00:00:00
This is what we need. Let him go.
00:00:01
>> All right, here we go.
00:00:02
>> This is Jason in the corner warming up.
00:00:04
>> Two. Shut the up, Freeberg. It's my
00:00:06
show. Three. Two. All right, everybody.
00:00:08
Welcome back to the number one podcast
00:00:10
in the world. The podcast I, Jason
00:00:12
Cowakanis, named, created, and I'm the
00:00:15
executive producer for life. With me, my
00:00:17
three Miss Crant friends, Chimath Poly
00:00:20
Hapatia, our dictator. Love you,
00:00:21
brother. Good seeing you. Uh David
00:00:24
Freedberg, our Sultan of Science and
00:00:27
Yeah. Thesar. Yeah. Who's now made his
00:00:32
way down to Austin. Welcome, brother.
00:00:34
Let's go shooting. Let's get those beef
00:00:35
ribs. David Saxs, how you how you uh how
00:00:39
you settling in to the great state of
00:00:41
Texas. Everybody wants to know, David,
00:00:43
>> I'm loving the 70 degree weather. Is it
00:00:46
like this all year round?
00:00:47
>> You know, it's uh this is a very
00:00:50
wonderful time of year. uh you miss the
00:00:52
two weeks where it goes to freezing
00:00:53
temperatures. We have 10 days of
00:00:55
freezing temperatures and then we have
00:00:56
80 days of 100 degree temperatures, but
00:00:59
you'll be on a yacht or Italy or
00:01:01
somewhere uh during that like the rest
00:01:03
of us. That's basically all you need to
00:01:05
know about Austin. Just get out during
00:01:07
the summers cuz it's brutal. That's it.
00:01:09
Everything else is fan freakingastic.
00:01:11
But in all seriousness,
00:01:13
>> you're here. You're here. You're you've
00:01:15
moved. You've doiciled in Texas. This is
00:01:18
This is This has happened.
00:01:21
>> It happened in December.
00:01:23
>> Yes.
00:01:24
>> And so we closed on a new house. We
00:01:26
moved in. Went to the DMV. I signed a
00:01:30
lease for an Austin office for craft.
00:01:32
>> Nice.
00:01:33
>> It's done.
00:01:34
>> It's done.
00:01:35
>> It's done.
00:01:36
>> Okay. I got to I'll get you a dentist
00:01:38
and whatever else you need.
00:01:39
>> I got a doctor, too.
00:01:41
>> Okay. Does this mean I have to bring
00:01:42
Moose back? This has been the big
00:01:44
discussion in our house. Does this mean
00:01:45
we lose Moose or do we have you in
00:01:47
custody?
00:01:48
>> He needs a significant acreage to run
00:01:50
around. We know that.
00:01:52
>> Oh, he does. He does. But he misses you
00:01:53
and I and we'll definitely bring him by
00:01:55
for a visit.
00:01:56
>> And we'll we'll be playing some back gam
00:01:58
smoking some cigars.
00:02:00
>> You got to come by.
00:02:01
>> Cannot wait.
00:02:03
Shamath, what about you guys? You guys
00:02:05
going to come down? Two of four besties.
00:02:07
>> Matt and I started the process in
00:02:08
December. We are coming to check things
00:02:10
out. We have not made any final
00:02:11
decisions though.
00:02:13
>> Okay. Shout out to our boy Ro Kana for
00:02:15
driving everybody out of the state.
00:02:17
>> So, here's the funniest thing is we're
00:02:18
all in the chat group discussing the
00:02:21
California wealth tax, whether people
00:02:22
are going to leave or not. So, Chimath,
00:02:25
he's making a big show. I'm going to
00:02:26
stay and fight. I'm not leaving my home.
00:02:29
They can't drive me out. And then
00:02:32
meanwhile, I get a call from my broker
00:02:34
who says she's helping Chimath find a
00:02:36
place.
00:02:37
>> UHOH. WHAT'S GOING ON?
00:02:39
>> IS CHAMOTH DOING BACKDOOR TRADE? I'm
00:02:41
shocked that Shamat tells you one thing
00:02:43
and is doing another.
00:02:44
>> Oh my god.
00:02:45
>> He's at least hedging his bets.
00:02:46
>> He's hedging his bets.
00:02:47
>> A lot of people are hedging their bets.
00:02:49
A lot of people are
00:02:50
>> Serge in Florida. He got a I'm sorry. Uh
00:02:52
Larry's got a beautiful place in
00:02:54
Florida. I see. According to the news, a
00:02:57
lot of people and I saw Governor Abbott
00:02:59
uh reached out to you.
00:03:01
>> That's right. He welcomed me to Texas on
00:03:04
X. A lot of people did.
00:03:06
>> Michael Dell did Ted Cruz.
00:03:09
>> Ted Cruz. And yeah, it was a real
00:03:11
welcome reception. It's funny. I never
00:03:13
got anything like that when I was in
00:03:14
California.
00:03:14
>> Jason, I I put it on.
00:03:17
>> The politicians were never
00:03:18
>> They weren't embracing you.
00:03:19
>> Yeah, they were embracing me. I don't
00:03:20
know why.
00:03:22
>> Who knows? I put this on X. But when you
00:03:24
look at our friends that all explicitly
00:03:27
left, it's about half a trillion of net
00:03:30
worth, which I think is very bad for the
00:03:33
long-term budget of California.
00:03:36
then I can pick about 25 people just off
00:03:39
the top of my head. And then if you
00:03:41
think about all the people that will
00:03:42
stay and fight, I still intend to stay
00:03:45
and fight, but where if we're forced to
00:03:48
look down the barrel of a an asset tax
00:03:52
that has god knows what methodology,
00:03:55
>> it's the only thing that's united
00:03:57
everybody on the left and the right.
00:03:59
Even Reed Hoffman thinks this is insane.
00:04:01
I think a lot of other people will
00:04:02
leave. It's probably half the total
00:04:05
wealth that the budget estimated would
00:04:08
be available to be taxed will be gone.
00:04:10
>> Wow. I mean, these are I I don't
00:04:12
understand.
00:04:13
>> That has huge implications to the social
00:04:15
programs and the general budget of
00:04:16
California.
00:04:17
>> Listen, I think this is going to be a
00:04:18
topic. This is a prediction. I think
00:04:20
this is going to be a topic throughout
00:04:22
the year because it's not going away.
00:04:24
They're gathering signatures right now.
00:04:26
>> I agree.
00:04:27
>> And we're going to find out in say April
00:04:29
whether it's on the ballot. Now, it's
00:04:30
possible they don't gather the
00:04:32
signatures, but they only need about
00:04:34
850,000 of them. If it gets on the
00:04:36
ballot, you know, again, we'll know in
00:04:39
just a few months. There's going to be a
00:04:40
huge freakout and I think there'll be a
00:04:42
lot of people who will say, "I can't
00:04:44
take the risk. They're going to leave
00:04:45
the state." So, I think there's going to
00:04:47
be a rush for the exits. There's going
00:04:48
to be all sorts of repercussions from
00:04:50
that. Then, there'll be an election in
00:04:52
November. Obviously, we'll find out if
00:04:54
it passes or not. And then there'll be
00:04:57
legal challenges. So, this is going to
00:04:58
be a saga. I don't think this is over by
00:05:01
a long shot. And quite frankly, even if
00:05:03
it's beaten in 2026, I think a lot of
00:05:06
people expect that some version of this
00:05:07
comes back in 2028, which is the thing
00:05:09
that kind of pushed me over the edge in
00:05:11
terms of leaving is I don't think this
00:05:13
problem is going away. It's very
00:05:15
difficult if you're an entrepreneur with
00:05:17
a good idea to start building here
00:05:20
because if you get stuck in success with
00:05:22
a bunch of illquid stock and have no way
00:05:24
to pay 5% of that value, you're going to
00:05:28
bankrupt your own company. It just
00:05:30
doesn't make any sense.
00:05:31
>> And what if your company goes to zero
00:05:32
the next year, which can totally happen
00:05:34
with private companies? You still owe
00:05:36
the tax bill.
00:05:37
>> Yeah. I don't know how that reverses
00:05:38
itself. It's a terrible idea. I mean, I
00:05:40
was talking to Roana and Eric Swallwell
00:05:43
who we had on the program and I told
00:05:45
these guys like these dopey Democrats,
00:05:48
you have to stop fraud first before you
00:05:51
start seizing people's assets or start a
00:05:53
discussion about raising taxes. And you
00:05:56
know, we had Nick Shirley on last week
00:05:57
who was doing his investigative
00:05:59
journalism. Shout out to Shirley. And uh
00:06:02
how do we sell to the American public
00:06:06
that we want to seize their assets while
00:06:09
and then sending it out the back door to
00:06:12
fund fraud? That makes no sense. It's a
00:06:16
leaky bucket. So fix the bucket first
00:06:19
and then let's have an honest discussion
00:06:21
about what the right tax rate is and and
00:06:23
why do this with a unique tax? Why not
00:06:25
just put a point onto capital gains or
00:06:27
income tax and and have that discussion?
00:06:30
>> That's a great point. You could also do
00:06:32
what Bill Aman suggested, which is stop
00:06:34
allowing these margin loans. There's a
00:06:36
lot that actually live off of margin. Is
00:06:39
it a good idea? Yes and no. Depending on
00:06:41
the asset base you have, and if the tax
00:06:43
laws changed, we would all change the
00:06:45
approach.
00:06:46
>> You mentioned that Larry and Sergey have
00:06:49
left the state and they're probably
00:06:50
getting dragged for that. But one of the
00:06:52
reasons why I think they kind of have to
00:06:55
is because of the super voting stock
00:06:56
provision in this thing where the way
00:06:59
they calculate the value of your stock
00:07:01
is not based on its liquid market value
00:07:03
but if you own super voting shares they
00:07:06
multiply your ownership your super
00:07:08
voting by the market cap of the company
00:07:10
and they deem your shares to be worth
00:07:11
that. Yeah.
00:07:12
>> So for example Larry and Sergey I think
00:07:14
they combined have voting power of about
00:07:17
52% of Google. So what's Google worth
00:07:20
these days? uh 4 trillion
00:07:21
>> and a half trillion. 4 trillion.
00:07:23
>> Okay. So now I think I mean they're very
00:07:25
wealthy guys. I think they're each each
00:07:27
worth whatever 100 billionish or
00:07:29
whatever it is
00:07:30
>> I think. Yeah.
00:07:31
>> 200. But now their net worth will be
00:07:33
deemed to be I guess each one of them
00:07:36
would be deemed to be roughly one
00:07:38
trillion each. Not the call it 200
00:07:41
billion. So the 5% tax for them is more
00:07:44
like a 25% tax of all their net worth.
00:07:47
So it becomes and it becomes it becomes
00:07:49
50 because you'd have to sell more than
00:07:51
that to overcome the drag of selling to
00:07:53
generate 25 billion or 50 billion of net
00:07:55
worth. You have to sell 2x that because
00:07:57
you have to pay taxes on that,
00:07:59
>> right? So now what what is the point of
00:08:00
having that super voting provision in
00:08:03
there? It's just totally punitive and
00:08:05
vicious.
00:08:06
>> All right, so let's just go with a quick
00:08:07
prediction here.
00:08:08
>> I'm going to call an audible. We're
00:08:10
gonna get into the prediction show,
00:08:11
folks. We've been delaying this
00:08:12
prediction show because the world is
00:08:14
moving at an incredible pace and the
00:08:16
news is just, let's just call it what it
00:08:18
is. It's just intense. And we have a lot
00:08:20
of stories you all want us to to cover.
00:08:22
We will cover them, but we're going to
00:08:24
start with our prediction show. Just
00:08:26
lightning round prediction here. Does
00:08:28
this seizure tax, I'm going to call it
00:08:30
what it is. It's a seizure tax. They're
00:08:32
seizing assets. Does the seizing assets
00:08:34
tax go into effect or not? Does it pass
00:08:37
or not? Freeberg, you're first. Yes or
00:08:39
no? Give us a percentage poly marketed.
00:08:42
>> Well, does it get on the ballot first
00:08:43
and then does
00:08:44
>> Well, we know it's going to get on the
00:08:45
ballot. I think we agree with that. But
00:08:47
not correct.
00:08:47
>> Oh, we don't know. So then I'll make it
00:08:49
a two-parter. Fine. Does it get on the
00:08:51
ballot? Does it pass? Chimoth, you seem
00:08:53
ready to go. Go.
00:08:54
>> No. Free. Go ahead.
00:08:55
>> I don't think it's going to get on the
00:08:56
ballot.
00:08:57
>> Oh,
00:08:58
>> I agree with that.
00:08:59
>> In California 100%.
00:09:01
>> All right. Here's your poly market,
00:09:03
everybody. Shout out to Shane. No,
00:09:04
>> this is to make the ballot. This is to
00:09:06
make the ballot.
