“People DON’T KNOW What’s Coming!” Prepare For The CHANGING WORLD ORDER | Ray Dalio

New York City's becoming more dangerous. Chicago's becoming more dangerous. Places Chicago San Francisco's becoming more dangerous. Um you're seeing people leave some places for other places. The greatest danger for most people is failing to look at um the things that could be harmful to them. Ray Dalio, welcome back to the show. Great to be on your show again. Dude, I'm always excited to talk to you. This is an incredible phase that you're going through in your life where you're taking all of this incredible information that you've gleaned through your years in the financial markets. We're living through a truly unprecedented time of uncertainty, disruption. I think a lot of people are really afraid in terms of what's going to happen to their money with inflation. Are we headed towards hyperinflation? Uh and in your book, The Changing World Order, Principles for Dealing with a Changing World Order, and the video by the same name, which has blown up, um I think the reason people are reacting to that is everybody has a sense that something is happening, something that they don't understand how to navigate. And then along comes your book, your video, which really gives a lot of context to that. And so while in by the end of this talk, I really want to give people a sense of what they can do and what we can all do to forestall the essential decline of an empire, which is what we're living through right now. And but first to get to that, I think we have to understand your concept of this is just another one of these. And by looking back over the last 500 years of history, we can see this cycle that empires go through, and the US is just the most recent one to go through it. If you don't mind walking us through a a thumbnail sketch of the six stages um of a an empire, And then we'll talk about where we're at now and what we can do. Okay. Um, it let's start, um, by describing it's something like the new order to the next new order. And what I mean a new order, I mean a new system, right? Like, um, the world order was made in 1945 at the end of a war. And, um, a civil war can begin a new order inside of a country. Like, the Chinese Civil War began their new order inside the country 1949. And so, that's like a new beginning. And what they always come out of wars. And a war is a fight for how the system works. So, we'll begin there. Um, after the fight of how the system works, it's a it's a great leveler. It gets rid of a lot of the debts, um, and it starts over. And then there's a new power. Um, in the United States, the new world order, it was an American world order cuz the United States won World War II. It had 80% of the world's gold. Gold was money. It had the dominant, uh, military power. It had nuclear weapons. And because of that, we began the American world order. We literally got people together in a room and said, "Hey, we're going to be entering literally a new order." And they lay things out. It was in Bretton Woods, if I'm not mistaken. And so, I want people to understand like this is people they get together and they actually decide this stuff. That's right. They carve up the world. Here are the borders. This one this group gets this piece and so on and so forth. And then they begin. And during And And by the way, this has happened repeatedly throughout history. And so, they start off with those new rules of the game, and you enter a period of peace and prosperity. And it's peace because nobody wants to fight the dominant power. The dominant power won, and you don't want to fight the dominant power. And so exhausted. I mean, and this is one thing you're careful to point out in the book is like war is horrendous. And so part of what creates that period of stability is just we've seen so many people die. There's so much destruction of life, wealth, which is why, you know, the stakes are high when you're talking about this. That's right. And there's a change in psychology that really that you're dealing with because quite often these things take place. They take a generation or more to take place, a lifetime. And the people who enter the war do so so boldly. But everybody who enters the war and then goes through the war wish they never went through the war because it's so terrible. But they come out, as you point out, and then they're uh the war is over, they want peace, they want productivity, and so on. And then they and it's a great leveler, less wealth gaps, and so on. And they work well together, and they build a period of peace and prosperity that is a long period of peace and prosperity. But during that peace and prosperity more and more prosperity takes place, and they increasingly bet on that prosperity, and people get more in debt. And so you see the debt levels rise, and you see the um naturally, as prosperity comes, it comes in uh unequal ways, and some get richer than others. And so wealth gaps rise, and then those wealth gaps increasingly create opportunity gaps because the rich people have more resources to educate their children and give them the benefits. And so that happens over a period of time while the economy gets more indebted. And of course, as time progresses, other countries also rise. Those may be that even lost the war, like Germany and Japan. They rebuild and they become competitors. And so what was a unique power of having won the war becomes less unique as there are more as there was more competition. And then you get a new generation of people who have a different mentality. They get used to those those benefits and so on. And they are let's say less cautious. Less cautious in their financial behavior and so on. And so the classic ingredient also is that that country that wins the war also has the world's reserve currency. Because okay, you you need a currency to transact internationally. It's like a language. You need a language to transact internationally. And the winner of the war gets the world's reserve currency because everybody thinks that's the most stable and they also want to save in it. And so when you have a world that's important to to really double click on. There's two things here that I want to go a little bit deeper. So one of the most profound things I've ever heard you say and this really hit me is that there's a reason this repeats over and over and that reason is there's only so many personality types. And so people just are the way they are. And so if you put them into these predictable situations, they're going to react in predictable ways which makes this whole cycle incredibly predictable. You can go back, you know, you did a detailed analysis of the previous 500 years and you just see this same thing happening over and over because hey, the money's coming in. It's the roaring 20s, but the roaring 20s are going to lead to the 30 style depression basically every time because people are overextending themselves because they are they are making the faulty prediction that if I look back at the history of my life because it has always been this way, it's always going to be this way. Not zooming out and seeing, "No, no, no. You're in a bigger cycle that repeats over and over and over." And the reason I want to hammer this home is since by the end of this, everybody watching, I want you guys to know what to do uh to prepare yourselves for this. This is Ray's whole point is to make sure that people are actually prepared, but you have to buy into the fact that this is predictable. Otherwise, you're going to ignore the advice. And so for me, recognizing that people just are a certain way and that thusly given similar circumstances, they will react in similar ways. And so that was I think really important for me to acknowledge. Yes, and and you could see it not just in the cycle taking place over and over, but if you deal with the cause-effect relationships, they're logical. So for example, if you have bad financial conditions as measured by if you're spending a lot more than you're earning and you don't have a lot of savings, you have more debt or liabilities than savings, you're not in a good financial position. That's a fact. And if you have a downturn, if the country as a whole experiences that problem, and you have a lot large wealth gap, you are likely to have a fight. I mean, so these cycles don't just take places cycles, they take places conditions that are measurable. And so in the book, it was very important to me not to just use words and theories of how this thing works, but to actually show the measures. What is the wealth gap? What is the amount of debt? What is the amount of printing? What are the conflicts that are taking place? Because then you can monitor those things. All right, my friend. I have a big announcement. My incredible and talented wife Lisa is about to launch her new book, Radical Confidence. In it, she has managed to perfectly capture the process of how to go from feeling lost and insecure to taking control of your life and doing amazing things despite feeling fear. Sometimes a lot of fear. Now, let me tell you, nobody knows Lisa better than me, but when I read Radical Confidence for the first time and heard her describe what it was like for her to go from having these big exciting dreams as a kid to then adult scheduling her life around the TV shows that she wanted to watch or how lonely and isolated she felt instead of pursuing her dreams, it was brutal for me. I would never say though that it was worth it for her to go through all of that just so that she could write something down that allows others to avoid it, but I will say that at least she was able to capture the strategies that she used to break out of that rut, find