of people who are like the [00:06:33] creators of these systems. And they were [00:06:35] arguing kind of what you're arguing, [00:06:36] Matt, that that eventually AI will be [00:06:38] better at everything and none of us will [00:06:39] have jobs anymore. And what are we going [00:06:42] to do with our day? And I raised my [00:06:43] hand. I said, you know what? I know what [00:06:44] I'm going to do with my day. I'm going [00:06:45] to take care of my family. I'm going to [00:06:46] go to synagogue more often. I'm going [00:06:48] to, you know, learn the holy books. I'm [00:06:50] going to actually spend more time [00:06:51] getting in touch with God. Like, I think [00:06:52] that actually religious people and [00:06:54] community oriented people will be fine [00:06:56] because we actually have a thing to do [00:06:57] with our day. I think that secular [00:07:00] humanism is going to have a real problem [00:07:01] determining what to do with its day in a [00:07:03] way that many religious people will not. [00:07:05] And then just as far as the quality of [00:07:06] it, I'm not sure that AI is ever going [00:07:09] to be creative enough. Visually, it will [00:07:11] be. It'll be able to fool you visually. [00:07:12] But in terms of the actual creativity of [00:07:15] truly great writing. I don't think AI is [00:07:17] ever going to be a great writer. It's [00:07:18] all derivative. I I think that AI [00:07:21] because it's predictive text mechanism [00:07:22] and it's it's you you will end up with [00:07:24] mid-range slop for the most part. But [00:07:26] the the way that I've used AI in my own [00:07:28] work is to save time asking a [00:07:30] sophisticated question that would take [00:07:32] me a while to research for example or if [00:07:34] I'm doing creative writing project and I [00:07:35] don't want to take a lot of time looking [00:07:36] up the details of Soviet Russia in 1938 [00:07:39] or something then I can ask a multi-part [00:07:41] question it'll spit out an answer. If if [00:07:43] I asked it to write dialogue the [00:07:44] dialogue would just not be as good. Uh, [00:07:46] and so I I agree with that. There will [00:07:47] be a lot of slot, but I think that the [00:07:49] people who are best at their craft will [00:07:50] actually end up benefiting from AI and [00:07:52] and usually when the best get better, [00:07:54] that's actually good for everybody else [00:07:55] because it tends to drag everybody else [00:07:57] along in terms of quality. [00:07:58] >> So on your point on the religious uh [00:08:02] people who you know uh they'll know what [00:08:04] to do with their time or the educated [00:08:06] people or the cultural elites or what I [00:08:08] totally agree with that. But to me, this [00:08:10] is what's really worrisome about Matt's [00:08:12] point that it's going to displace 15 [00:08:13] million jobs and most people are not [00:08:15] going to know what to do because I agree [00:08:16] with you. You you will figure out what [00:08:18] to do with [00:08:19] >> No, but in the white collar jobs, [00:08:20] Michael, in the white collar jobs, [00:08:23] >> those are the jobs. But those are but [00:08:24] those are the people who you're talking [00:08:25] about like largely bluecollar people who [00:08:28] are like you're saying, you know, all [00:08:30] the people who are like the intellectual [00:08:31] elite, those are the people who are now [00:08:32] most likely to lose their jobs. [00:08:35] >> No, I'm drawing a distinction here. [00:08:36] There are plenty of people in white [00:08:38] collar jobs who are complete philistines [00:08:39] who are secular humanists who are who I [00:08:42] don't know that they that they they are [00:08:43] going to figure out what to do because [00:08:44] really what it gets down to is is a [00:08:46] perennial question which is what we do [00:08:48] for leisure time. You know that's what [00:08:50] the liberal arts were supposed to teach [00:08:51] us how to do. Now we think of them more [00:08:53] as trade school but it was supposed to [00:08:54] teach us what to do with our freedom [00:08:56] what how aristocrats are supposed to [00:08:57] live. We we obviously don't really have [00:08:59] that. So my my fear is that the promise [00:09:01] of AI is really just an extension of the [00:09:04] promise of the internet. the internet [00:09:06] was going to make us all smarter. We [00:09:07] were going to have all of human [00:09:08] knowledge at our fingertips. We were [00:09:10] going to we could learn a new language. [00:09:11] We It's all the same stuff we're hearing [00:09:13] with AI. And the reality is for some [00:09:16] people the internet did make them [00:09:18] smarter and more productive and more [00:09:19] thoughtful and have fuller lives. And [00:09:21] for more people than that, I really for [00:09:24] most people I think it made them dumber [00:09:26] and it made them more vicious. And I [00:09:28] think it made them more likely to look [00:09:29] at porn and it made them more likely to [00:09:31] ignore the great works. And this goes [00:09:32] all the way back to the Federris. you [00:09:34] know, Plato's dialogue where Socrates is [00:09:36] saying that written language books [00:09:38] essentially are going to make people [00:09:40] dumber because they're going to have the [00:09:41] simulacrim of wisdom, but they're not [00:09:43] actually going to memorize anything. [00:09:44] They're not going to know anything. And [00:09:45] so, I fear I I think you're right. I [00:09:47] think if for people who have their lives [00:09:48] in order and are religious and have a [00:09:50] cohesive view of the purpose of life, I [00:09:52] think it could improve their lives. And [00:09:54] I think for most people, it probably [00:09:56] won't. Drew, [00:09:57] >> this is Well, this is I if I could take [00:09:59] you and Ben and mash you together just [00:10:01] for my own personal pleasure, that would [00:10:03] be great. But also I think that what [00:10:04] you're say what you're saying you're [00:10:05] hitting that the problem is not AI the [00:10:07] problem is human beings and it's always [00:10:09] the problem. I mean people talk about [00:10:11] are are we going to have to regulate an [00:10:12] industry. You don't regulate industries. [00:10:14] You regulate human beings. You have to [00:10:16] regulate human beings because they're [00:10:17] sinful and broken and we'll kill each [00:10:19] other and rob each other and do all [00:10:20] these things already. We see with AI. I [00:10:23] mean recently last week I think it was [00:10:25] they brought out an AI where you can [00:10:27] record somebody and then after he's dead [00:10:29] you can continue to talk. will give you [00:10:31] an AI version of your dead relatives so [00:10:32] you can talk to mom even after she's [00:10:34] passed. I mean, this that is idolatry of [00:10:36] the worst possible kind. There have been [00:10:39] AI dolls that have been put in [00:10:40] children's rooms that talk them out of [00:10:42] believing in God and tell them how to [00:10:43] get drugs and things like this. So, the [00:10:45] problem is not the AI per se. It is it's [00:10:48] what people are going to do with it. It [00:10:50] is going to make porn spectacular. I [00:10:53] mean, the porn that's [laughter] going [00:10:54] to come out of AI, I mean, I can already [00:10:55] see that it it will do anything you want [00:10:57] it to do. It's going to it's going to [00:11:00] rob people of their desire to read. I [00:11:03] mean, it's already people are like [00:11:05] condensing books. Well, now I've got, [00:11:07] you know, War in Peace. It's just give [00:11:08] me two paragraphs. But that's a complete [00:11:10] destruction of what it means. And so, [00:11:12] people who don't have the meaning of [00:11:14] life or don't know where it's it it [00:11:16] lies, which is in the internal life, uh [00:11:19] are are going to be lost. You and I, [00:11:22] Nolles, had a conversation with a very [00:11:24] powerful leader in AI just the other [00:11:27] week or so. And I went up to him and I [00:11:29] said to him, "Don't you understand that [00:11:31] when AI speaks, it's not speaking? It's [00:11:34] not conscious." And I said, "It's like [00:11:36] it's like I quoted the great Louisie [00:11:38] Armstrong saying, I see friends shaking [00:11:40] hands saying, "How do you do?" They're [00:11:42] really saying, "I love you." meaning [00:11:44] that when we speak we deliver our inner [00:11:47] selves to one another even if our words [00:11:49] are not precisely that meaning AI has no [00:11:51] inner life and these guys don't know [00:11:53] that they are convinced that because it [00:11:55] can imitate an inner life they think the [00:11:57] touring test which is the stupidest idea [00:11:59] anybody ever had is is uh indicative of [00:12:02] an inner life if it can confuse us about [00:12:04] its inner life it has one so what I'm [00:12:06] worried about it is it is in some ways [00:12:08] the ultimate idol and we know what [00:12:10] people do with idols you know we know [00:12:12] that when all Moses has to do is leave [00:12:14] town for 5 minutes [laughter] and they [00:12:16] start worshiping the golden calf. That's [00:12:17] where I think the danger lies. I think [00:12:19] jobs will create be created. I think [00:12:21] creativity will exist. But I think your [00:12:24] point is it's a really important point [00:12:26] because part of that conversation and [00:12:28] I've had this conversation with other [00:12:29] people too is can AI write a poem and [00:12:32] people get really really I don't know [00:12:33] vitriolic about this. They very because [00:12:36] it's it's really the heart of the AI [00:12:37] debate. And my argument was they can't [00:12:40] write a poem because to write a poem you [00:12:42] have to have sensual experience. You [00:12:44] have to be you have to be able to like [00:12:46] describe a grape in a way that you know [00:12:48] gives someone the sensory experience of [00:12:50] that and you have to be able to take [00:12:51] language which is just full of dead [00:12:53] metaphors. It's like the graveyard of [00:12:55] dead metaphors and you have to create a [00:12:57] new metaphor you know something that's [00:12:58] that's evocative that and and AI in [00:13:01] particular cannot do that because it [00:13:03] doesn't have any senses yet. It's worth [00:13:05] pointing out that with robotics it [00:13:06] actually might have sensory experience [00:13:08] and two it's just learning on dead [00:13:10] language. So in my view it it can't make [00:13:12] a poem but uh I don't know may maybe it [00:13:15] can and all of this is a little bit [00:13:16] beside the question of all right if it's [00:13:18] going to have these negative effects [00:13:20] what do we do about it? Do we regulate [00:13:21] it or do we not we let the market run [00:13:24] its course? What are we going to do? [00:13:25] >> You guys you guys hang on a second. This [00:13:28] is why you guys need me here as a [00:13:31] community college dropout with all you [00:13:32] Ivy League nerds who immediately this [00:13:35] becomes a this becomes a like can AI [00:13:37] make a poem and what will we what will [00:13:40] we [laughter] think about in our leisure [00:13:41] time about AI? My question is how are [00:13:44] people going to eat? Okay, I'm not [00:13:45] talking about leisure time. How are you [00:13:47] going to feed yourself? How are you [00:13:48] going to make money to buy a house? like [00:13:51] that that that's the first question here [00:13:53] because and and if the answer is well [00:13:56] >> we'll live in some sort of AI socialist [00:13:58] dystopia where where where AI will [00:14:01] provide all that stuff for you well I'm [00:14:03] I'm very skeptical that it will work out [00:14:04] that way I think what's actually going [00:14:06] to happen is you're going to end up with [00:14:07] you know a handful of trillionaires off [00:14:09] this AI stuff and a lot of other people [00:14:11] who are totally destitute but even if it [00:14:13] did work out that way okay well then [00:14:15] that's our life that now we're living as [00:14:17] people that are totally dependent