00:00:00
What are your thoughts, Freeberg, on the kurfluffle, the Donny Brookke, the bruhaha between Elon and President
00:00:07
Trump? There's a lot of people that are making accurate declarations that federal spending needs to be reduced,
00:00:14
the deficit needs to be shrunk, we are in a debt death spiral, and they are absolutely correct. So, I don't think
00:00:22
that Elon is off the reservation when he makes those comments and he's talked about this continuously and he dedicated
00:00:30
months of his life to operating Doge and trying to bring to light some of the extraordinary operating inefficiencies
00:00:38
in the federal government that should be addressed and I think, you know, we'll see what happens. Jury's still out. for
00:00:43
those actions to get permanent, they I believe need to mandate them in a appropriations bill. And the White House
00:00:51
has publicly declared that they are going to move forward with an appropriations bill to try and cement
00:00:56
some of the Doge actions. So I'm hopeful, but I think Elon's right with respect to the spending. I will provide
00:01:05
the voice I have heard publicly stated from the alternative view from the White House, which is this is not the bill to
00:01:12
do that because it mostly focuses on these mandatory spending programs and they are addressing cost savings to some
00:01:20
degree in these mandatory spending programs while keeping the tax rates where they are or reducing tax rates in
00:01:26
some cases which the expectation is will stimulate GDP growth. So the White House
00:01:32
view is also a view that you could look at and say economically I could see a path here that does make sense. You're
00:01:39
reducing spending only on mandatory programs. You're going to come back with an appropriations bill to address
00:01:44
discretionary spending. And then the final kind of action that the White House might take which we've heard about
00:01:49
separately is empoundment that at the end of the fiscal year they may come back and say all the money that we saved
00:01:55
by not spending it we can actually recover through empoundment. And the CBO has not accounted for tariff revenue.
00:02:05
And just looking at the recent deal done with Vietnam, Vietnam's about $130 billion a year of uh imports to the
00:02:11
United States. And they did a deal that they announced two days ago with a 20% tariff on Vietnam, which you know, if
00:02:19
Vietnam's import volume does not increase, is about 26 billion a year of incremental revenue for the federal
00:02:26
government. So there's an argument that Bessant and Lutnik and others are making
00:02:32
that you guys have failed to recognize that we've got a few other things we have up our sleeve that we're going to
00:02:37
do. We're going to do empoundment. We're going to do this appropriations bill. We've got more revenue coming in. Net
00:02:42
net. We will get the deficit down to where we need to be. In fact, Scott Besson was on TV saying over and over,
00:02:47
we're going to get the deficit below 3% of GDP, which is the key target here. But the immediate reaction to this bill,
00:02:54
I think that Elon is having is the same that I've had and it is the same that Senator Johnson had and is the same that
00:02:59
many others have had, which is what the f are we doing? We are in a fiscal emergency in this country and we're not
00:03:05
addressing it. So, I think both points of view can be valid and both sides can have a good kind of argument for why the
00:03:13
bill should be passed and why the bill shouldn't be passed. The White House has declared that this is the only way
00:03:18
they're going to get some of the programs done that they believe they need to get done. for national security
00:03:23
like the ICE border stuff and these are things that they believe they need to get done but a lot of folks are looking
00:03:30
at the numbers and saying this just isn't enough and you're now increasing the deficit by cutting taxes. One of the
00:03:35
things the CBO does not do though is they don't have a strong model and there's a ton of economic debate on this
00:03:41
point which is how do tax cuts stimulate GDP growth and job creation and income growth for people with jobs. The one
00:03:49
argument is when you cut taxes, more dollars flow into the economy, more jobs are created, more businesses are
00:03:56
created, the GDP grows, income for other people grows. The alternative argument is it's a tax cut for the rich. What are
00:04:03
you doing? They're going to put that money in their pocket. It's only going to benefit themselves. So that's I think
00:04:07
a key crux in the argument that you'll never get to a resolution on. The one side will use that one argument and the
00:04:15
other side will use the other argument. So look, I mean with respect to Elon and
00:04:19
Trump, I will say one thing very importantly. I don't think MAGA can exist successfully without the tech
00:04:25
alignment. I don't think tech can exist without MAGA because of the government alignment and the importance of the
00:04:32
government allowing these new technologies like AI to come to market and to proliferate. I don't think that
00:04:38
these two can exist in isolation and in conflict with one another. Elon is the de facto king of tech. he is the person
00:04:46
that is saying look if I'm in conflict with Trump tech is in conflict with Trump or that at least that is the
00:04:51
perception on the MAGA side and I think that that is very risky for both sides to allow a conflict to kind of endure
00:04:59
and I do think that both sides have heads that are going to be cooler that will prevail here and I do think that
00:05:06
these two are going to recognize the importance of being codependent if you will in being able to progress their
00:05:12
respective agendas. Chimath, your thoughts on the kurluffle seem to be winding down and maybe
00:05:20
reaching some sort of endgame. It feels like we're in some sort of an endgame here. And if there is one, what is it?
