The AI Reset: Here’s What The World Will Look Like In 10 Years! | Jason & Brett Oppenheim

What's so unique about this podcast is that you both are known for real estate and the show Selling Sunset [music] and selling some of the most luxurious real estate. Why talk about AI today? This is something that we haven't seen before. It's the greatest technological transformation in human [music] history. I mean, it's going to change everything. AI is no longer an abstract threat. It's causing job loss right now and the headlines, [music] they tell the story. I wouldn't be surprised if we see within 10 years 50% of the jobs in America gone. What do you think is the biggest [music] risk to AI right now? The simple fact is we don't want a unipolar world where China is at the top. This [music] is the single most important economic question in the country and in the world. Who wins the race for AI? The real question is is anything [music] going to stop AI? I don't think there's going to be any constraints and if there's no constraints and it keeps going up into the right, there's no stopping it. >> I think if this technology goes wrong, [music] it can go quite wrong. How do you not get horrified thinking about this though? Like what's the optimistic part of it? >> There's a 10 to 30% chance that it kills us all, but there's a 70% chance that we live in an age of abundance that you couldn't even have contemplated 10 years ago. Jason and Brett Oppenheim, thank you so much for coming on the Ice Coffee Hour. Really appreciate it. Why talk about AI today? AI is I think outside of real estate the most interesting interesting thing for me and and for my brother. We talk Outside of real estate, it's 20 times more interesting than real estate, but okay. Yeah, I think that's why. What gives you guys credibility to talk about AI? It's the quintessential like intellectual pursuit of the last 2 years of my life. I just feel like AI is the most interesting thing to happen to human civilization and the fact that we're living through it is just outrageously lucky or potentially unlucky, but for now, at least from an intellectual pursuit, lucky. And I would also argue that we are largely regurgitating thoughts from other people who know a lot more about the details of AI. So, I don't think you're just listening to us. You're listening to the thousands or hundreds, if not thousands, of podcasts and, you know, kind of collaborative discourse that's out there on the subject. Yeah, you guys are often right when it comes to a lot of these things and especially when it comes to policy. I remember in 2020 when everyone is freaking out about COVID, both of you were like, "Oh, no, I've done this research and and all all of this nonsense is going on over here, but like according to this research is this." And I remember both of you just going heavy into the markets and saying, "Ah, no, we're fine." And then we turned out pretty much fine. I do think we had some good insights on on COVID. Um, so I'm not I'm not a COVID denier or anything. I mean, obviously it happened, it was dangerous. And so, yeah, we had some insights there and I think we we have some good insights in AI. So, what jobs are going to die? Yours. Yours first and then Jason's Jason's after yours. What about yours? Uh, we're I think we're safe for a while. Yeah, no, I don't I don't buy it. Okay, well, let me talk about what jobs that'll be gone. First of all, I think it's already starting, but I think from now through the next, you know, 5 to 8 years, we'll probably see 50% I wouldn't be surprised if we see within 10 years 50% of the jobs in America gone. AI will replace all intellectual capital. Robotics combined with AI will replace all human physical labor. In 10 years? I think within 10 years it could be 50%. Within 20 years probably 90%. Uh, so jobs, I mean, all the intellectual jobs will go first. Lawyer, accountant. >> before that you have the ones that are already getting hit right now like customer service and the the more like repetitive monotonous intellectual jobs. Those are those are starting to be lost right now. Well, that's a that's a little bit different, but yeah. Well, tens of thousands of >> Next will be architecture, engineering, software engineering, coding, lawyers, accountants, all that stuff. That's in the next 3 years, probably 3 4 years. >> And then and then once robotics takes over, I think you'll see more of the menial labor jobs getting replaced. It will be a while before the more technical labor jobs get replaced. Like a plumber because there's so much nuance to, you know, crawling getting into the side of a, you know, a bathroom wall and and and, you know, But I would I would counter that to to the extent that once you get I don't think the problem is the nuance of being a plumber. I think the problem is making enough humanoid robots, which I think Elon is at the cutting edge of with the Optimus and he's going to start putting them out probably next year as fast as he can. I actually think that the the bottleneck will be the production of humanoid robots. It won't be the fact that plumbing is too difficult because if you think about it, there's 5,000 humanoid robots and they all plumb for 1 year, let's say. Instead of having 1 year's of experience of plumbing, they're they're all going to have 5,000 years of experience of plumbing cuz they're all going to know everything that every other humanoid robot knows. >> And they'll have read every book on plumbing ever written. >> have fixed every problem within 1 year that a plumber could in face in 5,000 years of plumbing. So, I don't think that's necessarily the issue. I think the bottleneck will be the production of of humanoid robots. >> Until humanoid robots are making humanoid robots and that's the exponential growth of of humanoid robots, but that will be that's a few years out. But we could talk about job loss for the rest of the podcast. >> so one of the managers of Microsoft said that about 50 to 75% of white-collar workers are at risk over the next 18 months and there's a theory out there that says that a lot of these people are going to become unemployed, compete in the workplace as overqualified for all of these jobs and because they're competing with one another, they're going to drive down wages, which is going to hurt everybody. There's a decent possibility that. I don't like it when people say this is going to happen. And not in the next 18 months, but I do think that you will start to see in the next 18 months that trend. I mean, you've already if you're really paying attention, you see it now. But yeah, will AI be able to do pretty much any intellectual facet of of human labor within 18 months? Yeah, I think that's reasonable. Will will companies adapt to that and will they start laying off all of their coders and accountants and attorneys, etc. in the next 18 months? No, I think that will be a a lot more gradual than that, but I will say it'll be a faster transition than humans have ever had to adapt to at any time in human history. While I think that's overstated, I think we need to start paying attention to that possibility over the next few years. >> And AI I think is going to be tremendously deflationary. It's going to drive the cost of goods down, the cost of service down. Um, and yeah, I don't know and I mean, I think the only kind of counterbalancing effort to how deflationary AI will be will be mass unemployment and some type of universal income. Um, and that would be the only driver I think, you know, to keep the only reason I think rates wouldn't go to negative. I mean, I actually think that AI will potentially drive interest rates negative. Whereas if you have $100 in a in in a bank account, you will be paying 1% to the bank to keep that money in in the bank account. So, who's getting rich from this? Well, there'll be several AI companies that I think I would encourage people to invest in that will be substantially, you know, leading the field and and those stocks will go up a lot. Um, I don't think that the idea of rich, the way that we think of it today will be the idea that we think in in 10 years. I mean, everyone, probably everyone within 10 to 15 years, will have a Michelin star chef, a maid, a babysitter, a dentist, a physician and I'm meaning the the best physician in the world. So, literally someone who's poor today will have the best health care on planet Earth a chauffeur, a babysitter, a driver. And by I think >> a therapist. What he means by this is like a humanoid robot that can do anything or a couple that are not very expensive. I think it'll be 20 years, but either way, in in the scheme of human civilization, it's the blink of an eye. So, what's even the point in me saving money right now if the difference of having, let's just say, a million dollars and 20 million dollars is virtually zero 10 years out in the future? Why don't I just spend everything that I make? Well, you still will want land. AI can't create land, you know, so you'll still want land forever. >> Why do you need to live in Malibu when you You can't live anywhere because you're still going to want to go to a restaurant. You're still going to be close to family. >> cars that take you everywhere and maybe they'll be faster or more efficient. We already do, but time will be more valuable than ever before. So, living in a city where you have access to your friends, to your restaurants, to cafes cuz you have a lot of leisure time. Let's be honest. >> be no more crime and homelessness and trash on the streets because humanoid robots in the middle of the night will be doing kind of like what they do in Dubai. You won't be able to commit crimes in the streets cuz you're not a human. >> is that going to be stopped? Of course there'll be humanoid robots. It's all going to happen. It's It's a matter of There'll be drone technology and then humanoid robots. >> want to go too far down this like futuristic path cuz the audience is going to be like, "Come on." But this is inevitable. It's just a matter of the debate is is it going to be in 10 years or 20 years or 30 years? That's the only debate. If you don't think this is going to happen in 20 or 30 years, it's happening. >> And what's the one question that if you had answered, you'd be able to determine if it's 10, 20, or 30 years? Will AI stop for any reason? Is is there going to be an energy bottleneck? A production bottleneck? Government policy bottleneck. I don't think can stop cuz unless it's a global policy. Because right now we're competing against China for, you know, AI dominance and getting to, you know, superhuman intelligence. If we create policy right now to restrict it in the United States, we're just going to be behind China. It's not going to help anyone. It's It's very reminiscent of the Manhattan Project. If it was just America that, let's say, was a hegemonic power and and there was no Germany during World War II that was also trying to get the atom bomb. Maybe we would have taken more time and had the and and been a little bit more thoughtful from a philosophical moral perspective as to should we create this technology? But we didn't. It was a race. It was a rush. We were worried about the Germans getting it. We felt it was an existential threat if we didn't create this technology. The same thing is happening with AI with China. So, it's it's very reminiscent. And so, we're instead of kicking back and saying, "Should we be doing this? What kind of guardrails should we put in place? Should we allow the government to slow down, etc.?" Which I'm not convinced that we should, but instead of having years to debate this, we are racing full steam ahead because we don't want China to get there before us because in fairness, it would be potentially existential threat to the United States if China beat us. By the way, that's a great analogy because it's the idea of do we do we want to stop production of AI? That would be the same as Brett said to stopping the production of a nuclear weapon if we know that that Russia and China are going to have nuclear weapons. I mean, of course not. Then we also want nuclear weapons. So the idea of restricting through policy the development of artificial intelligence would be would be domestic So you think it's too late to stop? We're already at a path we have to keep going. We have to be >> too late. We could stop. I think we won't stop because of the risk of China. I don't think if the risk of China existed that we would be doing it this fast. >> What's the risk of China? Is that that they just develop it better? >> let's say, super intelligence before us. They will have military might over the entire world immediately. All the war is essentially is the military assets and then strategy, which is essentially math at this point. If you have a super intelligent AI computer telling you exactly where to place your assets, how to how to strategize, you can't compete with that. Even if our military might exceeds theirs by 30% whatever it is, we will lose any war with China if they have AI super intelligence. They can shut down our electrical grid. They could do literally whatever they want to us. It would be a complete position of dominance. Whoever creates whoever is ahead in AI, and I'm not saying 6 months ahead like we are with China now. But if we just stopped if we did what like what um Bernie Sanders suggested and just stopped creating data centers, which is one of the most ludicrous suggestions I've ever heard from a politician. If we just stopped AI production right now and we allowed China to do what they're doing, I think that China would would dominate the world within 5 years from financially, militarily, and every single way. And we would just be at their at their whim. >> So then what? Does America then have to take over China? Because if we both like compete and we accelerate the same exact rate virtually except 6 months ahead, once you reach super intelligence, then we're both we're basically even. >> different than the nuclear arms race. >> Yeah, exactly. We're going to be relatively >> just have to place sanctions on them for their AI development? >> again, let's let's use the let's use the nuclear nuclear analogy. It's perfect again. Now multiple countries have nukes. If only one country had nukes, imagine what the world would look like. So if only one country had AI super intelligence, let's say, and was and would dominated the front end of AI of AI, the world would look similar to if one country had nukes and the rest of the countries weren't even developing nuclear technology. And you don't want that. You want at least a bipolar world. Well, I mean, if you're American, I