00:09:07
>> This is the question.
00:09:09
Will the billionaires to Austin tax,
00:09:12
wealth tax, drive people uh will it make
00:09:15
it onto the California ballot? Lightly
00:09:17
traded currently at 69%.
00:09:20
>> But you see how much lower it was? That
00:09:22
spike happened after Roana elevated the
00:09:25
issue. So when it became a cause celeb
00:09:27
among progressives and Bernie Sanders
00:09:29
weighed in, it spiked up from what was
00:09:32
it like 45% to 80%.
00:09:34
>> Okay. So when Roana committed political
00:09:37
sapuku, uh, it drove up. Maybe he had a
00:09:39
bet. Maybe he placed a bet.
00:09:41
>> I don't think it's political suicide for
00:09:43
him. There's only two ways it doesn't
00:09:45
get on the ballot, right? One is
00:09:47
>> if the SCIU uh, which is the union that
00:09:51
supported this, proposed it,
00:09:53
>> doesn't have the money to pay to collect
00:09:55
the signatures.
00:09:57
>> But I, you would think that they would,
00:09:59
right?
00:09:59
>> Mhm. 8 million or so is roughly what it
00:10:02
costs to gather the signatures for these
00:10:04
types of things. Clearly, they can find
00:10:06
850,000 people in California who support
00:10:08
it
00:10:09
>> if they're willing to put the effort in.
00:10:11
The other possibility is that the powers
00:10:13
that be, let's call it Gavin Newsome and
00:10:15
the machine are able to negotiate
00:10:19
>> with this union to get them to stand
00:10:21
down. And I don't have any insight into
00:10:23
that because that's obviously Democrat
00:10:26
politics, not Republican politics. H but
00:10:29
Freeberg and Chimat might have some
00:10:31
information. You have some insight. I
00:10:32
don't know. We're going to we're going
00:10:33
to leave it at that.
00:10:34
>> But if it does get on the ballot, what
00:10:35
do you think the odds are that it
00:10:37
passes?
00:10:38
>> I think it's going to be a really
00:10:40
important
00:10:41
>> 40%
00:10:41
>> moment for people to vote
00:10:44
the ability to be industrious and have
00:10:47
agency or what did Mamani say? It's
00:10:50
rugged individualism versus
00:10:53
>> collectivism also known as communism as
00:10:56
in collect. We collect your assets,
00:10:58
Jamal.
00:10:58
>> He said that we're going to replace
00:11:01
>> the fragility of rugged individualism
00:11:04
with the warmth of collectivism.
00:11:07
>> I mean, at least he's saying it out
00:11:10
loud. I I like this new I like these new
00:11:12
politicians just telling you straight up
00:11:15
what we're doing.
00:11:16
>> Well, his new housing commissioner, have
00:11:17
you seen this?
00:11:18
>> Yeah. The white lady's like, "White
00:11:19
people must suffer." And then she's like
00:11:21
she had these things where she's like,
00:11:23
"I see white babies in the airport and
00:11:25
it makes me mad." And I'm like, really?
00:11:28
This is crazy.
00:11:29
>> Um, what man broke up with this lady?
00:11:32
Because that dude
00:11:34
>> has created a monster.
00:11:36
>> Didn't she say something like, "We need
00:11:37
to introduce a a new relationship
00:11:39
between
00:11:40
>> white people and property and their
00:11:42
property rights or something."
00:11:43
>> Yeah, exactly.
00:11:44
>> I mean, they're saying it out loud now.
00:11:45
And then I guess she had a mental
00:11:47
breakdown and started crying when they
00:11:50
came to see her. I
00:11:51
>> No, no. What happened is they pointed
00:11:52
out that her parents own a multi-million
00:11:55
dollar home and then she broke down in
00:11:56
tears.
00:11:57
>> Oh, her mom's a white supremacist. I
00:11:59
didn't realize her mom was a white
00:12:01
supremacist. That explains it all
00:12:03
because this is all about her mom.
00:12:04
>> I feel bad for her parents.
00:12:06
>> Oh god. Can you imagine your imagine one
00:12:09
of your kids goes and does this and
00:12:11
says, "We have to go collect your
00:12:13
houses." I mean, listen, let's do it.
00:12:15
Let's do what everybody wants to hear.
00:12:17
Our predictions for 2026. We've been
00:12:20
pushing it off. We're going to give it
00:12:21
to you right now. We always like to
00:12:23
start since uh you know we got into
00:12:25
politics here on the program at some
00:12:26
point. The biggest political winner,
00:12:28
last year's prediction for biggest
00:12:30
political winner for 2025 to remind
00:12:32
everybody. Freeberg said young
00:12:33
candidates. Well done. Gavin who was on
00:12:36
the show sitting in for Sachs who was
00:12:38
busy joining the administration. He said
00:12:42
Trump and centism would be the biggest
00:12:44
political winner. Chimath, you said
00:12:46
fiscal conservatives and who asked for
00:12:49
restrained spending. It was a good
00:12:51
thought and I said Gen X and Elder
00:12:54
Millennials, the JD Vance, Tulsi Sachs
00:12:56
group. So, let's go around the horn
00:13:00
here. I wonder Friedberg, who you think
00:13:03
will be the biggest political winner of
00:13:05
2026? Freeberg, your chance. Democratic
00:13:07
Socialist of America, the DSA, just like
00:13:09
the MAGA movement took over the
00:13:10
Republican party, I think the DSA is
00:13:12
taking over the the the Democratic
00:13:14
party. And I think that's the move we'll
00:13:15
see solidified in 2026.
00:13:17
>> Okay. Tight is right. Well done. Chama,
00:13:20
who do you got for biggest political
00:13:22
winner 2026?
00:13:23
>> Whoever is going to fight waste, fraud,
00:13:25
and abuse at the
00:13:27
>> federal, state, and local level.
00:13:29
>> Got it. So, it's an open lane to
00:13:31
anybody.
00:13:31
>> It's an open lane. It's a political
00:13:35
gambit that I think will work really
00:13:36
well in 26.
00:13:38
>> Very nicely done. David Saxs. Gosh, I
00:13:41
can't imagine who you would pick as a
00:13:43
political winner in 2026.
00:13:44
>> Well, I'm gonna go ahead.
00:13:46
>> I'm gonna say that the Trump boom is
00:13:48
going to be the biggest political winner
00:13:50
of 2026.
00:13:52
The good economic news start breaking
00:13:53
out before 2025 was even over. We have
00:13:56
2.7% inflation. Core CPI at 2.6. Both
00:14:00
those are 40 basis points below
00:14:01
expectations. 4.3% GDP growth in Q3.
00:14:06
Lowest trade deficit since 2009. The
00:14:08
Challenger Gray report out today showed
00:14:10
that job cuts dropped 50% from November,
00:14:13
which was itself down about 50% from
00:14:15
October.
00:14:16
>> Give us a number for the boom. What is
00:14:17
it going to be?
00:14:18
>> Hold on. The S&P 500 keeps making record
00:14:21
highs. People are paying less for gas.
00:14:24
Mortgage costs have fallen by $3,000.
00:14:26
Real wages are up over $1,000. And by
00:14:29
June, I predict we will see more rate
00:14:31
cuts, possibly 75 to 100 basis points.
00:14:34
And big tax refunds are coming in April.
00:14:37
thanks to a bigger standard deduction
00:14:39
and no tax on tips overtime and social
00:14:41
security. So I think there is so much
00:14:44
good economic news coming and it's
00:14:46
already started and I think that it's
00:14:48
going to have a huge impact not just on
00:14:49
the economy but also on political
00:14:51
perceptions for next year.
00:14:53
>> Pick your GDP for this boom year. Three,
00:14:55
four, five or six points sacks. I'm
00:14:57
pinning you down.
00:14:58
>> Pick four.
00:15:00
>> If you make it a prediction then I'd
00:15:01
like to pick as well.
00:15:02
>> Okay. I'm going to go sacks first.
00:15:03
>> I'm going to go for 5%.
00:15:05
>> Within a rounding error I believe 5%.
00:15:07
>> Sure. Sure. Plus or minus? Chabat. You
00:15:09
want to pick a number? You said you did.
00:15:11
>> I think the lower bound is five. I think
00:15:12
the upper bound is 62.
00:15:14
>> Wow. Incredible. Well, just to put that
00:15:17
in perspective,
00:15:19
if we print six, the only country in the
00:15:22
modern world that we think of as a
00:15:24
quasipier competitor that has printed
00:15:26
six is the Chinese. In a period where it
00:15:29
had complete and total coordination and
00:15:31
domination of a federal, state, and
00:15:34
local economy. And the fact that we can
00:15:36
do it under democracy and capitalism
00:15:41
is outrageous. Freeberg, do you want to
00:15:43
take a stab at that?
00:15:44
>> 2026 growth. Yeah. 4.6%.
00:15:47
>> Okay. I was going to go with between
00:15:49
four and five as well. In terms of my
00:15:51
prediction for the big political winner,
00:15:53
I went back and forth between the
00:15:54
emperor's apprentice, Darth Vance, JD
00:15:56
Vance, or the Mandami moment. I said
00:16:00
Darth Vance for a couple of reason. uh
00:16:03
you know he is out there defending Trump
00:16:06
uh and he's surging on poly market and
00:16:08
in the polls. He's obviously the
00:16:09
co-pilot of MAG. He's done a great job
00:16:11
of being second seat. He is not usurping
00:16:14
President Trump which would be a big
00:16:15
political mistake. He's really
00:16:17
navigating being the co-pilot there. But
00:16:19
he is the most popular politician
00:16:21
clearly at Turning Point USA and he is
00:16:24
the OG in the America first America only
00:16:26
moment. But I'm going to give the edge
00:16:28
to the Mandami moment. He's 34 years
00:16:31
old. We've got Ro Khan at 49 pivoting
00:16:33
into a socialist. And I think that's
00:16:36
because Democrats believe the easiest
00:16:37
way to win in 2026 is to go full
00:16:40
socialist. And Trump has, I think, given
00:16:44
this lane because he's forgotten about
00:16:45
the working man and woman in America.
00:16:48
Net disapproval for Trump on the
00:16:50
economy, 58% inflation. Despite what Sax
00:16:53
is saying there, it's still closer to 3%
00:16:55
than 2%. And Trump just announced he
00:16:58
wants to increase the military budget by
00:17:00
50% while people are still complaining
00:17:03
about their healthcare. And Trump has
00:17:05
turned into a complete neocon, bombing
00:17:08
seven countries this year and uh
00:17:11
threatening to take over Colombia and
00:17:12
Greenland. Who knows if that's Trump
00:17:14
being Trump or if that's reality, but
00:17:17
Trump becoming a neocon was not on
00:17:19
anyone's bingo card. And uh I think
00:17:22
Trump may have incited and given a bunch
00:17:24
of fuel to the Mandami moment by not
00:17:27
addressing the American people's needs
00:17:30
and going for the international
00:17:33
interventionism.
00:17:35
Okay, now
00:17:36
>> that was like three different answers
00:17:38
right there.
00:17:38
>> My answer is clearly Mandami. My second
00:17:40
place though I like to always explain my
00:17:42
thinking is Darth Vance. JD Vance
00:17:44
biggest political loser. Last year's
00:17:47
predictions I said Putin. Gavin said
00:17:49
Putin. Chimath, you said progressivism
00:17:52
and Freeberg, you said the pro-war
00:17:55
neocons would be the biggest political
00:17:57
losers. Uh, let's get into who we think
00:18:00
will be the loser this year. Uh, Sax,
00:18:03
why don't you start? Who's your big
00:18:04
political loser in 2026, you think?
00:18:06
>> Well, I said democratic centism or
00:18:09
democratic centrist, which is sort of
00:18:11
the flip side of you guys saying that
00:18:14
socialism or progressives are uh
00:18:17
winners. And there's two reasons for
00:18:19
this. One is because the socialist
00:18:21
ideology is sort of ascended among the
00:18:23
democratic base, especially the young
00:18:24
people who support Maani, things like
00:18:26
that. Unfortunately, our universities
00:18:28
are woke madrosas have done a terrible
00:18:30
job educating these students and they've
00:18:34
brainwashed a lot of them into this woke
00:18:35
ideology. But also, there's the fact
00:18:39
that there's so few House districts
00:18:41
anymore that are truly competitive. So
00:18:44
both the Cook Political Report and Larry
00:18:47
Sabado's Crystal Ball, they say that
00:18:49
there's fewer than two dozen House races
00:18:51
that are genuinely competitive going
00:18:53
into 2026. That's because of uh
00:18:55
gerrymandering and so on. So if you're a
00:18:58
Democrat incumbent who is in one of
00:19:01
these districts, like all but a couple
00:19:03
dozen of them, your only real threat to
00:19:06
losing your office is from the left,
00:19:08
right? It's some young AOC type coming
00:19:11
up to challenge you. And so you don't
00:19:13
want to expose your left flank. So even
00:19:15
the Democratic moderates have been
00:19:17
shifting further and further to the
00:19:19
left. And so you see this AOC mammi
00:19:22
effect happening there. So I'm kind of
00:19:24
in the same camp as you guys is this is
00:19:27
not a good trend. But uh I put this as
00:19:30
biggest political loser.
