Palmer Luckey Will Change How You Think About War | #464 | The Way I Heard It (YouTube Video Transcript)

(00:00:00) Your YouTube transcript will appear here (00:00:00) I want America to be in a world where if (00:00:02) there is a just reason to rise to the (00:00:06) occasion that we're able to, but I I (00:00:08) just don't think that we have it in us. (00:00:10) Look at the kids who are who are on the (00:00:12) beaches in Normandy on D-Day. (00:00:14) >> Yeah. (00:00:14) >> Do you think that we have a few million (00:00:16) of those? (00:00:17) >> I do not. You'd much rather have our (00:00:21) wars and battles being fought with the (00:00:23) kind of hardware that you're creating. (00:00:26) Better to have the gear over there than (00:00:30) our blood and treasure. (00:00:31) >> That's right. (00:00:36) >> Palmer Lucky came in hot. Uh I (00:00:39) appreciate it. A helicopter (00:00:41) >> brought you to my modest. (00:00:42) >> I flew I flew in in um it's I I I own a (00:00:44) few helicopters, but today I flew my uh (00:00:47) Euroopter EC120, although now it's owned (00:00:50) by Airbus. (00:00:50) >> You flew it? You flew it? (00:00:51) >> Yeah. Yeah. I I flew it with a co-pilot, (00:00:53) so I'm a I'm a uh (00:00:54) >> So, you're still under some level of (00:00:55) supervision. (00:00:55) >> I'm Look, when you get to a certain (00:00:57) level of responsibility, uh it's (00:00:59) irresponsible to uh not spend a little (00:01:02) money and have somebody who's a lot (00:01:03) better at it than you. And I'm Look, I'm (00:01:05) I'm an okay beginner helicopter pilot. I (00:01:08) am not uh competent enough to be flying (00:01:10) around on my own. If I could, I'd bring (00:01:12) a co-pilot on my motorcycle, but I (00:01:14) can't. See, that's the level of (00:01:16) disclosure and honesty I'd like to hear (00:01:18) on a on United or American Airlines as (00:01:20) I'm strapping in, right? I just like to (00:01:22) hear the guy up front or or the or the (00:01:25) woman. Just level with me. You know, (00:01:28) this is my second year. I I feel pretty (00:01:30) good. I think I've got room for (00:01:32) improvement and I appreciate you guys (00:01:34) letting me work through some of the bugs (00:01:35) here. The captain has, you know, 40 (00:01:37) years of experience. That's what people (00:01:38) want to hear. (00:01:39) >> Yeah. We want the warm milk that says, (00:01:41) you know what, it's it's going to be (00:01:43) okay. Somebody's got an eye on you. (00:01:45) Ignore the sirens outside. It adds to (00:01:47) the very similitude. But um it's funny. (00:01:51) The first time I met you, I think it was (00:01:53) it it must have been nine months ago. (00:01:55) >> Alex Epstein in Newport. It was the (00:01:58) energy conference. (00:01:58) >> That's right. (00:01:59) >> Now, I don't know if you remember this. (00:02:00) You arrived at that event on a (00:02:02) motorcycle. (00:02:03) >> I did. I do remember that. (00:02:04) >> Dude, you were wearing what I think may (00:02:07) have been a jacket made of copper. (00:02:10) >> That's right. Actually, it's so funny. I (00:02:12) I don't even wear it all that often. And (00:02:14) I wore it on Joe Rogan and I wore it on (00:02:17) that motorcycle. I'm actually not sure I (00:02:19) wore it more than once or twice between (00:02:22) those events a year apart. So, it's a (00:02:24) it's a it's funny that that jacket comes (00:02:26) up yet again. (00:02:27) >> Well, I mean, it's really cool, though. (00:02:29) I've never liked fashion for the sake of (00:02:31) fashion nearly as much as fashion for (00:02:33) the sake of uh functionality. Like, I'm (00:02:35) I'm wearing these I'm wearing these uh (00:02:37) these, you know, my my five finger (00:02:38) shoes. Well, at least you're not I mean, (00:02:40) I was expecting flip flops. That's the (00:02:43) standard. (00:02:43) >> So, this is the thing. I normally do (00:02:44) wear flip flops, but in this case, I had (00:02:46) to fly my helicopter. And so, I want to (00:02:48) get some uh I want to wear shoes that (00:02:50) are uh fire retardant in case I crash. I (00:02:53) don't want my shoes melt into my feet um (00:02:54) in case, you know, you have to step (00:02:56) through some fire. Uh I needed something (00:02:57) that is really flexible, really thin, so (00:02:59) I can feel the pedals really well. It's (00:03:00) important to be able to operate the foot (00:03:03) controls in a helicopter, even more so (00:03:05) than an airplane. Um and so, I'm not (00:03:07) wearing these for fashion reasons. I'm (00:03:08) wearing them for for for function (00:03:10) reasons and that's that's the best kind (00:03:11) of fashion I think (00:03:12) >> and also creates opportunities for guys (00:03:14) like you to capitalize on some sort of (00:03:16) inefficiency. I think it does create (00:03:18) opportunities where it gets tricky of (00:03:20) course is where it's tied to uh you know (00:03:22) legislation especially where it can get (00:03:24) very prescriptive. You know there's (00:03:25) there's certain areas where you can (00:03:27) innovate relatively freely. Um and and (00:03:30) those tend to be the areas that see the (00:03:32) most innovation right that there's a (00:03:33) reason that I think the internet and (00:03:35) social media and all these things got so (00:03:38) much investment. It was partly because (00:03:40) those were nent technological spaces. It (00:03:42) was also because there were basically no (00:03:43) rules. You could just do anything right. (00:03:45) Uh whereas you one of my one example of (00:03:48) this is with um is with like (00:03:50) automobiles. Uh there's a lot of safety (00:03:53) devices that uh are legal in other (00:03:55) places like automatic steering (00:03:57) headlights and they're just not legal (00:03:59) here in the United States yet. And (00:04:00) eventually usually we catch up with (00:04:02) these things. (00:04:02) >> Automatic steering. You mean headlights (00:04:04) that pivot as you as you turn (00:04:05) >> as you turn. Yeah. Exactly. So they can (00:04:07) they can basically uh you know keep more (00:04:09) like imagine if you're going around a (00:04:10) tight turn, your headlights are pointing (00:04:11) forward. Now you can't see anything in (00:04:14) the inside of the turn. They solved this (00:04:15) in in Europe a while ago. I don't (00:04:17) usually give kudos to Europe, but that (00:04:19) this one the one thing, (00:04:21) >> but um (00:04:22) >> yeah, croissants are good, too. Well, (00:04:24) that was done a long time ago. I' I've (00:04:26) got a whole theory that a lot of these (00:04:28) European nations are kind of living in (00:04:29) graveyards where, you know, they're like (00:04:31) monuments to their forebears who who (00:04:33) invented, you know, the croissants. And (00:04:35) but like another example is seat belts. (00:04:36) Um people wonder why seatelt technology (00:04:39) hasn't advanced and why we haven't had (00:04:41) something that like replaces seat belts. (00:04:42) The answer is that when seat belts were (00:04:44) being first introduced, there were (00:04:46) actually active research and development (00:04:48) programs around things like uh total (00:04:50) immobilizers based on airbag technology (00:04:53) on uh cars that had uh that had just (00:04:56) different schemes for protecting someone (00:04:57) in a crash. But then Congress passed (00:04:59) legislation that required all cars to (00:05:01) have a seat belt. And a seat belt is (00:05:03) defined in an extremely specific way. (00:05:05) It's a three-point harness. It does (00:05:07) this. It does that. For example, this is (00:05:09) my favorite example. Um race cars. Mhm. (00:05:12) >> Those guys are not using three-point (00:05:13) harnesses. They're using 4.5 point (00:05:15) harnesses. And why are they doing that? (00:05:18) Because it's safer. So, like I have a (00:05:19) buddy of mine who has a car and it has a (00:05:22) uh five-point harness in it (00:05:24) >> and it has a three-point seat belt in (00:05:27) it. Why? Because if he gets pulled over (00:05:29) on the highway wearing his inarguably (00:05:32) scientifically proven to be safer (00:05:34) fivepoint harness, well, that doesn't (00:05:35) meet the definition of a seat belt. (00:05:38) You're supposed to on the highway be (00:05:39) wearing that three-point harness. And so (00:05:40) this is one of those things that kills (00:05:41) innovation. Why would GM or Ford invest (00:05:44) billions in a new safety technology that (00:05:46) would replace a seat belt when the law (00:05:48) says you have to have a seat belt? And (00:05:51) here's exactly what a seat belt is. It's (00:05:55) Anyway, but the point is these tightly (00:05:57) regulated spaces, it's where you see the (00:05:58) least innovation, which is why I'm crazy (00:06:00) for starting a company in the defense (00:06:02) space because it's so highly regulated. (00:06:03) >> Yet you're talking about the uh the trap (00:06:07) of of of doing it right. Y (00:06:09) >> in other words, just because you're in (00:06:11) compliance doesn't mean you're out of (00:06:13) danger. (00:06:14) >> Y (00:06:15) >> the theory, as I understand it, goes (00:06:17) back to something called homeostatic (00:06:19) risk or risk equilibrium or compensatory (00:06:22) risk, right? And this I'd love to get (00:06:24) your take on this. The unintended (00:06:26) consequence of introducing (00:06:29) various mandates and safety protocols (00:06:33) >> will make you safer (00:06:36) uh environmentally, but emotionally you (00:06:40) will compensate. (00:06:42) >> So So now you know you're safer cuz (00:06:44) you're seat belts on, your helmet's on, (00:06:47) you're locked in five points. Every (00:06:49) study indicates that the driver who (00:06:51) feels that way will accelerate, corner (00:06:54) more tightly. That's right. (00:06:55) >> And take more chances. Not on purpose, (00:06:57) but because your brain is trying to get (00:06:59) back to some sort of equilibrium that is (00:07:02) only pegged to your individual (00:07:06) tastes and everybody's protocols are (00:07:10) different. Now, everybody has to have (00:07:12) this fundamentally unsafe car because (00:07:14) then everybody will realize that they're (00:07:17) not going to survive a crash. Therefore, (00:07:19) you don't need speed limits anymore (00:07:21) because everybody is going to compensate (00:07:24) their risk equilibrium. But (00:07:26) >> same argument, NFL, take away the (00:07:29) helmets, more or less brain injury. (00:07:32) >> Well, right. Because the theory is you (00:07:33) give them the helmets and they're doing (00:07:34) these, you know, they're using the (00:07:35) helmets as weapons basically. Yeah. (00:07:37) They're slamming into each other. 