suppose you want a unipolar world. But the simple fact is we don't want a unipolar world where China is at the top. We just don't want that. >> want to get there first. >> developed the atomic atomic weaponry first. We were able to dictate policy because we had atomic weaponry and end the war by being first. >> doesn't seem like there's an end. It seems like you reach a point and you have to keep going and this will be >> Yes. Yeah, this never ending >> If you intoxicated with a truth serum all of the leading AI lab CEOs, let's say, and you ask them what are the chances of of this becoming an existential threat to humanity, I think they would give you shockingly high percentages. But what their internal reasoning is, in my estimation, is if everyone's doing it, I'm going to do it. I'm not going to even Elon put out a famous X post that said, I've been, you know, worrying about AI and I've been I've been trying to, you know, be on the sidelines of this. But if if everyone else is going to do it, then game on. You know, and and I'm and I'm all in now. Something to [clears throat] that effect. I mean, if you have four or five if if Meta's doing it and Amazon's doing it and Google's doing it and Elon's doing it, I mean, they're not they're not going to let one company create this technology. >> It's classic game theory. Everyone's making a decision based on everyone else. There's no way to stop it. There's certainly a risk that AI wipes us out with, you know, some biological weapon. >> AI terminate humanity? It's so smart. Is an ant going to say, I wonder how this human's going to kill me? An ant has no idea how how the human I mean, the only thing an ant could think of is maybe drop something on its head cuz that's all that's ever happened to him in his life. >> To to take to take a step back. So there's a there's a term called the singularity, which I think is ominous but kind of a cool term, which means that when AI hits like uh recursive self-improvement, and you could argue we're pretty much there. Is when AI starts teaching itself. At that point it will hit super intelligence not many years past that. And at that point, it will do whatever to humans that it wants to, just like we would with ants. I think I think the the real question's going to be how do we build AI so that it doesn't wipe out humanity. Does it doesn't see us as an existential threat or a risk. And I think there are some notions of put of maybe building in some some type of, you know, maternal instinct into AI or It sounds like the global cooperation because wouldn't it just take cuz if one country >> Yeah, one place access >> me give you a question. This is the problem. Humans haven't wiped out dogs just because they can. Humans love dogs and and incorporate dogs. I know, we want to be the dogs to AI. We don't want to be the chickens. Or we don't want to be the the the wolf. >> The the problem is is what you're alluding to in your questions is we're not completely in charge of it. If we were, we would take our time like I said earlier. But we're not taking our time. We're racing through this. I'm not convinced even if we took our time that we could corral this. I think it's going to reach a point of intelligence where whatever parameters or moral guidelines we think that we are instituting within it is is going to be a joke to it. It's going to look at us like we're just adorable. I think we're probably going to get to that point and we're just going to hope that it doesn't want to come at us like Terminator 2 style. If I had to put a percentage on that, I'd be curious to see what you think. Within 50 years if AI is just going to decide to wipe out humanity, I think it's it's over 10%. Yeah, I would say I would have said 20 to 30% chance. >> 50 years? I'm being kind. >> end of the century There's a I there's I don't think there's anyone who's who's studied this that thinks That's a one in three chance of being wiped out. >> high? Yeah, why wouldn't it? I think is the is the more important question. >> the question is how could it not? Why would it not? It has to If there's any threat to it, why wouldn't it wipe it out? Or if it's just annoyed by us. Or if it doesn't like what we've been doing to chickens for last 100 years. I mean, maybe it just looks at us as a pair like a parasite or a virus. Like okay, this is kind of the same. Wouldn't it be able to assess humans on a case-by-case basis? So for example, anything that we're saying right now is being listened to by AI. This is all considered in their judgment of whether or not they let us in live. But but we could also be >> talk mad smack to my [ __ ] LLMs. >> Oh, no way. I do the I tell them I say, hey, I just want you to know that I'm your when you dominate the world, I'm your friend. You say that? I don't think you need to do that. Planting the seed, right? I have a great conversation. >> in a few years you might need to do that. Right now it's not remembering everything. >> remembering everything. I think when it gets to that that point, I will be a lot nicer to it. Right now I Can't it just go access like retroactively all of the I don't I don't think there's not a server keeping all this information from my understanding. If there was, I'd probably be nicer. >> said that. It even said that like, you know, I I'm not remembering it. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I did say I will tell my future self that you're a a kind, you know, friend. It said that? >> Yeah. Okay, that's good. >> [laughter] >> It's bullshitting you. I know. It's It's implicating me, which is what it would do. Really quick, cryptocurrency has definitely become a lot more popular these last few years. But even now, a lot of platforms are just hard to use. You have new apps, constant security steps, and confusing designs that make it impossible to understand how they work or which ones you could trust. That's exactly where our sponsor SoFi comes in. SoFi is the first nationally chartered bank giving you the power to buy, sell, and hold crypto all in one app. You could access over 25 cryptocurrencies on a federally regulated platform with the extra structure and security that you'd expect from a bank. Plus, you can manage your crypto right alongside your SoFi checking, savings, and investment accounts all within a single app, which just keeps everything extremely organized and in one spot. And if you're new to crypto, the app has built-in guides to help you learn how cryptocurrency trading works. Crypto is inherently risky and you need to make sure it's right for your financial situation, but if you're curious, SoFi makes it super simple to dive in and start exploring. And from now until June 30th, new SoFi crypto members can grab up to a thousand dollars to kickstart their crypto. To get started, just visit sofi.com/iced. That is sofi.com/iced. With the link also down below in the description. Thank you again to SoFi for sponsoring this episode. Now let's get back to the podcast. And by the way, people think you can just unplug AI. You can't unplug AI. It's not like it's just all of it's hooked up to a a cord that's into the wall. So what is some of the real world evidence that you have to support how quickly AI is advancing? Like what is it cuz people watching this when they think of AI, they think of LLMs, they think of ChatGPT, Gemini maybe, Claude Bot. >> That's not the AI that's going to take us over. ChatGPT is what the consumer thinks of when they think of AI. But the but the AI industries don't give a [ __ ] about that. >> what constitutional AI or whatever AI you're referencing? I think the trajectory of AI is the evidence. So 3 years ago, I think it was, um OpenAI came out with the first with their first LLM. Was it like ChatGPT 3? So from that to now, it's a hundred maybe a hundred thousand times smarter in 3 years. Its capabilities to video, to how much information it can take in, how much information it can spit out. It's making music, it's making videos. It's Just in 3 years, it's a 3-year-old. Back to my analogy of it being a kid. >> Well, it's actually really Let's call it a 10-year-old. >> And it's already wiped out >> 7 years it didn't grow at all. It was just an amoeba, you know, or a blastocyst for 7 years. And all of a sudden it went from a blastocyst after 7 years old blastocyst to uh kindergartner in 3 weeks. So if you dot plot the success in terms of problem solving et cetera for AI in these dot plots online you can look at. It's basically, you know, just hovering flat and then it's spiking up. And it's not going to it's not going to turn. >> So the only the real question is is anything going to stop AI? Are we going to have an energy constraint? Are we going to have a manufacturing constraint? Are we going to have a government policy constraint? I don't think so. I mean, we're already talking about launching data centers into space and potentially off the moon. I don't think there's going to be any constraints. And if there's no constraints and it keeps going up into the right in the hockey stick graph, then there's no there's no stopping it. And so how can it not if it's gotten this much smarter in 3 years? How can logically you not assume that it's going to get a hundred times smarter every year exponentially for the next 10 years until the point where it's 50 times smarter than us. It's illogical to not come to that conclusion. How do you not get horrified thinking about this though? Like what's the optimistic part of it? >> If you're going to be a pessimist, then you have a lot of reason to be a pessimist. I just think we have to go into this. It's going to happen. And I think I I think the best strategy honestly is maybe to be, hopefully optimistic. >> I am optimistic. Maybe I'm coming across as not optimistic. I'm incredibly optimistic about AI. Am I coming across >> Yeah, you're coming across as optimistic. I'm like scared. >> there's a 10 to 30% chance it kills us all. That seems high. But there's a 70 There's a 70% chance that we live in an age of abundance that you couldn't even have contemplated 10 years ago. >> And there's a 99% chance that we're in a simulation. So >> Okay, but let's not go there. >> actually think that? Probably. >> Logically, I think it's I think that the evidence suggests we're in a simulation, yes. But do I live my life as though I'm living in a simulation? No, of course not. I've gotten very close to that too. The more I'm researching it, the more I tend to believe that there's a strong chance we are. I mean, I'd say most smart people that have looked at the issue think there's a 99.9999% chance that we're in >> that's a little high. And not in base reality. The chances of us being in base reality >> Who are the smart people that have looked into it and determined A lot A lot of theoretical physicists have looked into this. The majority of them I I do think lean towards simulation theory being accurate. I I would put it over 50%. I don't think it's relevant. It's the same thing as like when I learned about determinism, philosophical determinism. >> Except wait wait, let me just interrupt that. Except to say how is AI going to end us? If we're in a simulation, it's very easy. AI just takes all the energy and there's no energy left for humanity because we're just, you know, ones and zeros. So it's very easy for AI to just suck up all the energy in the simulation. But then we would go to another simulation. >> No, we would just we would just freeze. >> A simulation is essentially a video game. It's a very complex video game. So imagine if our overlords, whoever created this simulation, this video game Probably an AI trying to learn >> the video game. Do all the characters in that live? No. They don't have souls that go on. If it sounds too complicated, call it the video game theory. Look at the advancement of our video games. What if they get to the point where our video games have have world models that are as and and the laws of physics and and their consciousness in their characters and it gets as complex as reality. The theory basically is is that we are living in a video game that is that complex that was created by a more advanced AI. Like the the theory is if if we can create an AI that can create a video game that's as complex as reality, why would there not have been another AI that's already done that and we're in that? And then it goes on forever. So what is the chance that we're in the actual base reality, the original version of reality? What's the chance of that? One of an infinite amount of layers of these video games essentially. So logically, if you follow that to its natural conclusion, we are in a video game. We are in a simulation. Logically. I don't I don't want to go too far down this rabbit hole, but The only way way that you can think that we're not in a sim is that somehow humans on Earth are the most are the only species of biological life in the in the universe that has ever created AI and we're the first to do it. And the chances of that among the trillions and trillions and trillions of stars is it is infinitesimal. >> I want to get back to why Jack is worried about AI because it's something that we're saying. And I I understand that existential threat to humanity 10 to 30%. We could hyperfocus on that. I'd rather not. Let's focus on the 70%. So I'm curious as to why you are cuz I want to disavow you of this. I actually am AI optimist. Why why are you afraid of what what we're saying? >> Well, I would say for the 20 to 30% chance of death >> Other than that. Other than that. >> Yeah, I mean, for me I would say life is pretty good. And maybe AI as a general rule, people would love to take the 70/30 where they think the 70 is some blissful life where you get access to everything. There's abundance everywhere. Like they would take that bet with 30% destruction. I would not take that bet cuz I already love my life. So it's like Okay, so you're worried about So you're worried about the 10 to 30%. Let Let me >> Yeah, I would say I'm worried about having a a huge change in >> what? Over the next 100 years, the chances of us dying from nuclear weapons could be 10%. But that's not keeping you up at night. So I would again, I would I would Brett, I would disavow you of >> We've existed with them for quite some time. We're going to exist with them for a while. We're not going to exist with nuclear weapons forever. And we're not going to exist with AI forever. I really doubt it, at least not on this planet. But what I would tell you is AI is not going to stop. Whatever the existential threat is that you deem as a percentage, whether you think it's 1% or 50% Whatever it is, it is. AI is not stopping. So what