00:05:28
I mean, I think it's just important to recognize that on the one side you have the most powerful person in the world
00:05:36
and on the other side you have the most important powerful entrepreneur and richest man in the world. And when you
00:05:43
have people that are that accomplished, it's not as if you're going to get along
00:05:49
100% of the time. So I think a lot of the breathlessness around all of this stuff is overblown. I think the reality
00:05:56
is that when push comes to shove, I think that they agree on more things than they probably disagree.
00:06:05
And I think when everybody realizes that the alternative is essentially some insane form of socialism and
00:06:16
redistribution, I think the alliance will hold and that they'll find some common
00:06:24
ground. Jason, what do you think? Well, I think you're right. These two individuals are used to speaking their
00:06:30
mind and they're both really good at social media and then there's no better media cycle than covering the two of
00:06:37
them battling it out and trading barbs. But I think what Elon did this cycle was
00:06:44
really interesting. He started a preference stack for Trump and that cascade, preference
00:06:51
cascade, preference stack, however you want to phrase it, you know, I think played a large role, if not the role in
00:06:57
getting Trump elected. People can debate that. I don't know that you can perfectly know what that $250 million
00:07:04
and all that effort he put in, you know, what that did in terms of Trump's chances. Trump probably would have won
00:07:10
anyway versus Kamla, but maybe not. Putting that aside, the platform Elon has refined during this political cycle
00:07:17
is one that resonates and I think it's a really good idea for him to maybe if he's going to be involved in politics,
00:07:24
pull that string and just crisply define it. And I was thinking about it over the
00:07:30
last couple days and I think it hits into four basic groups. Balance budget and government efficiency. That's kind
00:07:37
of one. fiscal responsibility, sustainable energy, which obviously he's been passionate about, and he's the
00:07:42
leader in solar, batteries, EVs, and then manufacturing in the United States, which he also is the leader in, and
00:07:48
pronatalism, and just, you know, the uh the population crisis. He really cares about those four issues. So what I think
00:07:55
he should do is take that America pack and instead of making it like just pro MAGA, he should just clearly define what
00:08:02
it is that he believes. Small set of issues and then he should go and back the people who are running to to be in
00:08:10
Congress and senators and just say, "Hey, here is what I would like you to be in favor of." And do what Norquist
00:08:17
did with his no new taxes pledge. Do some sort of pledge like that. I don't know if it needs to be a new party, but
00:08:22
just really crisply define what matters to him. If he's going to be involved in politics, then get people to agree on
00:08:28
it. And if he wants to give them donations, as is his right, as is his pack's right, to raise money, he could
00:08:34
represent, I think, a very world positive view. Sustainable energy, just incredible execution, and a really
00:08:41
efficient government. He should technical excellence, technical excellence, excellence at large, and
00:08:46
America. Just go for it. and and and it doesn't have to be personal against Trump. One of the big problems with
00:08:51
Trump is he he has a bunch of sick offense around him and the more you kind of appease him and just blindly follow
00:08:59
him, I think the closer you the perception is that's the closer you get to him. I don't know that that's true. I
00:09:04
think he likes debating stuff. So, I think he should embrace the people who debate it with him and then those people
00:09:10
should just crisply say here's what I stand for and I'm putting my money behind it. I hope we're in alignment,
00:09:15
but I'm going to stay in my lane and I'm going to prioritize what matters to me.