100%. (00:07:39) Well, something else that people (00:07:40) probably don't (00:07:41) >> Would you do that? Like, would you favor (00:07:42) that knowing like the way I'm trying to (00:07:44) figure out how your brain works? I well (00:07:47) look I I lean libertarian so what I (00:07:49) would say is that that'd be a voluntary (00:07:51) contract that you can enter into. I (00:07:52) think if somebody wants to enter into a (00:07:54) contract that has a 50% chance of them (00:07:57) suffering brain injury over the course (00:07:59) of their career they should be allowed (00:08:00) to do it. These players are making tens (00:08:03) of millions of dollars a year. Some of (00:08:04) them if they want to enter into a (00:08:06) contract to do that knowing that there's (00:08:08) risk of concussion. What they should do (00:08:10) is they should try to mitigate that (00:08:11) risk. They should advocate for things (00:08:13) that are meeting their risk tolerance. (00:08:15) And if and if and if people don't want (00:08:16) to participate in that, that's fine. But (00:08:18) with all the problems that exist in (00:08:20) society, the long-term health impacts of (00:08:23) people who sign up for what is (00:08:24) effectively a combat sport and then and (00:08:27) and to have other people advocating for (00:08:30) the these combat, you know, uh athletes (00:08:34) on their behalf, I've always thought (00:08:36) rings ring rings rings a bit hollow (00:08:39) given all the other problems you could (00:08:40) fight for. I'm just interested all of (00:08:42) this. It's like the unintended (00:08:44) consequences of force compliance. Unlike (00:08:48) 99% of all the bobbleheads ever (00:08:50) produced, the micro micro bobble head (00:08:53) was made entirely in this country. (00:08:55) Consequently, Micro Micro only wears (00:08:58) clothing made in the USA, specifically (00:09:01) by American giant. Why? Because Micro (00:09:04) Micro understands that back in 1980, 75% (00:09:07) of all the clothing worn by Americans (00:09:10) was made by Americans. And today, it's (00:09:13) less than 2%. Which is why he would very (00:09:16) much appreciate it if you would stop by (00:09:18) American-giant.com (00:09:20) and pick up something awesome, something (00:09:22) made in the USA. Check out their (00:09:25) terrific collection of American (00:09:26) essentials. Currently available in red, (00:09:28) white, and blue, and all the usual adult (00:09:31) sizes. Use code mike to get 20% off your (00:09:34) order at american-giant.com/mike. (00:09:37) >> Be a giant. american-giant.com/mike. (00:09:41) Thank you. (00:09:42) >> And where we started, if I remember, was (00:09:45) basically how that impacts language. And (00:09:48) in a jokey way, we talked about what (00:09:50) would happen to the state of mind of a (00:09:53) passenger on a plane if he or she was (00:09:55) confronted with with the blistering (00:09:58) truth (00:09:59) of the pilot. Mhm. (00:10:01) >> Cuz right now, to your point, we're (00:10:03) being lied to. Like when I sit down and (00:10:05) strap in, as I will later, um my pilot's (00:10:09) going to tell me that safety is our (00:10:10) priority. (00:10:11) >> Yep. (00:10:12) >> Now that's (00:10:13) >> If if it were, we wouldn't be, you know, (00:10:16) in an aluminum tube flying 550 mph (00:10:19) defying gravity. We We simply wouldn't (00:10:22) do that if the most important thing was (00:10:23) to be safe. Uh but he's going to tell me (00:10:26) it is. And then he's going to say he's (00:10:28) going to serve a bunch of warm milk. (00:10:30) designed to make everybody, you know, (00:10:33) feel a special way. If he told the (00:10:36) truth, on the other hand, if he said, (00:10:38) "Look, my name's Jack McGillicuy. I've (00:10:41) been flying for this airline now for 20 (00:10:43) years, and I'm big fan of everybody on (00:10:46) the plane. We're so grateful for your (00:10:48) business, but in the scheme of things, I (00:10:50) love my wife more, and my kids are super (00:10:52) super important to me. So, here's the (00:10:54) good news. I'm going to get my ass home (00:10:56) to them tonight. Come hell or high (00:10:59) water. you guys, you just sit back, (00:11:02) strap in, don't give the flight (00:11:03) attendants a hard time, and you're (00:11:06) welcome. I would feel so much better. Is (00:11:09) any of this applicable in the business (00:11:12) of defense? You'd be surprised. I think (00:11:15) so. I mean, one of the interesting (00:11:17) things about the defense industry is (00:11:19) that we've built kind of a a similar set (00:11:22) of fictions around our capability and (00:11:25) how we're safe and we're secure and (00:11:27) we're spending all this money on on (00:11:30) defense to good end. I think it's (00:11:33) started to fall apart uh slowly first as (00:11:36) we just spent more and more and more and (00:11:37) I think people realize we're just (00:11:38) spending too much on it. (00:11:39) >> Wait a minute. Are you talking about you (00:11:40) or the big five? I'm talking about I'm (00:11:42) talking about big picture. The United (00:11:43) States of America just big picture. The (00:11:46) United States really since the end of (00:11:48) the Cold War has erected these ideas (00:11:52) that the things that we're spending (00:11:54) money on are going to keep us safe and (00:11:55) that they're going to help our allies (00:11:57) win win any potential war that comes (00:11:59) along. And then we've been confronted (00:12:01) with this stark reality. Things like the (00:12:06) Ukraine invasion where we realize that (00:12:08) actually a lot of these tools are (00:12:09) sitting ducks. you're going to have $50 (00:12:11) million bombers blown up by $500 drones, (00:12:15) that we don't have the tools that we (00:12:16) need to stop them. Uh that we that that (00:12:19) the globalization of our economy and (00:12:20) allowing containers and ships and (00:12:22) everything else to move around the world (00:12:23) basically unimpeded means that you don't (00:12:25) even have to use an ICBM to deliver a (00:12:28) nuke into a port. You can just put it in (00:12:29) a shipping container and put it over on (00:12:31) a ship and it will go right up to the (00:12:32) same place and it'll only cost you like (00:12:34) 600 bucks, too. Yeah. Um, I think people (00:12:37) are realizing that there were all of (00:12:39) these un underlying assumptions that (00:12:42) that just aren't true. That that we kind (00:12:44) of assumed that a war would look like (00:12:46) how we assumed it would during the Cold (00:12:48) War. And we're realizing actually we (00:12:49) live in a world where people are going (00:12:50) to exploit every every advantage they (00:12:53) have and every disadvantage that you (00:12:55) have and it probably doesn't look (00:12:56) anything like uh the conflicts of the (00:12:58) past. And that's that's actually why I (00:12:59) got into the defense space. It wasn't (00:13:01) because I thought this was an area that (00:13:03) was ripe for innovation. It wasn't (00:13:05) because I thought, "Oh, this is the (00:13:06) place where I'm going to be able to just (00:13:08) very easily come in and change things." (00:13:10) It was because I was so terrified of (00:13:12) what would happen if we didn't get (00:13:13) people out of working on things like (00:13:15) tech, you know, search engines and (00:13:18) social media and put them to work on (00:13:19) building the things that can stop the (00:13:21) actual threats that the United States (00:13:23) faces, things that are being built by (00:13:25) Russia, by China, by Iran, even by North (00:13:28) Korea, and then really whatever comes (00:13:30) next. There's a lot of there's a lot of (00:13:32) these things. You don't need to be a (00:13:33) superpower to build to build small (00:13:36) drones or cyber warfare tools or really (00:13:39) interesting novel boweapons. Uh you (00:13:42) don't need to be like a US style (00:13:44) hyperpower to try and build a bioweapon (00:13:47) that exterminates your ethnic neighbors (00:13:50) in Africa that aren't quite exactly the (00:13:52) same type of African that you are. Those (00:13:55) are type the types of things that we (00:13:56) need to figure out how to defend (00:13:57) against. and uh the you know the big (00:13:59) five but also the United States in (00:14:02) general was not equipped to work on (00:14:05) those problems. (00:14:05) >> So who just so people understand it (00:14:07) maybe me too but General Dynamics Rathon (00:14:11) uh is thol part of them uh or that's (00:14:14) that that's more rocket (00:14:15) >> it dep it depends on the year you know (00:14:17) it's a (00:14:17) >> Northrup North Yep. I mean what what (00:14:20) happened postc cold war was a (00:14:22) consolidation of about 50 companies of (00:14:26) note into maybe five six seven depending (00:14:30) on you know how at what point you count (00:14:32) the mergers. Yeah. Um there was a (00:14:34) massive amount of consolidation that (00:14:35) that happened and there that was that (00:14:38) was not an accident and it wasn't even a (00:14:40) free market thing. It was actually (00:14:41) directed by the government. Uh there was (00:14:43) there was a dinner called the last (00:14:44) supper where they brought together the (00:14:46) executives from all these top companies (00:14:48) right after the end of the cold war. (00:14:49) >> This is the military-industrial complex (00:14:52) writ large. (00:14:53) >> And there was a dinner (00:14:54) >> literally one dinner (00:14:55) >> called the last supper. (00:14:57) >> It's it's known to this day in the (00:14:59) defense industry as the last supper. And (00:15:02) the the quote the quote from it uh from (00:15:04) the joint chiefs was consolidate or die. (00:15:08) it was they said we will not support a (00:15:10) defense industry of all these different (00:15:12) companies. Uh you need to consolidate (00:15:15) you and I think the theory was we're (00:15:17) going to be spending less on defense. We (00:15:19) won't be able to support all these large (00:15:20) companies. Therefore, you need to become (00:15:22) more efficient. The problem is that (00:15:24) often times consolidation in an industry (00:15:26) leads to less competition (00:15:29) >> and and wild inefficiencies. (00:15:31) >> And there's another thing that it leads (00:15:33) to which is a lot of too big to fail (00:15:35) type of decisions. When you have 50 (00:15:38) companies, it's easy to let the one that (00:15:40) trips and falls because they were (00:15:42) running too fast uh perish. You know, if (00:15:44) someone does a risk if they if they're (00:15:46) taking too much risk, and I'm not even (00:15:48) talking about technical risk. You have (00:15:49) to take technical risk in research and (00:15:51) development. I'm talking about things (00:15:52) like they were paying too much of their (00:15:54) profits out to shareholders as dividends (00:15:56) and so they don't have any cash reserves (00:15:57) to cover to to to cover the shortfall (00:16:00) when when a program is running long. (00:16:02) It's, you know, that type of risk. But (00:16:04) when you what what do you do when you (00:16:05) only have one company in the entire (00:16:08) country that can build fighter jets? (00:16:10) What do you do when there's one company (00:16:12) that is able to build submarines? You (00:16:15) end up in a really gnarly situation (00:16:17) where you either have to prop them up no (00:16:20) matter how bad it gets or you have to (00:16:22) let them die and probably you're you're (00:16:25) now just screwed for decades until you (00:16:27) can restand up that capability (00:16:29) elsewhere. And I think unfortunately the (00:16:31) people who made this centrally planned (00:16:33) decision as as people doing centrally (00:16:37) planned government uh often do they did (00:16:38) not realize what that f the second and (00:16:41) third order impacts of their decision (00:16:42) would be this consolidator die they (00:16:44) didn't understand what it was really (00:16:46) going to bring about which brings me to (00:16:48) this question (00:16:51) the department of war. (00:16:52) >> Yep. (00:16:54) >> Did somebody just actually speak the (00:16:56) truth? So I I don't know if you know (00:16:58) this either, but I was one of the people (00:17:00) who was pushing for the name change (00:17:02) Department of War. (00:17:03) >> I swear to God, I had no idea. Paul, (00:17:05) >> it was actually when I was at Mara Lago (00:17:08) right after Trump won, one of the very (00:17:11) first things that I started pushing was (00:17:14) that we need to be honest about what the (00:17:16) Department of Defense does. And (00:17:18) remember, it used to be the Department (00:17:20) of War. (00:17:20) >> Sure. for a long time. In fact, the (00:17:22) Department of War as the Department of (00:17:24) War has a better track record than the (00:17:25) Department of Defense. (00:17:26) >> And I don't I don't know if that's (00:17:29) totally unrelated. Obviously, there's (00:17:31) more factors than just a name. But when (00:17:35) you should think of it as a sliding (00:17:36) scale of possible names and possible (00:17:38) meanings, (00:17:39) >> um Department of War is at one end. It's (00:17:41) very very clear what it is. Your goal is (00:17:44) to win wars, not necessarily to start (00:17:47) wars. Remember the Department of War, (00:17:49) it's job. They don't get to decide who (00:17:50) they're fighting. That's up to Congress. (00:17:53) That's up to the president. That's up to (00:17:54) the civilian leadership that are (00:17:56) accountable to leaders. You shouldn't (00:17:58) want the people in the Department of War (00:17:59) to be people who are measured people (00:18:02) weighing what