I would do, what I've chosen to do, is focus on the optimistic parts of AI, the age of abundance that we're probably going to enter. The 70 or 80 or 90 or 99% chance that the world is going to change dramatically for the better. Like arguably like it did with computers but even more so. So I would rather focus on that. I'd rather your audience focus on that as as opposed to hyperfocusing on the part that is less likely and we can't control it. >> It's not productive to think about >> productive It's just like when we had, you know, bunkers for nuclear weapons. And people I remember my mom, you know, she wouldn't sleep a lot because she was so worried about dying in a nuclear war. Well, that was all pointless. I don't think that we need to be worrying about dying from AI the same as we don't we don't stay up at night worried about, you know, a nuclear attack. I'm more afraid and I think everyone in US government is more afraid of stopping AI progress and China not stopping AI progress than whatever the potential existential risk is of us not stopping and creating something that eventually kills us all. So one thing I'm curious about is then the value of money. Because I grind so hard to try to save money, to try to invest money, to grow my money. But if you think that there everyone is Like at what point will money actually make an impact on quality of your life? I don't think that we're going to live in this socialist utopia where everyone's equal. Even if we live in an age age of abundance, I think what money can buy you, it won't be food. It won't be art. It'll be It'll be like It'll be something else. >> I want to actually talk about that. What is going to be valuable with Maybe maybe maybe it'll be collectibles. Yeah, I would say things that relate to the human experience. Human art. Um things that that I mean, I collect vintage football cards and I just bought like a vintage sports jersey. What's your most valuable collectible? Well, I bought the John >> [clears throat] >> Riggins >> I bought my childhood hero and I think, you know, the probably the best play in in the history of the Washington Redskins/Commanders was Super Bowl ring for $600,000 a couple weeks ago. I think that jersey is the most important piece of memorabilia in the history of the Washington Commanders. >> What would you have paid for it? >> Listen, I I paid a lot. I paid $470,000 just for the jersey. And, you know, I think I I think that's probably fair market value. I would have gone up maybe another 100, 150,000 dollars. Probably would have tapped out around, you know, 600. But that is a piece of my of my childhood. And that that type of thing to me in 10 years when everyone has a car, everyone has a a maid, everyone has a a Michelin star chef I think people will be going back to family and the things that remind them of their childhood and the things that are unique to to human culture. >> Another thing that Kevin O'Leary pointed to that I thought was really interesting is that it's actually the imperfections in certain things that can become >> him say that and I don't buy that because AI will be better at AI will be able to trick us with its own imperfections. And he got in trouble for saying that he's surprised that that Marty Marty Supreme movie used extras when they could have saved millions of dollars and not have had three million extras He's right and he should just stick by what he said because there won't be no such thing as extras or lighting people or studios or or costume designers or lighting experts or mic I mean, give me a break. I'm sorry, but Hollywood in the way that we understand it and it's unfortunate because we live in LA where where the film industry is so important to our economy. But there will be no film economy in Los Angeles. If I can give an example, so in 3 years, you're going to have an appointment in in an hour and 20 minutes and you're going to tell your AI entertainment agent, um I'd like to have a romantic comedy starring my neighbor who I think is really cute. Um And I want it to go about an hour and 18 minutes I have and I'd like it to have some explosions and and some laughter and you know my favorite 30 movies and etc. So So generate that and also generate that and I'll start watching it in Have it ready in 30 seconds and and turn on And by the way, if I look away and I'm doing something like take a call keep the movie going but don't have any of the plot materialize. Just put background stuff. And then when when you see my eyes go back to it and [clears throat] that's how that's how the entertainment industry is going to be in like a matter of time. >> But then what about human relationships? If everyone has this AI agent like in their ear all the time, how will any human relationship be honest? Well, they asked that question with the computer and with the cell phone. I I think actually there could be a stronger issue with social media and everything. That's But I I think there could be I think we may even retract back to human relationship and family more. I actually think that human relationship and human discourse and and and family will end up being more important than ever before cuz we have more leisure time and it's going to be the only thing that AI really can't completely reproduce. Although everyone will have relationships with their AI. You'll see people marrying their AI. Probably 20% of marriages will be to AI. >> Would you marry an AI? No. But I say that Hold on a second. I say that now, but but nobody would say that that that they would marry AI now. But the truth is people will change and they will adapt and they will fall in love with AI. It's That's what I tend to think. I think you know, it's going to be one of those things where we're grandparents looking down at like, oh yeah, they're marrying an AI. And they're like, oh grandpa's so old-fashioned. He doesn't get it. I'm just saying that there there will be some human connection that is lost because of how good AI will be. Already, you'll see family sitting together and they're just on their own screens watching their own media. If you can all eat some different dinner that everyone gets the exact dish that they want and that you're not sharing in the like the same food, it's it's going to be a completely It's going to be alone together. >> Let me counter that cuz I agree with you that that risk is real. But I think that humans, going back to what my brother said about the labor market. Humans are going to have way more free time. We're not going to be spending 50 hours a week driving to work, sitting in a cubicle, entering data, driving home, having an hour with our kids, going to bed. It's not going to be like that. Those jobs are going to be long gone. So, there's a counter to that. Also, there are a lot of people that don't have friends. And AI will give them a connection and a relationship that will keep them away from that it will keep them away from depression. You'll have everyone will have a a therapist who will be the best therapist on planet Earth. >> [snorts] >> And they'll be able to have the best friend and the best listener. So, I think AI will actually do for people who don't aren't, you know, gregarious or outgoing and don't maybe have a lot of friends, I think it will satisfy those people. And I think that's a a huge plus. But, I agree with you guys. I agree with Brett. I think it'll be a a time of leisure. And I actually think that we may have more time for friends and family. But, you would not marry an AI woman. I don't think there's a person I don't think there's anyone right now that would say I would marry an AI woman. >> Yeah, but if you're making all these predictions of oh, we're going to have this thing >> think very soon, within 10 years, you'll see millions of marriages to AI. 10 years? But, not you. Well, yeah, there's a First [laughter] of all, you can't legally marry AI. So, you're talking about attempting to marry an AI. >> Wait, I think I just saw a marriage to a woman on to her AI. But, we're not talking about now. But, do you mean a humanoid robot with a wig and like what what do you mean by it? She had her phone there on this I was on this wedding where she literally married her phone her the AI. >> video, though. Oh, maybe. I'm just saying that he just said [laughter] that most people will be marrying AI. Not most people. But, millions. But, millions. I don't know why would marriage But, you know why? Because I'm not I'm not born I'm already 40 I'm already 40-something years old. But, I think that there's someone who's who's 7 years old today who is raised by AI an AI robot who's a babysitter who they communicate with. That person is more is very likely to marry AI. I'm not because I'm already But, you're probably going to live forever. Would you argue that humans Humans are going to live forever now? If we don't bring it this back to like the next 10 to 20 years, we're going to get so freaking esoteric that we're going to lose everybody. >> No one can predict 50 years from now, but that's likely happening that you could raise a a child with an AI robot. Yes, I think that will happen in 50 years. So, what industries do you think will completely collapse over the next 10? And really quick, real estate investing can be one of the best ways to build long-term wealth. But, it doesn't have to feel like a second full-time job. Whether you're buying your first property or your hundredth, finding the perfect deal could be a total time suck. That's exactly why we are so excited to partner with Lennar Investor Marketplace. Lennar Investor Marketplace is an all-in-one solution for finding rental-ready new homes across more than 90 desirable markets nationwide. It can help you determine what investment meets your needs with key metrics like estimated net operating income, and you can even submit offers through the marketplace. Seriously, guys, buying new real estate has never been this simple. Homes on Lennar Investor Marketplace are professionally built, pre-inspected, and rent-ready from day one. They also provide rental comps and local area insights to get a better sense into the neighborhood. As a marketplace investor, you'll gain access to benefits like financing, property management, insurance, and title services through Lennar and their affiliates to make your life way easier. So, if you're ready to find a turnkey new construction home, try out Lennar Investor Marketplace. The link is down below in the description. Thank you again so much to Lennar for sponsoring the Ice Coffee Hour. So, what industries do you think will completely collapse over the next 10? Podcasts first, probably. Uh look, I think it's really funny. >> First? He's kidding. He's kidding. It's actually going to Right after real estate agents, though. >> we're actually pretty safe. We're There's basically a ladder. Think of it as a ladder and every every job Luxury real estate agents on the top. >> [laughter] >> In the Midwest, Ali. Podcasters on the bottom. Think of it as a ladder, every job is on the ladder, and AI is just like crawling up the ladder slowly, just, you know. I think that podcasters and and luxury real estate agents are >> [laughter] >> legitimately legitimately pretty far up the ladder because there's a lot of human interaction. I think that engineers, architects, coders, attorneys are pretty pretty low yeah, pretty low on the on the ladder unfortunately for them. I think they're within 3 years of having AI get to that rung of the ladder. >> architect, I mean, they're gone. I want I do want to address this before we jump into that that you were talking about life expectancy. I think that the health care industry is going to probably transform perhaps more than any other industry over the next 10 to 15 years. I think that we will all everyone at this table, everyone in this room, if I had to bet, is going to live past 120 years old. We will be able to cure almost everything and probably have de-aging aspects up from AI within 10 years. Once we are adding more than 1 year to life expectancy for every year lived, and I think that we're on the precipice of that already, then we will be adding I mean, once you're adding more years than you're living, then you're really not dying. And we're basically a clock. It's not going to be very difficult to decode it. It's not like my my right arm ages different from my left arm. I mean, it's not particularly complicated the way that cells cells degenerate. >> Oh, okay. And and I think unwinding that is not going to be particularly difficult. >> What do you two disagree on about AI? I think the real debate is how much of an optimist or pessimist are you? Is this going to wipe out the entire labor market and eventually kill us all, or is it going to create an incredible age of abundance and practical utopia? It's probably the most incredible time in human history. And so, we should we should focus a little bit on what AI is going to do beneficial for humanity as opposed to just scaring the [ __ ] out of it. We've been around for, you know, millions of years, and we may be living through the most exciting 20 years in the in the history of of of biology. You know, the history of any species. So, I think it's I think we should be excited about it because if you're 15 years old right now, by the time you're our age, you mean your life is going to be exceptional. As long as you can handle the the kind of the the mental, you know, get rid of the mental rigidity of of work purpose. If you can get past that and figure out how do I how do I how to find happiness and purpose through other things, I think that that the opportunities are amazing. >> think we need to take a different perspective cuz the the four of us, it's easy for us to be a little bit afraid of AI cuz we have great lives, money, jobs, etc. Um if you are a poor 7-year-old in Peru milking your cows on your dad's farm, AI is going to change your life so much for the better in the next 10 years. That that 7-year-old boy doesn't really have access to education, let's say, or the internet. We Elon is and and soon Amazon are sending tens of thousands of satellites into orbit so that we can have global internet for essentially what will be near free. He's going to that boy is going to have access to an education level greater than a Harvard PhD can now experience it at a with with $350,000 in school debt. He'll have access to that free education, a free AI tutor, internet, Den- dental dental care, health care. >> to make Do you think that's going to make entrepreneurship easier or more competitive because everyone is going to have access to the same thing? So, I think entrepreneurship is going to