on [00:14:18] this nonhuman algorithm to provide died [00:14:20] for us. I think that's a pretty [00:14:21] horrifying vision of the future. But [00:14:22] look, it's it's also this is [00:14:26] >> it's not just white collar jobs. It's [00:14:28] it's also blue collar jobs, okay? [00:14:30] Delivery drivers, truck drivers, Uber [00:14:32] drivers, that's all going away. That's [00:14:34] gone. That's finished. And that's just [00:14:35] the beginning of it. And they're not [00:14:37] being rep this is not creating new jobs [00:14:38] because this is different from any other [00:14:40] technology that has ever existed on the [00:14:42] planet. It is not analogous to anything [00:14:44] else because the whole point of it, the [00:14:47] whole point is to take the human element [00:14:49] out of it completely. It's not a new [00:14:51] tool for humans to use. It's not like [00:14:53] going from a carriage driver to now [00:14:54] you're driving an automobile. This is [00:14:56] the human is gone. We don't need you [00:14:58] anymore. It's artificial intelligence. [00:15:00] And so these jobs are leaving and [00:15:02] they're not being replaced for all the [00:15:04] drivers who are not going to have a job [00:15:05] anymore. There's not some new thing. Oh, [00:15:07] well, you'll go over here and do this. [00:15:09] It's there's nothing for you. You're out [00:15:11] now. [00:15:12] Why do you think that's true? They say [00:15:14] this every time a new technology comes. [00:15:16] >> I'm not I want to get I want to get No, [00:15:18] Drew. It's fine. I want to get to it. [00:15:19] But before we get to it, we need to we [00:15:21] need to eat. Okay. The [laughter] only [00:15:23] way we're going to eat is if I read this [00:15:24] ad right here. This one. So guys, just [00:15:27] cut for a second. [00:15:28] >> Well, [laughter] [00:15:30] I I hope not. Okay, guys. Did you know [00:15:32] that up until the 1990s, cryptography [00:15:34] was classified as a strategic weapon by [00:15:36] the United States government? And during [00:15:37] the Cold War, it was the it was added to [00:15:39] the same US munitions list that [00:15:41] restricts export of rifles and rockets. [00:15:42] In 1954, encryption hardware and [00:15:44] algorithms were added to the list to [00:15:46] prevent the Soviets from acquiring tools [00:15:47] that protected American military [00:15:49] secrets. Well, just the way that we are [00:15:51] allowed to possess firearms to protect [00:15:53] life and liberty because we have an [00:15:54] amazing Second Amendment. We also can [00:15:55] create, share, and wield strong [00:15:57] cryptographic arms to safeguard their [00:15:59] communications data and digital lives [00:16:01] from any adversary, foreign or domestic. [00:16:02] That's what ExpressVPN does for you. [00:16:04] It's what it does for me. It's an app [00:16:05] that encrypts and rroots your internet [00:16:07] connection through secure servers that [00:16:09] makes your online activity private. No [00:16:10] one can monitor, record, manipulate, or [00:16:12] profit from it without your consent. [00:16:14] ExpressVPN works on every device, phone, [00:16:15] laptop, tablet, you name it. And you can [00:16:17] protect up to 14 devices with one [00:16:19] subscription. Get four extra months of [00:16:21] ExpressVPN just by using our special [00:16:23] link. Go to expressvpn.com/friendly [00:16:25] fire. That's exsvpn.com/friendly [00:16:29] to get four extra months. Start [00:16:31] protecting yourself today. I know when [00:16:32] I'm traveling, I'm using public Wi-Fi. I [00:16:34] don't want anybody else looking over my [00:16:35] shoulder at the data that I'm using or [00:16:37] the stuff that I'm searching. So that's [00:16:39] why I use ExpressVPN. I'm using it all [00:16:40] the time. You should do the same. Head [00:16:42] on over to expressvpn.com/friendly [00:16:44] fire. That's exp rsvpn.com/friendly [00:16:47] fire. Get four extra months and start [00:16:49] protecting yourself today. Okay. Now, [00:16:50] Drew, you want to say something? [00:16:52] >> Hang on. I I also have to jump in, I'm [00:16:55] told, with with another momentum killing [00:16:58] advertisement. [laughter] Uh anyway, but [00:17:00] I'm right when it's getting interesting. [00:17:03] Let's jump in with the yes. It's fine [00:17:04] though. It's good because I do want to [00:17:05] tell you about uh Helix Sleep and I and [00:17:07] I do love Helix Sleep. I actually uh we [00:17:10] we have Helix mattresses in our house. [00:17:12] We all sleep on Helix. All of our kids, [00:17:14] all of our all of our 90 kids all have [00:17:16] Helix mattresses and uh and it's great. [00:17:19] Um I'm not getting a lot of sleep right [00:17:21] now because after the, you know, after [00:17:23] we fall back with daylight savings, [00:17:24] everyone talks about how, oh, we save an [00:17:26] hour of sleep. Well, the problem is when [00:17:28] you have young kids, they don't realize [00:17:31] they don't have they don't they don't [00:17:32] they don't pay care about the clock. So, [00:17:34] now I've got uh twin toddlers waking up [00:17:36] at 4:30 in the morning uh who are [00:17:38] rousing me out of sleep out of my very [00:17:41] comfortable Helix mattress. So, Helix [00:17:42] will help you sleep like a baby at [00:17:44] night. Unless you have babies in the [00:17:45] house and they will wake you up. There's [00:17:47] nothing we can do about that. Um but [00:17:49] Helix uh is great. I can't recommend it [00:17:51] enough. You can go to [00:17:52] helixleep.com/friendlyfire [00:17:55] for 27% off sitewide. That's [00:17:57] helixleep.com/friendlyfire [00:17:59] for 27% offsite. Why you go to their [00:18:01] website, you take a sleep quiz and you [00:18:04] get matched with the perfect mattress [00:18:05] for you. Um because everyone is [00:18:08] different and um and they take care of [00:18:10] that there. Make sure you enter our show [00:18:12] name into the post purchase survey so [00:18:13] they know we sent you [00:18:14] helixleep.com/friendlyfire. [00:18:18] >> So here's my problem with the no job [00:18:19] scenario is that it comes up every [00:18:21] single time there's a new technology. [00:18:24] Every time. And it's why government is [00:18:26] so bad at managing economies. It's why [00:18:28] you don't want a top- down economy [00:18:30] because when the carton horse goes out [00:18:32] of style, the government says we must [00:18:34] save the jobs of buggy whip buggy whip [00:18:37] makers, you know. And the thing is [00:18:38] there'll be new jobs. There will be new [00:18:40] jobs. And the thing is maybe we can't [00:18:42] even imagine. I think this has happened [00:18:43] a million times before. You can't [00:18:44] imagine what the new job is going to be, [00:18:46] but there'll be jobs to do because [00:18:48] people are endlessly creative. It's like [00:18:50] it's like the people who worry about [00:18:51] running out of oil. You know, we don't [00:18:54] you don't run out of energy because [00:18:55] energy is a product of the human mind. [00:18:58] The human mind turns things into energy. [00:19:00] And if we run out of oil, we'll turn [00:19:02] something else. You know, we'll mash up [00:19:03] nulls. We'll use him for energy. I mean, [00:19:05] you can always can always make energy. [00:19:07] The human mind and imagination and [00:19:09] creativity is bottomless. It's endless. [00:19:11] I don't I don't fear this about AI at [00:19:13] all. Although, I do think Ben is right [00:19:14] that there could be difficult [00:19:16] transitions and knowing what how people [00:19:18] are will handle that in the worst way [00:19:19] way possible. But I do think I do think [00:19:22] when you have a powerful new tool, you [00:19:24] have to start to think about human sin. [00:19:26] You have to start to think about the [00:19:27] things we're going to use it for that [00:19:29] are destructive. And that's where I I [00:19:30] see [00:19:31] >> I totally agree with this, Drew. I mean, [00:19:32] my my worry about AI is the endless [00:19:34] pornography, the endless, you know, [00:19:36] narcissism, the the things that social [00:19:38] media has done to human beings by [00:19:40] exacerbating our worst qualities and and [00:19:41] and that getting even worse. Obviously, [00:19:43] that's the thing I worry about. But as [00:19:45] far as sort of the economic point here, [00:19:47] I'm I'm significantly less worried about [00:19:48] that for a couple of reasons. one [00:19:50] because I'm just less worried about it [00:19:52] based on the the history of [00:19:53] technological innovation. If you go back [00:19:54] to the early 20th century, well over 80% [00:19:57] of jobs in the United States were [00:19:58] agriculturally based or early industry [00:20:00] based. Uh and and obviously very few [00:20:02] people do agriculture now. If you go to [00:20:03] the middle of the 20th century, America [00:20:05] was a manufacturing based economy. Now [00:20:07] we're a service-based economy. Jobs tend [00:20:08] to move around and human beings are [00:20:10] quite adaptable. If the question is, you [00:20:12] know, will I be endlessly poor where all [00:20:14] a few people are trillionaires? The that [00:20:15] that wouldn't work because they wouldn't [00:20:16] be trillionaires if everybody is [00:20:18] endlessly poor. [laughter] That's not [00:20:19] the way that actually wealth [00:20:20] distribution happens. They don't take [00:20:21] their wealth from a bunch of super duper [00:20:23] poor people. If there's no wealth for [00:20:25] them to take, then they don't generate [00:20:26] the product. So the actual thing that [00:20:28] would happen, the kind of worst case [00:20:29] scenario that people are talking about [00:20:31] actually would be a sort of Star Trek [00:20:32] replicator machine. So in Star Trek, I [00:20:34] know not a lot of Trekies on the line [00:20:35] here, but if you're if you are Treky, my [00:20:37] understanding is that there is a [00:20:38] replicator machine whereby you can [00:20:40] literally generate any product from [00:20:41] nothing with no resource use [00:20:42] essentially. And so you don't have to [00:20:44] worry about anything. Well, if you don't [00:20:45] have to worry about anything, I thought [00:20:47] that that was mostly the goal of human [00:20:48] beings because work, I mean, we all [00:20:50] understand that work is important, but [00:20:52] there are other types of work, right? [00:20:54] Like for example, spending time with [00:20:55] your family. It's a different type of [00:20:57] fulfillment. It's not really work, but [00:20:58] it's it's it's service. What we would [00:20:59] call in Hebrew avoda, which is the same [00:21:01] Hebrew, the the word for for work and [00:21:03] service is the same. It's avod. Um, the [00:21:05] same type of thing, I think, is true in [00:21:07] our lives, right? when I think of like [00:21:09] the things that I do that are important, [00:21:10] my work actually comes maybe third or [00:21:11] fourth on the list after family and [00:21:13] religion and and the stuff that I'm [00:21:14] doing in my community and for the [00:21:16] country. So, you know, I'm I'm less [00:21:17] worried about the kind of how do I get [00:21:19] my stuff? If things work out great, [00:21:20] we're all going to be way richer and [00:21:21] have a lot more leisure time. If you're [00:21:22] worried about the leisure time, that's a [00:21:24] human nature problem. That's what that [00:21:25] Drew is talking about. And then there is [00:21:27] the other problem, which is what's the [00:21:29] alternative? People keep talking about, [00:21:30] okay, we could regulate it out of [00:21:32] existence, right? We're just going to [00:21:33] regulate it, stop it from taking trucker [00:21:34] jobs. Okay, let's say that we were able [00:21:36] to do that. Let's say they were able to [00:21:37] ban all the self-driving cars. Does [00:21:39] anybody think that any other place on [00:21:41] earth is going to ban the self-driving [00:21:42] cars? So the actual thing that will [00:21:44] happen is that China will gain complete [00:21:46] economic dominance over planet earth [00:21:48] unless you are going