might be right (00:18:04) geopolitically. (00:18:05) >> It's not the time for nuance. (00:18:06) >> Their their job is to win wars and to (00:18:08) maintain a posture that will allow them (00:18:10) to win wars so that they so that the the (00:18:12) the civilian leadership has that as you (00:18:15) know the the the strength part of the (00:18:17) peace through strength equation. They (00:18:19) they need to be able to say, "Hey, we (00:18:20) can do this the easy way or the hard (00:18:22) way, and we'd prefer to not fight, but (00:18:24) if there's a fight, the Department of (00:18:26) War will win that war." And then there's (00:18:28) so on at the other end of the scale is (00:18:30) not defense. I would actually say it's (00:18:32) peace. Imagine if you called it the (00:18:34) Department of Peace. This would be very (00:18:35) 1984, I think, say, well, what are we (00:18:38) what is our our business is peace? And (00:18:40) of course, that that's just hiding the (00:18:42) truth. it's wrapping it in this it would (00:18:44) be it would be like farcical to to do (00:18:47) the department of defense in some ways (00:18:49) is is is worse but it is you know maybe (00:18:52) more back towards the middle of the (00:18:53) spectrum um because when you're spending (00:18:56) on defense well is there ever too how (00:18:58) much do you devalue your defense can you (00:19:00) ever spend too much on defense and (00:19:02) shouldn't defense also include things (00:19:03) like fighting you know defending our (00:19:05) country from climate change shouldn't it (00:19:07) also be that we are uh you know that we (00:19:09) are defending ourselves from (00:19:11) misinformation and these things that the (00:19:12) military intelligence community that the (00:19:15) military transportation logistics are (00:19:17) are used for and uh you end up with this (00:19:20) kind of hugely expanding set of duties (00:19:23) and I think that's way more honest to (00:19:26) just say the department of wars purpose (00:19:29) is to fight wars to be ready to fight (00:19:31) wars and every dollar that we spend on (00:19:34) it is a is a dollar that goes towards (00:19:36) that purpose I think I actually think it (00:19:38) would have been harder for the defense (00:19:40) budget to grow as much as it has if you (00:19:42) were more honest about it cuz because (00:19:44) every you said you want to spend money (00:19:45) on education or war fighting ability and (00:19:48) I think it it's a different weight than (00:19:51) if it's def department of defense and of (00:19:53) course imagine you said well what do you (00:19:54) want to spend more on education (00:19:56) healthcare or peace that would be like (00:19:58) the ultim ultimate lie you know we're (00:20:00) just spending more and more on peace so (00:20:02) I'm I'm a huge fan of the name change (00:20:04) the department's trying to get back to (00:20:05) the basics they're trying to get rid of (00:20:07) a lot of crust and graft and (00:20:10) overspending overdoing even (00:20:12) overtraining. You saw they've removed a (00:20:14) lot of training that is not required for (00:20:16) particular occupational specialtities. (00:20:19) They said no people need to focus on the (00:20:20) things that they are doing, not this (00:20:23) long laundry list of other of of other (00:20:25) things. (00:20:26) >> Sure. (00:20:26) >> And so a department that's getting back (00:20:27) to the basics, I think it's good to say (00:20:29) we're we're going you hearkens back to (00:20:31) that time and then even independently of (00:20:34) the history, I think it's better for the (00:20:35) department to have an honest name. (00:20:37) >> I think there's a correlary in language. (00:20:39) So if there's a if there's a department (00:20:41) of defense, where's the department of (00:20:44) offense? (00:20:45) >> Exactly. (00:20:45) >> Who do we call when it's time to be (00:20:47) offensive, belligerent, obnoxious? (00:20:50) >> That's right. Grabby, as clearly we have (00:20:52) been and always will be. So it's a kind (00:20:55) of virtue signal. I mean I mean Carlin (00:20:58) talked about the the general softening (00:21:00) of the language and (00:21:01) >> it attracts a different kind of person (00:21:03) too, which then it's a self-reinforcing (00:21:05) effect. that person comes in, they (00:21:07) change the nature more. The more the (00:21:09) nature changes, the more the type of (00:21:10) person that attracts changes. And so the (00:21:12) organism over time itself reinforces (00:21:14) more and more and more towards whatever (00:21:16) its stated purpose uh is is is purported (00:21:19) to be. (00:21:20) >> To what extent was your interest in (00:21:22) forming and (00:21:27) >> I it's constantly mispronounced. (00:21:29) >> Pronunciation debates don't get settled (00:21:31) by the company. They get settled by by (00:21:32) the by the general public. Eventually, (00:21:34) people decide what something is called. (00:21:36) >> Well, can't we in this case defer to (00:21:37) Tolken? I mean, I'm I'm assuming this is (00:21:39) the case, like the sword of power. (00:21:41) >> In that case, it's probably something (00:21:42) more like and (00:21:45) >> which is elven. Um, and so this is why (00:21:48) I've not I've not I'm actually a fan of (00:21:50) of andil, (00:21:51) >> uh, which is which is closer to the (00:21:53) Elven. Um, (00:21:54) >> so you're a token geek full on? Oh, I'm (00:21:57) I mean I'm a huge token geek, but I'm a (00:21:58) geek with a high enough charisma stat to (00:22:01) know that you can't fight people to (00:22:03) pronounce things the elven way and still (00:22:05) walk out of the room being a well-liked (00:22:07) guy. So, I've I've had to learn that. (00:22:09) >> Well, when you when you when you crack (00:22:11) open the Sylmerelion as your reference, (00:22:14) right? You have to rec Yeah, you have to (00:22:16) recognize, you know, look, I'll debate (00:22:17) it with other with other, you know, (00:22:19) token nerds, but I'm not going to I I (00:22:22) don't need to fight about it with, you (00:22:23) know, like CNBC when they call it when (00:22:26) they call it Andril, right? (00:22:27) >> I just say just let it go. (00:22:28) >> That's right. (00:22:29) >> You bet it is. (00:22:29) >> That's right. That's 100%. (00:22:31) >> You got to pick your battles. (00:22:32) >> To what degree did the inefficiencies (00:22:35) that you mentioned before, especially (00:22:37) regarding cost, (00:22:38) >> Yep. (00:22:39) motivate you. A guy who created Oculus (00:22:44) Rift, sold it for a couple billion (00:22:45) dollars, got himself fired from Facebook (00:22:48) for donating nine grand to some pack (00:22:50) that supported Trump (00:22:52) to to cut to get back into this world. (00:22:56) To what degree was your desire to save (00:22:59) the country some money a motivating (00:23:02) factor? (00:23:03) >> It was a huge motivating factor. And the (00:23:06) way to look at it, you know, it's some (00:23:07) combination of having better having (00:23:09) better capability because we desperately (00:23:11) needed it, but then also saving money. (00:23:14) And these two things actually go hand in (00:23:16) hand. If you don't have efficient (00:23:17) innovation and you don't have efficient (00:23:19) product creation, you'll never be able (00:23:21) to build the right tools to move (00:23:23) forward. In other words, think about it (00:23:25) this way. Spending money is really just (00:23:27) a proxy for something else. I in theory, (00:23:31) you could just spend more and more and (00:23:33) more on defense. And if it was only a (00:23:35) matter of money, I'd actually be okay (00:23:36) with it. Like it wouldn't be great, but (00:23:38) I'd find it hard for me to become (00:23:39) passionate about. It's hard. It's hard (00:23:41) for me to become passionate about think (00:23:42) something that's, you know, just saving (00:23:45) taxpayer dollars, as good as that is. (00:23:47) But you have to remember that money is a (00:23:48) proxy for something. It's a proxy for (00:23:50) someone's time working in a factory or (00:23:53) for a building that had to be (00:23:55) constructed that took two years to build (00:23:57) or for a raw materials that had to be (00:23:59) extracted from the earth, processed, (00:24:01) turned into something else. And so when (00:24:03) you're spending lots of money on (00:24:05) something, ignoring, you know, like, you (00:24:08) know, graft and and fraud. Yeah. Uh it (00:24:11) represents in some way (00:24:14) the efficiency of a product. When when a (00:24:16) product costs twice as much, it's (00:24:17) because you're probably doing it cost (00:24:19) twice as much as it should. It means (00:24:20) it's twice as hard to build as it should (00:24:22) be. Um, and that was the thing that I (00:24:24) was really worried about because if you (00:24:26) get into a war with another superpower (00:24:29) and let's say that you need to start (00:24:30) making fighter jets fast enough to (00:24:32) replace the ones that are being shot out (00:24:34) of the sky and you need to start (00:24:35) building ships fast enough to protect (00:24:38) not just us but all our allies who are (00:24:40) now at threat all over the world. (00:24:42) Even if I have unlimited money like (00:24:45) let's say financially we can print (00:24:46) unlimited money. There is not unlimited (00:24:48) productivity in the country (00:24:50) >> right? Even if you could somehow say (00:24:52) Palmer, here's a hundred trillion (00:24:55) dollars for the defense budget. A (00:24:56) hundred times more. Well, that factory (00:24:58) still takes two years to build. And that (00:25:00) guy who was slowly building that wiring (00:25:02) harness under a cost plus contract that (00:25:04) incentivized him to do it slowly, he's (00:25:07) he he only knows how to build harnesses (00:25:09) in that way, slowly. And and and then (00:25:11) the materials, maybe we selected (00:25:14) materials that are really hard to (00:25:15) process, really hard to mine. Maybe we (00:25:17) don't have enough reserves of them. And (00:25:18) so saving money really means that you're (00:25:21) probably figuring like if I want to (00:25:22) build something for a tenth of the cost, (00:25:24) I'm figuring out how to build faster (00:25:25) factories. I'm figuring out how to train (00:25:27) people faster. I'm trying to and and now (00:25:29) if I give myself that budget, I can (00:25:30) actually do stuff. So yes, I care about (00:25:32) the cost, but more as a proxy for (00:25:36) productivity (00:25:37) total because that's what we actually (00:25:39) need is the ability to make this stuff (00:25:41) if we need to make enough of it to win a (00:25:43) war. And interestingly regarding money (00:25:45) on the other end of things when you run (00:25:47) out of it, it sure seems like war (00:25:50) follows. States that run out of money (00:25:52) and collapse, war does tend to follow. (00:25:54) You get strong men in power. You need (00:25:56) people who need to seize resource seize (00:25:58) resources. They can't do it through (00:25:59) their own productivity and so they look (00:26:01) outward. But I would go a step further. (00:26:03) War can also happen through economic (00:26:06) irrelevance. Uh there's a lot of (00:26:08) countries here. Here's an example. I (00:26:10) don't want to be too mean to the Dutch, (00:26:12) but the Dutch used to have arguably the (00:26:15) world's most powerful navy. (00:26:17) >> Sure. (00:26:18) >> And there's a very reasonable question. (00:26:20) Well, why is that not today? Why is this (00:26:23) tradition of maritime prowess not (00:26:25) continuing into the modern day? Even (00:26:27) through World War I, you still had the (00:26:30) Dutch having a quite powerful navy. And (00:26:32) the answer is not that Dutch is not that (00:26:34) the Dutch have uh, you know, seen this (00:26:36) economic collapse. It's not that their (00:26:38) population has disappeared. It's that (00:26:40) the world grew up around them so much (00:26:43) faster that they became irrelevant. (00:26:45) Nobody destroyed the Dutch Navy. They (00:26:47) just made it not something you have to (00:26:50) think about anymore. They were made (00:26:51) irrelevant. (00:26:52) >> Exactly. Another