00:19:31
>> Biggest political
00:19:32
>> democratic centism.
00:19:33
>> Got it. Chimath, what do you got?
00:19:36
>> Can I just go back and just nitpick with
00:19:38
you a little bit? Why do you think
00:19:40
progressivism
00:19:42
didn't fail? And the only reason I ask
00:19:45
you that is outside of a few pockets of
00:19:49
progressivism and specifically Mandani,
00:19:53
if you look at the elections in Virginia
00:19:56
or the elections in New Jersey, those
00:19:58
are more centrist than progressive. And
00:20:01
if you look at the general approval
00:20:02
rates of Democrats, they trended
00:20:04
consistently down through 2025 as they
00:20:08
handgun themselves about leaving
00:20:10
centrism and embracing progressivism. So
00:20:12
the more talking points around
00:20:14
progressivism that emerged, the poorer
00:20:16
they performed. So I know your
00:20:19
perception or some people's perceptions
00:20:21
may be different based on one localized
00:20:23
win, but if you look at the broad trend,
00:20:25
it didn't work. I just put that out
00:20:28
there just as just as the facts and not
00:20:30
the vibes.
00:20:31
>> Well, I don't want it to be true. Just
00:20:32
to be clear, I would
00:20:33
>> I'm I'm picking
00:20:34
>> I would love for the Democratic party to
00:20:35
be
00:20:36
>> I don't want it to be true either, but
00:20:37
it does seem
00:20:37
>> No, but you like it was wrong and it
00:20:40
wasn't wrong. So,
00:20:41
>> well, I it might be a jump ball might be
00:20:43
the best way to describe it because you
00:20:44
have effect and
00:20:46
>> Okay, just look at the numerical
00:20:48
numbers. The trends were horrible. Like
00:20:50
meaning wherever the Democrats started,
00:20:52
the more progressive talking points they
00:20:54
added, the poor and poorer they
00:20:56
performed, the approval ratings went
00:20:58
down, the disapproval ratings went up.
00:21:00
I'm not saying that they didn't win a
00:21:02
mayoral race. They did do that. I'm just
00:21:05
saying broadly speaking, nationwide, is
00:21:08
the Democratic Party and its embrace of
00:21:10
progressivism, at least at the federal
00:21:12
level, has it paid off over 2025? And I
00:21:14
would say categorically, mathematically
00:21:17
not.
00:21:19
>> Okay. Now going to 2026. What is my
00:21:21
biggest political loser? What I would
00:21:24
say is the biggest loser of 26 is the
00:21:27
Monroe Doctrine. I think that when
00:21:29
historians look back on the Trump
00:21:32
presidency, they're going to rewrite it.
00:21:34
I think people have tried to minimize
00:21:36
Trump's worldview as a Trump corollary.
00:21:39
I don't think that's what this is. They
00:21:40
even try to minimize it by calling it
00:21:42
the Dawn Row doctrine. I don't think
00:21:44
that's what this is. I think that there
00:21:45
is a clear Trump doctrine that trumped
00:21:49
the Monroe doctrine and I think that is
00:21:51
the political loser because there is a
00:21:53
huge body politic that has been built
00:21:56
around the Monroe doctrine. How do we
00:22:00
view wars? How do we view our spheres of
00:22:02
influence? How do we view economic
00:22:04
multilateralism versus unilateralism?
00:22:07
All of that is out the window. You know,
00:22:09
we view this as hemispheric dominance.
00:22:12
That's Trump. We view it as proactive
00:22:15
and in very specific cases
00:22:17
interventionist. We intervene against
00:22:19
drug cartels. We control immigration. We
00:22:21
secure vital assets. That was you know
00:22:24
not really the scope of the Monroe
00:22:26
Doctrine.
00:22:27
We have more transactional relationships
00:22:31
quite honestly which allows us to react
00:22:33
in the moment. So I think the Monroe
00:22:35
doctrine is the biggest loser of 2026.
00:22:38
>> Free your biggest loser 2026.
00:22:42
My biggest political loser of 2026 is
00:22:44
the tech industry. I think AI and tech
00:22:47
wealth have become the lightning rod for
00:22:49
populism on both sides of the aisle. I
00:22:52
think um the right is fracturing a bit
00:22:54
where this call it alliance between tech
00:22:56
and MAGA seems to be getting a really
00:22:59
strong challenge from the more populist
00:23:01
movement. In the same sense the left is
00:23:04
turning hard on tech because of tech's
00:23:06
alignment with the right. And so I think
00:23:09
we're going to see in the midterms a
00:23:11
really big referendum against the tech
00:23:12
industry coming out of
00:23:14
>> good populist women.
00:23:16
>> That's a great one. Can I tell you guys
00:23:17
a little story from yesterday? I had a
00:23:20
meeting with three very senior sitting
00:23:22
senators before I flew back to
00:23:24
California. These are Republican
00:23:25
senators
00:23:27
and Freeberg. I was surprised exactly
00:23:29
what you said. There is a couple of
00:23:33
companies that have exacerbated their
00:23:36
frustration. They view those companies,
00:23:39
these are techs and the tech leaders of
00:23:41
these companies as just not trustworthy
00:23:44
and they've largely been grining these
00:23:48
guys for a long time and they're pretty
00:23:49
frustrated with it. So to your point, it
00:23:51
is palpable.
00:23:52
>> Look, I can tell you that the natural
00:23:55
ally for tech is with MAGA because we
00:23:58
still believe in property rights and
00:24:00
innovation. And if the Democratic party
00:24:02
is truly going progressive, which means
00:24:04
socialist, they want to rewrite your
00:24:06
relationship to property rights,
00:24:08
whatever that means, and impose wealth
00:24:10
taxes and the realized gains taxes and
00:24:12
all the rest of it. So, look, I don't
00:24:15
think tech has that much of a choice. As
00:24:17
Arnold Schwarzenegger said in one of
00:24:19
those movies, come with me if you want
00:24:21
to live.
00:24:21
>> Come with me if you want to live. Yes.
00:24:23
>> Get in the chopper.
00:24:25
>> But let me say this. The reason why
00:24:27
there's anger on the populist right is
00:24:29
because they remember the censorship and
00:24:31
the deplatforming
00:24:33
and the shadow banning and all that kind
00:24:35
of stuff. And what there needs to be is
00:24:38
I think there just needs to be some
00:24:39
meetings, some truth and reconciliation
00:24:41
that happens between some of these tech
00:24:43
leaders and some of these conservative
00:24:45
influencers.
00:24:45
>> Guess what, David Tax? I know one guy
00:24:47
who can help make that happen. No, I
00:24:49
would I would like to host some of these
00:24:51
meetings in 2026 and get these people
00:24:53
together because I think that the tech
00:24:55
companies have either realized their
00:24:57
mistake or they were pushed into it in a
00:24:59
lot of cases by the Biden
00:25:01
administration.
00:25:02
>> Yeah, they had a gun to their head.
00:25:03
Yeah,
00:25:03
>> they had a gun to their head. Now, I
00:25:04
also think that one other mistake
00:25:06
they've made is quite frankly they've
00:25:08
been donors to only leftwing causes. And
00:25:11
so, if you listen to Cernovich's
00:25:14
account, he's like, "Look guys, you
00:25:16
banned us. You cost us our livelihood
00:25:19
for years.
00:25:20
>> Debbanked us.
00:25:21
>> Debbanked us. Where's the restitution
00:25:23
>> or at least at least start giving some
00:25:26
support to our conservative cultural?
00:25:28
>> By the way, you nailed it on the head.
00:25:29
The senators that I talked to, that's
00:25:31
exactly what they want. They just wanted
00:25:32
an apology. Just be honest and say you
00:25:35
did it.
00:25:36
>> This asset seizure tax proposal in
00:25:38
California and the conversation about
00:25:40
other states, I think, is bringing a lot
00:25:42
of people to that table. at
00:25:43
least the tech
00:25:48
only
00:25:51
maybe
00:25:54
contrary to what people may think it may
00:25:56
actually be doing
00:25:58
>> a lot more positive for the right side
00:26:01
than the left by putting this forward.
00:26:02
This may actually be catalyzing a big
00:26:04
change in Silicon Valley.
00:26:07
>> Yeah. Yeah. And if you if you think
00:26:08
about it, if you were Zuckerberg or you
00:26:11
were,
00:26:13
you know, the Google executives and the
00:26:15
FBI is telling you, hey, we need you to
00:26:19
take care of these censorship issues. We
00:26:21
need you to label these things, etc. You
00:26:24
know, it puts you in a pretty tough
00:26:26
situation if the FBI is calling you, if
00:26:28
you're trying to do M&A. And then, you
00:26:30
know, look, now M&A under Trump is on
00:26:34
fire. We'll talk about that more in our
00:26:35
prediction show. For me, I was going
00:26:38
back and forth in my biggest political
00:26:41
loser
00:26:42
with these dopey Democrats who are
00:26:44
centrists and the the new neocon Trump.
00:26:49
Now, I don't know if Trump will continue
00:26:53
these neocon ways. So, I'm going to just
00:26:55
align with Sachs here that the centrist
00:26:58
Democrats are going to be this year's
00:27:00
biggest political losers. Now that
00:27:02
you've mentioned twice that Trump is a
00:27:05
neocon, I have to respond to this.
00:27:08
>> No, you don't. You don't have to, but go
00:27:09
ahead.
00:27:10
>> Okay. Look, the the problem with neocon
00:27:13
regime change operations was I'd say
00:27:15
three-fold. Number one, the invasion.
00:27:18
You have this giant invasion, land
00:27:21
armies, huge numbers of people getting
00:27:23
killed. Took, you know, months or a
00:27:25
year. Took him like a year to get
00:27:27
Saddam, right? Number two, you then have
00:27:29
an occupation because whoever you then
00:27:32
put in power only stays in power if you
00:27:34
have American GIS there pointing the
00:27:36
guns. So you end up with a 10 or 20 year
00:27:39
occupation. And then third, you have
00:27:41
nation building, which is you end up
00:27:42
spending trillions of dollars basically
00:27:45
trying to turn them into us so that our
00:27:47
troops can leave. That was the mistake
00:27:49
of Afghanistan and Iraq. But look, what
00:27:52
has Trump done that is like any of those
00:27:54
things. There's been no invasion, no
00:27:56
occupation, and no nation building. This
00:27:59
war, I guess, with Venezuela, if you
00:28:00
want to call it that, it was a flawless
00:28:03
operation. It lasted three hours.
00:28:05
>> I mean, I woke up and it was like, you
00:28:07
know, the meme where it's like, "Wake
00:28:08
up, honey." It's like, "Wake up, honey.
00:28:10
Trump's won another war."
00:28:12
>> It was over before it even started.
00:28:14
>> They went in there and they basically
00:28:17
captured Maduro. No Americans were
00:28:20
killed. It was absolutely flawless
00:28:21
operation. and they are bringing him to
00:28:25
justice. By the way, he begged for it.
00:28:27
He's on tape talking a lot of smack at
00:28:29
rallies saying, "Come get me, you know,
00:28:32
>> calling the Americans chicken and so
00:28:33
on." So, in any event, he was begging
00:28:36
for it. We can go into a lot more of the
00:28:38
the reasons for doing it and defending
00:28:40
it, but I just don't think this is a
00:28:42
neocon policy. And in fact, it's the
00:28:44
Democrats who've been calling to put in
00:28:46
this uh Nobel Prize winner that you
00:28:49
interviewed, Freeberg, right? What's her
00:28:51
name? Maria Kito Alonzo.
00:28:53
>> Machado.
00:28:54
>> Machado. Okay. Anyway.
00:28:57
>> Oh,
00:28:58
>> Hector Alzando. I think it's Hector
00:29:00
Alzando. I think he did somebody from
00:29:02
the Brat Pack.
00:29:04
>> No, she was in Running Man, I think.
00:29:05
Anyway,
00:29:06
>> exactly.
00:29:08
>> But
00:29:10
but
00:29:10
>> you're talking about the Cuban Venezuela
00:29:12
actress.
00:29:13
>> I thought her name was Maria Kinchida
00:29:15
Alonzo. Okay. Maria Karina Machado.
00:29:17
Sorry. That's just what I thought of.
00:29:20
Miss World Miss World Venezuela 1975
00:29:23
winner Maria.
00:29:24
>> Look, the Democrats are are criticizing
00:29:27
the administration for not putting her
00:29:28
in power. But look, here's the problem.
00:29:31
Nobel prizes don't keep people in power.