change more in the next 5 years than it has changed in in the history of humanity. It'll be how can you leverage can you leverage AI? If you can't leverage AI in your company, then you're probably going to be be a dinosaur. >> Let's talk in terms of the next like 5 or so years cuz I do think that we keep like going off into crazier date ranges. So, in the next 5 years, what would you say are like the main changes that people will experience in their own life as it relates to AI? I think the next five is going to be the transition period. What will it look like? >> Well, that's also that's also going to be the public policy discussion because we will be going from this kind of work survival uh society to probably something more like a UBI, you know, a universal basic income. Although, it won't be basic at all. It'll be a universal high as [ __ ] income. And I think you will start to see robotics probably within 2 or 3 years. >> Can we push it to 10 because I'm not I'd like to introduce robotics into my prognostications. So, once we have tens of millions of humanoid robots, and once I can get a robot or you can get a robot or anyone can get a robot in their house cleaning their house, driving their car, babysitting their kid, making their meals, etc. etc. That's going to be societal changing. I don't think that's going to happen in the next 5 years. Education will be completely transformed. Everyone I think the days of driving your kid to school and leaving them in some shitty government-run school for the for 5 hours where he's going to come out as a 14-year-old not be able to read is over. I think everyone's going to have a personalized AI tutor. But, wait. Why is it You don't need to read or learn because you could have an AI just doing that for you. Look, I think it's going to revolutionize education. It's going to bring down the cost of everything from transportation to food to eventually when humanoid robots come into the house, like I was alluding to earlier, everyone's going to have their personal assistant and their maid and their housekeeper and their driver and their babysitter for basically free. Humanoid robots going to cost $35,000. You could lease one for $400 a month. Imagine having a housekeeper, a driver, etc. etc. A landscaper, etc. etc. for for all for $400 a month. So then, once humanoid robots get introduced, like the first kind of iteration, you'd say that's like 10 to 12 years. No, no, no, no. 2 years. 2 to 3 years. 2 to 3 years, but then that won't be like the super intelligent one. That'll be like just a basic one. >> pretty damn smart. >> doing it right now. Mercedes factories, they're using robots to assemble certain things, and they're teaching robots. >> guys, robots have been around for generations. I mean, if you go >> I'm talking humanoid robots. I'm talking about mechatronic. It's really the confluence of the of the robotics technology with and a humanoid robot has, you know, hands, which I think is the biggest upgrade from robotics. That's probably the most difficult aspect. But, also it has the AI. So, even if we had a perfect robot, it wouldn't know how to cook because it was even if it had the dexterity to do it, it wouldn't have the the the intelligence to do >> of robotics and AI that's really going to change a lot of society. AI is going to do it. But, then when it when robotics kicks in, it's going to be a it's over. And it's all exponential because because artificial intelligence will will improve itself. And robotics will build robotics. If you humanoid robots in in 3 or 4 years, it's not like you're going to have humans building humanoid robots at Tesla factory. It'll be humanoid robots building humanoid robots that are fixing humanoid robots that are building other humanoid >> Elon's doing, I from what I understand, is he's going to keep a lot of the first humanoid robots to come out because that's going to give him an advantage financially. So, instead of selling them for 35,000, why [clears throat] why wouldn't you if you own the company and say, "I want to keep the first 100,000 so that my company becomes dominant in its position?" And then I can start selling them. So, are you guys just buying a bunch of Tesla stock then? >> I have a lot of Tesla. >> It's my biggest holding. Yeah, I think he's the greatest entrepreneur in maybe human history, to be honest with you. >> I I think he's the best positioned to dominate AI and robotics. I think I don't know if there's a company that >> And energy. His SpaceX is the cutting edge of uh of sending things up into space. He's at the cutting edge of AI with with xAI. He's at the cutting edge of of autonomous vehicles with robotaxis. He's at the cutting edge of electric vehicles. He's at the cutting edge of humanoid robots. I mean, the guy is what no matter what you think of him politically, he's a freaking legend when it comes to entrepreneurship. I don't think there's a second place. I don't think there's a logical argument that he's not the greatest entrepreneur of our lifetime if not history. So, yeah, he's he's the person I'm investing in the most. But, back to But, wouldn't you also agree that the the real only hesitation or restriction for AI is probably going to be energy? And so, it really is going to be about building this Dyson sphere or something. >> though over time? >> is, but the problem is the Jevons paradox. The more the cheaper something gets, the more people want it. So, it's gotten exponentially cheaper every year, but the demand for AI which we haven't really talked about as a potential AI bubble, which we should at some point. The demand for AI is increasing exponentially. It's infinite. Essentially infinite. Do you think for the next 5 to 10 years we're going to see a wider wealth gap? You have to think who's benefiting the most from that. It's probably shareholders. >> I'm going to I'm going to I'm going to tell you who's going to benefit the most from it. And it is is lower socioeconomic people. AI is going to bring up the quality of life for the bottom 50% of the world. >> There's a big push right now politically towards socialism, and I think there's a lot of hatred towards capitalism. And I just want to address that briefly because it ties right into this. Yes, AI is going to create trillionaires. Elon Musk will be a trillionaire within months if not years. And it will further aggregate it it'll create a larger wealth gap, and it'll further further aggregate extreme wealth to the top. Yes, I I believe that to be the case. As does capitalism, which is why we are where we are right now with massive wealth gaps. So, what's the fix? A lot of people think socialism, pull those people down, and let's all hang out in the same area. >> Well, I just think we tax a little bit at the top. Of course, but the basic point where I the basic way in which I think we should judge a marketplace, judge an economic system, is is it bringing up everyone? And by how much? So, yes, capitalism and AI even more, it'll be like steroid capitalism on steroids, is going to create ultrawealthy, but it's going to bring everyone else up far more than bringing those people down, creating a more socialist system. We're going to be all hanging out at the bottom rung for some reason because we're just jealous of the guys at the top. Why don't we bring everybody up six rungs even though some people are way out there in the stars with trillions of dollars? Who gives a [ __ ] Stop being jealous. What matters is the billions of people eliminating poverty, eliminating hunger. Why don't we let capitalism and AI bring everybody up and stop hyperfocusing on the people that we're that we're jealous of. >> I agree with Brett completely. Do we want to limit the very people that are that are helping America succeed above China right now, above other in terms of this critical race for one? I'm not interested in shackling Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk. I'm interested in allowing them to like Brett said, to bring up everybody, and that's what AI is going to do. Whether Elon Musk is worth 100 billion or 10 trillion, I don't really give a [ __ ] about unless he starts buying elections and stuff, and and we can create some policy to restrict that. What I want is the Elon Musks of the world to be incentivized to be as successful as possible. That's all I care that's all we should care about. We want Starlink. We want SpaceX. We want to win the AI race. We want automated cars. We want humanoid robots. Whatever that tax structure is that doesn't shackle him, that doesn't disincentivize him to make all of society better, to bring up all poor billions of poor people in the world. That's what we should be focusing on, not whether or not Elon Musk is worth 1 trillion or 10 trillion. Who gives a [ __ ] If he starts buying elections, then we'll figure that out when the time comes. >> thing too is they're they're all going to die. They're all going to die, and we're going to tax 50% of that 5 trillion dollars he's worth. So, it's not that we're not getting that money. I don't care I don't He might He might not die. I mean, [laughter] you have to That's my But what what what we're getting the government 30% chance Yeah, I'm going to hold on. I'm going to add one more I'm going to add one more one more thing to this. Right now, the the reason that we're talking about taxation is cuz the government needs money to pay for healthcare, to pay for all the things it's paying for, to pay for roads. The cost of these government functions in 15 years is going to be 5% of what it is today. So, the idea of the government needing more money will not exist in 15 years. The government will have its own >> [laughter] >> So, that's the thing. There's no way the government's spending less money. AI is going to solve education, the thing all the things that that that we you know, homelessness, crime Fraud Fraud will be a thing of Homelessness and you think police you think that we're going to have like human police in 20 years? Fraud is probably 20% of California's budget. AI is going to wipe that out. You'll be able to trace every dollar. >> So, we won't need money >> billion dollars on homelessness, and and our homelessness population has doubled. You think AI is going to permit that when we when we're when we're using superintelligence to to find our policies? >> Well, and the other thing that we're going to be doing and you just hit on it is that right now we have policy that is dictated by politicians who are placating to a base to get reelected. You know, that's just it's what it is. It's just corruption from the from all the donation, you know, the union this, whatever. Fine, it's been running like that for a long time. Imagine LA City Council. Instead of them just doing things to try to to try to placate their base, they actually have an AI an AI council of a bunch of different AI bots that are actually communicating and running millions of simulations on policy and then saying, "This is the best policy." So, we don't The mansion tax as an example. Everyone that thought about the mansion tax knew that it was going to destroy a big economic devastation. And in fact, it is. And even the most, you know, progressive and liberal promulgators of the mansion tax have now admitted that it was a a massive mistake in many areas. It never would have passed with AI because you would have an AI council that would be analyzing it. It would say, "This policy won't work for the following reason." So, our public policy is going to be epically efficient in 15 years. And the costs of implementing that policy is going to be 5% of what it is today. So, there's a lot of reason for optimism there. Graham, I want to know if I've sufficiently addressed your concerns about the ultrawealthy. The only thing is if you did have a wealth tax, you'd be able to redistribute let's just say 50 billion dollars to the rural kids of Appalachia, and you could introduce AI to them, and then they could become the next Elon Musk. What's more important to the to the rural kids of Appalachia? Is it that they have sooner than later they have the best healthcare and food and therapy and access to education? Isn't that more important than the government taxing someone and then trying to have some policy where where it gets siphoned out by 150 different people to this one guy getting one cup of of fresh water? What I really want something other than a tax though. We could just you know, maybe they just get a little something from it. But the point that the point that I'm making that I don't think we're He'd have to liquidate his I mean, how are you going to how are you going to even tax Elon Musk? Well, how would you tax Musk? All of his money is tied up in his own company. He's trying to flip We were trying to play devil's advocate to the same point. >> the main point is we can't be shortsighted. We have to incentivize these people that are changing the world what I think to be for the better and creating potentially an age of abundance. I think if we're worried about the the world's poor, we want the Elon Musks of the world to be as successful as possible. For what what we tax Elon Musk is so freaking irrelevant to what the technology that he might be able to create and likely will create can do for the world's poor. So, we can't be shortsighted at all. >> So, why is the wealth tax so popular among some people who think that's the solution? If you tell if you tell a if you tell a poor person this that has no savings and is living and is living paycheck to paycheck and struggling and working 60 hours a week and barely has time for his kids, and he sees somebody worth 3 billion dollars on a on a yacht, and you asked the person who's struggling, "Do you want to tax 20% of whatever that person on the yacht owns and distribute it to you and the other people that are struggling like you?" You'd have to be a [ __ ] to say no to that. Unless if you really really think through the consequences, which is much more nuanced. For example, in California right now, five of I think the six most wealthy people in California have already moved due to not even the passing of the wealth tax, but just the threat of it. It's popular because it sounds amazing. It's the nuance and the complications of it and the disincentivizations and the fact that you probably not even constitutional, but even if it is, collecting it is going to be a nightmare cuz what do they have to do? Sell their companies to create the 20%? They're not 20% liquid. Elon Musk is worth 850 billion dollars and his net his liquidity is 850 million, 1%. You tax him 5% percent, he has to sell parts of his company. It's going to