to essentially make [00:21:49] America autaric and poor. That is the [00:21:51] way that trade actually works. China [00:21:53] will gain the advantage of every [00:21:54] efficiency on planet earth while we [00:21:56] hamper ourselves and we will live in [00:21:59] relative poverty compared to what we are [00:22:00] now. While China gains significantly [00:22:02] more power globally and then uses that [00:22:04] power in order to cram down its terrible [00:22:06] vision of the world which will [00:22:07] eventually is your view then like pure [00:22:10] less afair no regulation whatsoever. Let [00:22:13] the market lead in it and that way we'll [00:22:14] beat China and we'll maintain our [00:22:16] >> DEP except for morality except for [00:22:18] morality and national security. Yes. So [00:22:19] I don't think we should be selling [00:22:20] Nvidia chips to China because I think [00:22:23] China is our enemy. Um and I also think [00:22:25] that we should be heavily regulating [00:22:26] pornography period and that applies also [00:22:29] to AI. But if we're talking about like [00:22:31] should we stop AI from generating health [00:22:33] care solutions because people in the [00:22:35] healthare industry are going to lose [00:22:36] their jobs. Uh I mean let's let's be [00:22:38] real about this much like it's easy for [00:22:40] us living in a first world country with [00:22:42] an average life expectancy above 80 to [00:22:44] talk about you know the the evils of AI [00:22:46] but if AI for example in medical [00:22:49] industry extends lifespans by another 20 [00:22:51] years which could easily happen you know [00:22:53] that that that seems like a pretty good [00:22:55] thing to happen. And I think that one of [00:22:58] the big mistakes I see people happen [00:23:00] there's a mistake that I just generally [00:23:02] object to and that is I think it happens [00:23:03] on the Marxist left and I think it [00:23:05] sometimes happens on the populist right [00:23:06] and that is they take a spiritual [00:23:08] problem people's emptiness and inability [00:23:10] to function in the absence of particular [00:23:12] guardrails and then they say there's a [00:23:14] material solution for that [00:23:16] >> and it is very rare to me that there's [00:23:17] actually a material solution [00:23:20] point that's a very good point Ben [00:23:21] because it is true sometimes people [00:23:23] think like like with the birth rate [00:23:24] problem you can just fix it with a lot [00:23:26] of material solution And there's not a [00:23:28] lot of evidence. However, there's a [00:23:29] distinction between a material solution [00:23:31] and a government solution because the [00:23:33] government influences culture. It [00:23:35] promotes certain ideas, suppresses [00:23:36] others. It promotes religion [00:23:38] traditionally and I think inevitably. [00:23:40] And so, you know, like for the to use [00:23:42] the birth rate example, the only thing [00:23:44] that seems to reliably increase birth [00:23:45] rate is the promotion of religion. But [00:23:47] the government can can do things there. [00:23:49] Either explicitly promote religion or at [00:23:50] least stop the suppression of religion [00:23:52] like, you know, we saw under Joe Biden [00:23:54] and we see under a lot of liberals. So [00:23:56] is there any role just before we get to [00:23:58] the other guys is there any role for the [00:24:00] government here in maybe not providing a [00:24:02] material solution to the consequences of [00:24:04] AI but some role for the government? [00:24:06] >> I mean I I want to know the specifics. [00:24:08] It always comes down to the specifics. [00:24:09] And this, by the way, no one the problem [00:24:11] with AI is a bunch of unknown unknowns, [00:24:13] right? It's not known unknowns. It's [00:24:14] just we we literally don't know what's [00:24:15] going to happen next. How do you [00:24:16] regulate for that? Which is why the Ky [00:24:18] markets, right? Cali is one of our [00:24:19] sponsors right now in the Ky markets [00:24:21] like 5% shot that there's any serious [00:24:23] regulation of AI because no one even [00:24:25] would know what that looks like. What [00:24:27] does that even look? I mean, this is a [00:24:28] question, honestly, Matt, this is a [00:24:29] question for you because you're you want [00:24:31] to regulate AI. I assume you you want to [00:24:33] do something to stop sort of the forward [00:24:34] march of AI. So, on a practical level, [00:24:36] what does that look like? Well, I think [00:24:38] that and I don't have all the answers. [00:24:40] I'll fully admit that. That's why that's [00:24:41] why it it it's so frustrating to me that [00:24:44] we're not we're not at a serious level [00:24:46] even having this conversation. I mean, [00:24:47] we're having this conversation right [00:24:48] now, but including like our lawmakers [00:24:51] having this debate about what what can [00:24:54] we do, what should we do, and that [00:24:55] conversation just isn't happening at [00:24:57] all. Um, and if I had all the answers [00:24:59] myself, then I guess I wouldn't I [00:25:00] wouldn't be frustrated by that because I [00:25:02] could just say, "Well, here's the [00:25:03] answers, guys." I don't have them. But I [00:25:05] what I know the the answer can't be well [00:25:08] whatever. We we'll see how it plays out. [00:25:10] That can't be the answer when you're [00:25:11] facing something uh that's that is going [00:25:13] to fundamentally alter our civilization [00:25:15] the way that this is going to. Now there [00:25:16] are some things that can be done. I mean [00:25:18] people have suggested when it comes to [00:25:19] and this is kind of on a lower level but [00:25:21] things like um intellectual property. [00:25:23] This is another huge problem with AI and [00:25:26] I think some of you guys have already [00:25:27] have already kind of touched on it that [00:25:28] AI cannot create anything. It can't it [00:25:31] can't it can't it can't make a poem like [00:25:33] it can't write a poem. It can't do a [00:25:34] screenplay. [00:25:35] >> You were just making fun of me because I [00:25:36] brought that up and now you're bringing [00:25:37] that up. I'm bring I'm bringing it back [00:25:40] to the real world. So the the problem [00:25:42] with the reason why I can't do that is [00:25:43] because it's stealing from what other [00:25:45] people have done and right now AI lives [00:25:47] in this kind of like bubble where the [00:25:49] rules of plagiarism don't apply to it. [00:25:51] So uh there are things that you could do [00:25:53] there legislatively. There's um again [00:25:56] it's not easy to do but I I do think you [00:25:58] have to do something there to protect [00:26:00] people from having their from having [00:26:02] their having their creative probably [00:26:03] slow but but I but I would kind of I [00:26:05] would flip it back in the other way [00:26:06] because what I'm going to ask is okay [00:26:09] the uh the drivers are all going to lose [00:26:11] their jobs most likely customer service [00:26:14] the customer service industry a lot of [00:26:16] that is just going away because if when [00:26:19] AI is adopted and I I don't think this [00:26:22] is not some kind of like sci-fi [00:26:23] speculation It's just it's just [00:26:25] extending out a little bit. It's like [00:26:26] pretty clear that if we keep applying [00:26:28] this stuff, there's there's not going to [00:26:30] be anything for people to do in a lot of [00:26:31] these jobs. So, I think a lot of these [00:26:32] customer service jobs are going to go [00:26:34] away. Um, and then and then yes, there's [00:26:36] also the white collar, but I care about [00:26:38] those people, too. There people anyone [00:26:40] who sits in a in a in a cubicle all day [00:26:42] and enters data into computers, which is [00:26:45] millions of people, um, probably a lot [00:26:47] of their jobs are going away. And I [00:26:49] think that that matters, too. My [00:26:50] question is if that were to happen, [00:26:52] let's just say, and maybe AI all breaks [00:26:55] down and it doesn't happen. I think it [00:26:57] probably will. If that happens over the [00:26:58] next 5 to 10 years, and you've got tens [00:27:00] of millions of people who not just their [00:27:03] job, but really their entire industry [00:27:05] just went away, what are we doing with [00:27:07] them? What are we doing? [00:27:11] Here's the thing. Hold on. Let me just [00:27:13] answer that. It'll take me I I promise [00:27:14] like four sentences. Okay. So, here's [00:27:16] the answer to that. If I had asked you [00:27:18] that same question in 1998, the advent [00:27:20] of the internet is going to kill a bunch [00:27:21] of jobs. And it will kill a bunch of [00:27:22] jobs. You know, based on all the supply [00:27:24] chains being changed, everything getting [00:27:26] a lot shorter, you won't have to go to [00:27:27] the local mom and pop shop. You can [00:27:28] order off the internet. And I said to [00:27:30] you, don't worry. In 20 years, there [00:27:32] will be literally millions of people who [00:27:34] are working on AI coding and database [00:27:36] building, data center building. You [00:27:38] would say, what the hell are you even [00:27:39] talking about? What do those words mean? [00:27:41] I don't know what those words mean. If I [00:27:43] said to you there would be legitimately [00:27:45] thousands of jobs that were people who [00:27:47] were social media editors and marketers. [00:27:48] You say, "What the hell? What is what's [00:27:50] a social media and how do it work?" [00:27:52] Right? Like this is the whole point of [00:27:53] the market is that jobs that we don't [00:27:55] even know exist will come about because [00:27:57] that's what the market does. The market [00:27:59] generates innovation because the because [00:28:01] human desire is endless and then the [00:28:03] human desire for new and and innovative [00:28:06] things is also endless. This is [00:28:08] different. This is I want to hear from [00:28:10] >> Yes. Yes. We can't, you know, we can't [00:28:12] imagine these things. I I totally agree [00:28:13] with Ben. I think there are going to be [00:28:14] jobs that we have no idea could possibly [00:28:17] exist. But the question that Nolles [00:28:19] asked and actually Ben referred to is [00:28:21] the really important question. When back [00:28:24] in the day when you wanted to get a [00:28:26] pornographic magazine, you had to walk [00:28:28] into a store, shame yourself, you had to [00:28:30] make sure nobody none of the neighbors [00:28:31] saw you, you know, you went home with [00:28:32] this piece of paper that you could look [00:28:35] at and all this stuff. [00:28:36] >> Not that not Drew. Not that you have any [00:28:37] experience. No, I have no I'm talking [00:28:38] about the one right on theoretically a [00:28:41] friend of mine theoretically. Right. So, [00:28:43] but but nobody when people said, "Oh, [00:28:44] we've got to ban this." And they did ban [00:28:46] it and you know they they censored [00:28:47] things and then they said, "Oh, yeah, we [00:28:49] got to censor Ulyses, too." It it was [00:28:51] silly. You had to get rid of it. Now [00:28:53] you've got this sewer of porn wiping [00:28:56] people's lives away with no regulation [00:28:58] whatsoever. And so now conservatives [00:29:00] when I come out and say things for [00:29:02] instance like you should not be able to [00:29:04] censor opinions on YouTube. [00:29:06] Conservatives go oh my regulation [00:29:08] regulation. Well no it's a new thing. It [00:29:11] needs new regulations to make sure the [00:29:13] freedom of speech lives because if you [00:29:15] censor things on YouTube you have [00:29:16] virtually taken them off out of the [00:29:18] public square. So what do you do with [00:29:19] pornography? I mean, I I I who would [00:29:23] have said, you know, so what pornography [00:29:25] 30 years ago now think, holy, [laughter] [00:29:28] this is this is an a toxin being pumped [00:29:31] into the human psyche like never before. [00:29:33] >> Dude, I wrote a literal book on [00:29:35] pornography and what it was going to do [00:29:37] to