00:29:35
Men with guns keep people in power. And
00:29:38
she doesn't have the men with guns. So,
00:29:40
it' be American GIS. There would have to
00:29:42
be the guns to keep her in power. And
00:29:44
the administration has not done that.
00:29:46
They're looking to basically work with
00:29:48
the existing regime. And the big reason
00:29:51
why we got sucked into Iraq is because
00:29:52
that whole debathification process where
00:29:55
we didn't just get rid of Saddam, we
00:29:57
took out the entire elite of the country
00:29:59
which created a huge insurgency. So
00:30:01
there's been nothing like that. Jal is
00:30:03
what I'm trying to tell you in this
00:30:05
case. It's a whole different paradigm is
00:30:07
what I'm trying to tell you. We're gonna
00:30:08
need a new name for it. Maybe Chimath is
00:30:10
right. Is definitely not neocon.
00:30:12
>> Not neon.
00:30:12
>> Yeah, we might need a new branding for
00:30:14
it. depends on, you know, if Trump is
00:30:16
cosplaying Neocon when he says he's
00:30:18
going to take Greenland, when he says
00:30:19
he's going to take Colombia next, when
00:30:20
he says he's going to take Cuba, he's
00:30:22
certainly playing the character of
00:30:24
Neocon uh publicly here. And who knows,
00:30:27
that could be Trump just positioning
00:30:28
himself and anchoring future
00:30:30
negotiations. But if I was telling you,
00:30:32
you know, before the election when you
00:30:34
were saying, "Hey, do not let certain
00:30:36
people become president, Nikki Haley,
00:30:39
etc., because they're neocons and
00:30:41
they're going to go to war with
00:30:42
Venezuela. Are they going to go to war
00:30:43
with Iran? Well, that's exactly what
00:30:45
Trump has done. And as flawless as our
00:30:47
troops did and my my lord, the we have
00:30:50
the greatest military ever. So, just
00:30:52
incredible job and shout out to them to
00:30:54
do this and lose no American lives was
00:30:56
just unbelievable. And it just says
00:30:58
something about the dedication of these
00:31:00
individuals. But things can go wrong no
00:31:03
matter how good you are. We could be
00:31:04
sitting here right now with 12 captured
00:31:07
Delta Force. We could have 50 dead
00:31:09
Americans.
00:31:10
>> Where's the war?
00:31:11
But if that did, this is where you have
00:31:13
to be intellectually honest.
00:31:14
>> If we were dealing with a situation
00:31:16
where they didn't pick up the target and
00:31:18
we had lost American troops and god
00:31:20
forbid they had taken hostages, we would
00:31:22
be sitting here with a much different
00:31:23
discussion and so we have to be very
00:31:25
careful. I give but we're not I give
00:31:27
Trump, but that is an equal possibility
00:31:29
or certainly a non-zero possibility.
00:31:31
Things can go sideways. You sound like
00:31:33
when Sam Harris was saying that imagine
00:31:36
if CO actually killed a lot of people
00:31:39
then the conversation would be
00:31:40
different. Well, it didn't. There was no
00:31:42
war here. And by the way, with dead
00:31:44
>> and let's hope there isn't. And let's
00:31:46
hope there isn't. You know, this is why
00:31:47
I give Trump a lot of credit. He has
00:31:48
been strategic. I do give you that.
00:31:50
>> Stick and move. Stick and move is the
00:31:52
game.
00:31:53
>> I pray that he can continue.
00:31:54
>> And by the way, record first of all,
00:31:56
even if we took Greenland, it's not
00:31:58
going to be a there's 30,000 people who
00:32:00
live there. But I think it's more likely
00:32:02
that we'll we'll make a deal. I think
00:32:03
we're going to make an offer they can't
00:32:05
refuse.
00:32:06
>> Okay. Ken Harry, shout out to our guy
00:32:07
Ken Harry. Maybe you can make a deal.
00:32:09
Let's make
00:32:10
>> them an offer they can't refuse.
00:32:11
>> Yeah. I mean, how much could it cost? I
00:32:13
mean, there's nothing there. Biggest
00:32:16
business winner
00:32:18
for 2025. Uh, looks like Freeberg picked
00:32:22
robots and autonomous hardware. Year of
00:32:24
the robot. I think if you include robo
00:32:26
taxi there, you nailed it. Certainly
00:32:28
next year will be the year of optimist
00:32:30
uh 2027. Chimath, you said dollar
00:32:33
denominated stable coins. I think uh
00:32:35
given what we've seen with regulation,
00:32:37
that was spot on. Gavin, shout out to
00:32:40
our friend Gavin. He said big businesses
00:32:42
that use AI thoughtfully. Another great
00:32:44
one. I pick Tesla, which is at an
00:32:47
all-time high. And Google, which of all
00:32:50
of the mag seven crushed is the biggest
00:32:53
winner, and they did 65%. So I know both
00:32:55
of those we did. I think W all of us
00:32:57
crushed that one. Who do you have
00:32:59
Freeberg as your biggest business winner
00:33:02
prediction for 2026? Go ahead, Freeberg.
00:33:04
>> I couldn't decide. My number one is
00:33:05
Huawei, which I've mentioned in the past
00:33:07
out of China. I think Huawei's effort to
00:33:11
partner with SMIC to go deeper in the
00:33:13
chip stack and they're just firing on
00:33:15
all cylinders. I do think keep an eye on
00:33:17
Huawei over the next year. It's um it's
00:33:20
going to outperform expectations, at
00:33:21
least the western expectations. And the
00:33:23
second is poly market. I think poly
00:33:26
markets evolved from being kind of this
00:33:28
one-off quirky prediction market to
00:33:30
actually really providing insights into
00:33:32
current events and the news in a way
00:33:34
that none of us anticipated.
00:33:36
>> And I do expect that after the deal we
00:33:38
saw with NY that all of the exchanges
00:33:41
and we're already seeing this with Robin
00:33:43
Hood and Coinbase and we should expect
00:33:45
something from NASDAQ this year. Dina
00:33:47
Friedman talked to us about this, but I
00:33:49
do think that prediction markets could
00:33:51
become not just markets but also news
00:33:54
and I think poly markets um just in such
00:33:56
a position to have a breakout year.
00:33:59
>> Okay, great one. Chimath, biggest
00:34:01
business winner for 2026 after yourself.
00:34:04
Who do you got?
00:34:06
>> Yeah, it's hard. I mean, I will pick me.
00:34:09
>> Yep, we already done.
00:34:11
>> That one's coming.
00:34:12
>> It's already in the books.
00:34:13
>> Don't hurt your elbow. Don't hyper
00:34:15
extend your elbow. already in the books.
00:34:17
So, can't it's all downhill from here.
00:34:20
>> Nick, we need to use that meme of Obama
00:34:22
giving himself a medal.
00:34:24
>> Jam is giving himself.
00:34:27
>> I will pick copper.
00:34:29
>> Okay, copper.
00:34:31
>> We are still
00:34:33
completely underestimating
00:34:36
how short we are in terms of the global
00:34:39
demand supply dynamics of a handful of
00:34:42
critical elements that we need. Again,
00:34:45
in the Trump doctrine view of the world,
00:34:47
that is no longer as multilateral as it
00:34:50
was. And we need to have unilateral
00:34:52
national security. And if you look
00:34:55
through that lens, the asset that is set
00:34:59
up to go absolutely parabolic is copper.
00:35:02
And the reason is that it is
00:35:05
at least as it stands today the most
00:35:08
useful, cheap, amendable, conductive
00:35:11
material that we have. That material
00:35:14
manifests in everything from our data
00:35:17
centers to our chips to our weapon
00:35:21
systems. It's just everywhere,
00:35:24
everywhere, everywhere. And right now,
00:35:25
Jason, we are on a path by 2040 where we
00:35:28
will be
00:35:29
short about 70% of the global supply at
00:35:34
current course and speed. And uh
00:35:37
>> I will pick copper.
00:35:39
>> Sax, what do you got? Biggest business
00:35:41
winner of 2026. Your prediction. I said
00:35:43
the IPO. I think 2026 is going to be a
00:35:46
big year for IPOs. I'm not going to say
00:35:48
which ones. I think there's going to be
00:35:49
a bunch of them, a bunch of successful
00:35:51
ones.
00:35:52
>> And I think we could see trillions of
00:35:54
dollars of new market cap created of
00:35:56
public companies.
00:35:58
>> Totally.
00:35:58
>> For a while, people were concerned that
00:36:00
the number of public companies were
00:36:01
shrinking. Public companies were
00:36:03
actually being taken private. This is
00:36:04
going to be a big reversal of that
00:36:06
trend. So, I think this be part of the
00:36:08
Trump boom will be the idea.
00:36:09
>> I love that one. I like that one.
00:36:11
>> Great one. Uh, I went with uh since I
00:36:13
nailed the Mag 7 for last year and
00:36:14
picked the highest performer with Google
00:36:16
and I placed a bet on that, so I'm
00:36:18
feeling pretty good about it. Uh, my
00:36:19
prediction for 2026 is that Amazon is
00:36:22
going to have a massive year interesting
00:36:23
>> as they continue to replace humans
00:36:26
>> with robots. That's why here's a chart
00:36:28
for you. I've been talking about this a
00:36:30
little bit. I think this is the most
00:36:31
important company to watch because Zuk's
00:36:35
their self-driving is working. They're
00:36:37
making great progress with it. And here
00:36:38
when you look at this chart, you can see
00:36:40
they're essentially flat in terms of
00:36:42
hiring humans and they're surging in
00:36:44
deploying robots and they did their
00:36:47
whole PR comm strategy of calling them
00:36:50
cobots and donating to toys for tots
00:36:52
etc. I think they'll be the first
00:36:54
corporate uh singularity which is to say
00:36:58
the first company to have more robots
00:37:00
driving their bottom line than humans.
00:37:03
So that's my prediction for 2026 is
00:37:06
Amazon. And I'm going to place a bet on
00:37:08
that.
00:37:09
>> My prediction is that Jayla is such a
00:37:10
luck box that he'll end up being right
00:37:12
about Amazon, but not having anything to
00:37:14
do with the reason he gave.
00:37:16
>> Yeah, right. He'll hire a billion humans
00:37:18
to go do something and it'll be for a
00:37:20
different reason. I am a luck box. That
00:37:22
is true.
00:37:22
>> It'll just be better free cash flow and
00:37:24
all of a sudden more people using AWS
00:37:26
and Jal will be right. Well, I actually
00:37:28
I think the reason is if you just if you
00:37:30
think about it, I don't know if you guys
00:37:31
have had this experience, but with the
00:37:34
delivery business, which was kind of a
00:37:35
dog for a long time, obviously AWS is
00:37:37
crushing it, but that delivery business
00:37:40
here in Austin, we get everything the
00:37:42
same day. You're going to experience
00:37:44
this, David, there are because of the I
00:37:45
think the geography here and the ability
00:37:48
to have depot centers very close.
00:37:51
Everything you order on Amazon comes
00:37:52
within the same day.
00:37:53
>> You know, I've noticed that already.
00:37:54
I've already started ordering things
00:37:56
from Amazon. You're right. It was all
00:37:57
same day. I'm like, "Wait, what is going
00:37:58
on?"
00:37:59
>> That's
00:37:59
>> what it is is we have a lot of space 15
00:38:02
miles outside of the city center, 20
00:38:04
cent, and they built these huge um
00:38:06
warehouses. So, you just get everything
00:38:07
within 4 hours. They're like, "We'll be
00:38:09
right there." It's very bizarre.
00:38:11
>> So, Jason, you'll buy like virtues at
00:38:13
like 8:00 a.m. and it arrives by noon.
00:38:16
>> Yes. Absolutely. Absolutely. And uh when
00:38:18
you put your order in for ethics and
00:38:20
morality, it just never shows up. I
00:38:22
don't know. It's lost again. Who knows?
00:38:24
It's just incredible. We're just both
00:38:26
ends of the spectrum here.
00:38:28
Moral. It's like, "Hello, customer
00:38:31
support. I ordered a moral compass 2
00:38:32
years ago. It still hasn't arrived."
00:38:34
Okay. Biggest business loser.
00:38:36
>> I love each month.
00:38:37
>> It hid behind the 20 billion.
00:38:39
>> It did. Absolutely.
00:38:41
>> All I know is I got my beak wet. So, I
00:38:43
hope your compass never shows up.
00:38:46
>> You got your beak wet on that deal.
00:38:48
>> Well, Sundep came to Besties and he
00:38:51
wanted to collect all besties. We all
00:38:52
got to place a little bet and then
00:38:54
>> Oh, by the way, by the way, I devested I
00:38:57
devested my Gro shares as part of
00:38:59
joining the government back in like
00:39:01
February or March.
00:39:02
>> Oh god.
00:39:03
>> So,
00:39:03
>> oh by the way, by the way, what would
00:39:05
that cost you like what the last triple
00:39:07
up?