her voice, and begin doing incredible things despite her insecurities and fears that she wasn't going to be good enough to achieve great things. So, while it hurts me to know the dark place that Lisa went through, I really am excited for people who are going through something similar right now to read this book. Radical Confidence is an instruction manual for how to become the hero of your own life even when you're scared to death. Look, I know better than just about anybody how easy it is to get off track in life or to just not have yet found your calling, and it's even easier for people to feel so insecure and unprepared that they don't even want to pursue the things that they want. But, what Lisa shows people in Radical Confidence is that the radical part is that you can accomplish extraordinary things even when you feel fear. That's what radical confidence is. Being afraid and unsure and having a toolkit that allows you to still make massive progress. Pre-order your copy today because if you act now, you can claim the bonuses that Lisa has created for you at radicalconfidence.com. They're only available if you pre-order, so act now. Then, once you've done that, we'll get back to today's episode. All right, guys, read the book and get ready to be the hero of your own life. Peace out. Yeah, so this is where it starts to get a little unnerving. So, okay, you recognize these are patterns, they happen all over history and they repeat. And then, because you're plotting all of this and you can look at these leading indicators that you talk about pretty extensively in the book. There's 18 that you go into detail. A couple of times you break them down into ones that maybe are more important than others, but as you peg, so if there's six stages to this arc, um you've said that the US is in stage five. And to give everybody an idea, stage six is basically revolution, war, it's the the violent restructuring of the economy. And whether we're in the seventh inning of stage five or the third inning, I don't know, but the fact that we're in stage five, which is obviously where there's massive internal conflict, which rings way too true. Um and the massive disparities, which you did a really cool graph in your video where you show income inequality and that gap between the lines you filled in with resentment. And so you have growing resentment, you get populists on the left and the right, you get internal conflict, people fighting, and then you get a potential external power looking at you going, "They're weakened by their internal conflict." And that historically is when a rising power makes its move. Yeah, so I think there are three things three big forces to keep your eye on. And when you see them in their cycle, then it's clear. First, are you earning more than you are spending? And it Do you want people to look at this at an individual level or at a country level? Well, you can have both. I want them to look at it as the country, but the country's nothing more than the aggregate of the people. Mhm. And so, um when you look at those three forces, I want to make sure that they're clear and you could align them up and you could see where you are. Is the country earning more than it's spending and building savings? Or is it spending more than it is earning and creating debt? Because one man's debts are another man's assets. And when somebody is holding those assets and they're producing a lot more of that money and debt, they go down in value. Money goes down in value as they produce it to produce that buying power. And then that gets people um bad returns, bad in it produces a higher amount of inflation, and it produces bad returns for holding debt or bond So, in other words, cash or bonds, and then people get out of cash and bonds, and that produces rising interest rates while there's rising inflation. And that produces stagflation. So, I want them to get the mechanics of that because that's happening now. You could see it. This is not controversial. We are producing a lot of debt. We're spending a lot more than we're earning. And as a result, they're printing a lot of money, and the printing of a lot of money creates a lot of inflation. And with that inflation, then nobody wants to, you know, cash is trash, you don't want to hold cash, um and you get out of that and that causes rates to rise and that's one of those three factors. So, you can see it happening and you could also see the cycle of it as shown in the book. The second force that is dealing with is the internal conflict force, how you are with each other. Are you operating cohesively, common mission, and moving in the right direction, the system working? Or or are you at each other's throats? Um on is the system threatened? Because history has shown when the causes that people are behind are more important to them than the system, the system is in jeopardy. And that is a risky situation. It's a risky situation because it produces disorder. And it can produces a form of civil war. And yet those times when you have that, you see greater and greater polarity. It in politics, it shows up at greater and greater populism of the left and populism of the right. And populists uh want to fight for their side. They're not moderate. Moderates want to work together to try to find a compromise that's best for the whole. Populists say um appeal to their crowd by saying, "I am fighting for you." And they will fight each other. And that fight can be at the threat of the system. So, in history, for example, we saw four democracies in the 1930s choose to become dictatorships as one side fights to the other because they become so disorderly. And we have a system right now that you could see that it is possible in elections that one side neither side might accept losing. And so, the system becomes in jeopardy and you see that the moderate leave the system. They you can't be moderate. You have to pick a side and fight. And so you see this in the French Revolution. There were moderates in the early part of it that recognizing that there were problems and and wanting to work together. The moderates got guillotine. They the polarity began. The same was true in the Russian Revolution. The same was true in the Chinese Revolution, the Cuban Revolution and so on. Those polarity gets greater and greater as there's a greater intensity to fight. And that is the internal piece. And so you could see where we are in that internal piece. Right now, we see that moderates are dropping out of choosing not to run for re-election. And you're seeing in the primary system that the fight is who's over most extreme in representing that. And you're seeing this greater polarity. And you see it reflected in many statistics. The something like 10 or 15% I forgot if it's 10% of the Democrats or if it's 10% of the Republicans I don't remember versus 15% wish the members of the other party would die. They don't want them to measure their they don't want them to marry their children. I mean there is a great polarity. And you're seeing that lead to changes in where people live. They're moving to different areas not just because of tax reasons, but because of differences in values. And so that kind of you can see it today happening these things, but you also can see the arc of them in the book because that it measures statistics. It shows these things happening. So when you have a financial problems and you have this kind of polarity, and you have a bad time. You have a lot of fighting internally. So, imagine where we are in the economic cycle. We're in the part of the economic cycle where they have given the the government has given a lot of money and credit to people. They've put put it out. Well, no surprise, that's leading to a lot of inflation. Okay? Inflation takes buying power away from people. And it also means that then there's going to be higher interest rates, and that's going to squeeze people. And so, that makes that wealth gap and that wealth issue uh more difficult. So, though that's the second force, and the third force is the rise of a great power, the geopolitical force that's going on that we're seeing today with China and Russia and so on and how that's changing. Because when the country when the power of a country diminishes, okay? When we get weaker financially or how we are with each other and so on, there are greater vulnerabilities. And there's always the competitive power that learns how to become stronger. And competition always happens. There's the establishment and then there's the new competition. And as they get stronger, they get stronger in all ways, militarily and commercially and so on. And that's the dynamic that we're seeing. Yeah. So, we've got Taiwan looming in the the sort of political background. You said many times in the book that that's a an indicator that you'd really be looking at. If there was a a fourth skirmish over Taiwan that you would get increasingly worried. We definitely need to talk about inflation in a minute. I want to know what people should be doing in that environment. But first, like the and I don't know if people are like me, but the thing that got me to stop and really start paying attention to this was how far into stage five we are. That was the thing that compelled me that I have to slow down. I really have to look at this because I actually don't like thinking about money despite my long-standing pursuit of success. That's really been about something else for me. Money's been a byproduct of that. Um and that's in the book and I don't know if your number has changed, but in the book you say that you give a 30% chance of the US falling into civil war, I think in the next 5 to 10 years and that uh a major conflict with