example of this is (00:26:53) South Korea. (00:26:55) >> South Korea has a uh rapidly declining (00:26:58) birth rate. They're now down to about 67 (00:27:02) births per woman on average. And you (00:27:04) need to be at about 2.1 to meet (00:27:07) replacement rate. And what that means is (00:27:09) that North Korea doesn't need to fight (00:27:11) South Korea to win. All they have to do (00:27:13) is keep having kids and making artillery (00:27:16) shells. And within about two (00:27:19) generations, there's going to be eight (00:27:21) times more North Korean military age (00:27:23) males than South Korean. And I'm not (00:27:25) saying military age males just because (00:27:26) they're going to get into a fight. (00:27:28) Military age males are a reasonable (00:27:29) proxy for economic productivity, right? (00:27:31) You know, these people are who are going (00:27:32) off, they're starting businesses, (00:27:33) they're running factories. And then you (00:27:35) wait four generations. Not that long, (00:27:37) right? You can do four generations (00:27:38) inside of a lifespan. Inside of a (00:27:40) lifespan, you're looking at something (00:27:42) like 16, maybe 20 times as many North (00:27:45) Koreans as South Koreans. So, what (00:27:48) happens when South Korea is like what (00:27:51) happens when there's less than a million (00:27:52) people in Soul? And the answer is it (00:27:55) doesn't matter how smart they are and (00:27:56) maybe they're really rich per person in (00:27:58) Seoul, but they're economically (00:28:00) irrelevant. And so you have to ask, is (00:28:02) the United States going to be able to (00:28:04) justify, let's say, fighting World War (00:28:07) II over a country that has shrunk down (00:28:10) to be smaller than a small town? (00:28:13) >> Your country just turned into the Dutch (00:28:15) Navy. (00:28:16) >> Exactly. And so this is the this is this (00:28:18) is the this is the this is the real rat (00:28:21) race that we're all stuck in whether we (00:28:22) like it or not. But this is also (00:28:24) >> the globalized economy has made it where (00:28:26) you have to hit a certain level of (00:28:28) growth or you will even if you don't run (00:28:31) out of money you become irrelevant. You (00:28:33) become a target and people are there's (00:28:36) this nice idea like well I've heard I've (00:28:38) heard people say I think we would still (00:28:40) stick up for South Korea. I say you (00:28:41) can't possibly predict what the world (00:28:43) looks like a lifetime from now. And I (00:28:45) bet that Americans a lifetime from now (00:28:48) are not willing to send their kids to go (00:28:51) die for a tiny enclave of people they've (00:28:55) never met on the other side of the world (00:28:56) who are economically irrelevant to our (00:28:58) economy. Like there's a reason that we (00:29:00) have such strong ties with South Korea (00:29:01) today because we have incredible (00:29:02) economic bonds in the automotive space, (00:29:05) the resource space, ship building, (00:29:07) semiconductors, displays, TVs, (00:29:09) computers, phones. Where's your phone (00:29:11) made? My phone's made in Korea. Uh if (00:29:14) that's not the case, the world changes. (00:29:18) >> What do you really do in a world where (00:29:22) most of the wars (00:29:24) are so determined by the size of the (00:29:26) populations? (00:29:28) >> Well, you you you have to do what (00:29:31) Anderald is doing. You have to figure (00:29:33) out a way to fight them autonomously. (00:29:35) Well, I mean an important point that I (00:29:37) often make to people is we have this (00:29:39) time advantage on China where we were (00:29:42) prosperous before they were. It's only (00:29:45) an advantage in time. It's hard to (00:29:48) imagine even talk to the most (00:29:50) anti-Chinese, most racist guy you can (00:29:53) think of, (00:29:53) >> Chuck, but let you know go find him and (00:29:57) and and ask him, do you think, and he'll (00:29:59) say, well, America's, you know, better (00:30:01) per person than any China. And so that's (00:30:04) why we're going to beat them in the long (00:30:05) run. And what I would argue with them is (00:30:07) it doesn't matter how convinced you are (00:30:09) of American exceptionalism and (00:30:10) superiority. How can a country of 500 (00:30:14) million people in the long run out (00:30:17) compete economically and military (00:30:19) militarily a country of two or three (00:30:22) billion people? You'd have to believe (00:30:23) that each American is six times as (00:30:26) productive or useful as each Chinese (00:30:29) national. That doesn't seem likely. I I (00:30:32) I I don't even the most anti-Chinese (00:30:34) person is not going to say that they're (00:30:37) that different from us because they (00:30:40) because they aren't. I found I found the (00:30:41) quote. Here we go. (00:30:44) By the way, I brought this up uh (00:30:45) recently on Twitter in September because (00:30:48) there's a lot of people who uh they look (00:30:50) to Tolken and they say, "Oh, I can't (00:30:52) believe Palmer named his company after (00:30:55) something from the Lord of the Rings. I (00:30:56) can't he doesn't understand the novels. (00:30:58) They don't understand that Tolken hated (00:31:00) war, blah, blah, blah." But so do I. (00:31:03) That's the whole point. Tolken was not (00:31:05) someone who uh he was not someone who (00:31:08) was pro-war by any means. the things he (00:31:10) saw in World War I. He made that very (00:31:12) clear. But he did believe in good and (00:31:15) evil and he did believe in wars that (00:31:17) needed to be fought. And he made very (00:31:19) clear that those are the wars you need (00:31:21) to focus on fighting. So here's here's (00:31:23) the quote. This is from CS Lewis. Almost (00:31:25) the central theme of the book is the (00:31:28) contrast between the hobbits or the (00:31:31) Shire and the appalling destiny to which (00:31:34) some of them are called. The terrifying (00:31:36) discovery that the humdrum happiness of (00:31:38) the Shire, which they had taken for (00:31:40) granted as something normal, is in (00:31:42) reality a sort of local and temporary (00:31:45) accident, that its existence depends on (00:31:48) being protected by powers which the (00:31:50) hobbits forget against powers which the (00:31:53) hobbits dare not imagine. (00:31:55) >> And I think that describes a lot of (00:31:58) Americans and a lot of American allies. (00:32:01) They're they're being protected against (00:32:03) powers that they forget, against forces (00:32:06) they dare not imagine, and they forget (00:32:08) that it is a local and temporary (00:32:10) situation. (00:32:11) >> And you look at the map of Middle Earth (00:32:13) and you see where the Shire is. (00:32:15) >> That's right. It's far behind lines. And (00:32:17) so you have you have you have you have (00:32:18) the men the men of Gondorf basically (00:32:20) holding the line, fighting every day. (00:32:22) And this one of the interesting themes (00:32:24) also that I think that Tolken (00:32:26) understood, he didn't do you by the way (00:32:28) Tolken hated allegory. I don't know if (00:32:29) you know this. So it's very difficult to (00:32:31) to say this is an allegory for this. (00:32:33) It's more some of the themes around (00:32:36) universally what is good and what is (00:32:38) evil. You can tease out his worldview to (00:32:40) some degree. (00:32:40) >> We take the times we live in and (00:32:42) immediately juxtapose it to whatever the (00:32:44) story is (00:32:45) >> and it's not quite so simple, (00:32:46) >> right? It's like that's they're not (00:32:47) really Nazis, right? But but one of the (00:32:50) interesting things that he does call out (00:32:51) is the the the is how you have this (00:32:53) human nature for the people who live far (00:32:56) away from Mordor to basically not (00:33:00) believe any of these things. They (00:33:01) literally don't believe in this (00:33:03) invasion. They don't believe that these (00:33:05) monsters exist. Contrast that with the (00:33:07) men who are living literally on the (00:33:09) front lines of this conflict. They are (00:33:11) the last line of defense for the entire (00:33:13) kingdom of man and everyone who lives (00:33:15) behind them. you you they're not they (00:33:18) don't have the luxury of wondering if (00:33:21) these things are real. They don't have (00:33:22) the luxury of of thinking that maybe (00:33:25) evil doesn't exist. They're they're (00:33:26) they're confronting it every day. And I (00:33:28) think it's there's very similar analog (00:33:30) to our modern military. You'll talk to (00:33:32) people who say, "Oh, well, you know, I I (00:33:35) don't think that anyone's truly evil." (00:33:38) And I think that nobody deserves to die. (00:33:42) Uh, nobody deserves to die uh as a as a (00:33:45) result of their actions. You know, we we (00:33:47) need to bring these people, you know, at (00:33:48) at worst. We need to try them and bring (00:33:50) them to justice. (00:33:52) There are a lot of people who have been (00:33:54) on the front lines of conflicts who (00:33:55) could never they don't have the luxury (00:33:57) of that. someone who's been who's who's (00:33:59) looked evil in the eye can't pretend, (00:34:02) well, I think it doesn't exist and (00:34:04) really we shouldn't be killing anybody. (00:34:06) There's nobody who deserves to die. Uh, (00:34:09) >> you get to be an isolationist. (00:34:10) >> That's right. (00:34:11) >> Because you're isolated. (00:34:12) >> That's right. That's right. (00:34:13) >> There's no isolationism in, you know, (00:34:17) Hapsburg or the World War I Europe, (00:34:20) right? You're like, you're sharing a (00:34:22) border with everybody and the knives are (00:34:24) out all of the time. Well, and I I think (00:34:26) too in World War II, we got a really (00:34:29) good bit of immunity uh to these (00:34:31) problems in that every family had (00:34:34) someone who fought. I mean, almost (00:34:36) without exception. The draft was was was (00:34:38) so extensive and the uh the the the (00:34:41) number of volunteers was so broad. (00:34:43) >> There was a homeront. (00:34:44) >> Exactly. And and so people understood (00:34:47) that we were fighting for something that (00:34:48) mattered, that we were fighting for (00:34:50) allies who mattered, that we were (00:34:52) fighting a just war against uh against a (00:34:55) real foe. And I think that as those (00:34:57) people have died off, we now live in a (00:34:59) country where less I think it's (00:35:01) something like I don't want to get this (00:35:03) wrong, but I think it's less than a (00:35:04) third of families in the US have a (00:35:07) family member who is in the military. (00:35:09) And you wonder what does that do to the (00:35:11) character of a nation? And it becomes (00:35:12) much easier for a whole family of people (00:35:14) to become, you know, anti-military. Not (00:35:16) not not anti-war. There's a difference (00:35:18) between these things to become (00:35:19) anti-military, (00:35:21) >> right? (00:35:22) >> In their pursuit of being anti-war. And (00:35:24) it's because they don't know anybody (00:35:26) who's actually been part of it. They (00:35:27) don't know anyone who's been part of (00:35:28) that, at least not directly. Maybe they (00:35:30) did in their past, but they forget. (00:35:32) There's a lot of kids today who can't (00:35:33) remember 9/11. Do you really think that (00:35:36) they're going to be remembering the (00:35:38) lessons of World War II or World War I? (00:35:40) This is why it's such an incredible (00:35:41) quote where it talks, you know, a sort (00:35:43) of local and temporary accident really (00:35:46) describes the relative peace we've had (00:35:49) since the end of World War II till now. (00:35:51) It is a local and temporary accident (00:35:53) that comes as a result of PAX Americana, (00:35:56) this postWorld War II era. (00:35:57) >> I've heard you say in various interviews (00:35:59) that um (00:36:01) >> you'd much rather have our wars and (00:36:04) battles being fought with the kind of (00:36:07) hardware that you're creating. Better to (00:36:10) have the gear over there than our blood (00:36:13) and treasure. (00:36:14) >> That's