00:39:08
>> No, it was a small position that came
00:39:10
from Grock acquiring Sunny's old
00:39:12
company. We didn't invest in Gro, so it
00:39:14
wasn't big, but the point was
00:39:16
>> Yeah, it's just another example of you
00:39:18
sacrificing for the country, which I
00:39:19
give you a lot of credit for. It's good
00:39:21
for Sachs to put that on the record.
00:39:22
>> Yeah.
00:39:23
>> Well, it's just so ridiculous because
00:39:24
I'm accused of somehow doing this job
00:39:26
for money when it just keeps costing me
00:39:27
money.
00:39:28
>> It's negative money.
00:39:28
>> XAI just raised an up round at twice the
00:39:31
valuation from the last round and we had
00:39:34
to divest that too.
00:39:35
>> Yeah. No, no, we didn't sit it out. Hold
00:39:37
on. Let's be clear. We didn't sit it
00:39:39
out. We divested it.
00:39:43
>> So, you place the bet and then before
00:39:45
you get to collect the ticket, you lose
00:39:47
the last double up or triple up. The
00:39:49
economic cost to Sachs will probably
00:39:51
exceed a billion dollars by the time he
00:39:53
leaves.
00:39:53
>> Personally, this is crazy. I mean,
00:39:55
people need to know this. It's a very
00:39:56
important thing to put on the record. I
00:39:57
think it's important for
00:39:58
>> I think everybody should know. All these
00:40:00
dumb reporters don't get it, but Sax has
00:40:02
sacrificed
00:40:04
>> financially an enormous amount to work
00:40:06
on behalf of
00:40:07
>> the government and the people. That's
00:40:08
that's really amazing. It's fine. I
00:40:10
wouldn't even say anything about it if
00:40:12
it weren't for the fact that we got
00:40:13
these mainstream media reporters lying
00:40:15
and saying the opposite that somehow
00:40:17
this job is making me money,
00:40:19
>> right?
00:40:19
>> I wouldn't say a word about it
00:40:20
otherwise.
00:40:22
>> Business loser 2025.
00:40:25
>> Gavin said federal government service
00:40:27
providers, I guess because of Doge and
00:40:30
them being held to the fire uh feet to
00:40:32
the fire there to give us a better deal.
00:40:35
Old guard defense contractors like Bowen
00:40:37
and Lheed was yours Freedberg
00:40:40
and Chimath you said the Max 7 expected
00:40:42
a decrease in uh the record
00:40:45
concentration. I said open EI which
00:40:47
would see a peak valuation and obviously
00:40:50
I got that wrong. What do you got this
00:40:52
year Freeberg? Who do you think is going
00:40:53
to be the biggest business loser of this
00:40:54
year? To follow up on Chimath and my
00:40:57
conversation at the Christmas dinner, I
00:41:00
think these state governments are going
00:41:01
to have a real problem with finding
00:41:04
financing because what's going on with
00:41:07
the exposees that are underway on waste,
00:41:10
fraud, and abuse in state agencies, I
00:41:13
think, is going to lead to a
00:41:14
conversation that's going to cause folks
00:41:16
to question the long-term solveny in
00:41:19
operations because the response won't
00:41:21
be, hey, let's cut out the waste, fraud,
00:41:22
and the abuse. the response is going to
00:41:24
be we got to keep it going and that is
00:41:26
what is going to give people fear is
00:41:28
that if they did respond call it
00:41:30
equivocally to the discoveries that the
00:41:33
governments did then I think that
00:41:35
there's an opportunity to continue to be
00:41:37
able to borrow and access capital
00:41:38
markets but I do worry a lot about state
00:41:41
governments um borrowing. I think the
00:41:42
other thing that's going to hit the the
00:41:44
fan this year in state governments is
00:41:46
all of these um unrealized pension
00:41:49
liabilities. I think when these numbers
00:41:50
start to come out this year and a lot of
00:41:51
people are now digging deep into it,
00:41:53
folks are going to wake up and be like,
00:41:54
"Holy, there's a ginormous hole in these
00:41:57
states and their obligations."
00:41:58
>> And why does the government have to do
00:41:59
these pensions? Why can't we do
00:42:01
superanuation like Australia does? We
00:42:03
have to get this out of the I love that
00:42:05
pick.
00:42:06
>> That's called a defined contribution
00:42:07
instead of a defined benefit. And if you
00:42:09
get this defined contribution model and
00:42:10
then just have good management, it all
00:42:12
works out. So this is basically the
00:42:13
problem with social security. Social
00:42:15
Security is a defined benefit and then
00:42:18
all the money just doesn't sit anywhere.
00:42:19
It doesn't exist.
00:42:21
>> If it was a defined contribution,
00:42:22
>> it's just a liability.
00:42:23
>> And let me let me give a shout out. If
00:42:24
it was a defined contribution like
00:42:26
Invest America accounts or Trump
00:42:27
accounts as they're being called, and
00:42:28
you put the money in and you see how
00:42:30
much you have and every year you track
00:42:31
it and that's what your retirement is
00:42:32
going to be, just like we might have
00:42:33
with our 401ks or our IARS, that is a
00:42:36
system that actually has true solveny.
00:42:38
Otherwise, it becomes this runaway train
00:42:41
of liability. And that's effectively
00:42:42
what the states have set up. And it's
00:42:44
very dangerous.
00:42:44
>> And if we were to take government out of
00:42:46
it and then every American just had to
00:42:48
put 10, 12, 14% into their retirement
00:42:51
account and it was forced, you'd have
00:42:53
happy people who feel some agency in
00:42:56
their lives, which the people of
00:42:57
Australia do. Chimath, who's your loser
00:43:00
2026?
00:43:03
I will pick the software industrial
00:43:05
complex. So these are the companies that
00:43:08
sell licensed SAS to the corporations of
00:43:11
America. It's about a3 to4 trillion a
00:43:15
year economy. That is separated into
00:43:18
three buckets. Bucket one which is the
00:43:21
smallest is the initial licensing.
00:43:25
That's probably 5 to 10%. Buckets two
00:43:28
and three where all the money is made is
00:43:31
what's called maintenance and migration
00:43:34
which is how do I just maintain this big
00:43:37
bulky license that I just bought for
00:43:39
$300 million as an example
00:43:41
>> or how do I migrate it from product A to
00:43:43
product B.
00:43:46
Those last two buckets represent 90% of
00:43:48
all the dollars in revenue that's
00:43:50
generated in software. And because of
00:43:53
the advancement of these models and the
00:43:55
advancement of these technological
00:43:58
techniques that we are all uncovering,
00:44:01
building agents, building systems, I
00:44:04
think you're going to see that total
00:44:07
economic opportunity shrink and contract
00:44:10
aggressively.
00:44:12
The companies will still be able to do
00:44:15
their business. It'll just be at a much
00:44:18
much lower incremental revenue. the
00:44:21
customers will be able to do their
00:44:22
business. They'll have a lot more
00:44:23
flexibility and a lot of upstarts I
00:44:26
think will have opportunity. I'm
00:44:27
speaking my book obviously, but I'm
00:44:28
seeing it on the ground with you have a
00:44:30
company building software.
00:44:32
>> Our entire business 8090s business has
00:44:35
basically migrated to disrupting
00:44:38
maintenance and migration patterns. I
00:44:40
cannot describe how much opportunity
00:44:42
there is. It's very tactical, mundane,
00:44:45
not very sexy work, but it's incredibly
00:44:47
lucrative. And so I expect that that
00:44:49
thing is going to shrink. It's going to
00:44:50
impact SAS companies, public SAS
00:44:52
companies particularly quite severely in
00:44:54
20.
00:44:54
>> What do you got facts for your biggest
00:44:56
business loser of 2026 prediction?
00:44:57
>> For me, we already talked about this,
00:44:59
but it was California because of the
00:45:00
wealth tax and also the ownorous
00:45:02
regulations driving business and capital
00:45:04
out of the state. I hope you guys are
00:45:06
right that it does not make the ballot.
00:45:08
If it does, I think there will be a
00:45:09
panic and rush for the exits.
00:45:11
Regardless, there's two major refineries
00:45:13
closing by the spring. Higher gas prices
00:45:16
will be the result. I just think that
00:45:19
the politicians are not doing a good
00:45:20
enough job in California dispelling the
00:45:23
fears and the actual hostility of the
00:45:26
business environment.
00:45:27
>> That's a great one. And I went with
00:45:30
young white collar workers in America. I
00:45:33
think they're going to be the biggest
00:45:34
business loser. I think it's getting
00:45:36
really hard for them to get entry level
00:45:39
uh jobs. I'm seeing that all over the
00:45:40
place because companies are having an
00:45:42
easier job uh just automating with AI
00:45:45
than training up Gen Z graduates. That's
00:45:49
my belief. That's why I'm launched
00:45:50
founder university on three continents.
00:45:52
If you are a young person, you got to be
00:45:54
resilient. You're going to have to be
00:45:55
self-reliant independent of what Mandami
00:45:58
Mandami says about collectivism. It's
00:46:00
easier to use AI than it is to train up
00:46:04
and we don't have professional
00:46:05
development. That needs to come back. I
00:46:07
just did an interview with the CEO of
00:46:09
McKenzie, which you may have seen on the
00:46:10
feed. And this is the big challenge in
00:46:12
corporate America is they're taking out
00:46:14
the bottom two or three rungs and
00:46:16
automating stuff. And we really need to
00:46:18
develop young people so that they have a
00:46:20
path to take the CEO jobs eventually.
00:46:23
And I don't think they're going to have
00:46:24
an easy time doing that. That's why I
00:46:26
think all young people should start
00:46:28
companies. I am talking my own book. I
00:46:30
am talking about founder.university.
00:46:31
Please apply Japan, Saudi, and in
00:46:34
America. We're going to help you build
00:46:36
companies. Thank you for my promo,
00:46:37
>> Jason. I got a text last night from a
00:46:39
friend and it's in response to your
00:46:41
comment about young people not being
00:46:43
able to find jobs because of AI, which
00:46:45
is the statement you've made a couple
00:46:46
times. He said went to a roundabout of
00:46:49
50 CEOs of public and private companies
00:46:51
and asked everyone if they're hiring
00:46:53
junior engineers. Everyone said they are
00:46:55
still, but not as much as before because
00:46:58
during co every college lowered the bar
00:47:01
on admissions and the talent just isn't
00:47:03
as good anymore. My friend went on and
00:47:06
he said, 'You should talk about this to
00:47:07
counter Jal's point about AI taking
00:47:09
young people's jobs. We see this with
00:47:11
financial analysts and we see this with
00:47:13
sales people we hire. The Gen Z kids are
00:47:16
all really challenging to hire because
00:47:18
of cultural issues, not because we're
00:47:21
not hiring them due to AI. So, we try
00:47:23
and hire older people primarily to to
00:47:26
fill those roles. So, there's a real
00:47:28
interesting point that he was making. I
00:47:29
texted a couple of their friends to ask
00:47:31
them their opinion and I've heard this
00:47:32
concurrence shout out which is like a
00:47:34
lot of people think that recent grads
00:47:36
out of college and this may be a co era
00:47:39
phenomenon they just don't seem to have
00:47:41
the temperament the motivation the
00:47:43
organizational skills
00:47:45
>> executive function yeah
00:47:47
>> executive function and by the way some
00:47:48
of our friends who I've talked to who
00:47:51
have kids graduating college there's
00:47:52
even a conversation about none of these
00:47:53
kids are motivated to get jobs or to
00:47:55
make money there's a very weird
00:47:57
phenomenon in the youth right now and
00:47:58
this may be a COVID phenomenon and it
00:48:00
may be a cultural thing that's part of
00:48:02
the long form of what's going on in our
00:48:03
society or it may be a socialist trend
00:48:06
or it may be a populist trend or it may
00:48:08
just be that people have gotten too
00:48:09
wealthy and the nation has truly split
00:48:11
and you can't climb the ladder anymore.
00:48:13
There's a bunch of things going on here,
00:48:15
but I do not think, and I think a lot of
00:48:17
people are echoing this, Jal, that
00:48:19
challenges that young people are having
00:48:20
finding employment is purely rooted in
00:48:23
in an AI and automation phenomenon, but
00:48:25
it may be a cultural phenomenon. And so,
00:48:27
I just put that on the plate for you to
00:48:28
consider that I don't I do think it's
00:48:31
both. I do think it is partially what
00:48:34
you're saying is that maybe these young
00:48:35
folks um have, you know, they're just
00:48:39
either entitled or their parents have
00:48:41
enough money for them to skate and go
00:48:43
sideways and maybe not be as career
00:48:45
motivated. It could be a social thing,
00:48:47
it could be a co thing, it could be all
00:48:49
of those and certainly multiffactor. I
00:48:51
just know what I see on the ground which
00:48:53
is you know so many companies coming to
00:48:55
me saying we can replace the bottom
00:48:57
third of these tasks and that those
00:48:59
bottom third of tasks are typically done
00:49:02
by young people out of school. So I
00:49:05
think both things are probably true to a
00:49:07
certain extent and time will tell. I do
00:49:09
think it's going to be challenging and
00:49:10
continue to be challenging and you see
00:49:11
that in the numbers from you know
00:49:14
Google, Uber, Coinbase, all these
00:49:17
companies are doing more with less and
00:49:18
and maybe that's just the nature of AI.