destroy young people in 2005. And I [00:29:40] was mocked for it. I was 21 years old [00:29:41] when I wrote that book. Many were [00:29:44] question these are the questions that [00:29:46] we're not addressing now where we where [00:29:48] we know the danger, we can see the [00:29:49] danger. is only going to get worse. [00:29:51] These are the issues I think we should [00:29:53] be addressing, not whether jobs are [00:29:54] going to disappear because everything [00:29:56] will change or we don't even know what [00:29:58] that's going to look like. [00:29:59] >> All right, Matt, last word. [00:30:00] >> Yeah, on the on the regulation side of [00:30:02] it, I mean, obviously the most the most, [00:30:04] you know, the sort of the most [00:30:05] heavy-handed and obvious thing if we're [00:30:07] talking about regulation is, you know, [00:30:09] the government saying that, hey, okay, [00:30:11] you want to wipe out all the driver [00:30:13] jobs, you want to wipe out uh you want [00:30:14] to, you know, you want to get rid of all [00:30:16] your customer service jobs if you're [00:30:17] McDonald's. And it's it's a law saying, [00:30:20] "Well, you can't do that. We're just [00:30:22] you're not you can't do that. We're not [00:30:23] going to let you do that." Uh because [00:30:25] we're not going to let you put millions [00:30:26] of people out of work all the same time [00:30:27] because we just can't we can't sustain [00:30:29] that as a society. We can't it it can't [00:30:31] happen. And uh now that's very [00:30:33] complicated. That's a that's the kind of [00:30:35] thing that I normally would not support [00:30:37] and there is this tension between like [00:30:39] free markets and then this other huge [00:30:41] civilization level concern. Uh so that's [00:30:43] just that's that's the thing. That's [00:30:45] what we're dealing with. And I do think [00:30:47] and I just go back to that this is a [00:30:48] different kind of thing. I think any [00:30:50] analogy breaks down. Ben, you brought up [00:30:52] the internet. Well, the internet is a [00:30:53] different kind of thing. The internet is [00:30:55] a, you know, a very high tech um [00:30:58] sophisticated form of communication. [00:31:00] It's just a way of for people to [00:31:01] communicate and connect with each other. [00:31:03] And and so that in and of itself is not [00:31:06] going to take away jobs. It might change [00:31:07] what the jobs are, but you still need [00:31:09] the the you still have humans who are on [00:31:11] the internet communing communicating [00:31:13] with each other. And that's the case [00:31:14] with all of these technological [00:31:16] innovations that it's just a different [00:31:17] tool for people to use. And so yeah, [00:31:19] maybe the job where you use the the more [00:31:21] primitive tool goes away, but now you [00:31:23] use the more sophisticated tool and [00:31:24] that's the job. And I think with AI, [00:31:26] it's just different because uh as I [00:31:28] said, it's artificial intelligence, [00:31:30] which means the entire point of it is [00:31:32] that we don't need a person to do this [00:31:34] at all. It's not a new thing for you to [00:31:35] do. You're not needed. And because we're [00:31:38] facing this totally new kind of thing, [00:31:40] which I really believe is unprecedented [00:31:41] in human history, um I think we might [00:31:44] need to embrace solutions we we [00:31:46] otherwise would that otherwise would [00:31:48] make us uncomfortable. [00:31:49] >> In fairness, we don't know if that's [00:31:51] even Matt really talking right now. That [00:31:53] could be [laughter] rock or Gemini or [00:31:55] something. Now, I want to get to it [00:31:57] something we touched on though. It's [00:31:58] it's related, but it's a totally [00:31:59] separate topic is affordability. It's [00:32:02] the word. It's the meme that everyone's [00:32:04] it's the new 67. Everyone's just saying [00:32:06] affordability all the time. I want to [00:32:07] get into what that actually means. But [00:32:09] first, before you talk about a little [00:32:10] balance to this conversation, I want to [00:32:12] say I want you to tell us [00:32:14] >> here is something that AI cannot do. It [00:32:16] cannot eat your vegetables. It can't [00:32:17] even eat my vegetables. In fact, I can't [00:32:19] eat your vegetables. It's a very very [00:32:21] complicated thing. These these [00:32:22] vegetables and if you want to get enough [00:32:24] of them, you need to use balance of [00:32:25] nature. because I love vegetables, but [00:32:27] if I ate enough the kinds of things [00:32:29] that, you know, nutrition experts [00:32:31] recommend, it would be all over my [00:32:33] beard, my face, it would be just [00:32:34] disgusting. So instead, I have balance [00:32:37] of nature, fruits and veggies. And you [00:32:39] may say, well, if you use them all the [00:32:41] time, which I do, why aren't they open? [00:32:43] It's because I have so many of these [00:32:45] things [laughter] [00:32:46] that I don't even have to open them. I [00:32:47] got more downstairs that are open. [00:32:49] Balance of Nature. What they do is they [00:32:51] freeze dry fruits and veggies, then [00:32:52] powder them, and blend them into the [00:32:55] most convenient nutritional value. You [00:32:56] can take the fruits and veggie [00:32:58] supplements with water, chew them, or [00:33:00] open them up, and mix the powder into [00:33:01] your food or drinks, which just sounds [00:33:02] silly to me, but it's still, it's made [00:33:04] from 100% whole food ingredients. You [00:33:08] wonder how an animated corpse like [00:33:09] myself can look like a 30-year-old man? [00:33:12] It's because I use Balance of Nature. [00:33:13] So, go to balanceofnature.com and get a [00:33:16] free fiber and spice supplement. You [00:33:18] didn't even have time to talk about the [00:33:20] fiber and spices. Plus, you get 35% off [00:33:23] your first set as a new preferred [00:33:24] customer by using discount code friendly [00:33:27] fire. Go to balanceofnature.com and use [00:33:29] the discount code friendly fire. Now, [00:33:32] Nolles, what were you saying? [00:33:33] >> Well, I was saying with the rest of your [00:33:35] money, you need to go to [00:33:36] dailywire.com/subscribe [00:33:37] because we have the biggest deal of the [00:33:39] year right now. This is the Black Friday [00:33:41] deal. 50% off. It's really, really big. [00:33:44] Uh, you're going to get everything. [00:33:45] Obviously, we have Pen Dragon coming [00:33:46] out. You're going to get the world [00:33:48] premiere of that trailer coming out at [00:33:50] the end of the show. Really big stuff [00:33:52] though. New docs, new hosts, new [00:33:53] everything. It's It's very exciting. Uh [00:33:55] you guys are are who empower DW to build [00:33:58] culture. And so right now you can save [00:34:00] 50%. I I love building culture, but I [00:34:03] also like doing it on a good deal. You [00:34:06] know, I like I want to build culture [00:34:07] frugally. And so when you can do it for [00:34:10] 50% off, it's great great time to do it. [00:34:12] Go to dailywire.com/subscribe. [00:34:15] Absolutely fitting, apt way to talk [00:34:17] about affordability, which is a a very [00:34:19] serious problem. You know, I usually [00:34:21] sweet little Alisa does the shopping in [00:34:23] the house occasionally. I had to go out [00:34:24] the other day to get lemons for a [00:34:27] cocktail that I was made, not even for [00:34:28] food, just for a cocktail I was making. [00:34:29] And uh so I a great cocktail, but that's [00:34:32] a story for another time. Anyway, I go [00:34:34] to the grocery store and the prices are [00:34:36] insane. I see why Alisa had been keeping [00:34:38] me from them largely. I mean, you know, [00:34:41] the affordability problem is very real. [00:34:43] It's not that it's not being pounced on [00:34:45] by political actors and it's obviously [00:34:46] become a big political talking point, [00:34:47] but it's very, very real. A ton of [00:34:49] Americans are hurting. A lot of the [00:34:52] fundamentals of the economy are a little [00:34:54] shaky right now, even though those MAG7 [00:34:56] stocks that we were just talking about [00:34:57] AI is pumping up the market. It's it's [00:34:59] really really tough. And so there there [00:35:01] are a bunch of related questions. One, [00:35:03] uh can the government do something to [00:35:05] fix this? Uh is or is the government [00:35:08] only going to make things worse? uh how [00:35:10] is this going to affect the midterms in [00:35:11] the 2028 election? Are we are we headed [00:35:14] for an economic disaster? And Ben, you [00:35:16] got in a huge amount of trouble because [00:35:18] there was a short clip of you going [00:35:20] around saying, "Yeah, listen, you know, [00:35:22] if you can't afford stuff, move out of [00:35:24] your move out of your town, even if it's [00:35:25] your hometown, even if your family's [00:35:27] been there for a long time, just get you [00:35:28] got to get out. You got to be mobile." [00:35:30] And you were variously uh exalted and [00:35:33] pillaried for this comment. So, what's [00:35:35] it mean? [00:35:36] >> Yeah. So uh uh let me start with what [00:35:38] that uh that comment meant. That was a [00:35:40] piece of personal advice to people that [00:35:42] I think every single young person that I [00:35:44] know has at some point taken, which is [00:35:46] if you're living in a place that you [00:35:47] can't afford and the policies aren't [00:35:49] going to change and you want to make [00:35:50] your life better, you do have to make a [00:35:52] significant calculation as to whether [00:35:53] you think your life is going to get [00:35:54] better where you are or whether you're [00:35:55] going to have to go pursue a dream [00:35:57] someplace else. And and you've seen [00:35:58] this. You've seen tremendous population [00:35:59] movement in this country right now out [00:36:01] of New York to places like Austin, [00:36:03] Texas. You've seen tremendous population [00:36:04] movement from the blue areas to the red [00:36:06] areas. of the country specifically [00:36:07] because people are seeking economic [00:36:08] opportunity. So what I thought I was [00:36:10] saying was something that's that's [00:36:11] fairly obvious which is that if you are [00:36:13] on a personal level in a place where [00:36:15] you're stuck and you can't afford to [00:36:16] live there, you have to make the best [00:36:18] decision for yourself and your family. [00:36:19] And that does include the possibility of [00:36:21] actually moving as opposed to shouting [00:36:23] at the wind if the policy isn't going to [00:36:24] change. That's a separate question from [00:36:26] what sort of policies could be pursued [00:36:28] in order to make things more affordable. [00:36:29] I mean, I'll start with this. If you're [00:36:31] talking about Manhattan, Manhattan will [00:36:33] never be as affordable as De Moine. It [00:36:34] just is not going to. And anybody who [00:36:36] says that it is going to is totally [00:36:37] lying to you. It's just a it's just a [00:36:39] flatout lie. The the reality is there [00:36:41] are only two ways to make things more [00:36:42] affordable. One is to drop the demand [00:36:44] for a product and retain the same [00:36:46] supply. The other is to radically [00:36:48] increase the supply of a product and to [00:36:49] retain the same demand. That's it. Those [00:36:51] are the only way that things become more [00:36:52] affordable. There is no magical third [00:36:54] way. The only way things become more [00:36:55] affordable is if the supply greatly [00:36:57] outstrips the demand. And the only ways [00:36:58] to do that are to increase supply or [00:37:00] reduce demand. That's it. So if you're [00:37:02] talking about how to make things more [00:37:03] affordable, one of the things you can do [00:37:05] to increase supply is remove [00:37:06] regulations, right? You can get rid of [00:37:08] tax structures that disincentivize [00:37:09] investment, you you can get rid of a lot [00:37:12] of the difficulty in building, for [00:37:13] example, in New York. But are