China at 35% in the next 10 years. And you said, "Look, it's a guess, but you lay out a lot of data before you say that it's just a guess. So, it's obviously a very well-informed guess. One, do those numbers roughly hold for you still? And if they do, how do we pump the brakes on this? Um I I'm I would say that those numbers probably are a little bit higher now, I would say. The same thing is happening. Things are progressing a little bit quicker. Um the Do you mind ballparking me if if we're not at 30, are we 31? Are we 40? Yeah, let's let's say um let's say 35 to 40% um on on each, let's say. And who And I'm not I'm not being precise, but the events that happened in the Ukraine um and that is is um bringing all this development internationally up um at a little bit quicker pace. It's the same dynamic. There is There are two sides and there'll be neutral countries. Just like in the war, there was the allies and the Axis powers and then there are the neutral countries. And so, that part is developing. Um the US uh conflict part is probably progressing a little bit quicker. Um so, I mean the let's say the odds of that. On the on the you on the world order the developments in the Ukraine, maybe I should put those in perspective. You like me to do that? Please, absolutely. Um Okay. Um There is a a very close relationship a common objective of the Russians and the Chinese. So Um there is a um a competition in the world. And there's a dominant world power which is perceived as being overly controlling. So, the Chinese believe that the policy of containment of the United States, in other words, just right within their borders that there isn't a region that's suitable for them. Much the same way as the United States there's always a geographic region as an area of influence. The United States in the area like the Cuban Missile Crisis. Cuba when there's a threatening power in Cuba, we reacted to that. Those that kind of geopolitics they believe that the United States is sort of containing them and they are growing in power. So, that there's that dynamic and Russia has the same kind of view and so that there's a common let's call it enemy, competitor. And there are five types of wars. There's a trade war. There's a technology war. There's a geopolitical influence war. There is a capital war. And then there's a military shooting war. Um and we are in the first four of those wars um in uh in this competition. With China or with Russia? With China. Well, we're not in a shooting war with China. We are in um a shooting war of sorts in with Russia and the Ukraine. We're providing arms and so they're shooting and so there's a military war going on. And I and we're in it in our way. So we're at those particular uh spots. Um and the capital war um is sanctions. We hear the notion of sanctions and what that means is they're economic. And the way they work is to shut off um to produce economic pain by either um not letting them get at their money or um not letting them get to goods that they can import. And these have happened through time. Um in Japan, that was what set us up for uh the bombing of Pearl Harbor because the United States cut off Japan's oil supply. It was in the process of doing that. And also confiscated its uh bonds. Much the same way is happening now. And that put them into a corner that led them to um bomb Pearl Harbor and then we went to a military war. So that's where we are now and that also is risky because it threatens the value of the dollar. Because um Um, and right now right now, debt is dollars. And any currency, the way you hold it is you hold it in the form of debt. You don't hold it just in paper. And um, because it there's a rising inflation, and because there is a lot of printing of money, and because there's also a greater fear on a number of countries that they too could be sanctioned, there is a selling of dollar denominated debt. So, you're seeing that the bond market is going down, and interest rates escalating recently? Yeah. That's right. And so, there is that that dynamic that's going on. The capital wars um, are the ones that accelerate immediately before um, the uh, the military wars. Usually, the coffers are empty, they're printing a lot of money, and then they're trying to use uh, economics as a weapon. So, we're we're in that part of the cycle. Now, um, in terms of how this will transpire, I think there are um, there are three big questions that we're going to learn about and get answers to pretty quickly. Um, the first is does uh, Putin and Russia uh, win or lose? Um, I'll describe win as um, what he wanted at the outset, which is win for Russia would be to have um, the Ukraine ha- um, be some not non-threatening position, such as a neutrality, a guaranteed neutrality. And for Russia to have control over eastern provinces. And for Russia not to be um, economically devastated. Um, instead to be maybe have it something like a 10 or 12% decline in GDP. And for Putin to be in power. If those four things happen, then the cost of his actions will have been worth the uh what was it obtained from that. And that would be viewed as a win. Um, it would be then also a loss from the Western countries. The world is looking at the power of American sanctions. Um, because American sanctions are the greatest power the United States has. If it was a military power, it's the world has uh come to the position that a number of countries have had um an equal ability to do harm to the United States militarily as the United States would have have to do to them. And so we don't have a dominant military power anymore. But we do have a uh dominant um sanctions power. So if ahead of China? Um, s- in the United States in the ability to influence have economic sanctions is much ahead because it controls the world's reserve currency. That's our biggest asset. But in weaponizing the dollar, um it is leading those to get around and not want to hold dollars because they get worried that they're going to be confiscated. So um so we will see if that dollar um sanctions power, we'll see how powerful it is. If it isn't very powerful, that's going to be a problem. Um because it will perceive our weakness. Well, and they'll also realize then um uh then you only have military power. I mean, think about this way. If this war is not a difficult war for the United States and Europe for the most important that it produces higher oil prices and the like. But um while Russia is throwing in military, we are throwing in sanctions. And these sanctions don't cause cost lives. Um it's not a military war. Uh so we're fighting it with sanctions and they're fighting it with um with military. If you didn't have that, how would you fight this war? It would be a much more difficult situation. And the third thing that we're seeing is how the world is lining up. The world is lining up um which, you know, there are in wars typically axa axis and axa uh and allied powers. And you could see by the actions that are taken by as to which are lining up. Um who voted in favor of what at the United Nations. Who is allowing what rules uh who is trading with the other party. Who uh Um uh Russia actually put out a list um who are friendly and adversarial countries. Um you'll see it the next G20 meeting uh who will be in favor of Russia attending that meeting and who will be in favor of it not attending. And that's making clear how the sides are lining up. So you're seeing those sides line up and all sides are in preparation for war. Ooh. Okay. So, all right, we've got that escalating. Things are moving faster um between us and China than we thought, escalating tensions here in the US. Um inflation is one thing I want to really touch on. So, what do you do in an inflationary environment? As somebody who's not I don't consider myself a savvy investor, and so I always wanted I used to joke with my money manager, I want to be as close to my money buried in the backyard as possible. And obviously for inflation reasons, I have since learned that that is a terrible strategy. Um but what do you do? Well, first thing is you realize that holding cash and dead assets is a bad thing. So, a lot of money uh is in cash because people think that cash is the safest investment. But they are measuring that in the amount of money that they get nominal returns, and they say it doesn't wiggle much. But think about it. Um it's lost as of the most recent statistics, 8 and 1/2% over the last um inflation is 8 and 1/2%, and they receive virtually no interest rate in cash, and so there was an 8 and 1/2% loss of buying power as a result of inflation. And so psychology should change and is in the process of changing to realize that you have to think in terms of buying power, not the number of dollars you have, and you have to think um how much are your as your buying power, and so the worst thing is to be in cash. Like I say, cash is trash, and to be into and to be out of the market. Um the next thing is to have a diversified portfolio of assets. Um the diversification um means um uh some assets that are um uh inflation hedge prone. For example, you're better off to own an inflation index bond than a regular bond. Um What makes something an inflation index? Like what what are the natures that can be gold and precious metals, tangible things? Like what are the things that are resistant to inflation? Um yes, and inflation index bonds because their returns are tied to inflation. Interesting. I don't I don't understand that well enough to know what how one would do that. Is that worth going into? I don't know what the punchline is going to be. Yeah. Um I think the punchline is if you take a look at it, uh it's it's simple. It's uh like a regular bond except um its