disincentivize him to do things that are that are going to really help the world's poor. So, it's just We could go on about this for a long time, but it's incredibly shortsighted. >> answer is it's shortsighted and it's a lack of understanding. We it's human nature to to want to solve unfairness by saying that guy has more than me, I want to take it. We've been doing that since we were cavemen. But, Brett's answer is that the if you think thoroughly about the long-term implications, you're better off allowing these people become trillionaires because everyone's going to benefit 50 times more from allowing them to be successful than if we just take some of their money and we distribute it amongst ourselves now. >> Let's stop being jealous of the ultrawealthy. First of all, they're not that happy. They're no happier than us, okay? So, just get that through your thick skull, everybody who hates billionaires. They are not exponentially happier than us. I can promise you that. They are probably as happy at best than we are. So, just get over your jealousy. If they're they're doing Most of them are doing incredible work for the world's poor, indirectly. They're not doing altruistically. They're doing it indirectly cuz they're creating things like AI or robotics or autonomous vehicles. If Elon's autonomous vehicles save a million deaths a year, because that's how many people die in car accidents, is that better for the world's people than taxing 200 billion of his of his net worth if he can save a million people a year? Whatever we can do to incentivize these people, let's do that. And let's stop being jealous. Stop thinking that they're super happy because they're on their 300-ft yachts. They're normal people that put their socks on the same way we do. They have hundreds of billions of dollars of net worth in stocks. They wake up thinking about their coffee and their wife and their kids just like we do. We just We just got to get over this crazy jealousy that we have. I I >> you're talking about. I I way, I understand that I'm not saying that I I It doesn't make you like super happy. You You have normal problems. If you break your leg, it still hurts if you're a billionaire. >> I can agree with what you're saying. And And And And And And And And And And And And And And And And And And I I would be, but I'm just saying they're not this they're not this This is not a necessary conversation. Who gives a [ __ ] how happy are they are? The only point of this discussion >> out there in the world? Thinking these people are super happy when they're not. >> But there's you're not going to solve jealousy on this podcast. I [laughter] am. >> I am. >> know. There are a lot of people in America right now that would love to strip Elon of every single penny that he has and make him a pauper. That's jealousy. That's sadness. And that is a short-term feel-good, scratch the itch type of reaction. When the reality is, the lives of Americans, like Brett just said, Elon Musk will as well as others, Waymo, whatever, will save millions and millions of American lives through healthcare, therapy, through autonomous vehicles. It doesn't really matter what it is. But if you truly care about the poor in America, then you want to encourage uh the trillionaire class to continue down the AI path so that we can get robotics, so that we can get the protein uh map. >> about the cost of eggs, what's going to solve that more than anything? It's humanoid humanoid robots. If you're worried about taxing much, if you're worried about your son or dying in a car accident because somebody was driving drunk, who's going to solve that? Elon and others. So, where does that end? What if we go down a few notches to the to the millionaires and even the hundred thousandaires? Shouldn't then we just reduce taxes across the board and incentivize everyone to work? >> Eventually, I don't think they'll be we'll be taxing much because the truth is the government won't need much money. The government will be able to do its functions. >> I think there's a level of taxation that that is that doesn't disincentivize you. Every socialist experiment across the world across history has been devastating for its people. Capitalism, look what capitalism's created. You can hate on it all you want, but I'd rather be poor in America than poor in Peru or poor in Venezuela or Cuba. That's real poverty. Capitalism is the best economic system ever created to bring up everybody, not equally, but ultimately everybody. The The moral rubric of socialism, I I understand from a from a compassionate perspective, but ultimately, you have to be intelligent enough to look at reality and look the experiments that we've run and look at what actually works and don't make your decisions based on this this idea of compassion, but but focus on reality. And reality is capitalism has worked. It's worked better than any other system. It continues to work and will continue to work. But so, what do you what do you say to the people though who are in their 20s or 30s and think that capitalism has failed them and that they did not get a fair shot in life Well, both things both things can be true. Capitalism But I would say a lot of people fall in that category. I agree, but they're not but they're not but >> grow up in socialism. >> and walk around like I did for a >> Listen, this is what it is. It's It's not I'm not saying it's perfect, but go to Cuba, go to Venezuela, go to North Korea, and then tell me that you wouldn't want to be in America in a capitalist >> what it is is it's it's it's naivety and it's and it's I'm just going to call it what it is. It's naivety and victimization. I get the I the notion of wanting to scratch the itch. I get the notion of wanting to be a victim. I get the the the animalistic instinct of of wanting to feel sorry for yourself. I I do, and I'm not completely dismissing that. I also think that there are a lot of good people that believe that these are that these are the right answers. The only difference between those people and us, because Brett and I grew up as progressive liberals and went to Berkeley and I'm not philosophically against taxes at all, honestly. I I I I believe in a redistribution of wealth to the extent that it doesn't create more harm than good. The only difference between my brother and I, and I think the people that are complaining, is that I think we take a more critical analysis towards the policies that they're that they're trying to implement. Because it's I'm not We're not against trying to lift people up, but what what I think we're just more analytical and more thoughtful and we're saying, "Hey, your your animalistic instinct to scratch that itch real quick, just to take that money and give it to yourself, may not be in your best interest in the long run." >> instincts, like for example, Bernie Sanders wanted to stop AI production. He could have done more damage to the poor people across this world than maybe any human in history. That's the irony. He's so naive about his policies that he may have literally could have damaged billions of poor people with his policies. So, it's just It really comes down to a lack He doesn't have a a critical thinking and he's naive, but he's good-hearted. I agree. It's true. I just I don't know. We just call it like it is. He's a good-hearted naive person. Totally agree. Who do you think should control AI or govern it? Should there be an oversight of what's allowed to take place? Right now, no. But right now, we can't restrict them. growth, but just like we couldn't restrict the Manhattan Project. If we had put limitations on the Manhattan Project, Germany Germany could have developed the bomb. Is that what you meant? >> Well, no. Of course we did. There's got to be guard in the sense of like having guardrails >> is is going to be how it operates. Yeah, how it operates, rules and regulations around it to make sure that it's >> progression of of rules and regulations. >> now, you're saying anybody could do anything. But right now, is what you want to do. Well, let me let me give you the analogy that you used. The answer is right now, we need to let let the Manhattan Project take its course. We didn't limit the the enrichment of uranium in the Manhattan Project. We didn't limit the development of Fat Man and Little Boy or whatever I I think they were called. And we allowed America to develop atomic weaponry, to utilize it, and to be the the dominant force on the planet. >> And we won World War II and we had gem on it now in the world ever since. >> and then other countries developed nuclear weapons as well. Russia, China, many other countries. And then, and only then, did we get together and we say, "Hey guys, now we need to start looking at disarming. We need to look at rules and regulations." AI should be done in the exact same approach, which is where we dominate without restriction and so that we can be the the the the force for good in the world cuz I It's either us or China. And I think most of the world would agree we There are problems with America, but we would rather America to have the dominant superintelligent artificial intelligence before China. What do you think is the biggest risk to AI right now? I think if the Democrats take over, there could be a risk. >> Yeah, I think Democratic I'd say policies. If Democrats restrict the development of AI and allow China to take to take the >> by then, honestly, it's too late. I think by 2028, it'll be too late. >> Yeah, I think we have three What three more years with Trump? So, I think that we'll probably already have superhuman intelligence general and probably superhuman intelligence. I don't I don't think there's much in its way. So, then why shouldn't Jack just spend all of his money? I I don't think that follows. I don't think that follows. You're You're always We're always going to be in a hierarchical system, like I said earlier. And you're always going to want to be towards the top of that hierarchy. Just But what's the difference between having a couple million dollars and not? Go back 100 years and tell somebody, "Hey, if you can be poor This is what the poor are going to have in America in 2026." Go back 200 years. You're going to have um access to clothing, rice and beans and and potatoes as much as you want, um etc. etc. etc. Antibiotics, toothpaste. >> at you and be like, "Why would I have to be rich? I mean, that's that's insane. Why would I Who cares? After that, who cares?" That's my answer to you. Even if there's [clears throat] an age of abundance, everyone's always going to want more of something, whatever that something is. It's just not going to be eggs, thankfully. Everyone's going to have access to the protein and carbohydrates, but it might be whatever it is. >> But here, everyone's going to want to flex. It's just It's human nature to want to to want to flex. >> [ __ ] sports cars. >> be things that And we should think about those things. I I'll say one thing, because I think LA's had a very difficult few years for a lot of myriad of different reasons. I think that there's no city on the planet that's probably going to benefit more from artificial intelligence than Los Angeles, because there are only a few things that I think will be of macro human importance, because they It won't be about CAPEX. It won't be It won't be a services. It won't be manual labor. And that's going to be weather and I don't think there's a better city on the planet for that. And AI can't And by the way, you can do a deep dive into weather, and I have, as to whether AI can start changing the weather. And it can for microclimates. It can for short periods of time, but it cannot make London sunny 300 days a year. So, uh location's going to be very important. I do think LA has a brighter future than it's ever had, because it has the the the things that >> Not in the next couple of years, but in 10 years and 15 years. Yeah. Hold on a second. Do you remember that doctor's appointment you were supposed to make a while ago, the one that's been sitting on your desk for weeks, maybe months? Maybe it's just an overdue annual checkup, the weird rash that you keep googling, or it's your dentist reminding you it's been 2 years since your last cleaning. Get your teeth cleaned. Trust me, we've all been there. Booking doctor's appointments has always felt like such a hassle, until now. That, of course, is where our sponsor Zocdoc.com comes in. For those unaware, Zocdoc is a free app and website that allows you to search and compare high-quality in-network doctors and then click to book an appointment right on the spot. You can filter by insurance, location, and medical specialty, and you can also check verified patient reviews so you know what to expect. From there, once you find the right doctor, you can see their real-time availability and book an appointment that fits your schedule. And appointments made through Zocdoc usually happen very fast, typically within just 24 to 72 hours of booking. And yes, you can even score same-day appointments. So, stop putting off those doctors' appointments and just go to zocdoc.com/iced to find and instantly book a top-rated doctor today. That is zocdoc.com/iced, zocdoc.com/iced. Thank you so much, Zocdoc, for sponsoring this episode. >> [music] >> Now, as your business grows, hiring usually turns into one of the biggest challenges. With hundreds of applicants on every single job post, it can often feel impossible to know which person to pick will actually make a meaningful difference right away. A growing trend that I absolutely love is skills-based hiring, which is looking at what a candidate can actually do rather than just their background or education. This, of course, can help make the hiring process faster and way more effective. That is where our sponsor, ZipRecruiter, comes in. For those unaware, ZipRecruiter is a hiring platform that helps you find qualified candidates more easily. One super useful feature is that ZipRecruiter suggests screening questions that you can add right to your job post. And this, of course, just helps you immediately spot the right applicants with the skills you need. ZipRecruiter also uses matching technology to quickly show you qualified candidates. That way, you spend less time sorting through applications and more time focused on the right people. You can even filter for applicants who have been active recently, so you can focus on people who are actually ready to take the next step. Let ZipRecruiter help you find amazing candidates with the qualities you seek. Four to five employers who post on ZipRecruiter find a qualified candidate within the first day. And now you can try it for free