00:09:18
And Elon's priorities are exceptionally sharp and well- definfined, and he should pursue them. Yeah. Jury's out on
00:09:26
where this ends up and the broader picture. You guys will get annoyed because I've talked about Ray Dalio so
00:09:35
much, but I think he's done an amazing job in the last 5 years basically explaining everything we've seen from
00:09:42
global conflict to the internal conflict, the rise of socialism in the US and the relationship to the debt and
00:09:48
deficit cycle. He just posted on Twitter yesterday that he went to DC to discuss
00:09:53
the budget deficit with senior people on both sides of the aisle. and he said, "It's clear to me that we are unlikely
00:09:58
to change the debt trajectory we're on and avoid the painful consequences." And he talked a lot about this concept of
00:10:04
absolutist politics. And this is the same reaction I've had every time I've gone to DC and we've met with members of
00:10:09
Congress. And if you guys remember from the beginning, I said Doge isn't going to be it. As much as Elon can identify
00:10:15
and resolve to a better way of operating the federal government's agencies, you cannot change the spending without a
00:10:21
change in statute from Congress. You have to get Congress to act. And every time I met with members of Congress,
00:10:27
their incentive is to keep the money flowing to their districts. That's what they focus on. And every year their
00:10:32
districts want more in different contexts, in different forms, through different programs. And that's what
00:10:37
their job is. Their job is to go to DC to represent their state's interest or their local district's interests and say
00:10:42
we need to make sure that we're taken care of as the money flows. And as a result, everything keeps getting bigger
00:10:47
and bigger and spiraling away. At the end of the day, the way we economically save America, if we even have a shot
00:10:53
without money printing, which a lot of people like Bology and Dalio and others are now indicating is what's going to
00:10:58
happen is we're going to end up inflating away or printing away all of the debt that we've taken on is to get
00:11:03
to a 333, which Bessent has highlighted is also his goal. 3% federal deficit to GDP, 3% GDP growth, and 3% inflation.
00:11:14
And just to give you a sense of where those numbers sit today, the current estimate is 6% deficit to GDP, 2.4%
00:11:20
inflation. So we've actually got a little bit of room to run on inflation. And GDP growth this year of 1.4%.
00:11:27
So will the tax cuts in this bill increase GDP growth? Will AI increase GDP growth? The jury is out. Will the
00:11:36
tariff revenue reduce the deficit more than the CPO is estimating? And the increased GDP growth reduce the deficit?
00:11:42
The jury is still out. And what will happen with inflation? And if the Fed cuts rates, you're going to see
00:11:48
inflation climb a little bit more. Maybe the tariffs effect on inflation will still come through. Some folks have said
00:11:53
that hasn't hit yet, but it will come later this year. Will we exceed 3%. Inflation TBD. So the jury is still very
00:12:01
much out on whether these actions that are being taken, which Bessant has declared is going to get us to that 333
00:12:08
number. But then a lot of folks who are looking at this with a cold stare with like no political influence with no
00:12:14
political intention not representing a party not representing an administration like Ray Dalio are saying what the there
00:12:23
is no way we're going to get there. Bology I think you know pointed out in his tweet his point is actually a very
00:12:28
good point which is our debt is not just the federal debt but there's other debt
00:12:34
that we're not even accounting for. consumer debt. I've said this in the past. There's there's actually corporate
00:12:39
debt. Yeah. The business debt, consumer debt. There's also state and local debt.
00:12:45
And then the one key number that we never talk about is the unaccounted for liabilities in public pension funds,
00:12:51
which is on the order of trillions of dollars more. So when you add all of this up, someone's going to pay the
00:12:56
bills on all that debt or we're going to have to inflate away that debt by printing money. And at some point, the
00:13:01
trains left the station. A lot of people are saying, "We're done. There's no way
00:13:04
out of this. So, you know, the Elon Trump battle is like an interesting kind of side kurfuffle, but it's not really
00:13:11
the big story here. The big story is the trains left the