payments are linked to the inflation. So, they compensate you for inflation. So, is this a government bond? Yeah, government bond. Okay. And there are some tax advantages to them, too. So, look into them. Okay. And why don't people just flood into that? Well, I'm I think it's it's one type of asset. The flooding into any one thing is a is an issue. But the but moving from the nominal bonds in which the government just says I'll give you this amount of money and it has the unbeli- unb- unbelievable and unlimited ability to print the money it gives you, um it would favor inflation index bonds. Um and it can be other assets. You know, some people would say something in terms of cryptocurrencies or it might be um the those other assets. Um I think take on crypto? So, crypto is a huge part of my portfolio. I think you'd be mortified to see uh just how much so, but yeah, what are your thoughts on crypto? Um I think I think that too much peop- people pay too much attention to one uh at at the extreme of the other, you know? Um that either somebody's all crypto um or they're all gold or they're all something and I I believe that that's a challenge. I think that um crypto like gold is not a productivity earning asset and it can be controlled by governments uh in lots of ways. It's been outlawed in a number of places and it also can be monitored. The privacy um element is not uh secure from governments doing monitoring and So, um and the size of crypto is about the size of um Microsoft. You know, it's all crypto combined. And so, to um be overly concentrated in it in my opinion is a mistake. Um but to have some of it uh is a good it is a good thing. So, the question is always uh what amount of it. So, that's um you know, I have a little bit about it. You know, I'd probably shock you about how little I have. You shocked me about how much how much you have. Um but having some of it Um so, the um and other things I would say is that geographical location is important. In other words, not just all in US and US dollar uh, assets. Um I would say that the three things that that again I'm looking at if I go down countries is first, um, are they earning more than they're spending? Do they have a good income statement and balance sheet? This is going to be very important in the period of head ahead because the amount of credit that's going to be available to bridge the gap between spending and earning, uh, cash flows and so on is going to be uh, quite narrower. So, a lot of companies even that were able to raise cash, um, and not have good cash flow because of maybe growth expectations in the future will find it more difficult. That'll be true for individuals, it'll be true for, um, countries. So, uh, is it does it have a good income statement and balance sheet will be important. The second is, um, places. How are they working with each other? Is there civil civility or is there civil war on the brink of civil war? Because countries where they work well together, they're productive, are going to have a real competitive advantage. Orderly places, safe places to be, um, are on the rise in that? So, obviously I I'm shocked to say this out loud, but the US would be in a bad place in terms of that. Um, what are places that have great stability there? Well, um, there are parts in the United States that are worth better than parts other parts of the United States. Meaning like local government bonds or something like that? Well, I'm I'm not talking about the, uh, like where you want to be and then that'll be, but yes, the it could be bonds, it could be places. I'm talking now the places. The, um, uh, for example, we just had the shooting in New York City on the subway. And and New York City's becoming more dangerous. Chicago's becoming more dangerous. Places Chicago San Francisco's becoming more dangerous. You're seeing people leave some places for other places. You're seeing them leave, I don't know, to Texas and Texas is Austin or to Florida and so on. So, there are differences in within the United States and differences from the United States. people need to think about picking up and moving and actually going and being in a different place. Yeah, and those are also the better places economically. Because when when um people do leave and they do that, those who leave are higher income and higher taxpayers. And as a result, there's more of a hollowing out that takes place in that which creates an economic problem as well as you know, a lifestyle problem. So, I think you're going to see greater differentiation in places which affects where you want to be and where people who can afford to be there want to be and also affects what their economies and markets are like. And that's so in the United States, so yeah, and the third element is so are they financially strong? In other words, income more than expenses and good balance sheet? Are they civil with each other? So, they're working together rather than hurting each other? And number three is are they in a position where they're likely to be in a war or they're likely to be out of a war? You you you don't want to be in a war. So, uh in those places, investing-wise, history has shown, um, do worse. Because they have to spend more money, there's more, uh, problems, more pain that's being exchanged. Neutral countries in wars, uh, do very well, as it turns out. Uh, so, elements of diversification. So, it's a long-winded answer to your question, but I would not want to be in that or or cash and and those instruments. I would want to diversify well, with a bias toward, uh, inflation-protected assets. And I would want to, uh, diversify between locations, countries, um, in terms of the investment based on the criteria I just mentioned. Mm, okay. That all makes sense. Now, you've said that competing in the markets is harder than competing in the Olympics, uh, which I found funny and distressing all at the same time. You said that you guys at Bridgewater spend hundreds of millions of dollars on research alone, and that somebody like me is going to have to compete with that. So, what's the advice for the average person that isn't going to be doing that? And how often should people be reassessing? I feel like in a turbulent environment, should I be looking at this like every week? Like, how often and do you like if you were managing your personal account without computers? At least without the you know, sort of hyper auto trading. Um, how often are you looking at it? And how do you avoid trying to compete against the best of the best of the best? Uh, I I think that you have to understand what a good strategic asset allocation mix is. That is, how to create a good, well-diversified portfolio. Assuming that you don't know how to make these buy and sell decisions. Bec- uh, because what happens is think of it it's it's like a poker game and you're playing against others. And those others are putting in most lose. Most most buy at the highs and sell at the lows. Most behave emotionally. Most don't have the same information. So, it's it's a very difficult game. Like I say, you know, you wouldn't think I'm going to go try to compete in the Olympics. But more people think that they can compete in the markets. They think I think the markets are going to go up or down and the track records there are terrible for most people, okay? Because of those handicaps relative to others. So, for that reason you start off with a well-diversified balanced portfolio because diversification can reduce your risk without reducing your return. If you understand how to get equally attractive investments that are not correlated with each other, that diversify each other, you can build a diversified board portfolio. It would take too long for me to explain, you know, how to do that right now, but that becomes the headline. Um and I um I described it in my book Principles for Life and Work. Um also, Tony Robbins described it and he asked me about it and and then described it in his book. I forgot the name of it. Money Master the Game. Okay. And and he describes it pretty well. And for the that I'm, you know, I direct you there. I'm going to be writing a book. I'm in the process of doing it about economic and investment principles and then I'll describe it more completely, but right now that's the best I can do in this interview. No, for sure. That that already is really helpful. Hello, my friend. You know that I believe success requires you to see failure as the ultimate learning tool. Success requires you to be disciplined and gritty and to never ever quit on your dreams. I say all of that because one thing is certain, the road to achieving your goal is not smooth or linear. I wish it was, but it's not. It's going to be bumpy, sometimes scary, some days you'll take two steps forward and slide 10 steps back. And that's why success also requires you to know how to pull yourself out of a rut and get unstuck fast. Life is short. You can't be messing around with your goals. You've got to make progress every single day. So, I've pulled a class from Impact Theory University called How to Get Unstuck, which you can watch for free with a link on your screen or by clicking below. When you join me for that free preview of that workshop from Impact Theory University, I'm going to teach you my strategy for how to understand exactly where you need to be going, how to identify the obstacle that's blocking you, and the best way to make the most progress towards that goal and keep your momentum. All right, click that link and let's get to work. All right, I'll see you on the inside. Let's talk about um day trading for lack of a better word. So, I think about this a lot because I'm I'm in the world of NFTs as a creator far