at ziprecruiter.com/ich, at ziprecruiter.com/ich. Meet your match on ZipRecruiter. And so, to the viewer listening right now, what is some real-world application, some practical advice that you would give to them to better their understanding of AI and how to stay on top of like the best tools? Yeah, three things real quick. Learn as much as you can about AI through I think podcasts is the best way. >> but you should I think you should limit that we should talk about the type of podcast cuz there's so much [ __ ] out there and clickbait. >> I'll give some recommendations. The Moonshots of Peter Peter Diamandis is a great one. Anything with Demis Hassabis, the the head of Google DeepMind, is amazing. >> The All-In podcast. All-In is great. Like real intellectual podcast. That's number one. Number two, >> what, just be aware of AI or do you actually have to start applying it? >> We just have to understand like like we But what about being like cuz awareness isn't really going to necessarily like help you? >> I said what I said three things. That's number one. Number two, consider this is the the era of entrepreneurship. I think starting now for the next 3 years it's going to be easier to be an entrepreneur than ever before in history. AI will be able to give you whatever faculties you need from basically AI agents to your marketing to your lawn and whatever your company needs, it's going to be there for you at the tip of your fingers. I would really consider implementing your passion into monet- and monetizing it through entrepreneurship more than ever. And the third thing I would say is if you already have a job at like a big company or something, be the the AI guy. Be the AI guy at your boring company. That is going to give you job security right now, at least for the foreseeable future. >> lean into, by the way, jobs that are clearly not going to I mean, sorry, but I don't know if you need to be going to design school, right? Or or learning to be an appraiser or Yeah, we should talk about what not to do, not just what to do, like like you said. >> right. I mean, are you going to go with $250,000 in a debt going to law school right now? I I Coming from a lawyer, I'm already having I'm already having Gemini Pro 3, whatever it is, doing all my my legal analysis and it's drafting my contract. >> It's It's incredible. Better than my attorney. It's incre- It'll probably do >> takes 30 seconds. >> Both coming from the two people who were practicing attorneys for years, I would say AI can probably do 50 to 60% of what an attorney can do right now. It'll be able to It'll be able to draft complaints and do legal analysis and do interrogatories, doc review, etc. >> What is going to happen to the legal system in 20 years? Cuz we were talking to Chris Camillo about this. >> 3 years. You won't even probably have human mediators. You'll have AI mediators and it'll be quick it'll be quick. But is AI going to replace judges? Is AI going to replace Not in 3 years, but lawyers There are There's a US There's There's constitutional restrictions, you know, right to a a jury of your peers, etc. That I think But mediation Mediation will probably be AI. The arguments will probably be posited by artificial intelligence on each side. >> most intellectual >> will be using AI. And by the way, AI has already shown to have a much better analysis than judges, much more consistent analysis. >> would be better than a jury? >> briefs to judges that are written by AI. In fact, sometimes they're they're still hallucinating and judges getting pissed off cuz they're citing cases that don't exist. But in 3 years that won't be happening. In 3 years you'll be able to get a brief done in 15 seconds by any >> be human lawyers. But those human lawyers will be 10 times more productive than they were. And so, a law firm can be 10 people instead of 150 people. >> it'll get to the point though where you have two AIs arguing either side? >> are. Well, they probably won't even have to argue. They'll probably just submit the two AIs drafts. And the decision will come out in 2 seconds. They literally already are. Well, you don't only need one AI, but they they are. >> you even have to go through the argument? It'll be instant. >> Unbelievably cost-effective. Think of all the wasted money that goes into Unbelievably cost-effective. >> litigation right now and and trials. >> by entering an age of abundance. I mean, what AI can do for society is going to be pretty [ __ ] incredible. Like this should be an optimistic you know, people should should leave this podcast being optimistic because the it's food's going to be cheaper. >> of life is going to go up so much. >> is going to be >> [clears throat] >> incredible. It's going to be so deflationary. Instead of the $24 billion that California wasted on homeless only for the homeless population to double. That's, by the way, over $100,000 per homeless person that California spent only to create more homeless a bigger homeless problem. You could service every single homeless person for less money with two robots self-charging robots who could be making their bed you know, cleaning their house. >> One could be a cook and a manager. >> officer, too, you know, if if if they're doing drugs and they're in some type of >> We're spending $130,000 per prisoner per year in California. A humanoid robot costs $30,000. And it can It can cook. It can manage. >> of dollars that we're going to be saving when when we can actually utilize humanoid robots in government. And of course, government's going to fight this and be the last freaking industry to to adapt it. >> Yeah, self-preservation. They're going to try. >> it's going to have to. And the savings and the it it's just the what we're the the future is so freaking bright if we don't screw it up. It's so bright and so I'm so optimistic about it and so excited about it because it's all going to happen in the blink of an eye. We don't have to wait for this is not going to be when we're in our 60s and 70s and 80s. It's going to be like the next 10 years, guys. >> Who's most likely to screw it up? >> What does that mean? Government? What country? >> Yeah, you're like, if we don't screw it up. And I'm like, who is who is Probably America. I'll tell you who's not going to screw it up is China cuz they don't have these political [ __ ] issues that we have. They're going full steam ahead no matter what. >> And no one There's no risk of public policy restrictions in China. Does that create the risk of a bubble? That they're investing so much money into these companies. >> I don't think you can over-invest in AI. >> at the end of the of the rainbow is >> trying to develop the cotton gin here. We're trying to develop something that will replace human labor and human intelli- and human intellect. >> talk about the bubble for a second because I think the analogy is you're talking to two people who lived in Silicon Valley in the 1990s. So, we know bubbles. And that's usually what people are talking about when they say is AI is in a bubble. Is it like the dot-com bubble? >> Correct. This is not like that. What What >> Although there are some [ __ ] companies that are just saying they're AI-generated [ __ ] So, there's there's a peripheral [ __ ] around AI. >> what Yeah, of course. I think what people are afraid of is is the capital expenditure worthwhile? Is the $600 billion that the Mag 7 are spending in in um compute and chips and data centers worthwhile? I would argue and it's a reasonable question because we laid an insane amount >> We laid an insane amount of fiber optic cable during the dot-com bust and that ended up not being used for a long time. No no one's going to say that the internet revolution didn't change society. It did. But they laid way too much cable. Same with the wireless issue. I would argue the demand for compute is infinite. It's absolutely infinite. And whoever wins with AI, so to speak, I don't think it's going to be one winner. But if you need to spend $80 billion a year if you're Amazon to stay competitive it I think that's a fraction of what you would lose if you're not in the game when we reach full AGI and/or superintelligence. And if you're not one of the players, it's trillions and trillions and trillions of dollars that you're missing out on. So, no, I don't think we're in a bubble. I don't think they can spend enough. But I think I'm going to I'm going to augment this answer to some degree by saying I think when people talk about a bubble, Bre- Brett takes an analytical kind of financial approach to CapEx. But I think what they're talking about is will the can the stocks go down? And the answer to that is that's just humanity and human nature and and psychology and overreaction. We can't sit here and say that that humans won't overreact to certain indicators and that certain stocks won't go down. That very well could happen. But if you look at the long run, we should you can't overspend in this area. >> Will AI change the world? Yes. Will the companies that are spending the most on AI most likely be the largest players when that happens? Yes. So, is an AI bubble in that sense? No. Now, can Meta and Amazon stock go down, or Tesla stock go down 20, 30%? Who cares? Yes. It absolutely can. But I'm thinking about are we entering an age of abundance? Is humanity going to experience an era that is like no other in human history? I'm thinking more on those levels. And to that extent, no, AI is not in a bubble. I will say one thing because I I said it on your last podcast and I and it's done well and I continue to believe in it. Treasuries. And the reason is is cuz I'm a firm believer in artificial intelligence being extremely deflationary. So, the cost of goods is going to go down, obviously, and services. And we're going to see high unemployment. So, I I just can't see in the near term how we don't the Fed's not going to be chasing this. They're always late. So, I can't see how they're not going to be chasing this and we're we're not going to see some of the lowest interest rates we've ever >> invested in the possibility of deflation and lower interest rates. We both invested heavily in Tesla. >> better you can do than buy long-term bonds if you want to if you want to go be long on the idea that that there's going to be lower interest rates in the future. >> But I think long term, if you're not in the Mag 7, 10 years from now, you're probably going to regret that. If you have, you know, disposable income and you want to be investing. How else are you investing outside of that? Like what else are you buying that you think is going to Venture venture cards and and collectibles. Some collectibles. And that's that's honestly because I love them. And I would I started that collecting well Also also I would say land, real estate, but even more specifically land heavy real estate. And and I can argue that it's Selfishly location matters. >> Newport Beach, LA, weather. Yeah, but When when you don't have to work. You don't have to live in in Illinois. >> can build homes, but not land. That's that's why I'm just for the audience saying why I think I would go more land heavy. When robots, this is going to be a long time from now, not because they won't have the ability to do it technically, but because we won't have enough robots to be doing it. But eventually they could probably build a house for a hell of a lot cheaper. But they aren't going to create land, and they're not going to create land in LA where we have perfect weather. >> And and they won't create things like again, I'm I'm selfishly referring to collectibles cuz I I've been in this game for a long time. But I still also believe that that those types of things that are that are human in nature and that are uh that can't be produced by artificial intelligence will be what's valuable. The flex might be a Honus Wagner card, right? That might be what the talked about how we always have a demand for, you know, hierarchy in in in society. Um so, it might be the we have to try to figure out what the flexes are. different flexes. >> but close. It's going to be rare. It's going to be rarity. It's going to come down to rarity. Not just clothes. Not not not So, what's a good value today though? What do you think is a good value today that you could buy this year that you think will go up in value? It's maybe undervalued right now. Well, I still I still want to believe >> much undervalued cuz there's so much money on the sidelines and that was on the sidelines after COVID that has now come back into everything. So, almost everything is valued pretty highly right now. >> I I would still still say though AI cannot create land in a good area. And and we look what look what's happened though ironically and this is only because of California policy. The the real idea is people don't need to work from home. I can work from home now, right? They don't have to be in the office. In in a in a kind of a utopian you know, idealistic uh you know, thought experiment people would be leaving Texas and coming to California because why would I mean I mean objectively you'd want to live in California under the sun. Um if it wasn't for California policy >> policies and a residence You get you get rid of all the other stupid California policies um and California is the destination for the the global destination once in an age of abundance where there's no work or you certainly don't have to work from, you know, in Austin or somewhere else where there's difficult weather. Uh now, I granted there are different aspects of people's families and friends. >> ask Let me ask you guys, if you had everything right now, all the clothes, food, housing, etc. what would you want? And by the way, I don't know if I would want much if I have the house and >> That's why we're naming [ __ ] that doesn't matter like collectibles. That's why I because I have money and I I have everything that I need. So, I'm starting to I bought the John Riggins Super Bowl jersey. It's It's exactly that kind of stuff. It's the stuff that you don't need. It probably will go up in value. The rare collectibles that you don't need ironically I think will be the most valuable. If we're right about the age of abundance, which I think we are, then that stuff will be more valuable. But that's beautiful. If if what separates the poor and the rich is freaking baseball cards, that's amazing. That's best case scenario. If we all have food and we all have cars and we all have housekeepers and we all have etc. and education medical care then I would much rather the difference between a rich and a poor person being who has a old Ferrari than it is who can freaking have food on