right. (00:36:15) >> But you've also made the point and I and (00:36:18) I certainly agree with it that (00:36:20) >> if the country itself becomes (00:36:22) disconnected from its military either (00:36:24) consciously or unconsciously, (00:36:26) >> then we're not in the fight in the same (00:36:29) way. And the more disconnected we get (00:36:31) from the fight, the more likely it is (00:36:34) >> the fight will come to pass. And our (00:36:36) goal is to avoid the fight in the same (00:36:38) way that our goal with cars is not to (00:36:41) crash or get tmis playing football. (00:36:45) >> Vis all the unintended consequences and (00:36:47) language that we've talked about. H how (00:36:50) does how are we to think about the (00:36:53) positives of all the tech that's (00:36:55) allowing us to fight without being (00:36:58) there? (00:36:59) >> The US needs to stop being the world (00:37:01) police and start being the world's gun (00:37:03) store. In other words, we shouldn't be (00:37:05) sending our own people to die for other (00:37:07) count's interests. We should be giving (00:37:09) them the tools that they need to (00:37:11) maintain, you know, their existence as a (00:37:14) nation that the US wants to be allied (00:37:16) with. The my analogy I prefer is to turn (00:37:18) them into porcupines. You give them tons (00:37:20) of surfaceto-air missile defense (00:37:21) systems, tons of local local, you know, (00:37:23) local defense systems and and offensive (00:37:26) weapons that make it where you just (00:37:28) don't want to put this guy in between (00:37:30) your teeth because even if you could (00:37:32) win, it's going to be so painful you're (00:37:34) not going to want to. Um, what you're (00:37:37) talking about, you not about, you know, (00:37:38) the the perils of becoming more and more (00:37:41) likely to become involved in these wars (00:37:43) as as the people are pulled out. I think (00:37:45) that's one of the reasons it's so (00:37:46) important to stop being the world police (00:37:48) and instead leave that decision as to (00:37:50) whether to fight up to the people who (00:37:52) are dealing with the consequences. So (00:37:54) like somebody in uh somebody in Ukraine (00:37:56) for example, they're not thinking about (00:37:58) whether or not they'll fight on the (00:38:00) basis of whether or not it's a robotic (00:38:02) system or not, whether they're on the (00:38:04) front line or the backline. For them, (00:38:05) it's much more fundamental. It's (00:38:06) actually a little bit like the pilot (00:38:08) analogy earlier looking at his family. (00:38:09) They're fighting so that their country (00:38:10) exists. (00:38:11) >> They're in it, man. (00:38:12) >> They are they are in it. (00:38:14) I think that that's actually a very (00:38:16) healthy motivation to fight. If if you (00:38:18) are fighting for the existence of your (00:38:20) country and your family and your (00:38:22) business and your culture, you know, (00:38:24) that's the person who should be deciding (00:38:26) whether or not this is a life or death (00:38:28) fight. It shouldn't be another country (00:38:30) on the other side of the world fighting (00:38:32) that for you. And then also, how does (00:38:34) how does that country know when to stop (00:38:35) fighting too, right? I think this is (00:38:36) what we saw in the Middle East. We (00:38:38) fought these wars in the Middle East (00:38:40) long after the people we were supposedly (00:38:42) helping wanted to be fighting them. And (00:38:44) that's of course why the Taliban was (00:38:45) able to come immediately back into power (00:38:48) in Afghanistan. Like within weeks of the (00:38:50) US pulling out, it's because the Afghani (00:38:52) military that you we were propping up, (00:38:54) they what were they fighting for, right? (00:38:57) They we can't want your sovereignty more (00:39:00) than you do. (00:39:00) >> Exactly. And we shouldn't be making that (00:39:02) decision. And so I think these things go (00:39:04) together. If you give people the tools (00:39:06) that they need, I think that they're (00:39:08) going to be motivated not by the fact (00:39:10) that they have robotic weapons to fight (00:39:12) or not fight. It's going to be about the (00:39:13) existence of their countries. I think (00:39:15) countries should generally not be making (00:39:18) decisions about the ex prolonged (00:39:20) existence (00:39:21) or fighting decisions of another nation (00:39:25) that is not their home. Like the US (00:39:26) shouldn't be deciding if Ukraine (00:39:28) continues their war or not. And the US (00:39:30) shouldn't be deciding if Taiwan is going (00:39:32) to defend itself or not. That has to be (00:39:34) their decision. (00:39:35) >> Sure. (00:39:36) >> And I want to give them the tools that (00:39:37) they can use to make that decision. I (00:39:39) believe this partly is a moral thing, (00:39:40) but I I I can make a very practical (00:39:42) argument that I've had with like, you (00:39:44) know, the the kind of real politic uh (00:39:46) GOP side of things in particular where (00:39:48) they say, "Oh, you know, well, Palmer, (00:39:50) sometimes we do need to go abroad and (00:39:52) sometimes we do have interests that we (00:39:54) have." And and my point to them is (00:39:57) >> we don't have the political capital to (00:39:59) do that as a nation anymore. We the (00:40:01) America is done with it. We are we we we (00:40:03) we we burned all of that credibility (00:40:06) that we built up during World War II. We (00:40:07) burned most of it during Vietnam and we (00:40:10) burned up the rest of it in the Middle (00:40:12) East fighting this war on terror. And (00:40:14) you will not convince Americans to go (00:40:17) fight another war, even if it is just (00:40:19) and this is not a judgment on whether we (00:40:21) should. I I would argue I don't think (00:40:24) that America could work itself up enough (00:40:26) to go fight the Nazis again. I think (00:40:29) that if if it came to us, they said (00:40:30) we're gonna have to lose a few million (00:40:31) people and we're gonna have to mobilize (00:40:32) our whole economy, I think we literally (00:40:34) don't have it in us, and that whether (00:40:36) it's spiritually or morally or (00:40:38) politically, what whatever you want to (00:40:39) call it, we will not be able to muster (00:40:43) the political will or capital to make (00:40:45) that happen. And so this is kind of the (00:40:47) remaining solution whether you want it (00:40:48) to be or not. (00:40:49) >> Well, that that worries me. (00:40:52) >> Oh, it's it worries me too. It's (00:40:53) worrisome. I I I want America to be in a (00:40:56) world where if there is a just reason to (00:40:59) rise to the occasion that we're able to. (00:41:01) But I I just don't think that we have it (00:41:03) in us. And I don't think the kids coming (00:41:05) out of modern schools are are are ready (00:41:08) to go do I I don't think that the kids (00:41:10) who are (00:41:12) look at the kids who are who are on the (00:41:15) beaches in Normandy on D-Day. (00:41:16) >> Yeah. (00:41:17) >> Do you think that we have a few million (00:41:19) of those? (00:41:19) >> I do not. (00:41:20) >> That's the problem. (00:41:21) >> I do not. Our trust has also died in the (00:41:24) very institutions that we used to (00:41:26) immediately defer to. (00:41:28) >> Sure. (00:41:28) >> And so building that back is way outside (00:41:31) my pay grade. It has to happen. But I (00:41:34) suspect it won't happen until things go (00:41:36) splat first. Sometimes (00:41:39) Church Hill, right? When you're marching (00:41:40) through hell, keep keep going. You got (00:41:43) to get through it. (00:41:44) >> Historically speaking, you're right. (00:41:45) It's very rare that when when it's very (00:41:48) rare that uh something with a lot of (00:41:50) inertia stops without a sudden impact. (00:41:54) >> Well, that's just (00:41:55) >> because it takes (00:41:55) >> it's very Newtonian of you. (00:41:57) >> That's right. (00:41:58) >> The thing I think we can control, (00:42:01) but I'm not quite sure how and I really (00:42:03) want to get into it with you. Why were (00:42:05) you at that energy summit? How important (00:42:10) is our energy policy in enabling you to (00:42:13) make the tools that we need to prevail (00:42:16) in this coming population (00:42:19) collapse world and um skilled labor (00:42:26) we have to reinvigorate the trades (00:42:28) somehow. That's why I was at that (00:42:29) conference and you made some remarks (00:42:32) with um with Alex that that makes me (00:42:36) think that we might be singing out of (00:42:37) the same himbook in this regard. (00:42:39) >> 100%. So you want to have skilled jobs (00:42:42) in manufacturing, making goods, (00:42:46) processing minerals. I mean you can pick (00:42:48) almost almost anything. Um (00:42:51) it has to be competitive. And I look, (00:42:55) this is another one of those things (00:42:56) where we live in a globalized world. And (00:42:58) so in a world where the US only buys (00:43:00) stuff that's made in the US and we're (00:43:01) not competing against anyone overseas (00:43:03) and we don't need to export overseas, (00:43:05) you could maybe choose a different (00:43:07) strategy. But let's say it's a given, (00:43:09) right? We live in a globalized world. (00:43:11) Other countries get to sell to us and we (00:43:13) are selling to them. If that is the (00:43:15) case, you have to have low energy cost (00:43:18) because it goes into everything. It (00:43:20) drives the cost of everything. If your (00:43:22) energy costs are too high, there won't (00:43:24) be any jobs for skilled labor because (00:43:26) the products that would come out of that (00:43:29) energy cost will be too expensive to (00:43:31) compete against foreign options here in (00:43:33) the US and they'll be too expensive to (00:43:35) export to other countries. They're just (00:43:37) going to choose other people. And so if (00:43:38) you want there to be skilled jobs and if (00:43:40) you want there to be, you know, jobs for (00:43:43) people to like there has to be an (00:43:45) economic impetus for that. And that only (00:43:48) happens if we're competitive on energy, (00:43:50) ideally much cheaper. The interesting (00:43:51) about energy is you can be competitive. (00:43:54) Uh which means like let's say you can be (00:43:55) competitive with Asia and and and Europe (00:43:57) and if but it's also a bit of an easy (00:44:00) button to be hyper competitive. If I can (00:44:02) drop my energy costs down to near zero (00:44:05) and other countries can't do it. Now (00:44:07) they're the ones that are screwed. Now (00:44:09) they're the ones that are saying, "Oh my (00:44:10) god, how do I compete with American (00:44:12) automobiles? their cost of energy is so (00:44:15) low that they're able to extract metals (00:44:17) easier, process metals easier, weld (00:44:19) metals easier, run their factories so (00:44:21) much more easily, and then as a result, (00:44:24) there's all of this demand for skilled (00:44:26) labor. They have this economy built (00:44:28) around all these people doing this. How (00:44:29) can we compete with them when our energy (00:44:30) costs are five times as high? And uh I (00:44:33) think that America is one of the few (00:44:35) countries that is actually well (00:44:37) positioned to turn that knob to zero. (00:44:40) This was the dream of (00:44:42) the early age of atomic power. It was (00:44:45) power that was too cheap to meter. It (00:44:47) was so cheap to make electricity it (00:44:49) wasn't even worth keeping track of how (00:44:51) it was being used. And (00:44:53) >> I think that uh that that dream maybe is (00:44:56) not going to be viable on like a (00:44:58) industrial uh scale like you know an (00:45:00) aluminum smelting plant draws a lot of (00:45:02) power. You it's definitely worth it's (00:45:04) definitely worth running it through a (00:45:05) meter. But I think that we actually will (00:45:07) get to the point where things like (00:45:08) residential power consumption are going (00:45:10) to be such a rounding error that it (00:45:12) literally isn't even worth billing (00:45:13) people. (00:45:13) >> I just walked I just walked