more than as somebody who's buying them. And as I look at Web3, the reason I don't treat it as an investment and I don't think of NFTs as an investment class, even though people are treating it like that, they're treating it like a hedge against inflation, some people treating it like a get-rich-quick scheme, it's that same idea that the vast majority of the money is being made by I think less than 5% of the wallets. And so, 95% of people are getting beaten to death while 5% of people make all the money. And it feels like that's a similar idea to how somebody like myself who I know enough to like get moving to do the research and things like that, but I don't want to be in there trying to day trade. So, is this in some ways you you definitely want to be thoughtful about your mix, diversifying, making sure you're going for uncorrelated asset classes, uh following the guidance that you just gave us, but is there also an element of don't try to time the market, it's time in the market? And so, get my diversified portfolio set and forget, or do I need to be in there like constantly re-upping, rebalancing, that kind of thing? Um it's a little bit like um you can start off with and I I and I think this is most important. What's your strategic asset allocation mix? And then, it's like going to the poker table. And then you say, "What is my angle? Where's my edge?" Where do I get to take money away from others cuz I'm better at it, okay? But you start Everybody should start with a balanced portfolio, okay? Most everybody, they have careers to do and they and I think they're arrogant. They think they can go in there and they can take money away. Maybe some can, but if you're going to play that game, um the first thing is um also test your decision rules. Um don't just go in and then you say, "I'm going to wing it." And and and and and do it. And um because you won't even have enough sample size in your decision rules to know whether you're good at it or bad at it. What? After the first five times, you're going to pronounce how you are? It's a learning experience, just like any other learning experience to develop your expertise. What I find is really important is to take my decision rules and test how they would have performed in the past to at least give me my some perspective of what I I might expect in the future. But you have to think through a game plan and operate that way. So I by and large would say first the the most important things you could do are actually the simplest thing you could do to build that strategic asset allocation mix not to be out in there day trading your life's fortune away. That makes sense to me. I want to go back to the idea of got the cycles. It's So far every global reserve currency ever has collapsed and been replaced. And so it would certainly be hubris to think that the US's time as that reserve currency is going to last forever. But in your video you showed a guy like holding up the the falling line and and trying to forestall that effect and hopefully, you know, carry it out longer or at least make it a more gentle tapering out. Um what can we be doing to forestall some of the internal conflict? Um how do we get There's I know there's a lot of momentum going that stops people from making more than they spend at the government level. Um but are there techniques like if if I could convince you to run for office and you got elected, um what would you do to forestall that inevitability? Well, um again, there's those who control the system and what should be done and then there's what the individual should do to assuming that they can control the system. So your question really is I view it in terms of those two parts. Um what's necessary is um you have to earn more than you spend as a society. And so we look at our country as a whole. Um and so you have to get financially sound. And this is what people talk about with austerity, right? Well, or productivity. In one way or another, you have it's the same thing. So, productivity would be make more money. So, keep spending what you're spending, but make more money. That's right. Okay? And um and that that opportunity has got to be uh as much equal opportunity across the population. Because um if it is for the averages may be very misleading. Um, and if it if most people are not benefiting or have that opportunity, it is something that is um suboptimal for the development of the country because you don't know where the talent comes from. What's the lever we pull to do that though? Well, let me get it out and then I'll get to the let to how I would do it, okay? But, I'm just saying, okay, what you have to do is two basic things. You've got to be um you got to be financially strong. So, you've got to get you have to be productive so that your income um is greater than your expenditures. And you've got to be good with each other. You work well together, you're not destructive with each other, and and and If you do those two things, like you're good with each other, and you're you know, so you're productive and you're financially sound, you've got to do those things. Now, under those things, there are a number of things. You have to end you have to engineer educate your population well, they have to learn how to be civil with each other, you have to provide a system that produces that allows productivity to be good, blah, blah, blah. But, to answer your question and really get to the punchline, because that's what I need to do. You need to create a system that both increases the size of the pie and divides it well. Okay? And most importantly, divides opportunity well, not just the output well, but opportunity, but also uh the the wealth well. So, you have to increase the size of the pie and divide it well. Um and the way that I would do that is I would start by having a bipartisan cabinet. Uh and bring together smart moderates. People who can work on both sides because I think that the first thing is that the polarity is going to kill us. I I think we're going to fight before we're going to resolve smartly what we should do. So, I would want to have a bipartisan cabinet. And I would also want to have um a program that's like a Manhattan project in which I take the smartest from both sides and work um to engineer a program that is like that. So, that when they come out with the program, there's the moderate left and the moderate right, in a sense, who are who are who are agreeing because uh we each have our own ways of doing this thing. You know, and but what I will do is we'll kill each other over which exact way we do it. And I think that to have a common uh bipartisan program that is raising productivity and redistributes opportunity and wealth well is the most fundamentally important thing. So, I would have that bipartisan cabinet, and then I would have those moderates have to deal with the extremists on their body. Um their parties. Because I believe that more than likely it's going to be the extremists who are going to um destroy the system, threaten the system um because they won't be able to compromise. The fight will be so bad, and the answers do not lie in the extremism. Yep, I would agree with that very much. Um so if you were to guess, what were what are going to be some of the elements to create at that are going to come out of that Manhattan project? Like if you had to throw some of your own ideas in the ring, uh I'm sure you've thought through this before. Well, it it it it you know, it's it's it's kind of like very easy. You could see what happens before. Um education and infrastructure are two areas that are fabulous in terms of um being great investments and not are not treated in as great investments. I um my wife particularly and me um peripherally uh work in the state of in uh Connecticut for education. I'll give you a picture. Um uh Connecticut is usually uh average per capita income number one, two, or three in the country. And in Connecticut um in high school students 22% of the high school students are disengaged, which means that they have an absentee rate of greater than 25% and they're failing classes. Whoa. And uh or discon- disconnected means they've dropped out of school and they don't know where they are. So one in five students, more than one in five students um at education system is failing. They will be on the streets. They will be not doing good things on the on the streets. They are likely to be incarcerated. There are um gangs and gun shootings and so on at um that all must end. Okay, that all must end. That there have to be um there's a level of bottom to which you can't let the society go. And um we found through uh largely her efforts and so on um that for um $7,000 per student, we could get them through high school and into jobs and then they become productive. What is it about that money? How How do you allocate that to break that cycle? Uh um there are things that you can do uh at certain points in their life, particularly between 8th and 9th grade um that you can um help them um make that transition and understand how they're doing and then work with providing supports to make them successful. Some cases putting them in a direction where there's they go into trade programs. Uh um uh uh uh so that they'll be prepared for jobs and so on. But there are my main point is um that's only just one example. At as I see what we're operating a lot philanthropically in different areas. And we see so many cost-benefit um to uh creating um improvements and great investments um that would have a big effect. But it starts with real education. And because you have to have an educated population and a civility it's a very difficult thing when the children are raised. Children are raised where