you ever [00:37:15] going to build enough units so that [00:37:16] suddenly the the real estate prices [00:37:17] there reflect what it would be across [00:37:19] the river in in sort of rural parts of [00:37:21] New Jersey? The answer, of course, is [00:37:23] no. And and when people talk about [00:37:24] affordability, the thing that makes me [00:37:26] totally crazy about this is I'm totally [00:37:28] sick in politics. I'm sick to of people [00:37:30] in politics doing this routine where [00:37:32] they say the problem over and over and [00:37:34] over providing zero solution and then [00:37:36] when you say you know what I don't [00:37:37] really see a solution to the thing [00:37:38] you're talking about. They pillar you [00:37:40] for noting the obvious like okay if [00:37:41] you're not prov Zoram donni is not [00:37:43] providing a solution. Him saying [00:37:44] affordability didn't make affordability [00:37:46] magically appear like Beetlejuice if he [00:37:48] said affordability three times. And also [00:37:50] politicians are in the business of lying [00:37:52] to you. Okay. when when the president of [00:37:54] the United States, who I generally agree [00:37:56] with, he made a mistake when he came [00:37:57] into office and said, "I'm going to make [00:37:59] things affordable again." The answer is [00:38:01] no, you're probably not. And the reason [00:38:02] you're probably not is because all of [00:38:04] the inflation that Joe Biden embedded in [00:38:06] the economy already made things so [00:38:07] wildly unaffordable that the best you're [00:38:09] probably going to do is keep prices [00:38:10] stable. Right? What the Federal Reserve [00:38:12] seeks to do is keep the inflation rate [00:38:14] at like 2%. Which is an increase in the [00:38:17] prices just by the very nature of it. [00:38:18] And what people actually want is for [00:38:20] there to be deflation. They want the [00:38:22] prices to be back at 2019 levels. [00:38:24] They're not talking about going back to [00:38:25] 2024 levels. They're talking about 2019 [00:38:28] levels. The only way to get back to 2019 [00:38:29] levels is probably an economic [00:38:31] recession. That's just the reality. And [00:38:34] so I I again saying unpopular things. [00:38:36] The the best that the inflation rate [00:38:38] could look like for President Trump is [00:38:39] like this under Joe Biden and then like [00:38:42] this under Trump. Okay. So here's okay. [00:38:46] This would be Biden. This gigantic spike [00:38:48] and then Trump stays steady. The problem [00:38:50] is people are looking at the prices here [00:38:52] and they're saying, "Well, they don't [00:38:53] look like the prices here." Well, yeah. [00:38:55] What's Trump supposed to do about that [00:38:57] absent a radical increase in in the [00:39:00] interest rates that would sink the that [00:39:01] would sink the economy? [00:39:02] >> So, one thing that has happened, [00:39:04] everyone was predicting that Trump's [00:39:05] tariffs were going to be inflationary. [00:39:07] And the Treasury Secretary, Scott [00:39:08] Besson, was doing a a little victory lap [00:39:11] because when he was uh being confirmed [00:39:13] for his position, he said, "No, I [00:39:15] actually think tariffs are going to be [00:39:16] deflationary." And the San Francisco Fed [00:39:18] just came out and said the tariffs are [00:39:19] deflationary. [00:39:19] >> No, no, no. You're reading the study [00:39:21] totally wrong. That's not what the study [00:39:22] says. I read the entire study. It's 150 [00:39:24] pages. What that study says is that when [00:39:27] you look at the infl tariffs over time, [00:39:31] there's a spike at the beginning because [00:39:32] things get more expensive because you're [00:39:33] reducing the supply and the demand [00:39:35] remains the same, right? So the price [00:39:36] goes up temporarily and then people [00:39:37] start to lose their jobs. And when [00:39:39] people start to lose their jobs, the [00:39:40] demand goes down. And when the demand [00:39:41] goes down, the prices come down. [00:39:43] >> No, no. So you can say it's [00:39:44] deflationary. There was a big caveat [00:39:45] even in the popular reporting which is [00:39:47] the caveat is it hurts employment and it [00:39:50] hurts economic growth. Yeah. So there's [00:39:51] obvious [00:39:53] there's one one further point on it just [00:39:56] to why I think your video went viral Ben [00:39:58] is because one thing people are hearing [00:40:00] is they're not they're not missing the [00:40:02] context of you're giving personal advice [00:40:04] to someone who's asking you know but at [00:40:06] a at a macro level at a political level [00:40:08] what people are hearing is hold on [00:40:09] you're telling me my family's been in [00:40:11] this town forever. I'll use my own [00:40:12] example. I got I have dozens of family [00:40:14] members buried in the local uh cemetery [00:40:18] in my hometown and even before that go [00:40:20] the Nolles initially were from New [00:40:22] Hampshire and they you know they arrived [00:40:24] here the null side in 1660 the Nolles [00:40:27] family home stood from 1660 until 1994 [00:40:31] when the home burned down. There are [00:40:33] still Nolles's all over that area in New [00:40:36] Hampshire and Maine. And what I think a [00:40:38] lot of people are looking around at is [00:40:40] part of the reason that housing in [00:40:42] particular is is unaffordable right now [00:40:44] is because of government decisions. [00:40:46] Government decisions to flood the [00:40:48] country with a bunch of like Venezuelan [00:40:50] criminals or Somali or something and [00:40:52] increase the cost of housing or [00:40:53] government decisions that are are going [00:40:56] to compromise certain industries or [00:40:57] certain jobs because of trade deals or [00:40:59] whatever going all the way back to NAFTA [00:41:00] or even further. We don't need to to [00:41:02] litigate those in in particular. But [00:41:04] you're saying, "No, it's part of this [00:41:06] political order that has led to this [00:41:09] crisis at the very least with [00:41:10] migration." And so why is it that I'm [00:41:12] just supposed to say, "A shucks, I got [00:41:14] to lose my hometown because well, you [00:41:16] know, Republicans and Democrats together [00:41:18] flooded the country with with aliens." [00:41:21] Isn't there a good to having, you know, [00:41:24] long family histories in a single place? [00:41:27] >> Of course. Sure. And there's and there's [00:41:28] a single and there's a good to having [00:41:29] your family live near you. I have tons [00:41:31] of family that lives near me. I'm a [00:41:32] person who who grew up in LA. I spent my [00:41:34] entire life living in LA until I was 35, [00:41:36] one mile from my parents and then I [00:41:38] moved to Florida and I still live one [00:41:39] mile from my parents because I took them [00:41:40] with me. So, I'm very much in favor. One [00:41:41] of the things I talk about on the show [00:41:42] all the time is having family structures [00:41:44] nearby because you need those supportive [00:41:46] family structures. That's not the case [00:41:47] that I'm making is that you should [00:41:49] abandon this sort of stuff or that mass [00:41:51] migration should replace you in your [00:41:52] hometown. I think everyone here is very [00:41:54] much against mass migration is in very [00:41:56] much in favor of what President Trump [00:41:57] has been doing on the immigration [00:41:58] program. That the problem that I see is [00:42:00] is not any of that. I agree with all [00:42:01] this on policy, but if there's a [00:42:03] mentality that sets in that says I bear [00:42:05] no responsibility in changing my own [00:42:06] life if I can't change the outside [00:42:08] circumstances and now I'm just going to [00:42:09] sit here and about it like that [00:42:11] doesn't seem like a a specific recipe [00:42:12] for individual success. But Matt, I I [00:42:14] want to know what you take cuz I I think [00:42:16] you and I are as as usual we are on [00:42:18] opposite ends of the spectrum in some [00:42:19] ways. [00:42:19] >> I agree with your practical point and I [00:42:22] agree also with maybe I'm sort of in [00:42:24] between because I agree with your your [00:42:26] point. I also agree with some of the [00:42:27] criticism, the more the more rational. [00:42:29] >> You have a modern position, Matt. [00:42:31] >> Well, no, because here's here's the way [00:42:32] I would put it. Ben's correct, and I and [00:42:34] I've said the same thing many times that [00:42:36] uh especially as a young man, I also [00:42:37] think there's a gender element to this [00:42:38] that is a is a sort of a different [00:42:40] topic, but like as a as a parent, I want [00:42:43] my sons when they become adults to move [00:42:45] out of I don't want them to move 10 [00:42:47] hours away hopefully, but if they have [00:42:48] to, they have to. I do want them to like [00:42:50] move out and, you know, experience [00:42:52] living on their own a little bit uh [00:42:53] before they become before they become [00:42:55] husbands and fathers. My daughters, I I [00:42:57] would love for them to just stay home [00:42:58] with me until they get married many many [00:43:01] many years in the future. So, I do think [00:43:03] there's like a gender element to it, but [00:43:04] that's a separate thing. I think if I I [00:43:07] totally agree that if you're in a spot, [00:43:09] particularly if you're a young man and [00:43:12] you can't afford anything, you can't get [00:43:13] a job, can't afford to live anywhere, [00:43:16] while you're single, you have you have [00:43:18] no kids, you have no dependence, you can [00:43:20] go anywhere and do anything and you can [00:43:22] take risks and you know, the stakes are [00:43:25] are pretty low. I mean, worst case [00:43:27] scenario, you go somewhere, you end up [00:43:28] sleeping in your car or something for a [00:43:30] while. I mean, that's not good, but it's [00:43:31] like, well, it's just you. You can you [00:43:33] can handle that, especially as a young [00:43:34] man. So you could take you could take [00:43:35] risks. You can go out and and and and [00:43:37] pursue opportunities. Uh however, at the [00:43:40] same time, it's also true that you [00:43:43] shouldn't have to do that. Like [00:43:45] something is wrong that so many people [00:43:47] have to do that. You should be able to [00:43:50] to Michael's point when if you're a [00:43:52] young man and you're looking at, okay, [00:43:53] well my my parents were born here. They [00:43:54] lived here. My grandparents lived here. [00:43:57] Maybe my grandpa my great-grandparents [00:43:59] lived here. So generations of a family [00:44:00] lived in the same place. And now all of [00:44:02] a sudden, and I'm I I I have the same [00:44:04] kind of skills that they do. I might [00:44:06] even be more more educated than they [00:44:07] were. So I'm in many ways more qualified [00:44:10] for a job than even any of them were. [00:44:11] And yet all of a sudden, everything's [00:44:13] broken down. It doesn't work for me to [00:44:14] live in this town anymore. Something is [00:44:16] wrong. Something is broken. It should [00:44:18] not be this way. We need to fix it. So, [00:44:20] but on the practical level, well, it is [00:44:22] this way now. And we want you to still [00:44:24] succeed. So you might have to go [00:44:26] somewhere else hopefully with the intent [00:44:28] of eventually coming back to live around [00:44:29] your family because I totally believe I [00:44:31] mean we we emphasize the nuclear family [00:44:33] so much which is important but also the [00:44:35] the quote unquote extended family is [00:44:37] also important so getting back to them [00:44:39] and that's what you know what a lot of [00:44:40] us did what I kind of did move around [00:44:42] move around end up back with your family [00:44:44] um so you might have to do that [00:44:45] practically [00:44:47] >> you shouldn't have to it shouldn't be [00:44:48] that way that's the policy end of it and [00:44:51] so we need policies in place that make [00:44:53] it possible for people to live with [00:44:55] their family and then move next door and [00:44:58] stay with generations of families their [00:45:00] entire life. You should be able to do [00:45:01] that in a functioning and thriving [00:45:03] society. One of the ways to make that [00:45:05] happen is the thing we all agree with. [00:45:07] Uh get all the illegals out. There's a [00:45:09] lot we've been they've been saying 20 [00:45:11] million illegals in this country. [00:45:12] They've been telling me that since I [00:45:13] like 20 years ago they were saying it [00:45:15] was 20 million. It's way more than that. [00:45:16] We don't know how many. Get them all [00:45:18] out. Shut down immigration. And uh [00:45:20] that's one of the policy changes that [00:45:22] could be made and we need to do that. [00:45:23] But until that happens, yeah, you got to [00:45:25] figure out what you're going to do in [00:45:26] your own rare moment. Totally agree. [00:45:28] >> I want to hear Ben's point and I want to [00:45:30] hear from my great great-grandfather [00:45:32] Andrew play. [00:45:35] >> I was just going to say I agree with [00:45:36] Matt actually. So Matt and I are [00:45:37] actually in total agreement on this. [00:45:38] >> Okay, now I really want to move on [00:45:40] because Matt's offering a moderate [00:45:41] opinion and Ben is agreeing with him. I [00:45:43] want to tell you at the other end of the [00:45:45] age spectrum about pre-born. I want you [00:45:48] to go to pre-born.com/fire [00:45:52] right now because Pre-born is is one of [00:45:54] my absolute favorite uh charities. I [00:45:57] personally support it. I encourage you [00:45:58] to personally support it to give what [00:46:00] you can. They've saved over 380,000 [00:46:02] babies uh through their rescue program. [00:46:05] Uh what they do is pretty simple. They [00:46:08] introduce babies to their mothers. And [00:46:11] when a woman sees an ultrasound, it [00:46:13] doubles the baby's chance of life. When [00:46:15] a woman is considering abortion, it it's [00:46:17] they provide amazing care and work. Not [00:46:20] only do they introduce the babies to the [00:46:21] mothers, they also take care of those [00:46:23] mothers afterward. Radically increase [00:46:25] the chances that that baby is going to [00:46:27] live and that they will have a [00:46:28] successful life. This giving season, do [00:46:32] not let another life be lost. Be the [00:46:34] hope for worried mothers and at risk [00:46:36] babies to donate securely. Two ways to [00:46:38] do it. If you like your phone, if you're [00:46:40] a little more of a lite than some of us, [00:46:42] you're not down with on the AI train, [00:46:43] you dial pound 250, you say keyword [00:46:46] baby, pound250, keyword baby. Or you go [00:46:48] to pre-born.comfire, [00:46:50] pre-born.com/fire. [00:46:51] Every gift is taxdeductible. So, it's [00:46:54] another way of not having to pay all [00:46:56] those bureaucrats in Washington. It's a [00:46:57] your money can be put to good use and [00:46:59] not be put to bad use. Okay. Ben agrees [00:47:02] with Matt. Matt has a moderate opinion. [00:47:04] I'm totally scandalized and I want to [00:47:06] hear from Drew. So, I disagree with Ben [00:47:09] in a couple of ways here. I mean, first [00:47:11] of all, Zora Mandani is is one of the [00:47:13] scummiest politicians I've ever seen in [00:47:15] my entire life. But he did do half the [00:47:17] job. He did raise the issue. And when [00:47:20] you raise the issue, people people perk [00:47:22] up. No, it's it's a terrible thing. He [00:47:24] raised the issue and then offered [00:47:25] socialist solutions that we know will be [00:47:27] utterly utterly destructive. It's not [00:47:30] playing Candyman to say the word that [00:47:32] people are thinking about. The worst [00:47:34] thing a politician can do and the thing [00:47:35] will destroy any administration is to [00:47:38] show people a chart that shows them [00:47:40] they're not suffering when they can't [00:47:41] afford Christmas presents for their [00:47:42] kids. Like here's the chart, you're [00:47:44] doing great, you know, and people know [00:47:46] exactly how they're doing and it it [00:47:48] makes them incredibly frustrated. What [00:47:49] what they're frustrated with Trump now [00:47:51] is he's do something I think is urgently [00:47:53] important. I think we're going to be [00:47:54] very grateful to Trump for what he did [00:47:56] five, six, seven years down the line [00:47:58] when China finally invades Taiwan. I [00:48:00] think he's totally rearranged America's [00:48:03] priorities in absolute great ways, but [00:48:05] he didn't pay attention to the thing [00:48:07] that's right there on the table and he [00:48:08] has to pay attention to it. Now, the [00:48:10] other thing I disagree with is normally [00:48:12] it is true that you have to put people [00:48:13] out of work to bring down inflation. [00:48:15] That's what Reagan did and he lost the [00:48:17] midterms. He didn't lose that the [00:48:19] houses, but he lost the midterms because [00:48:21] of it. And everybody said, "Oh, this is [00:48:22] a disaster." And then the economy turned [00:48:24] around for the next 25 years because of [00:48:26] what Reagan did. But the other thing [00:48:28] that the there is a third way of of uh [00:48:32] dealing with inflation which is raising [00:48:34] the investments and the salaries of [00:48:37] people. If you can steady you know if [00:48:38] you can cut inflation off and make the [00:48:41] prices level out and then wages start to [00:48:43] rise then you can actually that is the [00:48:46] same thing as bringing down inflation. [00:48:47] Now people can afford the things they [00:48:49] couldn't afford before. So Matt is [00:48:51] incred totally right that we got to get [00:48:53] rid of all the illegals and as far as [00:48:55] I'm concerned I don't care who it is. [00:48:56] I've lost all sympathy with the the [00:48:58] illegal immigrations. I know some of [00:49:00] these people are great people who snuck [00:49:01] in. They got to go. Everybody's got to [00:49:03] go and we got to give the country back [00:49:04] to the people who are here and who were [00:49:06] born here. No question about that. In my [00:49:08] mind, I cannot have compassion for 20 [00:49:10] million people. I can only have [00:49:11] compassion for one person at a time. If [00:49:13] one guy sneaks in, I can have compassion [00:49:15] for him. I can't have a compassion for [00:49:17] an invading army, which is what the [00:49:18] Biden administration gave us. But the [00:49:20] other thing is we have to have [00:49:22] capitalist solutions. And I think there [00:49:24] are capitalist solutions. For instance, [00:49:26] I think a lot of companies are now [00:49:27] offering people stock. A lot more [00:49:29] companies are offering people stock and [00:49:31] investment as payment as part of the [00:49:33] payment. I got that when I worked for [00:49:35] Coca-Cola. I was a reader for Columbia [00:49:37] Pictures and Coca-Cola owned them and [00:49:39] they gave me Coke stock. It was it was [00:49:41] transformative. I mean, it was I all I [00:49:43] had to do is hold on to it. And now I [00:49:44] had an investment in the company and in [00:49:47] the economy and I think that's really [00:49:48] important. Trump is talking about [00:49:49] personal savings accounts that I think [00:49:51] is also a really good idea. Some of his [00:49:54] ideas, like the 50-year mortgage, I'm [00:49:55] not too happy about because that's like [00:49:57] double the price of homes. But still, it [00:49:59] might it might [00:50:00] >> liime debt slavery. [laughter] [00:50:02] >> Lifetime debt slavery. Yeah. So, but I [00:50:05] think that there are ways for [00:50:06] capitalists to increase people's [00:50:08] participation in the economy so that [00:50:11] when things work for the bosses, they [00:50:14] work for the people too. I think this [00:50:16] it's a wonderful thing that this country [00:50:18] when it is working on all cylinders and [00:50:20] when the capitalism is in place, it [00:50:22] makes so much money that the big guys [00:50:25] can afford to share about a little of it [00:50:27] with the little guys. Not by having the [00:50:29] government redistribute it, but by [00:50:30] saying here's a piece of what you're [00:50:32] working for. Starbucks did it. It worked [00:50:33] really well for a long time and I think [00:50:35] all the a lot of companies should do it. [00:50:37] And so I think that there are ways of [00:50:39] dealing with this, but I think that that [00:50:40] dealing with it is something government [00:50:42] has to do. It is a policy problem. [00:50:44] government creates inflation. People do [00:50:46] not It's not the greedy banks. It's not [00:50:48] the greedy, you know, drugstores or [00:50:50] whatever. It's it's the government that [00:50:51] creates inflation. They can they can [00:50:53] actually do things to bring it down. And [00:50:55] I think one thing you're right that we [00:50:56] don't want deflation because it means [00:50:58] the economy is tanking. But you can get [00:51:00] wages growing in a lot of different [00:51:01] ways. One of them by reducing the [00:51:03] workforce by getting rid of the people [00:51:04] who shouldn't be here would be a great [00:51:06] first step. [00:51:07] I don't disagree with some of those [00:51:09] those policy prescriptions, but I think [00:51:10] that the thing that I am am kind of [00:51:12] stuck in and it's driving me a little [00:51:14] crazy is and I think it's the reason why [00:51:15] the country is penduluming [00:51:17] [clears throat] side to side incredibly [00:51:18] wildly. You'll see you'll see like right [00:51:21] now the you know Koshi is one of our [00:51:23] sponsors. I'll mention them again here [00:51:24] because I did on my show earlier. But if [00:51:26] you look at the polls right like the the [00:51:27] couch markets right now, Democrats [00:51:29] according to that market and I kind of [00:51:30] agree with this are actually the [00:51:31] favorites in 2028. Uh, and I think the [00:51:34] reason for that and I think the reason [00:51:35] that the country just keeps swinging [00:51:36] wildly poll is because when you have [00:51:39] politicians who are actively saying the [00:51:41] same thing but none of them are saying [00:51:42] what is true, this is what you end up [00:51:44] with. So if everybody says affordability [00:51:46] is I agree affordability is a problem. [00:51:48] This is why I'm kind of waving that [00:51:49] away. I can it's it labeling problems is [00:51:51] the easiest thing in the world. You can [00:51:52] do it in your life all day long. And I [00:51:54] can agree with my wife on every single [00:51:55] problem that exists in our life. It's [00:51:57] when you get to the solutions that [00:51:58] things get a little bit complicated. And [00:52:00] when you have politicians who always say [00:52:02] the same thing but from different sides [00:52:03] of the aisle, which is you're right, [00:52:04] it's government's job to solve it. Okay, [00:52:06] there's only one problem. If the thing [00:52:07] that you're saying is not going to solve [00:52:09] it, and you're asking for additional [00:52:11] centralized power in order to solve the [00:52:13] thing, what you are going to end up with [00:52:14] is failure. And then the other guy is [00:52:16] going to say, "Give it to me." And so [00:52:18] they're just passing the ball side to [00:52:19] side. The only thing that is going to [00:52:20] create affordability is a dynamic and [00:52:23] innovative economy, which means a few [00:52:25] things. One, a consistent level of [00:52:27] regulation or less regulation, right? [00:52:29] like actual certainty and what's going [00:52:30] to happen tomorrow in the economy. Two, [00:52:32] you're actually going to need innovators [00:52:34] to innovate and you need to leave them [00:52:35] alone and allow them to innovate and [00:52:37] actually capture the profits that [00:52:38] they're creating through innovation. And [00:52:40] then you're going to need to get the [00:52:41] hell out of the way. I mean, the the [00:52:42] magic of the Reagan economy. I know [00:52:44] Reagan has now become an anathema for [00:52:45] some reason that I cannot even imagine I [00:52:47] can't imagine why the right has decided [00:52:49] that Reagan was suddenly bad other than [00:52:51] because we we need to cast up a false [00:52:53] villain in order to elevate you know [00:52:55] whatever the new [00:52:56] >> amnesty irritated some people in [00:52:57] retrospect I'm not saying everything [00:52:59] about Reagan was I'm not saying [00:53:00] everything about Reagan was wonderful [00:53:01] but I don't think everything about Trump [00:53:02] is wonderful either I I do think that [00:53:03] the Reagan economy generated more job [00:53:06] growth and pulled us out of a greater [00:53:08] economic morass than any president in [00:53:10] history probably and so I think he that [00:53:13] that is worth something. And so if you [00:53:15] look at at, you know, Reagan, Reagan's [00:53:17] pitch, his pitch was, I can't solve all [00:53:19] your problems for you, but I can get the [00:53:20] government out of your way so you can [00:53:21] solve your own problems. And I just want [00:53:23] one politician who will say that, like [00:53:25] just one, as opposed to this kind of [00:53:26] centralized government bull where [00:53:28] everybody says, "No, no, don't worry. [00:53:30] You sit there and I'll solve all your [00:53:31] problems for you." No one is going to [00:53:32] solve the vast majority of problems in [00:53:34] your life. No politician will do it. the [00:53:36] best they can do is get rid of the [00:53:37] obstacles that are in your way. The [00:53:38] systemic obstacles that are in your way [00:53:40] and then most of the decisions in a free [00:53:42] country ought to be up to you and that [00:53:43] is scary because it means that actually [00:53:45] your success or failure is largely on [00:53:46] your own shoulders% [00:53:49] on this Ben this is different. I agree [00:53:50] with Ben 100% on all of it. [00:53:52] >> No, but I I in defense of those who are [00:53:54] critiquing Ray obviously I still love [00:53:56] St. Gipper and politicians come and go. [00:53:58] You know, Nixon was in in the crater for [00:54:00] a while. Now Nixon's making a comeback. [00:54:02] Kulage was the man for a while. Now [00:54:03] people are looking more toward I don't [00:54:04] know, they like Teddy Roosevelt. They [00:54:05] used him. So this happens as we rethink [00:54:08] uh history and as we move on to new [00:54:10] circumstances. Part of the reason that [00:54:11] there's a little more of a critical [00:54:13] lens, you know, as opposed to just [00:54:15] exalting St. Reagan is of being perfect [00:54:18] in all ways is because, you know, in in [00:54:20] the 80s, mass amnesty for illegal [00:54:23] aliens, for example, wasn't really all [00:54:25] that big a deal, but it did set the [00:54:26] stage for a major problem. And so, we're [00:54:28] rethinking that. In in the 80s, uh, you [00:54:31] know, obviously Reagan was massively [00:54:33] successful in his economic policy, as [00:54:35] was Thatcher, as was that that whole [00:54:36] kind of movement. We do live in a a [00:54:39] different world today. And so it's not [00:54:40] to say we throw out all of their sol [00:54:42] it's not to say that we throw out all of [00:54:43] their solutions, but it's to recognize [00:54:44] that there are more difficult economic [00:54:46] problems that we have to deal with. And [00:54:47] so one of, you know, Drew actually [00:54:49] offered some real solutions here, which [00:54:50] is uh he you pointed out, Drew, that [00:54:54] having people really bought into the [00:54:56] economy, you know, Coca-Cola giving you [00:54:57] some stock back in the day is helpful. [00:54:59] Back when we were rethinking some of the [00:55:01] problems with industrial capitalism a [00:55:02] 100 years ago, you had writers, [00:55:04] especially Catholic writers like [00:55:05] Chesterton and Bellock saying we need [00:55:07] some option, not socialism and [00:55:09] communism, not pure unbridled [00:55:10] capitalism, but some other option. They [00:55:13] propose something called distributism, [00:55:14] which is too complicated to get into [00:55:15] here and probably isn't all that [00:55:17] practical, but part a lot of what it [00:55:19] comes down to is give people some [00:55:20] ownership, give people some stake, and [00:55:22] and I think that's really really [00:55:24] important. And so here's another [00:55:25] criticism maybe of what came out of the [00:55:26] Reagan era is that we judge the health [00:55:28] of an economy purely by GDP. And GDP is [00:55:32] a fine economic indicator, but it's not [00:55:33] the beall and endall of everything. And [00:55:35] I think what a lot of people are looking [00:55:36] around at today is saying, look, you can [00:55:38] show a lot of economic activity uh in [00:55:41] all sorts of ways by the pornography [00:55:43] industry to use the topic we keep coming [00:55:44] back to. You know, the pornography [00:55:46] industry is booming. Look at that. GDP [00:55:47] is going up. You know, there are all [00:55:48] sorts of very destructive industries. We [00:55:51] we brag now about how women's employment [00:55:53] is the highest ever. I'm not sure that's [00:55:55] a great thing, you know? I mean, who's [00:55:56] taking care of the kids? Who's watching [00:55:58] the home? Isn't there some cost to that [00:55:59] as well? And so, I just I I wonder one [00:56:02] slightly practical solution might be to [00:56:04] say, "All right, look, maybe GDP isn't [00:56:06] the beall and endall of everything." And [00:56:08] maybe there are certain areas of the [00:56:09] economy that are legitimately immoral [00:56:11] and destructive, and we used to heavily [00:56:13] regulate them, like pornography, for [00:56:15] instance, but all sorts of other kind of [00:56:17] vicious and degrading avenues. We've [00:56:20] liberalized gambling. I don't know that [00:56:21] that's really great. Maybe that maybe it [00:56:23] ticks up GDP a little bit, but it [00:56:24] doesn't I don't think that's really [00:56:25] great for the true health of an economy. [00:56:27] Maybe we need to rethink what economic [00:56:29] health really looks like because uh the [00:56:31] changes that came about in the late part [00:56:33] of the 20th century h did have some [00:56:35] negative side effects as well as [00:56:37] positive outcomes. [00:56:37] >> Can I can I address the Reagan thing for [00:56:39] a minute though because a lot of this I [00:56:41] think started with that Caldwell book, [00:56:42] The Age of Entitlement, in which he he [00:56:44] blamed Reagan for things that Reagan [00:56:46] actually did. Reagan said he failed to [00:56:47] cut down the government. That was the [00:56:48] big failure of his administration. But [00:56:50] we've edited the Cold War out of [00:56:51] history. And you know, Reagan like won [00:56:54] the Cold War. He freed like a huge huge [00:56:57] section of the world of the globe. He [00:57:00] set people free. And what what they did [00:57:01] with that is up to them. But he he [00:57:03] actually did that. That you can't [00:57:05] imagine how unheard of that was, how [00:57:08] unexpected it was, how nobody thought it [00:57:10] would ever happen, how we were dealing [00:57:11] with the Soviet Union for the rest of [00:57:12] our lives. Not just people who thought [00:57:14] that communism was going to work, but [00:57:16] people who thought it's just never going [00:57:17] to go away. He he made it go away. And I [00:57:20] think for that he's a he's a hero. And [00:57:22] yeah, what what Nolles is saying is [00:57:23] true. We now are living in a absolutely [00:57:25] new economy. And while the basis [00:57:27] deregulation well the bas totally [00:57:29] disagree there's no such thing as a new [00:57:30] economy. [00:57:32] >> Let me finish. Let me finish. The ba the [00:57:34] basis of deregulation and freedom and [00:57:36] and uh free markets are absolutely the [00:57:39] same. They don't change at all. You [00:57:41] know, but the problems that arise [00:57:43] because pro no no system solves human [00:57:46] problems because human beings can't be [00:57:47] solved the the problems that arise and [00:57:50] the and the places where the peaks of [00:57:51] problems are change and then we have to [00:57:53] address those and one of them them [00:57:54] you're absolutely right. One of them one [00:57:57] of the key ones is the role of women in [00:57:58] our society which I think is screwed up [00:58:01] so badly that it's it's destroying [00:58:02] everything. We've actually stopped [00:58:04] reproducing which to me is always a bad [00:58:06] sign. you know [00:58:07] >> that economic indicator another [00:58:09] indicator [00:58:10] >> I mean so actually I this teaches me a [00:58:12] lesson I should let Drew finish his [00:58:13] sentences because when he finishes them [00:58:14] I'm more likely to agree with them but [00:58:16] [laughter] uh but at [00:58:17] >> that'll be a whole new relationship but [00:58:19] at the same time you know nullles I I'll [00:58:21] pick on you a little bit when we say you [00:58:22] know terrible we shouldn't look at GDP [00:58:24] it's not a good indicator of economic [00:58:26] >> it's not the be all and end all [00:58:27] >> okay it's not the be all but it's the be [00:58:29] all okay so there's no such thing as an [00:58:30] economic beall and end all okay but I [00:58:32] think that we are mixing up a few [00:58:33] terminologies here and I think that we [00:58:35] ought to tease without the strain for [00:58:37] one second. There's a difference between [00:58:38] economic health and societal health. [00:58:39] These are not the same thing. And you [00:58:41] you can have a very economically healthy [00:58:43] society that is that is breaking down in [00:58:45] a lot of social ways with with [00:58:46] tremendous pathologies. I think that's [00:58:48] what you're actually seeing. And so yes, [00:58:50] it turns out that we are materially [00:58:52] significantly better off than we were in [00:58:53] the 1980s. In fact, we are materially [00:58:55] significantly better off than we were in [00:58:56] the mid-200s. When when people talk [00:58:58] about the unaffordability of homes, [00:59:00] that's because an average home in 1950 [00:59:01] was a 980 ft, you know, square foot [00:59:05] brick house with no insulation and no [00:59:07] heating or air and maybe a bathroom [00:59:09] outside. Like the this kind of idea that [00:59:11] we're living worse than your parents or [00:59:12] grandparents is just belied by every [00:59:14] available fact. Maybe you're living [00:59:16] worse than your grandparents are right [00:59:17] now, but you're not living worse than [00:59:19] your grandparents were at the same age. [00:59:20] Right? But if you're a 20-year-old [00:59:22] living in 2025, you are not worse off [00:59:24] than your grandparents were living as a [00:59:26] 20-year-old in 1958 or 1960. [00:59:28] >> iPhone, but you don't have a house. I [00:59:30] mean, I do now, but you don't have [00:59:32] >> your apartment is nicer than their house [00:59:34] was. Okay, that is a reality. If you [00:59:36] were living anywhere except for New York [00:59:37] City, and and by the way, the idea that [00:59:40] you couldn't move somewhere and get a [00:59:41] house, that that's this is now you're [00:59:43] getting back to my original point, which [00:59:44] is on a personal level, if you want to [00:59:45] live a life like your grandparents, you [00:59:47] might have to do the thing that your [00:59:48] grandparents did. Okay? your [00:59:49] grandparents went to a war and then they [00:59:50] came back and moved to a town that they [00:59:52] actually probably did not grow up in and [00:59:53] then they got a house that was like off [00:59:55] the lot from some from from some big [00:59:58] corporation that built a bunch of [00:59:59] standard box looking houses that now you [01:00:01] drive past those on the freeway and you [01:00:02] say I can't believe somebody ever lived [01:00:03] in those. So it's kind of you know [01:00:05] rosecolored glasses about the past [01:00:06] drives me a little bit insane. And again [01:00:09] I