through a (00:45:15) data center for the first time. Yep. Big (00:45:16) tour Plano. Our buddies over at uh (00:45:19) Aligned, (00:45:20) >> right, (00:45:21) >> man. I I I talk about metering a thing (00:45:25) like the the the amount of energy that (00:45:27) it's going to take to run those things. (00:45:28) >> And we need and we need to make that (00:45:30) energy. And the and the thing is like (00:45:31) it's going to take everything. like (00:45:33) we're going to need oil, we're going to (00:45:34) need gas, we're going to need nuclear. (00:45:36) I'm I'm a huge nuclear fan. I think we (00:45:38) should, by the way, US has great (00:45:39) reserves of uranium. This is another (00:45:41) thing we have that other countries (00:45:42) don't. We were blessed with incredible (00:45:44) farmland and an incredible river (00:45:46) transportation system. And isn't it just (00:45:48) incredible that as we move into the (00:45:49) atomic age, it turns out we also have (00:45:51) more of the stuff you need for the (00:45:53) atomic age than anybody else? (00:45:55) >> What a what a what what a stroke of luck (00:45:57) that we've just kind of thrown away. And (00:46:00) I mean in California, we're shutting (00:46:01) down our nuclear plants just like (00:46:03) Germany is shutting down their nuclear (00:46:04) plants. We need more and more and more (00:46:06) energy. There was a great bit that AOC (00:46:09) did when the Green New Deal was going (00:46:11) through and originally it didn't include (00:46:13) any subsidies for nuclear power and (00:46:15) somebody asked her, "Hey, why are there (00:46:16) no subsidies for nuclear power? Isn't (00:46:18) that lowering about lowering carbon (00:46:20) emissions?" And she said, "The Green New (00:46:22) Deal isn't about lowering carbon (00:46:23) emissions. It's about fundamentally (00:46:25) restructuring the power of energy (00:46:27) generation. Power and energy generation (00:46:28) away from private corporations into the (00:46:30) hands of the government. I was like, "Oh (00:46:32) my god, that's (00:46:32) >> You just said the quiet part out loud." (00:46:34) >> She said the quiet and actually (00:46:35) >> she's the pilot who just leveled with (00:46:36) the crew. (00:46:37) >> I actually maxed out to AOC. I wrote a I (00:46:40) guess it was like a $5,400 check to her (00:46:42) campaign. Um they ended up returning it. (00:46:44) But my my thought was, you know what, I (00:46:46) want more people who are honest about (00:46:48) what they're doing in politics. I'd (00:46:49) rather have someone who's who's honest (00:46:51) about it um than somebody who's, you (00:46:53) know, talking out both sides of their (00:46:55) mouth and concealing their true their (00:46:57) true intentions. Also, she's from the (00:46:58) Bronx and nobody from my favorite (00:47:00) political part is likely to win the (00:47:02) Bronx. This whole concept of climate (00:47:04) change is predicated on the fact that (00:47:07) nobody wants it to change, but that's (00:47:09) not really true. This is actually, I (00:47:10) think, one of maybe the great (00:47:11) conspiracies of the modern time. The (00:47:14) reality is the the global south has (00:47:16) basically no political power globally (00:47:19) >> and they are the people who will be most (00:47:21) negatively impacted by temperature going (00:47:24) up a few degrees. I'm not saying it's (00:47:25) going to be like a catastrophe that (00:47:27) destroys the world. I'm just saying if (00:47:28) you count the impacts positive and (00:47:30) negative. Sure, (00:47:31) >> they probably come out negative. (00:47:33) However, for a huge chunk of the world, (00:47:36) the temperature going up by a degree or (00:47:37) two is actually really good for their (00:47:39) economy, massive for their economic (00:47:42) stability. Look at all the land that (00:47:44) China is going to unlock for (00:47:45) agriculture. Look at all of the northern (00:47:46) European nations that are going to have (00:47:48) somewhat more agricultural independence. (00:47:50) Russia don't even have to get into it. (00:47:52) It's just obvious. (00:47:53) >> Siberia could. (00:47:54) >> Exactly. My working hypothesis here is (00:47:56) the real reason nobody's doing anything (00:47:59) to uh so-called, you know, stop climate (00:48:01) change is because a lot of people (00:48:02) realize actually (00:48:05) we don't really have an interest in (00:48:06) stopping it until it gets to a certain (00:48:08) point and then all of a sudden we're (00:48:09) going to care. all of a sudden we're (00:48:11) going to do all these things. (00:48:12) >> What kind of sec security clearance do (00:48:14) you have? (00:48:15) >> I think (00:48:18) I am not supposed to get into the (00:48:20) details in a public forum like this, but (00:48:22) I I I have a security clearance and and (00:48:24) I'm and it's it's appropriate for the (00:48:26) level of information access that I have. (00:48:28) >> What level? (00:48:29) >> I I could say I do I have a sec I I do (00:48:31) have a security clearance. (00:48:32) >> I I mean you how how how big is your (00:48:35) company? We're about 4,000 people (00:48:39) kind of like full-time truly internal (00:48:42) people actually maybe closing on 5,000 (00:48:44) and then if you count contractors, (00:48:46) people who are working with us part-time (00:48:48) people you if you count everything it's (00:48:50) it's over 6,000 people. (00:48:52) >> Where will you be in the in the in the (00:48:55) paththeon of raons? Well, I mean, (00:48:58) they're they're a lot bigger than us, (00:49:00) but this gets back to what I talked (00:49:01) about earlier, which is that, you know, (00:49:03) money is a proxy for productivity, and (00:49:04) so is people. You know, h you it's (00:49:06) possible for a company to have 10 times (00:49:09) as many people (00:49:11) >> and still be slower than the first (00:49:13) company. And so, I I I think we're we're (00:49:16) definitely a lot smaller than the big (00:49:17) guys. I mean, they have tens of (00:49:18) thousands or like low hundreds of (00:49:20) thousands of people if you count all the (00:49:22) contractors working for them. Um but the (00:49:24) but the potential (00:49:25) >> potential for you guys to scale (00:49:26) >> the potential for us to scale is is is (00:49:28) there because I I don't need that many (00:49:30) people to do what I do. A lot of what I (00:49:32) do for example on the manufacturing side (00:49:34) a lot of it is automated. And it's not (00:49:35) that it's not that we don't have any (00:49:37) people who are doing manufacturing. We (00:49:38) have thousands of people doing it. It's (00:49:40) just we're augmenting them with (00:49:42) technology so that each of them can (00:49:44) fight with the strength of a hundred men (00:49:46) or in our case build wiring harnesses (00:49:47) with the strength of a thousand men or (00:49:49) you know build composits or sensors or (00:49:51) or or or or rocket motors but uh that (00:49:54) that that's going to be the key. I guess (00:49:55) what I would say is I don't measure the (00:49:56) progress at my company that much in (00:49:58) terms of the people. Uh I it's it's in (00:50:01) our output like what are we making? Are (00:50:02) we successfully making AI fighter jets, (00:50:05) robot submarines, rockets and munitions (00:50:08) and missiles and, you know, self- aiming (00:50:10) rifles and force fields? Like, if if (00:50:12) we're making that stuff, I'm okay if my (00:50:14) company isn't growing is if those people (00:50:15) are becoming more and more and more (00:50:17) capable. (00:50:18) >> And we started with the idea that, you (00:50:20) know, when you understate or overstate a (00:50:22) thing, it's only a matter of time until (00:50:24) the people catch up to your smack. (00:50:26) >> That's right. (00:50:27) >> Right. So here's Bill Gates, you know, (00:50:30) six, seven years after Alexandria at all (00:50:34) told us we had 12 years. He comes out (00:50:37) and he says, "No, I don't think that's (00:50:40) true. I still think it's an issue, but (00:50:42) and 3,000 words later, he's basically (00:50:44) walking a lot of stuff back, right?" And (00:50:46) so all of that kind of happened because (00:50:50) people who genuinely cared about the (00:50:54) future of the climate and the planet (00:50:58) >> overstated it, (00:50:59) >> right? (00:51:00) >> They abused the language. They certainly (00:51:03) understated the benefits too. This is (00:51:05) what Alex makes the point. They don't (00:51:08) talk about (00:51:10) the millions of people in India who will (00:51:12) die if fuel becomes more expensive (00:51:15) because they already don't have enough (00:51:16) to heat their homes. You know, he (00:51:17) doesn't there's (00:51:18) >> three billion people burning dung and (00:51:21) wood. (00:51:21) >> People like to Yeah. And they don't talk (00:51:23) about like the deaths caused by all the (00:51:24) particullet when they burn that dung (00:51:26) because they can't afford fossil fuels. (00:51:28) So yeah, it's it's simultaneously (00:51:30) overstating the negative impact and then (00:51:33) understating or even ignoring the (00:51:35) positive impact when really these things (00:51:37) need to be taken as a balance. And I (00:51:39) think the reason people haven't done (00:51:40) that is because it means taking (00:51:43) responsibility. (00:51:44) Imagine that I'm a imagine I'm like a (00:51:47) you know I'm a Euro Europolitic. (00:51:50) What's an easier position for me to take (00:51:52) to say climate change is a huge problem? (00:51:54) It's not our problem. It's being caused (00:51:56) by the United States and by China and (00:51:59) and by Russia, but it's a big problem (00:52:03) and it it's kind of this act of God that (00:52:05) we just have to try our best to stop. (00:52:08) Who knows if we could stop it or not? (00:52:10) Well, we're going to do our best to be (00:52:13) good moral people and fight the good (00:52:15) fight. Or imagine a position where he (00:52:17) says, (00:52:18) "I believe the global climate should be (00:52:21) exactly this. The average should be uh (00:52:24) should you know the average the average (00:52:25) should be uh 65° Fahrenheit right along (00:52:29) the meridian at exactly this point and (00:52:31) that should be our climate target (00:52:32) because that is what I believe will harm (00:52:35) the right number of people and hurt the (00:52:37) right number of people and people people (00:52:38) the thing is you if you said this think (00:52:40) about what happens next you say (00:52:42) >> it's it's the back of the ticket it's (00:52:43) the truth in the fine print (00:52:44) >> and they say but wait if we do that (00:52:46) those guys who live on the equator in (00:52:48) Africa are going to be destroyed (00:52:50) agriculturally and what's easier to say (00:52:52) to say I hope those people make it or to (00:52:56) say I am willing to trade the prosperity (00:52:58) of that African nation for our (00:53:00) agricultural security and doubling the (00:53:02) number of crop yields that we get from (00:53:04) our from our marshy fields and to to do (00:53:06) that takes respon you have to own it and (00:53:08) take responsibility and so I think the (00:53:10) real reason that people have been (00:53:12) talking about climate change as this you (00:53:14) know huge problem where everyone's (00:53:17) causing it and all we can do is fight it (00:53:18) together is because nobody has to take (00:53:20) responsibility for the winners and the (00:53:22) losers. And I wish we would just be (00:53:24) honest and say, you know what, we're (00:53:25) going to pick up temperature. That's (00:53:26) what it's going to be. There's going to (00:53:27) be winners. There's going to be losers. (00:53:28) We can fight it out in the UN. You know, (00:53:30) that African nation can come and make (00:53:31) their case. Maybe we pay them off and we (00:53:34) say, hey, you know what? You're you you (00:53:36) are going to get turbo screwed here. Uh (00:53:38) we'll give you some some of the surplus (00:53:40) profits of what we're doing here and you (00:53:42) can use it to subsize your economy. I (00:53:44) don't know the answer. I'm not a (00:53:45) politician. But what I do know is