um you know, it's quite often a single parent in a slum where there's drugs, where there's guns, where there's gangs. Who are you going to relate to? What What is your best likelihood of an income? It's through drug dealing and it's with gangs. That's your community and so on. That cycle has got to be broken. Um and I'm only giving that as as one example. But there are so many um cost-effective ways of putting in money. Um infrastructure like um to not have um laptops and connectivity um is today the equivalent of not having uh running water and electricity um or the telephone. And we see it with education. Uh we were again in Connecticut, we found uh 60,000 students didn't have computers. How were they going to get educated? Wow. So, we we got them the computers. But uh in a society that would allow that, there's something wrong. And then connectivity. So, certain basic infrastructure. I mean, there there are a lot of good investments that are not necessarily they don't necessarily come from um the business profit seeking world. Profit is a good but highly imperfect way of allocating resources because in some cases something you know, building a road may not be profitable. Um but it might when the United States built roads and it built railroads and so on, it uh, dramatically increased productivity. So, there's infrastructure and and changes that, um, that have to be made. And there's great advances on these things. Great advances on how to educate, um, using, um, computer technology that also not only helps the student learn, but it also helps the computer learn about the student and how they think. So, there's a lot of potential. Think about it this way. The world is richer today. We we we have more per capita income. We have more, uh, technology and know-how. Um, a- it just has to be redeployed in a way where it maximizes the efficiency and the and essentially the equa- equali- equality of opportunity so that, uh, we pull together. In but now that's a dream, you know? Uh, is it a likelihood? It's not a likelihood, okay? Because people in these cycles go to fight and and and, you know, they're focused, um, more on, um, them winning. Yeah, I want to I want to put a point on that. So, as you were talking about it, I was like, okay, how do we end up here? How do we get people out of this? There's a couple things that I see. So, as a kid of the '80s, um, loving America was cool. And like it was just natural. All my friends loved America. And recently I had a friend who was like, oh, I went on vacation and I put up an American flag outside my door. And I was like, I guarantee that's going to get ripped down. He was like, oh, yeah, it's already been ripped down. And I was like, that's crazy. Like we live in LA. Like this is, uh, a major American city. And for that to be considered offensive. So, anyway, I think about these kids. So, I don't know how much you know about my obsession and why I work as much as I do. I worked in the inner cities. I worked with these kids that you were talking about like up close. You get to know them, you love them, you want them to succeed, you want them to do well, so you start asking a basic question. They're really smart. Not universally, it's normal distribution. But you've got some really smart people in the inner cities just being destroyed by their zip code. So I'm like, okay, wait, how did we end up here? Like what would they have to do, know, whatever? And for me, I came down to a lot of this is mindset. Like they they've been told the world doesn't want you to succeed, so they don't even try. Which if you believe that the world is just stacked against you and that it's impossible, then of course, why would you try? So I was like, okay, we've got to get the right ideas in their heads so that they will take the right actions to learn and get educated. Now, I didn't get deep enough to, you know, learn about how many people don't have computers and connectivity and all that. That's distressing. But when I think about why, cuz you said, in a society like ours, something is wrong if you're allowing that to happen. And my answer to that is you've got the civility quotient of, in some cases, I just don't want to see the other side have their way. So if the right answer comes from the wrong side, then I'm going to fight against it if I'm the other side. Then you've got we can't agree that the country is worth loving. So even just saying like, "Hey, we've got to put aside our differences because we're all Americans." And let's make sure that we are elevating all Americans. It's like, nope, like I can't rally behind the flag, I can't get behind this idea. And so now all these people are stuck in this purgatory of nobody's looking at metrics to say "Hey, we are trying things. Is it actually working?" And if the metrics aren't improving, then we have to change the policy. But that's not happening because of all the fighting. But I do think that it's partly because you have that we can't even agree to rally around the country. Does that strike you as a without patriotism? I don't know. Is patriotism a force for good? Evil? How do you see that? Mhm. I think good produces the good type of patriotism. I So, I went through the same cycle, and I'll talk about metrics, too. Um the reason I put metrics in there is um and I'm every 6 months or 12 months, I'm going to update the metrics, so that everybody could look at those objective numbers and see are we improving or we deteriorating? And I think if the politicians, the people in government, were held accountable for those numbers, so that you can objectively see is education, is the wealth gap rising, is there greater productivity? These are measurable things. You can then see their And And they're not just measurable about outcomes, they're measurable about health. You know, if you have a better healthy income statement and balance sheet, you are healthier and financially and so on. So, those metrics we'll put out, but yeah, no, I saw the cycle. Um United States world order began in 1945. I was born in 1949, and I benefited from it. And I And it was um not just an American perspective, that American dream. It was a world dream. It was the only country in the world where there was really a sense of equal opportunity. I was very lucky. I had two parents who who cared for me. They loved me, took gave me good guidance. I went to a public I all public schools. Um and I came out to a world of equal opportunity. That's all I needed, okay? That's all almost everybody should get. Why shouldn't everybody get that? And it was a place where anybody from all over the world could come. And you were not you could be a citizen. And it was the only place in the world where you could really be part of that and not considered an outsider. So all that immigration brought the best talent. And we operated in a place where there was rule of law and everybody respected the law. There were property protections and you could make a life that was the type of life that you've had, the type of life that I've had where we're free free to free to speak, free to do those things, to have opportunity and and so on free free to invent, free to do what you're doing and I'm doing. And that is the American dream. And that was a beacon for people all around the world. That was what the United States was and so on. And that is good. That is good. Okay. Now we have something different. And we have a dynamic which is going on because we all abused that because we had to spend so much money because we became decadent in terms of overspending on some things and under taking care of other things and so on. And now there's a fight and that that becomes that dynamic. So yes, if we could recreate the realization of what that was, what that is the American dream, what is fair, how does that work, and rekindle that and then that has a tremendous power in being able to bring that back. But the dynamic of history shows that it's more likely that it goes the other way. But yes, if we rekindle that, the idea of heroes, you know, we don't have any heroes. Why don't we have any heroes? Because we're tearing people down. Heroes are role models, people who we admire. There are many people I admire, you know, and I've seen in my lifetime. You know, you know, we should see more of those role models as as as examples of how to be. But we Yes, we're missing that. We've become a decadent largely a decadent society that's at each other's throats, and we're in trouble. Yeah, we're in trouble. Innovation. Speaking of There's There's like almost a distrust now of people that strive for success. There's a distrust of science to some extent. There's um I feel like, and maybe I'm crazy cuz the stats will bear this out, but it feels like we used to be the place everybody would want to come. If you had that entrepreneurial dream and you wanted to build something and you wanted to generate wealth and innovate something, this is where you would come. And then I look at somebody like Elon Musk who honestly, man, just seems like an alien. I don't know how he's pulled off everything that he's pulled off. It's absolutely bananas. And yet, there are people who just can't have it. They can't have the level of success that he's had and aren't necessarily even looking at it from the lens of the innovations that he's created. Do you think that that's a a predictable change in attitude that people have and they they lose the desire for innovation? Is it Is it just being decadent or is there a rebellion against um education? I don't know. I don't I was so shocked to hear that there are people that aren't inspired by what he's doing, but instead are like just opposed. Um I think it's I think everybody's