think that if we want to look at the [01:00:10] real problems in our society we [01:00:11] shouldn't create a mythical past and we [01:00:13] shouldn't create a mythically terrible [01:00:14] present. We should actually look at the [01:00:16] problems in our society. And one of [01:00:17] those would be people not having kids. [01:00:19] One of those would be deep depression [01:00:20] and unhappiness. People killing [01:00:22] themselves with opioids. You know, [01:00:23] people being yes, people having their [01:00:25] jobs taken by illegal immigrants in [01:00:26] certain industries. Like those are [01:00:27] actual real solvable problems. But I [01:00:29] don't have a Delorean. All I have right [01:00:31] now is the way that people are living [01:00:33] right now. And so now we have to look at [01:00:35] the problems in front of us and how do [01:00:36] we solve those? Yeah, but that's the [01:00:37] that's the one that's the one part where [01:00:39] I so so at the buzzer I I get to [01:00:41] disagree with you Ben on on I remember [01:00:43] there was one thing you said in that in [01:00:45] that clip that I that I did disagree [01:00:46] with I couldn't remember then you just [01:00:47] said it again. Uh so the the the one [01:00:50] part about well this is you know [01:00:51] America's this how America's always been [01:00:53] that you you you leave and you go [01:00:55] somewhere else away from your family and [01:00:57] I think that like back in the pioneer [01:00:59] days I mean that there is something [01:01:00] about that that's in the American spirit [01:01:02] of like literally going out into a [01:01:04] wilderness and building your own life [01:01:07] maybe thousand miles away from anyone [01:01:09] that you know and so there's that's [01:01:11] American in a certain sense but that was [01:01:13] back in the pioneer days I think for [01:01:15] most of for most of for most of American [01:01:17] history. It It's like anywhere else in [01:01:19] the world. People they they grew up in a [01:01:21] place they didn't move that far away. [01:01:22] They they stayed where their support we [01:01:25] are less mobile now and by the stats. We [01:01:27] are less mobile now than we have ever [01:01:28] been any time in American history. Quick [01:01:30] raise your hand if you are currently [01:01:32] living in the town where you grew up. [01:01:34] >> You're saying but you're saying we're [01:01:35] less mobile now. [01:01:37] >> And I'm saying that we are a unique [01:01:38] breed in that we actually like we're a [01:01:40] little older than the Jenzers. Okay. [01:01:43] Like we but the the people who tend to [01:01:44] be more successful and again as a piece [01:01:46] of advice are the people who tend to [01:01:48] actually move in pursuit of opportunity [01:01:50] and if you look historically speaking it [01:01:52] is not true that in 1920 everybody is [01:01:53] living in the town where they grew up. [01:01:55] In fact in 1920 there were more people [01:01:56] who were moving across the country at [01:01:58] great expense and difficulty than there [01:02:00] are today in in 2025. [01:02:04] Exceptional people exceptional people [01:02:06] move. They go into the wilderness they [01:02:08] build new towns but most people are not [01:02:09] exceptional [01:02:11] people. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Right. So, so [01:02:13] and you want us and you want a country [01:02:15] filled with communities and filled with, [01:02:17] you know, people with traditions and [01:02:18] things like that. So, I I kind of half [01:02:20] agree with you on this. I do believe [01:02:21] that exceptional people should and will [01:02:23] move. But I but I think that that Matt [01:02:25] is right that it shouldn't be like that [01:02:26] for everybody. [01:02:27] >> Sorry. Go back to Matt and Matt can [01:02:28] finish disagreeing with me being a jerk [01:02:29] again. [01:02:30] >> Uh no, I I think I think uh I think [01:02:32] that's the I don't know the the claim [01:02:35] that um people were more mobile in the [01:02:37] 1920s. I there's also there's a [01:02:40] technological side of this too that that [01:02:42] for a lot of American history you know [01:02:43] moving away from your family uh and [01:02:46] going to another state over was like a [01:02:48] threemonth journey and you know people [01:02:50] are going to die along the way. So so [01:02:52] that this one one of the reasons why we [01:02:53] know that that that for a lot of you [01:02:56] know American history and human history [01:02:58] people didn't tend to do that. I mean [01:02:59] sometimes they did but that was again [01:03:01] that's like you're a pioneer. Um, I [01:03:04] think that the at the very least and I [01:03:05] and I don't think we're disagreeing on [01:03:06] this point that the desire to stay in [01:03:11] your community where you were born, [01:03:13] where your family is, stay with your [01:03:15] support system with your families and [01:03:17] your your family and your friends. [01:03:18] That's a good desire. There's nothing [01:03:20] wrong with that. [01:03:21] >> I agree with that. [01:03:22] >> And and a and a healthy country is one [01:03:24] where people if they want to do that are [01:03:27] able to do it. So, but I think that's [01:03:29] the part [01:03:30] >> I think we all agree on that, right? [01:03:31] That's that's you know this gets back [01:03:33] though to this point of uh the neat and [01:03:35] pat distinction between economic health [01:03:37] and social health. I'm not sure that we [01:03:39] can. Obviously, they're distinct [01:03:41] concepts, but I'm not sure that we can [01:03:42] totally separate them, you know, [01:03:44] especially as increasingly in the modern [01:03:46] age, we think of ourselves as [01:03:47] omoeconomicus, you know, we're like [01:03:49] primarily uh economic creatures. And I I [01:03:52] don't I think we're just integral [01:03:53] creatures and we we have all of these [01:03:55] things together. And so, you know, [01:03:57] especially at this kind of moment, you [01:03:59] look now compare it to 1980 or 1880 for [01:04:03] that matter. One of the major problems [01:04:04] that we have is that social solidarity [01:04:07] has really frayed, that religiosity has [01:04:10] declined precipitously, though there are [01:04:12] some signs that that's turning around. [01:04:14] And you can't divorce that from the [01:04:16] birth rate problem. You know, you can't [01:04:18] divorce that divorce that from the fact [01:04:19] that people aren't having kids. These [01:04:20] are great predictor. You know, [01:04:21] stability, tradition, and religion are [01:04:23] are predictors of people having kids. [01:04:25] And you can't divorce that from the [01:04:26] economic problems because if we don't [01:04:28] import the entire third world, we're [01:04:30] told that our our economy is going to [01:04:32] collapse, that GDP is going to collapse. [01:04:33] So that's the whole argument for mass [01:04:35] migration. And so these problems are all [01:04:37] so deeply intertwined that it seems to [01:04:39] me that there has to be some firmer [01:04:42] political uh solution to rather than [01:04:45] just say look uh we're going to let the [01:04:47] free hand of the market, you know, work [01:04:49] its way and we'll let the chips fall [01:04:50] where they may. A lot of people are [01:04:51] looking around and saying I don't like [01:04:52] where the chips are falling. Well, I [01:04:54] mean I this is a great place to for for [01:04:56] us to conclude because I'm going to [01:04:57] disagree for one second with Nolles and [01:04:59] just say that there are many many more [01:05:01] impoverished countries than the United [01:05:03] States that have less severe pathologies [01:05:05] than the United States. And in the past [01:05:07] we were a less wealthy nation with less [01:05:10] severe pathologies. And so this is why I [01:05:12] say that trying to tie the economic [01:05:13] situation to the pathologies I think in [01:05:15] some cases and in most cases actually [01:05:17] can be a fool's errand. But we'll have [01:05:19] to save that for next time because [01:05:21] here's the deal before we leave folks. [01:05:22] Our biggest and best sale of the year is [01:05:24] happening right this very instant like [01:05:26] at this moment while you're listening to [01:05:28] us. All DailyWare plus annual [01:05:30] memberships are 50% off. You get [01:05:32] everything. You get access to the DW [01:05:34] library of movies, documentaries, Matt's [01:05:36] documentaries mostly is what we're [01:05:37] talking about there because those are [01:05:38] the best ones that have ever been made [01:05:39] and series that stand for the ideals [01:05:40] that keep America free. And that of [01:05:42] course includes the Pen Dragon Cycle [01:05:44] Rise of the Merlin. It is coming January [01:05:46] 22nd. All Access members get early [01:05:48] access to episodes one and two one month [01:05:50] early on Christmas Day, which is a bit [01:05:51] of a sweetener for you there. You [01:05:53] empower DW Plus to build culture, defend [01:05:55] values, launch stories that ensure your [01:05:57] voice and your values shape the future [01:05:58] of the United States. Whether you want [01:06:00] to join or give the gift of a DW [01:06:02] membership to someone, now is the time [01:06:03] to do it at 50% off. It is our best deal [01:06:06] of the year. You can head on over to [01:06:08] dailywire.com/subscribe. [01:06:10] We will all be very happy to see you [01:06:12] over there. Well, in just a moment, we [01:06:14] are going to bring you the magical [01:06:16] mystical trailer for finally the Pen [01:06:19] Dragon Cycle, Rise of the Merlin, is [01:06:21] coming January 22nd. Guys, thanks for [01:06:23] stopping by. We will see you here [01:06:25] hopefully never for the rest of our but [01:06:26] actually, [laughter] we will see you [01:06:27] here in a couple of weeks and we'll get [01:06:28] together and disagree in friendly [01:06:30] fashion on friendly fire with one [01:06:32] another. Without further ado, here's the [01:06:34] trailer. [01:06:38] All of this is an illusion, an echo of a [01:06:41] voice that has died. [01:06:44] And soon that echo will cease. [01:06:53] [music] [01:06:57] They say that Merlin is mad. [01:07:04] They say he was a king in David, [01:07:08] the son of a princess of lost Atlantis. [01:07:11] They say the future and the past are [01:07:14] known to him. That the fire and the wind [01:07:18] tell him their secrets. That the magic [01:07:20] of the hill folk and druids come forth [01:07:23] at his easy [music] command. [01:07:26] They say he slew hundreds. Hundreds. Do [01:07:31] you hear that the world burned and [01:07:33] trembled at his wrath? [screaming] [01:07:38] >> The Merlin died long before you and I [01:07:41] were born. [01:07:44] >> Merlin Emmeris has returned to the land [01:07:47] of the living. [01:07:50] >> Vigan [music] is gone. Rome is gone. The [01:07:53] Saxon is here. [01:07:56] Sax and Hangust has assembled the [01:07:58] greatest war host ever seen in the [01:07:59] island of the mighty. And before the [01:08:01] summer is through, he means to take the [01:08:03] throne, [01:08:05] and he will have it. If we are too busy [01:08:08] squabbbling amongst ourselves to take up [01:08:10] arms against him, here is your hope. A [01:08:13] king will arise to hold all Britain in [01:08:16] his hand. A high king who will be the [01:08:19] wonder of the world. [01:08:21] you [01:08:24] >> to a future of peace. [01:08:27] [groaning] [01:08:28] >> There'll be no peace in these lands till [01:08:30] we are all dust. [01:08:32] >> Men of the island of the mighty. [01:08:35] YOU STAND TOGETHER. [01:08:36] [screaming and groaning] [01:08:37] >> We stand as Britain's. [01:08:40] We stand as warn. [01:08:44] >> Great darkness is falling upon this [01:08:46] land. [01:08:48] These brothers are our only hope to [01:08:50] stand against it. [01:08:53] >> Not our only hope. [01:08:55] >> They say Merlin slew 70 men with his own [01:08:58] hands. [01:08:59] Like Cath he slew 500. [01:09:04] >> No man is capable of such a thing. The [01:09:07] mortal man.