00:49:20
Maybe the first thing you do is cut
00:49:22
costs. And maybe the second thing you do
00:49:23
is hire people who know how to use these
00:49:25
tools. If you are a young person who
00:49:27
uses AI tools, you're going to find a
00:49:29
job. If you're a young person who isn't
00:49:30
motivated and doesn't use AI tools,
00:49:32
you're going to have a hard time. Let's
00:49:34
go with the biggest deal. Last year's
00:49:36
predictions for biggest deal for 2025,
00:49:39
traditional auto OEM consolidation. That
00:49:42
was you, Chimoth. I think that we
00:49:44
haven't seen exactly the consolidation,
00:49:45
but we have seen those businesses come
00:49:47
apart. So I think it's I give you
00:49:48
definitely twothirds of a credit there.
00:49:50
Uh Gavin said a title wave of M&A. I
00:49:53
think he's not wrong there. That has
00:49:55
started to happen certainly. Freeberg
00:49:57
you said massive compute buildout deals.
00:49:59
Of course you nailed that one. I said
00:50:01
consolidation amongst the on demand
00:50:04
economy. That hasn't happened but we do
00:50:06
see a lot of deals occurring. And I said
00:50:08
also Apple would buy Warner Brothers. I
00:50:10
got that like a I guess uh that wound up
00:50:13
going to Netflix. So I give myself a
00:50:14
half point for that. What do you have as
00:50:17
your biggest deal for 2026, David Saxs?
00:50:21
>> Well, I don't want to get prediction I
00:50:22
don't want to get too specific here in
00:50:24
terms of names of companies and that
00:50:25
sort of thing,
00:50:26
>> but uh what I would say is that I think
00:50:29
there was a breakthrough in the last
00:50:31
couple of months in terms of these
00:50:32
coding assistants where they've been
00:50:34
around for a while, but there seems to
00:50:35
have been another level of quality
00:50:37
achieved just in the last month or so.
00:50:40
And you're really starting to hear I
00:50:42
mean maybe a lot of it is hype but there
00:50:44
is I think a lot of people are getting
00:50:46
very excited about the potential here
00:50:49
and part of it is coding part of it is
00:50:51
just tool use. You can download the
00:50:53
programs and so it has access to your
00:50:55
file drive and it can take actions on
00:50:57
your computer. This trend feels to me
00:50:59
like chat bots did at the end of 2022
00:51:02
going into 23 where it's like people
00:51:05
were really hyped about it but then
00:51:07
continue to play out play out in the
00:51:09
next year and so I think these this call
00:51:12
coding assistance/tool use I think will
00:51:15
get bigger and bigger this year.
00:51:16
>> Freeberg what do you got biggest deal?
00:51:19
>> Uh Russia Ukraine I think it's going to
00:51:21
settle out this year. I think there's a
00:51:22
lot of motivating factors to get it
00:51:24
settled out this year. Economic and
00:51:26
other political factors, but I do think
00:51:28
it's going to settle out this year and
00:51:30
it's going to bring a bit more stability
00:51:31
to that region. And there's a whole
00:51:33
reset that's underway this year. I think
00:51:35
in terms of geopolitics and where the
00:51:38
powers all sit,
00:51:39
>> Trump can stop that war, he would be two
00:51:40
for two. That would be I think this
00:51:42
one's going to settle.
00:51:43
>> That would be that would be great. He
00:51:45
may not have done it on day one, but if
00:51:46
he gets it done in in, you know, year
00:51:48
two, that's good enough for me. Chimal
00:51:51
biggest deal 2026. What do you got?
00:51:53
>> It's not a specific deal, but it's an
00:51:54
approach. I think that M&A cannot
00:51:56
happen. And so it's the IP license M&A
00:52:01
workaround. And I think you're going to
00:52:03
see hundreds of billions of dollars of
00:52:05
these kinds of deals. So this is the
00:52:07
deal that Google did with Character AI.
00:52:09
It's the same thing that they did.
00:52:11
>> Microsoft did it. Yeah,
00:52:12
>> Microsoft did it. It's obviously what
00:52:14
Nvidia did with Grock. Why are these
00:52:16
deals happening? Well, if you just look
00:52:19
at what Facebook tried to do, they tried
00:52:21
to buy Manis for $2.5 billion. Manis was
00:52:23
a Chinese company that then left China
00:52:25
and essentially rebuilt itself as a
00:52:27
Singaporean business. The Chinese have
00:52:29
now said, "We're going to look at this."
00:52:31
They are going to actively import export
00:52:33
controls. They're going to actively look
00:52:34
at which technologies and even which
00:52:36
researchers are working on things that
00:52:38
are critical enough that it just can't
00:52:40
go abroad in this existential fight that
00:52:43
they believe they're in with the United
00:52:44
States. The United States is in
00:52:46
equivalent such position. All of this
00:52:48
leads me to believe that traditional M&A
00:52:50
is effectively dead. I think it's going
00:52:53
to be impossible to get a large
00:52:54
transaction done. So how will you do it?
00:52:57
You'll do what Sundar did. You'll do
00:52:59
what Satya did. You'll do what Jensen
00:53:02
did. You'll do what we did with Scale
00:53:04
AI. These huge licensing deals that
00:53:06
basically replace M&A. And I think that
00:53:09
that as a deal type will get better and
00:53:12
more refined and tighter and better
00:53:15
executed. We were the third or fourth of
00:53:18
these kinds of deals and even the third
00:53:20
or fourth iteration
00:53:22
was quite good.
00:53:24
By the time that you're into the middle
00:53:26
part of next year and you've done 15 or
00:53:27
20 of these things, I think the lawyers
00:53:29
that work on these things and the
00:53:30
accountants will just be bull. The tax
00:53:32
treatment is not ideal but the speed at
00:53:34
which you can do them is phenomenal
00:53:36
because the next day somebody like
00:53:38
Sundep can be working for Jensen which
00:53:41
is what Jensen wants. They want the
00:53:42
talent. Zuckerberg wants the talent
00:53:44
working there the next day
00:53:45
>> and the IP
00:53:46
>> and the IP of course. Um you know for
00:53:48
2026 I think we're going to see some
00:53:50
massive M&A. It doesn't matter to me how
00:53:53
it occurs but I do think we're going to
00:53:54
see a 50 billion plus deal. And I think
00:53:57
it could be uh one of the Mag 7, an
00:54:00
Apple, a Meta, a Microsoft or an Amazon
00:54:02
going out and trying to buy XAI, Mistro,
00:54:05
Perplexity, Anthropic. One of those four
00:54:08
comes to mind. I know most of them
00:54:10
probably want to go public and uh go it
00:54:12
alone, but I think an offer could come
00:54:14
in and during that race for which six or
00:54:17
seven large language models and man it
00:54:19
is a it is a battle where they are
00:54:22
moving up and down the rankings and
00:54:24
beating each other out, you know, on
00:54:27
your question
00:54:27
>> and I think one of them is going to I
00:54:29
think one of them is going to go for it.
00:54:30
I I I think it could wind up being
00:54:32
Apple.
00:54:33
>> I met Meta or Amazon who buys an
00:54:35
anthropic or a perplexity. I started
00:54:37
where you were, but this is why I went
00:54:38
to this deal type as the biggest
00:54:40
business winner because if any of those
00:54:42
companies tried to buy, let's just say
00:54:43
anthropic, I think it's three years of
00:54:45
antitrust minimum. It's worse than when
00:54:49
Microsoft tried to buy Activision
00:54:51
because that was a niche product
00:54:54
and even that took almost 2 years and
00:54:57
like three or four months if I'm getting
00:54:58
it right. It or about two years. It's a
00:55:01
huge slog because it's a it's about
00:55:04
global coordination of multiple
00:55:06
regulators.
00:55:07
>> Yeah.
00:55:08
>> And get through the EU and eventually
00:55:10
one of them takes the lead pole
00:55:12
position. But in the Microsoft case, it
00:55:14
wasn't just one. You had to navigate
00:55:15
China. You had to navigate
00:55:18
>> Europe. So I I agree with you because I
00:55:21
think there's companies with so much
00:55:22
cash on their balance sheets that are
00:55:25
effectively getting debased every day.
00:55:28
the markets will start to punish these
00:55:30
companies. It just seems like you're
00:55:32
right. There's going to be a hundred
00:55:33
billion dollar transaction. I just
00:55:34
suspect it'll end up as an IP license.
00:55:37
>> Yeah. And I think President Trump, one
00:55:38
of his great strengths is that he moves
00:55:40
quickly. Man, what a first year. Whether
00:55:43
you like the decisions or not, he he
00:55:45
makes decisions. I think this is one of
00:55:47
the things that Democrats are learning
00:55:49
is that you got to actually get things
00:55:51
done for the American people. I think he
00:55:53
might instruct our government to let M&A
00:55:58
be great again and that would be great
00:56:00
for American exceptionalism. These
00:56:03
companies do need to merge and to
00:56:05
continue to grow and we should go try to
00:56:07
get from a MAG 7 to a MAG 17. We need
00:56:10
more bigger companies with bigger
00:56:12
footprints taking on global markets.
00:56:15
Most contrarian belief most contrarian
00:56:17
belief. People like this one. I said
00:56:19
openAI loses its lead in the AI race. Uh
00:56:22
and in fact that has happened if you
00:56:24
look at the um arenas and you look at
00:56:26
their market share they are being
00:56:28
challenged. Chimath you said the banking
00:56:30
crisis in one of the major mainline
00:56:32
banks. Gavin said one year of 5% plus
00:56:36
GDP growth at one point over the next
00:56:38
couple of years. Well done to Gavin
00:56:40
Freeberg you said socialism roars back.
00:56:43
Another amazing prediction. What's your
00:56:45
prediction for this year since you
00:56:46
crushed it last year? Freeberg. Go
00:56:48
ahead.
00:56:49
My prediction is based on the premise
00:56:51
that I think there is going to be this
00:56:52
revolution in Iran and the Ayatollas are
00:56:54
going to be out. That's not the
00:56:56
contrarian belief. I think that's the
00:56:57
standard belief and I think that is
00:56:58
going to happen and that's the premise.
00:57:01
But a lot of people think that Iran is
00:57:03
part of the destabilizing force in the
00:57:06
Middle East. And I do think that there
00:57:08
is already in anticipation of the
00:57:12
turnover with the ruling parties in
00:57:14
Iran. there is already this brewing
00:57:16
conflict amongst the other Arab states.
00:57:19
So I think that between UAE, Saudi,
00:57:22
Qatar and this fraction in Yemen and
00:57:25
then I don't know if you guys have
00:57:26
followed but there's this kind of
00:57:27
emerging independence movement for
00:57:29
Somali land which is kind of north of
00:57:31
Somalia
00:57:33
that there may be more conflict brewing
00:57:36
in the Middle East than anyone
00:57:38
anticipates for this year that will not
00:57:40
necessarily involve Israel and or Iran.
00:57:43
it will actually be amongst the other
00:57:44
Gulf states as they v for influence and
00:57:48
power and that the contrarian point may
00:57:50
in fact be that Iran has been a
00:57:52
stabilizing force in that region and by
00:57:55
removing Iran and by changing over Iran
00:57:57
and they become this kind of independent
00:58:00
democratic state and this particularly
00:58:01
is going to be heightened as there's
00:58:03
going to be this battle for who's going
00:58:04
to take care of the Palestinians as the
00:58:07
two-state solution emerges and what's
00:58:09
the role that Jordan's going to have to
00:58:11
play versus Egypt versus Saudi and it's
00:58:13
going to lead to a lot of questions
00:58:14
about resource allocation. So, I think
00:58:16
that this year could end up being a
00:58:18
little bit nastier than folks anticipate
00:58:20
in the Middle East as Iran turns over.
00:58:23
>> Sax got a contrarian belief for 2026.
00:58:26
>> Yes, I said that AI will increase demand
00:58:30
for knowledge workers, not decrease it.
00:58:33
I would refer you to Erin Levy's post
00:58:35
called Jevans paradox for knowledge
00:58:37
workers. And the point of Jevans paradox
00:58:40
is that as the cost of a resource goes
00:58:43
down, the aggregate demand for it
00:58:46
actually increases because you discover
00:58:48
more and more use cases. So I think this
00:58:50
will certainly happen with code. In the
00:58:52
past has been very expensive to generate
00:58:54
code. You have to hire engineers.