got these opinions and they're so critical. And um not you know, if if everybody could just take care of themselves. You know, it's it's like um start with with oneself. Um the aspiration and I think the reality it should be to be self-sufficient plus. Okay, here here's my view. Uh success doesn't have to be making the most money or the most contribution. Success for us a successful life is that um you have the life the type of life that you want for you. Um but you earn more than you spend so that you're self-sufficient. And And if every individual could do that you would have self-accountability and and a successful society. Um and so it's not a bad thing. It's a it's a good thing uh when people produce things that others want. Um uh and they end up making in many cases billions of dollars. It doesn't have to be the billions of dollars to be successful. But let's not resent that. Like I think uh when we think about um the prejudice the prejudice of either against a billionaire or against a poor person. Um that that that prejudice um I think supposing um we didn't we eliminated the the billionaires. Most of the billionaires one thing is inheriting the billions the another thing is creating the billions. Um most of that comes from coming up with something that people wanted and then they and people spent a lot of money on that thing. And I think if you were to take those items that they created and you say that the society's not going to have those items would you have rather not have them? I think it it it it's all a matter of um stop the fighting, be productive, have the life that you want, um you know, not um not the not all this fighting and criticism that is going to tear down each other. Yeah, one thing that I've heard you talk about that I really resonate with is the idea of leading with understanding. Listen first, try to figure people out. Um I know your stance on China has become uh controversial, I guess, but when I hear what you say, it's basically understand them, even if they end up becoming our enemy, to understand them would be incredibly important. Is that a life strategy you have of trying to understand people? Are you somebody who sees yourself as as somebody bringing people together? What what do you think is that importance in terms of understanding others? Well, uh just just from merely just on seeking understanding is a very practical thing, and it's interesting as could be, and then um and then it has a lot of really good results because with that understanding, you can understand how to trade things to have win-win relationships rather than lose-lose relationships. So, um yeah, I think that um most people are operating in their perspective of uh you know, what's good for them. Uh and and then um the best are operating with the concept of win-win relationships. That they understand that um if I have a win-win relationship, um I can you know, like I'm at the principle, one and one equals three. Um, if you if there are two of you and you can trade things and you can help each other, that's a win-win relationship and and that is the best, but in order to do that efficiently, you have to understand their perspective and also their perspective is not as much like a characterization of good and evil, it is them doing what they believe is in their interest. Now, that may do you harm and you might call that evil, but, you know, it's almost that back and forth. So, so when you have that open-mindedness, so you can understand, understanding somebody else's perspective is not the same as believing that what they're doing is right. You may have a choice, but if you have somebody who has a different religion or a different way of doing things, at least have an understanding of that to see it through their eyes, right? You you can reject it, you can say I don't want it or but even then, you have the capacity to deal with it in a much more informed way than if you don't understand it. So, understanding, I think, is is and is important. And then, of course, the world works in a real in a way where it's the reality that they will move in a certain way and then you move in a certain way in those interactions. And if you don't have that understanding of the reasons why, you're never going to be able to play the game, whether that's a playing a game against them or playing a game with them to try to produce the best possible outcome, you're never going to be able to do that well. And so, yes, I see this tremendous misunderstanding because there's a tendency to demonize the other side, okay? And that's, you know, and it's so it becomes a distorted reality in which there's an inclination to go fight, and there's misunderstandings. Well, even if you're going to go fight, make sure you got understanding. Mhm. Yeah, so I um when I I was introduced to Taoism when I was probably 16. And so, that gave me when I was young, I really had an obsession with China and Chinese philosophy, and I studied Laozi, Zhuangzi, and just really became enamored with uh the East and Eastern thought. And so, for me, it's been almost strange to watch China take on a very different um tenor in terms of the way the US perceives China, right? To see this stuff escalating and getting darker and darker. Um what I find interesting is, like you said, to understand them is not the same as to agree with them, and I think that that's very important. First of all, I'm not a scholar on this, so I don't know. Um but, what I when I take that what you're saying and I apply it to the US, of okay, lead with understanding, lead with trying to figure out where they're coming from, lead with recognizing that if you don't and you encamp into this us versus them, it is inevitable that you conflict. And so, when I look into the future, I have whether I like China or think they're out of their minds, I have no interest in going to war with them. Just the loss of life is just too catastrophic to even contemplate. So, I started thinking, okay, like, how do we bring these together? And you had a key insight in the book that I thought was really powerful, and you said, "Look, no matter what you think about China, you have to understand that they believe they're doing what is right. You're not going to convince them to do it the American way any more than they're going to be able to convince us to do it the Chinese way. And I found that insight very compelling because you go into this ideological battle when you think, "Oh, we can convince them. We can win." When you think that you can draw them over to your side, that's one thing, but if you can't, then it becomes a very different game of, "Okay, how do we negotiate this relationship if I'm not going to be able to convince them?" And so, in the book you bring up another idea, which is the idea of dialecticals, two opposing forces coming together and and in the friction is the superior answer. So, I know that China looks at themselves that way and they use dialectics. I think that the US, given the the conflict between the left and the right, has to start doing the same thing of saying, "Hey, we actually need to value this friction, that it's not I'm not trying to convince somebody on the other side think like I think. I'm trying not to even think of myself as having a side if I'm completely honest. But, I understand that there are personality types. They see the world differently. They're never going to persuade each other, but hopefully we can let go of some of that the the warfare mentality and bring people back to a table of compromise. Am I understanding that the dialectical nature of those two opposing forces correctly and do you think that that is a useful way to instead of trying to get the other side to agree to to find the the strength in that push-pull? Yeah. Yes. And that Yes, totally. Unequivocally. And in addition to understand the cost of lose-lose and additionally the issue of sovereignty. Um you know, um the the invention of countries, which came in the uh late 17th century after the 30 Years' War, was one of the great inventions. They were not countries. There were no borders. Amazing thing. There were no countries. There were no borders. Um the way it worked is most countries were run by families because there were royal families. And um there was a constant fighting. Like I want to go take more or they would take more and there was constant fighting. And they had a war, 30 Years' War, they call it. And at the end of this 30 Years' War, they were so sick of war that they came up with this idea of countries. So, countries that had a border. And that you would determine, those inside those countries would determine what went on in those countries. Back then they fought fought whether it should be um Catholicism or Protestantism or whether it was the Pope or whether it was They fought about a lot of things. But when they had that, they said, "Okay, that's what we're going to do is we're going to do it within borders." So, I think that's interesting. So, the idea is that by and large, if you have a domain and it's in your border, that you have control of that. That that's one element. Then there's win-win uh relationships versus lose-lose relationships and the things that you were talking about, the dialectic uh reckon forces one to recognize the pros and the cons and to try to get into an equilibrium level. I think that that all all of that is right. None of these things works perfectly. So, the question of um you know, what is it uh the can anything go on within those borders and it's okay? Maybe there are common rules that the system as a whole agrees can or can't or something. But, those kinds of rules um I think are important. So, as we go down the checklist, um you