that (00:53:46) pretending that we can't control the (00:53:48) climate in both directions is only (00:53:51) possible if you ignore the wealth of re (00:53:55) I have to say one more thing about (00:53:56) forbidden truths. Did you know that (00:53:58) geoengineering is prohibited research at (00:54:01) many universities? A lot of these (00:54:02) universities, what they've done is (00:54:04) they've said you cannot research (00:54:07) geoengineering. And they're saying, (00:54:08) well, because geoengineering is (00:54:10) dangerous, like what if we use (00:54:11) geoengineering and then uh because it's (00:54:14) able to keep the climate perfectly (00:54:16) stable, we start using too many fossil (00:54:18) fuels and we cause ocean acidification. (00:54:21) So let's say temperature is constant, (00:54:22) but there's more carbon dioxide in the (00:54:24) air and so the ocean's more acid. (00:54:27) I agree that's a problem. I care a lot (00:54:29) about marine life. I've spent a bunch of (00:54:31) money conserving marine life and (00:54:33) researching marine life. But the way to (00:54:35) do that is not to prohibit people from (00:54:37) learning about the problem and examining (00:54:39) it. The real reason they don't want to (00:54:40) do it is because it's a it's a forbidden (00:54:42) fact and politically they don't want it (00:54:44) to even enter the equation. That perhaps (00:54:46) climate change isn't about cutting back (00:54:48) on consumption. Perhaps there are other (00:54:50) levers we can pull. It's it's it's as (00:54:52) AOC said, it's not really about changing (00:54:55) the climate. It's about moving the (00:54:58) levers of power out of the hands of (00:55:00) private industry and back into the hands (00:55:01) of the people, which of course means the (00:55:04) bureaucrats. How about this one? (00:55:06) >> Fracking. (00:55:07) >> Yep. (00:55:08) >> Right. I mean, this the ultimate f- word (00:55:11) in the energy game. (00:55:12) >> That's right. (00:55:12) >> My friend Harold Ham more or less (00:55:14) pioneered it. (00:55:15) >> The in the old days, if this were an oil (00:55:18) field, there'd be 50 50 wells. That's (00:55:21) all today. There's one. (00:55:23) >> It goes down a couple miles and it goes (00:55:25) out. (00:55:26) >> And I I don't know. I believe fracking (00:55:30) was the approximate cause horizontal (00:55:32) drilling the proximate cause of energy (00:55:34) independence in this country, right? (00:55:36) >> And we still that that was such a (00:55:39) failure of communication and there's (00:55:41) still so much misinformation around the (00:55:44) reality of what that is. I'm thinking (00:55:46) now about since you mentioned the oceans (00:55:48) um poly metallic nodules. (00:55:51) >> Oh yeah. (00:55:52) >> Oh my deep sea mining. (00:55:53) >> God it I mean look we just got to go get (00:55:57) them. (00:55:57) >> We've got to get them. It's a what is it (00:55:59) a 16 to20 trillion dollar industry. You (00:56:02) got every this is copper, nickel, cobalt (00:56:05) and manganese in a single potatoiz (00:56:08) nodule (00:56:08) >> and also a lot of rare earths as well. (00:56:11) >> And they're there a few months from now (00:56:13) it's going to be headline. We're we're (00:56:14) going to have the same giant (00:56:16) conversation about the ethical moral (00:56:19) dilemma of going down 5,000 mters and (00:56:21) scooping up these rocks and the (00:56:23) Meanwhile, there's the rainforest or (00:56:26) what's left of it. (00:56:27) >> That's right. Well, actually, here's (00:56:28) here's another thing that's there. We're (00:56:29) going to be doing all of this uh you (00:56:31) know, debating whether or not we should (00:56:32) be doing this mining. Meanwhile, Europe (00:56:35) and America are going to keep paying for (00:56:37) Russian minerals that are only in Russia (00:56:39) that we could be getting off of their (00:56:40) supply. Same thing with oil and gas. I (00:56:42) mean, Germany's given tens of billions (00:56:45) of dollars to Russia. They've given them (00:56:47) more oil and gas money than they've (00:56:49) given Ukraine's arm support. And so, (00:56:51) like, the these things have a real (00:56:53) trade. When you say, "We're not going to (00:56:55) drill from oil for more oil and gas." (00:56:57) What you're really saying is, "We're (00:56:59) going to fund Russia's war in Ukraine by (00:57:01) giving them money for their oil (00:57:02) instead." That's actually the real trade (00:57:05) that's going on. But it's it's kind of (00:57:06) out of sight, out of mind. That's (00:57:08) another country. I need your uh opinion (00:57:10) or maybe even your advice if you want to (00:57:12) give it. Uh I'm I've been at this what (00:57:16) 17 years now. Um trying to reinvigorate (00:57:18) the trades. (00:57:19) >> That's right. (00:57:19) >> Right. And we've had a huge amount of (00:57:21) progress. In fact, this year we had 10 (00:57:23) times the number of applications as we (00:57:25) did the year before. (00:57:26) >> Wow. That's extraordinary. (00:57:27) >> I'm not doing anything different. (00:57:28) Something's tipped right now. I look at (00:57:30) the maritime industry. You know, they (00:57:32) need 250,000 welders and electricians (00:57:34) for submarines. there's going to be (00:57:36) another 100,000 for the deep sea mining, (00:57:38) automotive, energy, AI, so forth. Like (00:57:42) the stakes are really real. And I'm a (00:57:44) little freaked out because after that (00:57:46) conference where I met you, I went to a (00:57:48) few others. (00:57:49) >> Yep. (00:57:49) >> And um the people who are helping us (00:57:52) with this national campaign are not the (00:57:55) people who I thought would call. It's (00:57:58) >> it's uh it's Wells Fargo. It's it's (00:58:02) Larry Frink of all people, Black Rockck, (00:58:05) it's Fiser Investments. He's big in (00:58:07) >> the whole ESG network. (00:58:08) >> It's in it's crazy. But but I think what (00:58:13) they've done is they've they've looked (00:58:15) into their own portfolios and they've (00:58:18) seen a lot of companies who are just (00:58:22) crapping up their backs, man. They're (00:58:23) scared. (00:58:24) >> Yep. (00:58:24) >> They don't know where these people are (00:58:25) coming from. So the question is, I (00:58:28) believe we need a national campaign. (00:58:30) Certainly a series of statewide (00:58:32) campaigns. I think I can get the money (00:58:35) necessary from some unlikely places, but (00:58:38) it's still (00:58:40) this is the Manhattan project in my (00:58:42) world. (00:58:42) >> Y (00:58:43) >> who do I talk to? How do I get the (00:58:45) attention of the people who are truly at (00:58:48) the grown-up table who who I know want (00:58:50) to help but are having a hard time (00:58:53) looking at the difference between a big (00:58:56) persuasive campaign (00:58:58) versus another scholarship (00:59:00) >> Sure. (00:59:01) >> program. (00:59:01) >> Sure. (00:59:02) >> Like where where do you think that (00:59:05) communication needs to be? (00:59:07) >> That's interesting. like what you're (00:59:08) talking about a persuasion campaign (00:59:10) versus let's say just another (00:59:11) scholarship is actually probably a (00:59:13) better use and more productive use of (00:59:14) money and you don't have to pay for (00:59:16) someone's education so much as convince (00:59:18) them hey the US is back this stuff is (00:59:20) real the vibe shift is is underway the (00:59:23) stock market goes up when the president (00:59:25) says that he's going to hit 6% GDP (00:59:27) growth partly because people just (00:59:29) psychically decide well if he's saying (00:59:31) that and they're going to make policy (00:59:32) that makes that happen that means things (00:59:34) are going to go well people also choose (00:59:35) careers on this high schoolers decide (00:59:37) what their degree is going to be in this (00:59:38) like people go gold rushes are real and (00:59:41) you can create them by saying that (00:59:43) they're going to happen. (00:59:44) >> There's gold and then Lar Hills. (00:59:46) >> Exactly. And and and so a persuasion (00:59:48) campaign of what you're talking about (00:59:50) probably makes a lot of sense. It's (00:59:51) probably effective. However, my initial (00:59:54) read is you're stepping into a poisoned (00:59:55) environment. You're stepping into a (00:59:57) world where one of the big problems that (01:00:01) this government has been trying to solve (01:00:03) is that there's been tons of money going (01:00:05) out to these kind of softer harder to (01:00:08) measure things and uh you know like gen (01:00:10) gender gender awareness in Uganda and oh (01:00:13) isn't it good that we do this or helping (01:00:15) helping kids learn to code in Rwanda and (01:00:18) the problem is those campaigns (01:00:22) so many of them were they were just (01:00:24) grafted and fraud and badly executed on (01:00:27) top of it. (01:00:28) >> Badly executed. You things didn't things (01:00:30) that were meant to be built didn't get (01:00:32) built. Things that were meant to happen (01:00:33) didn't happen. And there were a lot of (01:00:34) things that we shouldn't have been (01:00:35) doing. Like I'm kind of glad it didn't (01:00:37) work because they were ridiculous (01:00:38) propaganda campaigns anyway. So (01:00:40) unfortunately, you're stepping into a (01:00:41) poison. It's like a poisoned well (01:00:43) problem. You have people who have made (01:00:45) these things look like they're bad on (01:00:47) its face. And so I I can tell you (01:00:49) there's people in government who would (01:00:50) 100% agree with what you're saying. And (01:00:52) there's others who on their face are (01:00:53) like, "No, we are not going to use (01:00:55) government funds to do these types of (01:00:57) hard to measure." You a scholarship you (01:01:00) can measure. Did the kid go to school? (01:01:01) Did he get his degree? Did it work or (01:01:04) not? (01:01:04) >> Yeah. But I could also measure, do we (01:01:06) want South Korea to make our ships? (01:01:10) >> Yep. (01:01:11) >> Right now, it's an academic question. We (01:01:14) need them to. (01:01:15) >> That's right. (01:01:15) >> We can't do it. (01:01:16) >> We don't have the capacity. (01:01:17) >> We don't talk to Ballinger. talk to you (01:01:20) know I mean these are your I'm asking (01:01:23) you this question because (01:01:24) >> my current theory there by the way is we (01:01:25) should maximize our strengths we do for (01:01:27) example make some good power trains (01:01:29) electronics sensors like I think we (01:01:31) should basically say hey let's work (01:01:32) together we're going to build parts of (01:01:33) the superructure we're going to build (01:01:34) power plants we're like the power plants (01:01:37) of these ships like we should be let the (01:01:39) US has a lot of friends around the world (01:01:41) let's uh let's let's uh do stuff (01:01:43) together of course in the long run we (01:01:44) need to be building our own ships it's (01:01:46) crazy that we're not (01:01:46) >> yes I I keep coming back to the (01:01:48) electrician I ran into in Plano in a (01:01:51) data center who had been poached from (01:01:53) four other projects in the last year. (01:01:56) Yep. (01:01:56) >> He's making 230 grand a year. (01:01:59) >> He's 26 years old. He has zero debt. (01:02:02) Yep. (01:02:02) >> He learned the skill he has over like a (01:02:05) 14-month period. (01:02:07) >> Incredible. (01:02:07) >> And he's working and he his first kids (01:02:10) on the way. And (01:02:11) >> and this is a young guy. His career is (01:02:13) only going up from here. eventually he's (01:02:15) going to like he's not even into his (01:02:17) real earning years. (01:02:18) >> I have to find a way to make that kid a (01:02:24) household name. (01:02:25) >> Yep. (01:02:26) >> Times 100,000. (01:02:29) The there there are a lot of men and (01:02:31) women who are who are prospering in and (01:02:33) around your space as a result of (01:02:35) mastering a skill. Um now American (01:02:38) manufacturing is really poised in a good (01:02:40) way because I think people have realized (01:02:42) there is a cost to outsourcing and (01:02:45) export. I mean you've been on this for (01:02:46) decades so like it's not new to you but (01:02:50) uh I think a lot of people are truly (01:02:52) just now coming to terms with the cost (01:02:55) of exporting all of your critical (01:02:57) industry around the world and what it (01:02:59) looks like to be a country that can't (01:03:00) make anything itself. (01:03:01) >> That's it. And it's scary. And I think (01:03:03) look if I had an alarm bell here I would (01:03:05) ring it. And I I was in the room with (01:03:07) Howard Lutnik and Alex Karp and 36 other (01:03:10) CEOs and the president of the United (01:03:12) States in Pittsburgh. Yep. (01:03:14) >> When they when they announced $92 (01:03:17) billion earmarked and allocated for data (01:03:20) centers in Pennsylvania alone. (01:03:21) >> And there I am like just Debbie Downer (01:03:26) going, "Hey man, you're (01:03:27) >> you're talking about creating 2 million (01:03:29) jobs in manufacturing and there are (01:03:30) 482,000 open jobs right now we can't (01:03:33) fill. What are we going to do? (01:03:34) >> Where they going to come from?" Right. (01:03:36) And now you've talked about population (01:03:37) collapse. You've talked about all these (01:03:39) other things. And man, it's all real. (01:03:43) >> Well, it's all tied together. I mean, (01:03:44) I'm a big pronatalist, too. I think (01:03:46) everyone needs to have a lot more kids. (01:03:48) >> Congratulations on yours. You got (01:03:51) >> I've got one so far, but I've not I have (01:03:53) not I haven't even hit replacement (01:03:54) rates. So, I'm I'm keeping I' No, if I (01:03:57) I'm If I If I don't hit replacement (01:03:59) rate, then uh then I'm I'm a I'm a real (01:04:01) hypocrite. Uh but yeah, like I said (01:04:03) earlier, the US can't compete with (01:04:05) countries that have billions of people (01:04:08) if we're only hundreds of millions of (01:04:09) people. And so we we we we got to keep (01:04:11) up the pace. You're very interesting as (01:04:14) you know, but the whole Shire Hobbit (01:04:17) ring of doom juxtiposition industrial (01:04:20) military complex, the complexities of (01:04:22) our language and our airline pilots and (01:04:25) AOC and the ability. (01:04:26) >> We covered a lot of good stuff. We we (01:04:28) made good time across a lot of ground. (01:04:31) I'll put this conversation against um (01:04:34) against most. (01:04:35) >> It's fun too because you you usually (01:04:37) people just you know they they want to (01:04:38) they want they they want to talk most (01:04:40) people they want to talk about uh they (01:04:42) want to talk about fighter jets you know (01:04:43) and that's it. It's but it's fun to be (01:04:45) able to talk about these bigger picture (01:04:46) questions. (01:04:47) >> I can't bear to ask you questions that (01:04:49) you that that I know you've been asked a (01:04:50) thousand times. Is this this was a um so (01:04:54) I' I've done two events recently where (01:04:57) um instead of sending me I sent a robot (01:04:59) and I teleaoperated it using a VR (01:05:01) headset. (01:05:02) >> Um and I'm I've been getting away with (01:05:04) it so far. Eventually the novelty is (01:05:07) going to wear off and people people are (01:05:08) going to want me to start showing up in (01:05:10) person again. But man, what a timesaver (01:05:12) when you can pull it off. And think how (01:05:14) much I'm saving in terms of carbon (01:05:16) emissions by not flying. (01:05:17) >> Just clone yourself, man. How hard could (01:05:19) it be? Look at that. So, where where is (01:05:21) this creature? Where did you send it? (01:05:23) >> So, there were two two events that I've (01:05:25) done. There was the reindustrializ (01:05:27) conference and then this was actually (01:05:29) here actually uh at the at the Newport (01:05:31) Beach Country Club uh for for for an for (01:05:34) a recent Senate event. (01:05:35) >> This is home for you, right? (01:05:36) >> Yeah, this is home. Yeah, this is home (01:05:37) for me. I live in Newport Beach. There (01:05:39) are so many things that the United (01:05:41) States needs to do on the energy front (01:05:43) if we're going to be competitive (01:05:45) globally. And we have all the pieces. (01:05:47) And the good news is it looks like this (01:05:48) administration is going to allow nuclear (01:05:50) power to really come roaring back. And (01:05:53) that's that that's like that one piece (01:05:55) alone is maybe half the puzzle. (01:05:57) >> Do you imagine like small (01:06:00) reactors everywhere? (01:06:02) >> So I I think that particularly for like (01:06:05) things like factories, data centers, it (01:06:08) doesn't make sense to have a grid that (01:06:10) makes energy in one place and then ships (01:06:12) it, you know, across the city to the (01:06:15) building that uses it. They should just (01:06:17) have on premises uh (01:06:20) power generation. Like they should have (01:06:21) small nuclear plants and they that way (01:06:23) they're also not degrading everyone (01:06:25) else's grid. Like right now if you pull (01:06:27) from the grid you're pulling all that (01:06:28) power that's power that you like you now (01:06:31) have to overbuild the grid to handle (01:06:33) things that it was meant to like (01:06:34) people's TVs or you know running their (01:06:36) air conditioning. And then you add in (01:06:38) this massive constant base power load (01:06:41) that they were never designed or (01:06:42) intended to take. Yeah. Um the other (01:06:45) problem is the grid has also become a (01:06:46) political vector. So like in California (01:06:49) most of our energy cost is not the cost (01:06:51) of making the energy. It's all of the uh (01:06:54) political pulls that have been placed on (01:06:56) top of it in form of taxes. So (01:06:58) California has like what is it like 32 (01:07:00) cents a kilowatt hour. The national (01:07:01) average is like 8 cents a kilowatt hour. (01:07:03) There's some places that are approaching (01:07:05) two or three cents per kilowatt hour if (01:07:07) they've got nearby sources. (01:07:08) >> Not so different at the gas pump really. (01:07:09) Look, so like the whole point of a grid (01:07:11) is that it's supposed to be uh cheaper (01:07:15) to make power cheaper and more reliable (01:07:18) to make more power at a central site and (01:07:20) then distribute it to all of the end (01:07:22) users. So why is it that I can run a gas (01:07:25) generator at my house at a scale of just (01:07:28) my house and it's cheaper than buying it (01:07:31) from the grid? like that. So, like this (01:07:33) is another reason I'm a big fan of of of (01:07:35) of factories and and uh data centers (01:07:38) building their own building their own (01:07:40) power on board and for people being okay (01:07:42) with that. It means you can't have (01:07:43) somebody temporarily get into power and (01:07:45) say, "All right, I'm going to basically (01:07:48) put all of you under my thumb." Because (01:07:49) it's not just the cost, it's also the (01:07:51) threat. You can say, "Oh, I just want to (01:07:53) tax energy more equitably." But what (01:07:56) you're really doing is saying local data (01:07:58) center, if you don't do what I want (01:08:00) politically and if you support my (01:08:01) candidate, I'm going to make your cost (01:08:03) go through the roof. You're no longer (01:08:04) competitive with the data centers in the (01:08:06) next state and so your whole company is (01:08:07) going to go bankrupt because you can't (01:08:09) compete with them on AI cost per token (01:08:11) prices. Like that's a lot of power to (01:08:14) give to a politician. So I think energy (01:08:16) generation needs to become just like a (01:08:18) lathe, just like a screwdriver. It's (01:08:21) just another tool you have at your (01:08:22) factory that you use to get the job (01:08:24) done. Are you in a world now where (01:08:27) people go to a thing to like get a book (01:08:29) or watch a dock or something that you've (01:08:32) done? I didn't even think to ask you. (01:08:34) >> If you like video games, check out mod (01:08:37) retro.com. This is my side project I've (01:08:40) been running since I was 15 years old. (01:08:42) >> Yeah. (01:08:42) >> And we are doing things like making (01:08:45) modern heirloom grade tributes to the (01:08:48) most important game consoles of all (01:08:49) time. For example, we have a uh we have (01:08:52) a clone of the Nintendo Game Boy. It's (01:08:54) called the Mod Retro Chromatic. It plays (01:08:56) Game Boy and Game Boy Color Games. It (01:08:58) has an magnesium aluminum alloy shell. (01:09:00) It's the same metal that's used in some (01:09:02) of our attack drones at Android. Uh the (01:09:04) lens on it is not a piece of plastic (01:09:06) over the screen. It's a lab grown sheet (01:09:08) of sapphire crystal. It's the largest (01:09:11) piece of sapphire crystal on any product (01:09:13) anywhere in the world. And we're about (01:09:15) to launch a new product, the M64, the (01:09:17) Mod Retro 64, which plays Nintendo 64 (01:09:20) games. Uh we've got some other stuff (01:09:21) coming. Anyway, it's it's it's $199. I (01:09:25) lose money on it. Uh, so I I've I've (01:09:27) used my money to deeply subsidize it (01:09:29) because I really like this type of (01:09:32) stuff. And we've been re we've been (01:09:33) releasing new Game Boy games, (01:09:35) re-releasing old Game Boy games, and (01:09:37) even doing new releases of Game Boy (01:09:39) games developed in the '9s that never (01:09:41) came out. So, GameStop just launched a (01:09:44) new uh a new game in house. We just (01:09:46) relaunched Croc back for its 25th (01:09:49) anniversary. Um, we're doing Rayman. We (01:09:52) did a thing with Atari. We brought back (01:09:53) three of their '90s classics. Uh, you (01:09:55) can buy those in a set. And if you (01:09:57) scroll down a little bit, you can see we (01:09:58) have the Chromatic available in a whole (01:10:00) bunch of different colors. So, if I'm (01:10:03) going to get a shameless plug, that's my (01:10:04) this is my shameless plug. It's there's (01:10:06) no economic reason for something like (01:10:08) this to ever exist. But I but I really (01:10:11) wanted it to happen. And in fact, it (01:10:14) even has a custom screen. This is the (01:10:16) lowest resolution screen you'll find in (01:10:18) the world right now. It's 160x 144 (01:10:21) pixels. So it's about 80 times less (01:10:24) pixels than your iPhone display. 80 (01:10:26) times less. (01:10:27) >> What a delightfully shitty product, man. (01:10:29) >> That's that that that's how you make it (01:10:31) authentic. You know, we didn't want to (01:10:32) be scaling onto a modern screen. We had (01:10:34) to recreate (01:10:36) >> that old screen. And so uh yeah, that's (01:10:38) that's I I wasn't even expecting, but (01:10:40) yeah, that's my that's my that's my (01:10:41) shameless plug. Go check out (01:10:42) modetro.com. Check out what we're doing (01:10:44) there. It makes a great gift for dads. (01:10:46) Makes a great gift for husbands. Makes a (01:10:49) great gift for boyfriends. Women like it (01:10:51) too, but mostly but mostly this is maybe (01:10:54) one of those hidden truths. I'll tell (01:10:56) you it's like 90% men that are buying (01:10:59) this stuff. (01:11:00) >> Yeah. Well, I'll tell you another hidden (01:11:02) truth. You are some kind of geek, Palmer (01:11:04) Lucky. I I appreciate (01:11:05) >> Come and play Dungeons and Dragons with (01:11:07) me and my crew sometime where we we play (01:11:08) every week D and D night is tomorrow. (01:11:11) So, I'm a I'm a I'm a I'm I'm a wizard (01:11:12) named Nilm 5 from from Atlantis trying (01:11:16) to figure out what happened to my (01:11:18) country. Anyway, (01:11:19) >> that's it. This is this is the guy with (01:11:21) his finger on the button creating the (01:11:24) next generation of weapons uh to protect (01:11:27) uh truth, justice, and the American way. (01:11:30) On behalf of uh 330 million of our (01:11:32) compatriots, much obliged. (01:11:34) >> Thank you. If you like what you heard (01:11:37) and even if you don't you pretty please (01:11:42) subscribe. (01:11:43) >> Well, I hate to beg and I hate to plead, (01:11:46) but please pretty freaking please (01:11:52) sub. (01:11:54) Please subscribe.