00:58:56
There's not enough of them. It's an
00:58:57
expensive resource. So the amount of
00:59:01
software generated in the economy was
00:59:02
limited by that. I think it's going to
00:59:04
increase massively now because the cost
00:59:06
of generating code is coming down. so
00:59:07
much. But there's other examples too.
00:59:10
You take a field like radiology that's
00:59:12
frequently cited as a profession that AI
00:59:15
is going to put out of business. That's
00:59:16
not what the data shows. The data shows
00:59:18
that the number of radiologists is
00:59:19
increasing. Why? Because the number of
00:59:21
scans that people want to make is
00:59:23
increasing. And it's true that AI can do
00:59:25
some of the work, but you still need a
00:59:27
doctor to prompt the AI to interpret the
00:59:29
AI to validate it. So you get more
00:59:32
efficient. The cost of scans goes down.
00:59:34
And instead of it being a super
00:59:36
specialtity that happens very rarely
00:59:38
that you need like a referral on top of
00:59:40
a referral to get it becomes something
00:59:42
that's normalized and everyone starts
00:59:44
doing it and you start getting more and
00:59:45
more scans that leads to better and
00:59:47
better outcomes. So I think there's
00:59:50
going to be a lot of those examples
00:59:51
through the economy and we're going to
00:59:52
look back and see that the job loss
00:59:56
narrative was not only wrong but we
00:59:58
actually got job gains.
01:00:01
>> Okay. Okay. And for those of you who
01:00:02
want to understand Jeb's paradox a
01:00:04
little more, you can look at something
01:00:05
like electricity or steel or concrete.
01:00:07
When we lowered the cost of those
01:00:09
things, people didn't use less of it.
01:00:10
They built skyscrapers and we had more
01:00:13
routes for more airplanes to take you on
01:00:15
more vacations. And that went from being
01:00:17
something only rich people did to
01:00:19
everybody. So Jeban's paradox is
01:00:20
definitely at work. What do you got? Uh
01:00:22
Chimath, which what's on your uh
01:00:25
contrarian belief?
01:00:26
>> Gosh, I have two. Well, I'll give you
01:00:28
them both and you can just see. My
01:00:30
contrarian belief number one is I don't
01:00:31
think SpaceX will IPO. I think that it
01:00:33
will reverse merge into Tesla and I
01:00:35
think Elon will use it as a moment to
01:00:37
consolidate control and power of his two
01:00:40
seminal assets into one cap table.
01:00:42
>> Oh my god, I love that. Wow.
01:00:44
>> Well, he's talked about that before.
01:00:46
He's talked about having a holding
01:00:47
company for years of all of the
01:00:49
collection. You could put Neural Link in
01:00:51
there too, right Jim? You could put in
01:00:53
the Boring Company as well.
01:00:56
>> Sure. I'm just giving you my contrarian
01:00:58
take. there will be no IPO for SpaceX. I
01:01:00
think it will just be it specifically
01:01:02
will be a reverse merger.
01:01:03
>> There you go.
01:01:05
>> The second contrarian take is that
01:01:08
>> I think the central banks
01:01:11
will realize
01:01:14
that there are limitations to gold and
01:01:16
limitations to Bitcoin
01:01:19
and will as a result seek out a
01:01:22
completely new cryptographic paradigm
01:01:25
that they can control on their balance
01:01:27
sheet. that is fungeable, that is
01:01:30
tradable and that is completely secure
01:01:32
and private.
01:01:35
And I think the reason why that privacy
01:01:38
needs to exist
01:01:40
is that for the sovereignty of a
01:01:42
country, you need to be in a position
01:01:45
where you have assets that are not
01:01:48
easily disclosed
01:01:51
to anybody else, friends or enemies
01:01:53
alike. And then separately,
01:01:55
cryptographically, if you're going to
01:01:57
own a currency,
01:02:00
you need to hedge against the eventual
01:02:03
risk in the next 5 to 10 years that
01:02:07
there's a quantum chip that can
01:02:10
challenge the existing cryptographic
01:02:11
schemes that are used. And uh for my
01:02:14
contrarian, I was thinking about going
01:02:16
with OpenAI losing their lead and not
01:02:18
being the number one company again. uh
01:02:21
because I do think that will be the
01:02:22
trend that they will have the they'll
01:02:24
continue to give up their market share
01:02:27
to other players including Google and
01:02:30
Gemini and XAI etc. But I'm going to go
01:02:33
with a a pretty wild card here. I think
01:02:35
the standoff with China is going to be
01:02:36
largely resolved and I think President
01:02:38
Trump's when he makes his visit there. I
01:02:40
don't know if you're going to go on that
01:02:41
one sax but I think he should be
01:02:44
included in it obviously because of the
01:02:45
AI race. I do think that the standoff um
01:02:48
and the issues around Taiwan are going
01:02:51
to be resolved and I think this could be
01:02:54
the signature issue of Trump's second
01:02:57
term is that we work out a working
01:02:59
relationship where both China and
01:03:01
America win without one of us losing.
01:03:05
Best performing asset best performing
01:03:08
asset last year's prediction I said MAG
01:03:10
7 which was up 22% versus the S&P 500 at
01:03:13
plus 17. Chimathy were long CDS for a
01:03:17
potential run on a major bank. You said
01:03:19
it was a long shot. Gavin said high
01:03:21
bandwidth memory makers like Micron
01:03:24
which was up 230%.
01:03:26
That was a great call. And Freeberg, you
01:03:28
said Chinese tech stocks and ETFs Alibab
01:03:31
is up 85%. Chinese tech ETF up 47%
01:03:35
versus the S&P 500 at plus 17. So I
01:03:39
guess that means Gavin Freedberg and
01:03:41
then myself.
01:03:43
What do you got for this year's best
01:03:44
performing asset? Freedberg.
01:03:47
>> Poly market. Poly markets on a tear.
01:03:51
Network effects. Replacing media
01:03:53
replacing markets.
01:03:54
>> Congrats to our friend Shane. A poly
01:03:56
market.
01:03:56
>> Do you have a best performing asset for
01:03:58
2026? Go ahead, Shima.
01:04:00
>> I would pick a basket of critical
01:04:02
metals.
01:04:04
>> Okay. Basket of critical uh metals. What
01:04:06
do you got, Zach?
01:04:07
>> It's getting a little bit redundant for
01:04:08
me, but I just said the expanding super
01:04:10
cycle in tech. I mean, again, this is
01:04:12
just another facet of the boom. But
01:04:14
actually, let me just show you some data
01:04:15
that literally just came out. I feel
01:04:17
like this is breaking news.
01:04:18
>> Oh, breaking news.
01:04:19
>> Nick, can you pull this up? US
01:04:20
productivity just surged 4.9%, the
01:04:23
strongest reading in nearly 6 years. And
01:04:26
this is the news item,
01:04:28
>> is that the Atlanta Fed, their forecast
01:04:32
for Q4 GDP just climbed to 5.4%.
01:04:37
Can that be right?
01:04:38
>> Yes.
01:04:39
>> Can we get a fact check on that? Five to
01:04:41
six is I think where we're going to see
01:04:42
it, guys. We're going to see some sixes
01:04:44
get printed.
01:04:46
>> I mean,
01:04:47
>> January 8th, 2026, Atlanta Fed's GDP now
01:04:51
model estimate for real GDP growth in
01:04:52
the fourth quarter of 2025 is 5.4%
01:04:55
significant jump from the previous
01:04:57
estimate of 2.7% on January 5th.
01:04:59
>> You have to remember that there's going
01:05:01
to be 150 basis point correction in Q4
01:05:04
GDP because of the government furlow.
01:05:06
Okay? So let's say that GDP was probably
01:05:10
call it four. You're going to see a
01:05:12
print of 2 and a half. So you need to
01:05:13
readjust that because now all the
01:05:15
government workers are back. They're
01:05:16
recounted in GDP. If you look through
01:05:20
2026,
01:05:21
there's a handful of things that I think
01:05:23
people do not understand. Well, number
01:05:26
one, all of non-farm payrolls has been
01:05:29
completely reset and rebased. And the
01:05:31
reason why is because of immigration. So
01:05:34
what used to be a 100 to 150 number
01:05:36
print is now a 40 to 50 number print.
01:05:39
Why is that important? Because when you
01:05:41
look through earnings and you look at
01:05:43
the lower 25%
01:05:46
quartiles of earnings growth, they're
01:05:49
off the charts. There's all of these
01:05:52
anecdotal examples now of earnings just
01:05:55
exceeding expectations. There was an
01:05:57
article in the front page of the Wall
01:05:59
Street Journal yesterday about Ford
01:06:02
trying to pay mechanics $160,000 a year
01:06:06
and having 5,000 openings. So to Sax's
01:06:08
point, we are a coiled spring. Closing
01:06:12
the border plus adding productivity
01:06:14
lifts through AI and other things have
01:06:17
created a growth dynamic in the United
01:06:20
States that will really start to show
01:06:21
itself in 26. So I think that you should
01:06:26
be not short the US economy here. It is
01:06:30
ready to rip and uh adding to all that
01:06:33
and just giving my pick. I think if we
01:06:35
are in a rate cut environment and the
01:06:38
tailwinds keep happening and people have
01:06:40
a little bit of cash laying around. My
01:06:42
pick for best performing asset will be
01:06:44
the Robin Hood poly market prize picks
01:06:47
gambling wagering uh space because
01:06:50
people will be able to have a little
01:06:52
cash around to make some bets. You can
01:06:54
put Coinbase in there too. I guess
01:06:55
>> by the way the coralary to what we just
01:06:57
talked about if you see five and a half
01:06:59
and six and a half prints and these
01:07:01
employment numbers a lot of this
01:07:03
affordability stuff may be not as
01:07:06
accurate as we think it is. Everybody
01:07:08
right now is trying to figure out, okay,
01:07:10
well, where are the pockets of
01:07:11
unaffordability? And there are clearly
01:07:13
some, but those are narrow and they can
01:07:16
be fixed, but on a broad-based basis,
01:07:18
what Sax says is right. You have this
01:07:20
combination of earnings growth,
01:07:22
productivity growth,
01:07:25
and now this overlay where you have
01:07:26
these tax cuts that are going to hit in
01:07:28
26. My gosh, I mean, asset prices in
01:07:31
general, I think, will do well. Now
01:07:33
you'll also see potentially home prices
01:07:35
correct because if the president is
01:07:37
successful in making sure Blackstone
01:07:39
can't buy houses but on the other side
01:07:41
people are earning more and they can
01:07:42
enter with interest rates that are now
01:07:45
100 to 150 basis points lower. You'll
01:07:47
see a boom in housing
01:07:50
where it's not the corporations that are
01:07:52
buying the houses but individuals.
01:07:53
There's a lot of variables here that can
01:07:55
that can break in America's favor. This
01:07:57
is why I think 6% is not unrealistic
01:07:59
which would be absolutely nuts. Okay,
01:08:02
let's move on to the worst performing
01:08:04
asset. Last year's predictions for worst
01:08:06
performing asset of 2025, I said legacy
01:08:08
car companies and real estate. Both of
01:08:11
those turned out to be correct. Chimath,
01:08:14
you said enterprise SAS and the software
01:08:16
industrial industrial complex. Again,
01:08:18
that uh looked correct as well. Gavin
01:08:20
said enterprise SAS and Freeberg, you
01:08:22
said vertical SAS. So, we had three SAS
01:08:24
and I had legacy car companies real
01:08:25
estate.
01:08:26
>> Let me give you check out.
01:08:27
>> Yeah, let me just give you some numbers
01:08:29
on that to show you. Service Now down
01:08:31
30%, Workday down 18%, Docu Sign down
01:08:34
23%, Dropbox down 9% and Box down 6%
01:08:38
while the S&P was up 17%. I think it's
01:08:41
worth highlighting like it was a
01:08:42
challenging year for this enterprise
01:08:44
asset. There's
01:08:45
>> especially with the per seat pricing as
01:08:47
opposed to consumptionbased pricing. If
01:08:50
you have a static number of employees or
01:08:52
less employees like many of these
01:08:53
companies do, there's just less seats to
01:08:55
sell. So their whole growth was based on
01:08:58
land and expand. You land the client and
01:09:00
then you expand the client because
01:09:01
they're adding staff. If you're not
01:09:03
adding staff, you can't uh you know, you
01:09:05
don't have more people using Salesforce.
01:09:07
Okay. So, let's talk about our worst
01:09:09
performing asset predictions for 2026.
01:09:12
Who do you got? Sachs. Worst performing
01:09:13
asset of 2026.
01:09:15
>> Well, I just said California luxury real
01:09:17
estate because of the overhang of the
01:09:18
wealth tax and all the things we're
01:09:20
talking about.
01:09:21
>> Yeah, that one hits close to home, I
01:09:23
think.