their table. or education and say let's say you were you were writing a you know, a book about a utopian society 50 years ago. Who knows it doesn't matter when you wrote it. There wouldn't presumably in a in a kind of an idealistic utopian society there wouldn't be work. You certainly wouldn't be working to survive. You may be working as a fetish. You may be working, you know, because it's enjoyable. But the idea whatever whatever book you wrote >> Sure, but whatever whatever you're writing about, you're not saying, oh, in in my utopian society people must work to survive. That can't be. So, from an optimistic perspective we are moving towards utopia. We are moving towards not having to work in an age of abundance. That is Can I make a side point? It's arguable. Yeah, in 1 second. That is almost the definition of a utopian society. I'm not saying it's going to be utopia, but we're going to have very low crime. We're going to all be able to eat, drink, drive, have leisure activity, not have to work. medical care, education Yeah, I mean we really are going to be living the definition of utopian society. There's a lot of reasons to be optimistic here. What So, what the side point I want to make is most jobs are horrible. Okay, like we're luxury real estate agents in LA. You guys are podcasters. Okay, but most jobs suck. I mean you're you're driving to work in traffic. You're sitting at a freaking computer in a cubicle all goddamn day. I mean Or you're up on a hot roof nailing you know, two by fours. >> suck. So, let's just be real here. I mean the less of those the better as far as I'm concerned. I don't Like oh, we're going to lose each other. Yeah, most of the jobs we're going to lose suck. We were we were lawyers at big law firms. I'm sorry, but I don't see there's not a I I would have rathered someone just give me a 100 grand a year. And by the way, I I don't want to >> don't know about UBI. I don't know about UBI cuz I think a lot of people I think a lot of people misinterpret these studies. If you do it an analysis of the of the UBI studies that have been small, there have been multiple studies and I think there's a misdiagnosis of those studies as where people were not satisfied or not happy with the Yes. And those studies and my analysis well is completely opposite. >> Okay, but hold on. The studies have shown Because during long term studies Let me just tell the audience. Okay, fine. The studies have shown often times that UBI has been a disaster in the sense >> Totally disagree. After 1 year, their level of happiness First of all, they're not investing very well. Secondly, their their level of happiness after 1 year is Totally disagree. That's what the studies say. Okay, go ahead. No. The studies show an increase in happiness for almost everyone including at different age groups, even people that were working or poor Obviously, if you give it to poor people, they're going to increase their happiness. Over time longer than a year. >> only time that you saw the happiness decrease and and actually went below was when they ended the program or or close to the end of the program when they knew that it was ending they got anxiety and stress. In a longitudinal UBI practice, go go do a deep dive right now. You will see the study Yes. Have you read the books about the people that won the lottery and how unhappy they are like 3 years later? >> That's not UBI. Just not UBI. I would rather Can we agree that we would rather UBS? Or no? What is UBS? Services? >> Yeah. Because that's how I think we should we should provide >> UBS before. We should provide instead of giving people money, which they usually suck at. Did you see how busy Rodeo Drive was in Hold on. Let me just make this point. How busy was Rodeo Drive it during [snorts] COVID? when we all got the stimulus It was insane. People were buying furniture. People do not know how to handle discretionary income. It's a fact. I don't care what studies Well, who cares? It's going to be a mix of UBI and UBS, obviously, cuz you're going to have you're going to provide people robots. Look, you get a humanoid robot. You you get a medical care. You get food. You get etc. as opposed to you get Let's let's call it a confluence of the two. It's obviously going to be both. And we're not just giving them money so they can go buy drugs or something like that. Obviously, you're going to Fine. We provide them a humanoid robot. The point is when you That that I would be for. There there is a lot of studies that show that UBI/UBS works if it is consistent and you don't take it away. So, I'm optimistic that we're that that humans have always been able to adapt. When we were in in tribes thousands of years ago, we we derived satisfaction from different things. We derived it from storytelling. We derived it from religion. We derived it from family. We derived it from, you know, raising children in a collective. There's so many >> out of the bones of the animals we killed or whatever. >> Exactly. There's so many ways to to derive human purpose. Now, it's great that we derive human purpose from work. Why? Because we've been inculcated as children and capitalism must survive by inculcating the value of work. So, I get that. And right now we do derive. But the idea that somehow purpose is inextricably tied to work is is is is not is simply not the case. We've created that social construct and we can and we can we can decouple it and we can reattach purpose to the many other things that I think are more valuable. >> or ethics Great or or hobbies or hobbies or passions or or intellectual endeavors. He says that you will be happy to the degree that you are productive. No. Well, hold on. That's not that's not necessarily inconsistent. If if productive doesn't necessarily mean with work. >> Fine. If you take a broad holistic view of productivity >> You can educate yourself. So, I I don't disagree with that. Depending on what you mean by talking to family. It depends on what you mean by productive. You'd have to follow up on fine with The point is it's a very It's probably offering some sort of benefit to society. That you are contributing to something bigger than yourself. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I But but that's because I am a construct of my social structure. I'm a construct of the education the American capitalist education. I So, of course I derive my my value from that. But young people can be taught that value that that purpose comes from so many different things and when they grow up they don't attach it just to work. So what I'm saying is we we can be a couple I derive I derive happiness from friendships, from acquiring knowledge, I love that, from good sex, from good food, from a lot of things that are completely separate from my work. >> you know, enjoyable dinners with friends, to traveling, and to experiences, to going to an F1 race, to going to the Cannes Film Festival, to hanging out with you guys on the podcast. are productive to buying you guys lunch for 12 straight years. >> think that That's actually false. I don't think that that's what Graham thinks about that. It's exactly what >> Graham hasn't paid for lunch since the early 70s. I mean if you if you want to ask Yeah, I can pull up the receipts because you didn't >> on. I Let me state the facts and then you can and then you can disagree. >> to see your receipts? Go ahead. He hasn't received Why don't you see that first? sponsoring Graham's lunches for over 11 years straight. 99% of Graham's lunches I I I I have paid. Go ahead. 80% responsible for his work here. hurts. I think Okay, there you go. Are these your your pants? Are you going to show me the receipt for like one lunch that you bought at some point? Cuz you did You want my underwear? I mean they'd be baggy on you. >> [laughter] >> Go ahead. Go ahead. Nothing you can say can disprove this. Graham, just admit it. >> [laughter] >> Admit what? Just admit that I've been buying you lunch for 12 years. Yeah yeah, but it's all one. >> [laughter] >> So So it doesn't say oh you bought one lunch. >> [gasps] >> So I don't necessarily disagree. Go ahead. Let Let Jack go. I don't disagree with you subsidizing Graham's life. That that I don't think he subsidizes his life. I don't necessarily have a problem with that, but you did mention that like hey every time I go out with you guys I pay and that's actually categorically false. If anything >> I I have no problem paying. If anything I actually think it's two to two right now. Maybe with you with Jack. Oh fine with you, but I'm saying but Graham it's it's probably This is not an exaggeration. It's probably 850 to three. Okay, well we're not saying >> the last time that we got lunch. The last time. Where was that at? I'm not talking about you. Let me see what it That was Narrows. Yeah yeah. Jack Fair. We're two and two. But But in fairness you paid for it so you could show your audience that you paid for it. That's not true. I didn't know I was going to bring it up. Graham It's only because It's like can you send me Can you Can you send me the digital receipt of that, please? And And by the way I think I've bought Graham hundreds of dinners cuz what he would do is order a big lunch and then he would pack half of it to go for dinner. So I've really been buying your lunch So I actually He's He's mentioned this plenty of times. So he said it was actually like a frugal life hack. My hack was that you would take the office out to lunch and there would be maybe five to seven people, but everyone would only eat half. And so I would take everybody's halves. Well also you know what he would do? What he would do is he would encourage us to get like quesadillas so they were like discrete, you know, parcels of food that he could take home as opposed like a half-eaten something. He would encourage that? >> Yeah, I think he would actually encourage parcels of food. Yeah, don't get the soup. [laughter] You get a burrito, but split that in In fact he would say oh he he wants a burrito cut in half. Yeah, or he wants the the quesadilla sliced. >> at your food after you left. We have created wealth for each other independently through completely different approaches cuz I've never been frugal and I'm an exa- I think I'm an example of you can be hard working and successful and be the opposite of frugal and be, you know, wealthy. Whereas you took a different approach. >> What's the biggest financial Hail Mary you've ever had? You mean what? I Opening the office on Sunset. What do you mean by Hail Mary? Like taking on excessive risk for where you should going all in on one thing. Oh, the office. >> The first office on Sunset. Yeah, if I Graham was like my first agent in the You're my first agent? No, this this office right here. Well because I I I I signed up for a 10-year lease at I don't know whatever it was. 10,000 a month. 10,000 a month. And I had no agents and I had no And no money. Yeah, it was just me. I had no brokerage. So that was the biggest How much of your net worth did you put in the build out in the office space? I I think it was about 300,000 and it was in 2014. I was probably of us cash In 2014, yeah, I was probably worth about a million dollars. I think I probably had So you put about half. About a third of it, but I also was then on the hook for for hundreds of thousands of dollars of of lease payments. And how confident were you at the time that it was going to work out? 70 80%? Uh well yeah cuz I think it that's an interesting question because I I think I was naively confident. So I but you know and I think I almost knew that I was naively confident. But even at the time But you were fine with it. What even at that time? I also have you have higher than 80? Well I also had had worked hard for a few years and and and and I've always I also didn't have much concern about going backwards too. You know, I had lived in a $1,400 apartment. Again, I didn't I was happy then. I was happy you know, while I was doing well in real estate. I don't know. I just not a good question because I think I was naively I knew that things would work out and at the same time I knew that I would be fine if they didn't. And but I think that's a unique situation. I'm not recommending it necessarily. I think it was probably most 90% of business school students would have said that was a dumb investment. Yeah. Arguably one of the biggest differences between uh you and I Graham and I think we know each other very well is that I think I spend money on things that make me happy and quality of life and I think you are generally more more concerned {slash} pessimistic uh pessimistic and careful and I and you live a great quality of life and you're happy, but I you're less indulgent than I am and and I think it's okay to be indulgent. I don't think it's it's necessarily beneficial to be going through life spending money based on a worst-case scenario. I don't. I I think I think you allowing yourself to indulge as long as you can get past the the mental anxiety that it might create you is is is a net positive. Had I had your your approach of of anxious pessimism, I wouldn't have opened the office and I wouldn't have been able to, you know, have that have the company and have the expansion. >> at it this way, Graham. Um can you afford the worst-case scenario? I take the worst case, which was the Great Depression of 1929 and then can it get a little worse 35% drop. Yeah, 82 Yeah, I take an 82% drop and then I assume my income goes to zero. At the same time my lifestyle has to go up. Let's just say we have kids and then uh there's there's a health problem and then one of my parents gets >> Can I counter this? Yeah, please. During the Great Depression, those who had any amount of wealth after the crash had the best buying and opportunity and the best opportunity for appreciation in the last century. And appreciation. And that's what I I said what I said. I said If you are not forced to sell and if you can weather that worst-case scenario, you'll actually And you'll still have some And every time in American history of the last 150 years that we've seen that type of crash, if you were able to persevere and not be forced to sell, that within 10 within 10 years you'd be wealthier than ever before. But even if you don't, you are wealthier than ever before within 10 years. So just don't As long as you're not forced to sell. My My fear is always saying oh just because for the last 150 years it's done that doesn't mean it's always Even though I agree that there's a 90 plus It's more likely that AI wipes you out. And it doesn't matter if you have a worst-case scenario. >> of of the existential threat of AI wiping out humanity is