know, kind of um live and let live. Uh win-win is better than lose-lose. Understand each other, where they're coming from so that you could do good trades and don't misunderstand, you know, lose-lose wars are are are you know, are terrible types of things. There are that's as mean I mean, there are not things worth fighting for. But, if you operate within the parameters of borders and then then it's largely your own business. Uh and and then we come to ourselves. And the most important thing e- whether there's international or domestic issues is be strong. Like if it's like be healthy. Uh if you're strong and healthy, you don't have to worry domestically and you don't have to worry internationally. And it's just basic things of what's strong and healthy. You earn more than you spend, you're good with each other. You know, you educate your population, you're productive. Those are basics. Be that. Take responsibility for yourself doing that. The United States should take responsibility for itself doing that like every other country can. And if it does that, it will be strong and it'll be healthy and it'll be fine. Yeah. Yeah, Ray. I um I really want to be in a positive place about where all this is going. I'm such an optimistic person by nature, but there's something about watching that breakdown that you did of the last 500 years. I think I told you this when we were doing the pre-call. I couldn't I couldn't listen to the book first thing in the morning because it it was like putting me in this really um almost stressed out state of like, man, we're Go ahead. I But I have a principle. Please. If you worry, you don't have to worry. And if you don't worry, you need to worry. Because if you The thing that I could give you is this worry about realistic things that you can worry about. That's what I want to give the people. Uh that's why I did the video, by the way. The video You you you could skip the whole book. The video is a animated video. 10 million people have watched it in no time. It's something that's very digestible and it carries the picture. Um if um because if you worry, then you'll do something to prevent those worries. If you worry about going to World War II, if you worry about those. And if we could get enough people who believe in these things, uh then we will have a different choice, right? There'll be less likelihood of us fighting with each other and doing us doing each other harm and instead doing more good things that will raise ourselves and raise our living standards cuz we have the resources to be doing those things. So, um I yeah. The The The greatest danger for most people is failing to look at um the things that could be harmful to them because they don't like to look at them. It's like some people would rather not know that they have a serious disease or something. Yeah, okay. Look at it. Deal with it. And then you're most likely to be able to deal with it effectively and minimize problems or take advantage of opportunities. There's a lot of potential here for us to do amazing things. Technologies, the ability to think. I mean, we've seen amazingly wonderful things. The capacity for you have a pandemic and we come up with vaccines. The capacity to get around the fact that we can't get out of our houses. Um all of that could all raise living standards if we could all work well together. Yeah, at the end of the book you said something that was really interesting along these lines of you know, I I build my portfolios from I look at the absolute worst case scenario. The thing that just is is I can't let that happen under any circumstance. And so I address that. And so if you said I even have an end of the world portfolio strategy. And that you allocate resources to these different buckets to make sure well, if the world completely, you know, collapsed and I don't know what you deem the end of the world, but that's a pretty bold title. Um but that you look at those things. You said, you know, people assume that when I look at those that it actually makes me pessimistic, but in fact the exact opposite is true. It's liberating. To know that I have thought through those scenarios. I have taken action and I will say that's another thing. People may look, but if they don't do anything, like I really wanted to get you back on the show because when I read your book, I was like Ray, this is I think I was actually nervous coming into this interview. I'm like this may be the most consequential interview I've ever done because if people take away from this that we're really at a tipping point moment and that the way that we all act in these, you know, coming months and years could determine the world order, whether we uh maintain stability or whether we go into a period of such tumultuous chaos that the loss of life is just unimaginable. And by looking at that and saying, "Okay, that's real. And now what do we do about it?" It's a real possibility. 20 years ago, I would never have bought into it. I'd be like, "Oh, he's an alarmist." But it really feels real to me now. And so I I can't encourage people to skip the book because I think the book has a lot of additional information. The video is phenomenal. It's probably the right place to start. But then to read the book and to get that information, to really grow to understand exactly how these loops repeat, will give you an understanding of what we need to do to forestall that. And the things are simple, but they are very difficult to do. So, our goal is to be healthy and strong. So, uh spend less than you make. Um make sure that you are presenting yourself well on the world stage. And getting along well with each other. But that means we have to race back to the middle. And that was like I had this sense of like what I always told people was fill your heart with love. Whenever you're going into it, and it feels stupid, feels dumb when I say it. But when I think about somebody that I disagree with or whatever, that it's the dialectic approach of I need to learn from this friction. Rather than trying to convince them, I need to learn from their friction. I need to have respect for them as a human. So, I need to want to come to a place where we can compromise. And then not try to, you know, drag me over to their side, me not try to drag them over to my side. Or again, I try not to have a side. But just like what works? What are the metrics? Look at the metrics. Is this actually working? If it's not, adjust. If it is, pour gas on it, right? So, but figuring that out, coming back to the middle, and actually taking action on the stuff that you lay out, it's incredible. I think that you've done the world a tremendous service by taking these, however many years you're going to do it, and giving us all these incredible books and talks and videos that outline all the things that you've learned. So, one, just thank you. And then two, where can people engage with this, with all the material that you're putting together? Um Well, so first, you're welcome. Um and I want to emphasize that what I did in the book was to describe like maybe what we could collectively do, but also what individuals could do if we don't collectively do the right thing. Because either can happen. And that's why and in a sense, quote, like what I call the end of the world portfolio is to know um that if this, no matter what happened, if there was a civil war, or there was any war, or whatever, um that I have my protection in a certain amount, and I've taken that off the table. And then once that's off the table, ah, there's relief. There's a lot less worry. And then you could be more aggressive doing the things that you'd ordinarily do with the other part of the portfolio. Even thinking that way creates great relief. It's like having an insurance policy, and and and so on. So, um but the I think the actions that you described um to get informed one way or another, um the book is the best because it's most complete, and it brings you through it. Um but the video is is really easily digestible. Um as I say, 10 million people in 6 weeks and you know, it's grow it's it's it's a hot video. Many people um the uh see the video and then they go to the book. Whatever way that I can pass it along and and yes, it's it's my pleasure. I'm at I'm 72 years old and I'm in a phase of my life where the main thing I want to do is to pass along what I have that's going to help others uh particularly beyond me. So, uh I'm let me thank you for uh being a partner and being able to pass this along to your listeners. Anytime, Ray. Anytime, every time has been an extraordinary gift. So, I thank you. Very grateful for what you're doing to help us get back to the middle and and do things well, be healthy and strong. I appreciate it. All right, everybody, please go watch the video. It's absolutely incredible. Just type in Ray Dalio Changing World Order. It will pop up on YouTube. It's incredible. It's about 44 minutes. It is unbelievable. The book is even more incredible. So, if you like the video, definitely go get the book. It's extraordinary. And then also, you're updating things at um economicprinciples.org, if I'm not mistaken. That's right. So, check that out as well. It's all extraordinary. Um yeah, I cannot recommend Ray highly enough. And speaking of things that I can't recommend highly enough, if you haven't already, be sure to subscribe. And until next time, my friends, be legendary. Take care. Peace. If you want to actually make your dreams come true, I'm not telling you not to chase money. I'm just saying it's not going to feed you emotionally the way you think it is. So, you've got to completely divorce yourself from this notion of outcome and become completely obsessed with the idea