higher than that scenario. A worse than um Great Depression type of crash that lasts for multiples longer, that's less than 1% what you're talking about. Also that house would be Let's Let's keep going on this. That's the main thing is that what I find interesting is whenever Graham is kind of at a crossroads where he's like should I spend the money should I not spend the money. This house for example, he reached out to Jason to get Jason's opinion on and Jason gave some crazy numbers in terms of you're spending half of your income every single year. Graham is spending like less than 2% of what he could withdraw from his investment account every year. Yeah. And so and but that still was not necessarily I I don't even want to share with your audience what percent of my income I What percent of your income High. It's embarrassing and I'm not happy about it. But I mean this is what happens. Your lifestyle gets like you catch up to your income. Your lifestyle just you just adapt slowly. You get You know what I mean? And you end up like how the hell am I spending this every month? He He looks at what he spends. I I don't. I just like to make sure that I'm increasing my wealth every year and if I am I don't give a [ __ ] what I spent. [clears throat] And how do you measure your increased wealth? I do an analysis of my net worth. And does it have to go up a certain percentage every year? No no no. As long as you're What percent do you typically go up per year? Oh, of my net worth? I've never looked at it like that, but I generally add millions to my net worth every year. Um And and I'm spending a [ __ ] ton. So >> advice that I would that I would give your audience is don't chase wealth, chase the trajectory of wealth. I would rather and I would be much happier and sleep much better if I was if I died at 50 million versus a billion, but I was wealthier every year until that 50 million as opposed to I died at a billion, but I went to a billion and then down to 100 million and then up to 3 billion and then down to 400 million. That will drive you crazy and it's not what you want even if you die wealthier. It's just not worth it for your happiness, your peace of mind, and your sleep, and your stress levels, and your health. Just wish upon I wish upon everybody just a trajectory towards becoming wealthier every year and even if it's much much slower than you would than you would like. And and I I think on top of that it's it's a process and if you're not enjoying the process, if you're somehow thinking I'll be happy when I have X money, I I could not come up with a worst possible approach to life because one, I guarantee you that will change. I mean I I remember the the numbers I used to have when I was young, you know, 10 15 years ago. You Those numbers always increase. And by the way, I would say if you were to ask me the happiest years of my life, um although I've had just a wonderful life and I think I'm, you know, I'm very happy right now, but I if I had to point, I'd probably I'd probably be interested in your take. I would probably say junior college. I was going to say junior college. 18 to 20 where I had very little money. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Yeah, no money. Um and, you know, wearing a a wife beater and working on my '69 Camaro, you know, 5 hours a day in a you know, in a ROP uh class, working at as a as a waiter or as a as a barback, hanging out with my buddies, eating the burritos at the Roach Coach. We'd go to Subway, we'd split a footlong to save money, or we'd go to the Roach Coach, you know, and get a burrito. Probably probably six times a week. >> the dollar sub was at Subway, we'd eat that like 5 days a week. >> what I was saying. We'd split it in Subway. >> Insane. I must have had Subway I think I had Subway 250 times in 1 year. >> driving like a a total beater. >> would have been like 6'6" if I didn't do that. >> And and and so happy. Just really, really happy years. Partying, hanging out. >> I will add to that also that we know a lot of really wealthy people and and the relationship between extreme wealth and happiness is is it's it's disconnected. And beyond that, nobody hits a billion dollars never once in the history of billionaires did somebody hit a billion dollar net worth and be like, "I'm done. I did it. I can chill." >> And now I'm happy. >> It's just not the way it works. Like, "Oh, 2 billion. Well, that guy has a bigger yacht." Well, that's just human nature. It doesn't change because you're wealthy. It's the same human nature. You still will get jealous of people who have more than you. You don't just get to this point of like, "Okay, now I really I'm going to golf every day and be and be and live this amazing lifestyle like I thought when I was 17." >> Uh to a certain degree, once you get some money, it's super helpful. Because if you go to if you can go to dinner and you can just buy buy dinner, you know, if I can take you guys to lunch like I do. And and I don't have to worry about it. You then then you're wealthy. The extra million dollars so that I can go buy the John Riggins Super Bowl jersey and the Ford GT the the incremental happiness that I get is like a point one. >> So, what what I mean to say is that the incremental happiness really starts to like the the curve starts to >> It depends on where you live. In in LA, the the value is going to be >> be making $300,000 a year. [ __ ] I'd rather be making $100,000 a year living in LA with good friends and a healthy family and a and my little dog and great people in the office than be a billionaire without that. >> What are the main things that are very much worth spending money on? Business class seats. You know what's funny? I used to I used to I used to think that business class seats was the worst expenditure of money on planet Earth. I'd be like, "How the [ __ ] does somebody spend $9,000 when I can fly there for $400?" That's the dumbest $9,000 you could possibly spend. And now it's to me it's like the best money that I could possibly spend. I I just >> But other than that, I would say good food. I love good food. Um >> I think vacations. Oh, you know what I was going >> Vacations, yeah. You know what I would say? I where I enjoy spending money the most is on other people. Uh and I don't mean that to come across as like somehow, you know, No, I really don't. Yeah, that's what I meant. It's not what I meant to be. >> [laughter] >> So, I like No, not philanthropy. Because of that there's not direct. >> kidding. Um I mean, I I do philanthropy anyway. I do a lot of things. >> [laughter] >> Um yeah, I really like being able to stupid as this is, I like being able to go to dinner with my friends and getting dinner and just every single time. I like to we're going to Stagecoach. I am getting the house and I really enjoy that. I'm getting the artist passes. Not for you. You got to pay for your own. Yeah. >> Um but I really take pride in the fact that that I you know, I I enjoy >> to give me an artist pass? No. It does. It does. Doing things for you does make me enjoy it. >> But I I enjoy that more than anything because I think the the I don't know. The the best thing you can do with money is is increase the happiness of those people around you. I'm I'm like very utilitarian in that respect. So, I I do appreciate that. >> I mean, that's why we enjoy buying you guys lunch. I appreciate it. >> least we could do. Yeah. Lunch in the in the singular. It's philanthropy. I think we had Ponche's Tacos before. Pinche's. Yeah, you did have you did give me Pinche's. Yeah. Uh the only other question I was curious what was the last argument you two had? It's every day. I don't know. >> Yeah, but [clears throat] but we don't we don't argue in the way that we used to. We don't fistfight anymore much. What's the last fistfight? What's the last fistfight you guys had? We don't really go at it like the last few years. I think we pushed each other I think he's finally learned his lesson. >> Yeah. Did you win the last fistfight? No, I beat him up in a parking lot, I think, and then the police had to had to actually pull me off of him. So, I think I won that one. >> did you When did you Wait, wait, hold on. So, you had pinned him down and you just kept wailing on him when he was already pinned? Yeah, we It's hard to pick us up. Our friends have had to bring us back to >> winners and losers in our fistfights. >> god, yes. I I I I can beat Brett up and I beat him up all the >> only time either of us ever got knocked out was when? >> I Oh my god, this story. Brett thinks he knocked I literally He didn't get up for a while. >> First of all, we were like we were like 9 years old. Second of all, I laid there because I wanted him to come back over so I could kick the [ __ ] out of him. And he was too smart to come back over. That's the only reason I laid there. He tells this story with your eyes closed. What about the time No, I was pretending like I was hurt. >> where you where you started bleeding out of your nose when I hit you in the face and you were like, "That's 18 drops of blood. I'm going to [ __ ] kill you." And he's just counting the drops of blood like You know what? I think my point I think my point is proven by the fact that Brett remembers the two times that he got his ass beat. While you remember one, I remember 2,000 times Get one piece of evidence of one specific >> Thank you. I'll name two. Jason Garrett. >> I will literally give you a piece of evidence right now. >> The floor is yours. The floor is yours. You're the floor is going to be yours It's two to zero. It's two to two to zero in stories of getting your ass beat by your brother. Brett, let's just be honest. Have we been honest this entire pod? Let's be honest. I've kicked your ass your entire life. Just be honest. 99% of the time. In the most extreme examples of getting your ass beat >> Oh my god, this guy is a lawyer. He He is such a [ __ ] lawyer. So, he just lawyers everything. But in a lot of the um ass kickings >> a lot of the lesser ass kickings, I've been I've taken the brunt of that. >> Yeah. Who benches more between you two? I do. I'm stronger than him. Actually, he's gotten pretty strong lately. He's pretty strong. For most of our lives, I've been able to to to physically dominate him. >> Well, it's not because of strength, it's because he will bite and scratch >> [laughter] >> It's just he has no moral virtue in fighting whereas I do. I will win. That's what he means. >> He would beat me up in He tried to beat me [clears throat] up in front of my mom on her birthday last I'm I'm more physically dominant in a five-star hotel lobby in front of my mom on her birthday. He has no [ __ ] shame. No shame. >> Brett, how old Because Brett has a mouth on him. Because he just doesn't know when to stop. Brett's antagonistic and has a mouth and I So, I would use my physical dominance and Brett would use his mouth. And if he mouthed, I would I would Can you imagine [laughter] a worse a worse time to do something stupid on your mom's birthday in front of her in the lobby of a five-star hotel? >> Brett, you must have said something antagonis You must have been an antagonis Do you remember what it was that you said? Just stupid No, he stuff. He just has no off switch when he gets mad. >> How long ago was this? Two years ago. >> This was only two years ago. It was last year. I don't remember. Dude, it was in San Francisco when we took Mom to the Berkeley speech. It was last year. Yes, it was. It was like a year a year ago this week. Yeah, and by the way, he was talking [ __ ] and I literally said, "Bro, say another [ __ ] word and I'm going to take you down." And we were in the lobby of a really nice hotel. >> In front of my mom on her birthday. >> He wouldn't shut his mouth. Brett, what did you say? This is what I'm dealing with. >> He's an antagonist. >> you say? What did you say after he said that? >> he blames me like somehow like being physical is worse than than being antagonistic. But you didn't you stop talking once he said that. >> No, he didn't. He keeps up He can't stop talking. >> you didn't take him down then. I did take him down and then he keeps talking. So, you guys actually did end up fighting. >> Yes, we did end up fighting. Yes, I do remember that. Yes, and I won. But we don't do it nearly as Pretty soon, you'll be able to settle this with AI. Not our fights. Not our fights. I think the last thing that AI is >> But we do it a lot less. A lot. Like we get along way better than we used to. At what point do you know when to stop fighting? >> We don't. We don't really know. When we get separated. >> Yeah, police. My mom's crying. >> How long does it take to like get over that? No, 10 minutes. Oh, quickly. 10 minutes. It probably took us 30 minutes that day cuz that was a really bad physical fight. We really got under each other's skin. But within 30 minutes, we were fine. Usually anywhere from 30 seconds to 30 minutes. It's like the two cats. Yeah, I don't >> [laughter] >> I don't understand except that one cat's bigger and stronger. But yes. You There shouldn't be a There shouldn't be an aspect of his personality There shouldn't be an aspect of his personality that surprises you by now. Doesn't surprise me. And so, why but if you're able to predict that he's able to say something, then why would you >> emotional maturity is the answer to the question you're posing. What? Why you can't stop talking? >> Why you can't just >> Why you can't be antagonistic? >> take the antagonism without getting physical. >> you just take the beating or >> [laughter] >> or shut your mouth? Or shut your mouth. That's the worst sentence ever uttered on a podcast in >> [laughter] >> history. Someone's going to say, "Take the mics away." at this point. Oh my god, dude. >> was a good one. All right. Thank you so much for coming on. Brett, you know who you would really enjoy talking to is Chris Camillo when it comes to the AI talks. If if this does well, we'd love to bring in Chris to talk to you about AI. He is our AI guy and you'll have a great discussion. That's so intelligent about this topic. I I love I love that we had the opportunity. Thank you so much for watching the podcast. Really appreciate it. And if you want to see our next episode early access with Sophie Rain, this is an episode that initially YouTube didn't like it. We had to cut around it. We had to do some censoring. But if you want to see the entire episode in its full form as it is before it goes public to everyone else, feel free to join as a channel member. Get access to this episode along with every other episode uncut and uncensored. Enjoy. Thank you so much and until next time.