01:09:24
>> Now, yes, it does. Actually, what I'm
01:09:25
hoping for is a dead cat bounce. If you
01:09:27
guys are right that the ballot
01:09:29
initiative fails,
01:09:31
>> then the overhang will be lifted and
01:09:35
maybe I can
01:09:36
>> clear some real estate.
01:09:37
>> Clear some
01:09:39
>> It's not easy being It's not easy being
01:09:42
right sometimes.
01:09:43
>> Yeah.
01:09:43
>> Fre, what do you got?
01:09:47
>> What What like what what's your discount
01:09:49
price on that asset right now? I mean,
01:09:51
like I might make a bid, you know, if
01:09:52
you give me a
01:09:54
>> give me a good clearance. got $100
01:09:55
million laying around.
01:09:57
>> Yeah, I'm not paying 100.
01:09:58
>> Okay, here we go. Bestie negotiations
01:10:00
occur.
01:10:01
>> All right. Um,
01:10:02
>> give them the bestie price. The buy it
01:10:03
now. Bestie price. What's the buy?
01:10:05
>> No, no, no. Okay. By the way, you know,
01:10:07
San Francisco has that insane luxury tax
01:10:09
which they have in LA, too. You got to
01:10:10
pay 5% on any piece of real estate over
01:10:14
>> 25% in San Francisco. Do you know that?
01:10:16
>> Which makes it even harder for these
01:10:18
high-end places to trade. So wait,
01:10:19
you're saying if I if I bought Sax's
01:10:21
house for 100, I'd have to spend
01:10:24
>> Oh, he has to pay 6%.
01:10:26
>> 6%.
01:10:27
>> You got to pay your broker 6%. I mean,
01:10:29
they're just basically freezing the
01:10:30
market.
01:10:30
>> Okay. Not the buyer.
01:10:32
>> Well,
01:10:33
>> you can negotiate who pays.
01:10:34
>> The 5%, you know, quote unquote mansion
01:10:36
tax has just killed LA real estate. You
01:10:38
talk to brokers down there cuz people
01:10:40
used to flip houses a lot more. Now you
01:10:42
just can't afford to do that.
01:10:44
>> unintended consequences, folks. really
01:10:45
bad for the
01:10:46
>> Wait, you're telling me taxes slow down
01:10:49
transaction volume and reduce the growth
01:10:51
of the economy? That's crazy. I had no
01:10:52
idea, Zach. You should write that down.
01:10:54
We should do a whole thing on that.
01:10:55
>> Yeah, maybe we should write. I had no
01:10:57
idea.
01:10:57
>> Yeah. Somebody make a note.
01:10:59
>> Yeah.
01:11:00
>> So, worst performing asset, Chimoth,
01:11:02
what do you think? Worst performing
01:11:04
asset.
01:11:04
>> I won't say the worst performing, but I
01:11:06
think a very poor performing asset will
01:11:09
be hydrocarbons. I just think that the
01:11:12
trend in oil is inexurable and it's down
01:11:17
and the reason it's down is irrespective
01:11:20
of your thoughts on
01:11:22
climate change the trends on
01:11:25
electrification and energy storage
01:11:29
are just unstoppable.
01:11:31
>> And so what that does is it shrinks the
01:11:33
surface area of where oil is useful.
01:11:39
It's not like a cataclysmic thing, but
01:11:41
it's sort of a melting iceberg where
01:11:44
does it see $65 or $45? And I would say
01:11:48
on on a per barrel basis, and I think
01:11:50
it's more likely to see 45 than 65.
01:11:52
>> Okay. I went with the US dollar in
01:11:56
different permutations of how you can
01:11:58
buy it because our debt continues to
01:12:00
grow unabated. and you know
01:12:02
>> the defacement trade JCAL JCAL owning
01:12:05
the
01:12:05
>> I just think it's going to be hard for
01:12:06
you know the the USD because we're
01:12:09
talking about we've been adding I think
01:12:10
we're going to add two trillion in debt
01:12:11
this year and then if we're increasing
01:12:14
and again I I know Trump says President
01:12:16
Trump says a lot of things but if we're
01:12:18
increasing the military budget by 50% uh
01:12:21
that means uh that's going to be
01:12:22
straight to our debt line so it's going
01:12:24
to be harder and harder for the dollar
01:12:26
doesn't mean that America's not going to
01:12:28
do great but the value of the American
01:12:29
dollar is going to be challenged which
01:12:31
we see in people moving to gold and
01:12:34
silver and perhaps copper. Okay. If you
01:12:37
could give us your worst performing
01:12:39
asset of 2026, David,
01:12:41
>> it would be Netflix if they don't close
01:12:42
the Warner Brother deal. I do think
01:12:45
Netflix's service is being challenged
01:12:48
from all sides with deep content
01:12:50
libraries. And I think we're seeing a
01:12:52
great commoditization happening. I've
01:12:53
also heard directly from folks in
01:12:55
Hollywood, the creators of new content,
01:12:57
that people would prefer not to work
01:12:59
with Netflix. They only uh pay creators
01:13:02
cost plus 10% now. And so as a creator,
01:13:05
you're actually better off not doing
01:13:06
deals with Netflix anymore. So their
01:13:08
content library is going to shrink
01:13:09
because of the natural economic forces
01:13:11
underway. Alternative, if they do close
01:13:14
on Warner Brothers, I think they've got
01:13:15
some good runway in terms of that
01:13:17
content library and they'll be fine. And
01:13:19
in that case, my worst performing asset
01:13:21
would be traditional media stocks. And I
01:13:24
do think that they're going to
01:13:25
underperform. There's just such an
01:13:26
incredible
01:13:28
variety of high-quality content that's
01:13:30
emerging from independent creators that
01:13:32
are leveraging their own distribution
01:13:33
platforms through YouTube and others.
01:13:35
And I think that um traditional media is
01:13:37
going to continue to be deeply
01:13:39
challenged as we've seen for example
01:13:40
just in the news segment with the rise
01:13:42
of citizen journalism. So that's the
01:13:44
that's what I would kind of
01:13:45
>> Yeah. And you know the the Netflix
01:13:48
observation I think is was well founded
01:13:50
because they're also in terms of
01:13:52
expanding their library. They just did a
01:13:54
deal with Bill Simmons, I see, and with
01:13:56
um
01:13:58
Bar Stool Sports to move over their
01:14:00
sports shows, podcasts, video shows from
01:14:03
YouTube, and they're going to take them
01:14:04
off YouTube and put them on Netflix
01:14:06
exclusively. So, that's a really
01:14:08
interesting trend as well to keep an eye
01:14:10
on. Okay. By the way, before we move off
01:14:12
asset, just on best performing asset,
01:14:14
there's one category we didn't talk
01:14:16
about, but I think it's kind of
01:14:17
interesting, which is the category of
01:14:19
assets that qualify for accelerated
01:14:21
depreciation capital equipment.
01:14:23
>> Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
01:14:24
>> That includes things like planes, so
01:14:26
forth. There's now 100% accelerated
01:14:28
depreciation for certain kinds of
01:14:30
capital equipment because of the big
01:14:32
beautiful bill. And, you know, it kind
01:14:33
of goes along with some of the tax cuts
01:14:35
that we talked about, but man, that is
01:14:37
making those markets super hot right
01:14:39
now.
01:14:39
>> Absolutely. Yeah. Try buying a plane
01:14:41
these days. It's very difficult.
01:14:43
>> No, Jason. It's not planes. It's like
01:14:45
Caterpillar.
01:14:46
>> No, no, it's tractors. It Yeah, it's
01:14:49
generators. It's seaman. This is why
01:14:50
seaman stock is through the roof. All of
01:14:52
this capital equipment, you get to write
01:14:54
it off 100% year one. It's creating a
01:14:56
massive infrastructure build out in the
01:14:58
US. So,
01:14:59
>> absolutely,
01:14:59
>> there's some companies that are huge
01:15:01
beneficiaries of this obviously because
01:15:02
they're the sellers of the capital
01:15:03
equipment. And of course, this is one of
01:15:05
the reasons GDP is going up is people
01:15:07
are actually investing in business
01:15:09
again. Okay. Most anticipated trend.
01:15:11
>> By the way, this is the correlary of the
01:15:13
statement that if you reduce taxes, the
01:15:15
economy grows. So,
01:15:16
>> there we go.
01:15:17
>> Yeah.
01:15:18
>> Most anticipated trend of 2025. I said
01:15:21
the wrath of Lena ending and M&A and
01:15:23
IPOs being back. I get some credit
01:15:25
there. Chimath, you said the end of the
01:15:27
deep state. I think you get a lot of
01:15:28
credit there. Gavin said, "AI makes more
01:15:31
progress per quarter in 2025 than it did
01:15:33
in 2023." That's a great one. Free, you
01:15:36
said the nuclear power buildout. I think
01:15:38
you get some credit there, too. Yeah.
01:15:40
>> Not sure. Not sure. We got some work to
01:15:43
do there. Massive massively short
01:15:45
nuclear.
01:15:46
>> You're still short nuclear, but I know
01:15:49
the guy Howard Lutnik talked to him.
01:15:51
>> I talked to Howard Lutnik as well.
01:15:54
>> He said he's all in on nuclear.
01:15:55
>> Free, can I tell you why I'm short
01:15:57
nuclear? I think that we're in the very
01:15:58
delicate part of the cycle where they've
01:16:00
missed the window. So by the time that
01:16:02
they deliver
01:16:04
working SMRs at scale,
01:16:06
>> the problem is that the marginal cost of
01:16:07
electricity will effectively be zero and
01:16:10
it'll have gone to zero because of a
01:16:11
combination of solar and storage as well
01:16:15
as coal and oil. And so it's just in a
01:16:17
very delicate place where the large form
01:16:19
factor nuclear reactors make zero
01:16:21
economic sense by 2032 or 2035 which is
01:16:25
when through the Byzantine permitting
01:16:27
and building they get it done and then
01:16:29
the SMRs by the time that they get it
01:16:31
done they may not be able to meet the
01:16:33
market either. So I think it's a very
01:16:34
complicated moment for nuclear actually
01:16:36
not scientifically economically just
01:16:39
does not hang together mathematically. I
01:16:41
think that's if you assume um no shift
01:16:44
in the demand curve and I think that
01:16:46
like if you if you look at China going
01:16:47
to 8 terowatts of production and by 2040
01:16:50
or whatever it is
01:16:52
and we're sitting at one and we're not
01:16:54
moving we are going to have a big catch
01:16:57
up to do and the question is can we
01:16:59
really build out two 3 terowatts of
01:17:01
electricity generation how are we going
01:17:03
to build out 2 to three terowatts of
01:17:04
electricity generation the amount of
01:17:06
land that you would need with solar and
01:17:08
what's it going to take to get all of
01:17:10
that installed and so on. And by the
01:17:12
way, there's a lot of the stuff in
01:17:13
China, if you look at all the big solar
01:17:15
buildouts that they did where they're
01:17:16
ripping it up now. This is a longer
01:17:19
conversation, but I really do question
01:17:21
whether we can pin everything on solar.
01:17:22
It's going to be a mix of stuff. And so
01:17:24
your point may be right that in the near
01:17:26
term to meet the current kind of demand
01:17:27
curve, nuclear is going to be
01:17:29
economically challenged, but at some
01:17:31
point here, there's an inflection that
01:17:32
we have to meet.
01:17:33
>> So what's your most anticipated trend of
01:17:35
2026? Swedenberg,
01:17:37
>> Iran becoming an independent democratic
01:17:39
state. I think I'm just speaking
01:17:41
generally anticipated. I think a lot of
01:17:43
people are anticipating that that's
01:17:44
going to happen this year. There's an
01:17:46
uprising in the streets. There is a
01:17:48
weakening of the Ayatollas and there
01:17:51
seems to be a moment underway
01:17:54
>> and the demographics are destiny.
01:17:55
There's a lot of young people in Iran
01:17:57
and they do not want to live under the
01:17:59
current rule. They want to be free.
01:18:01
>> But there is a major economic problem in
01:18:03
Iran in terms of affordability. You
01:18:05
think we have an issue of affordability
01:18:06
in the US. In Iran, it's very hard for
01:18:08
people just to buy their basic
01:18:10
necessities, basic needs to the majority
01:18:12
of people. So that that's why they are
01:18:14
taking to the street. There's a real
01:18:15
economic crisis underway that is
01:18:17
motivating this turnover. Every year,
01:18:19
everyone like anticipates some big
01:18:21
change in the Middle East. But this
01:18:22
could be the biggest rewriting of the
01:18:24
Middle East in a long time.
01:18:25
>> Okay, Sax, what do you got
01:18:27
>> for category?
01:18:29
>> Most anticipated trend of 2026. What do
01:18:31
you got, Sax? I said auditing government
01:18:34
spending at all levels.
01:18:37
>> That's a good one. That's a good one.
01:18:38
>> Decentralized Doge.
01:18:39
>> Love.
01:18:40
>> Yes.
01:18:40
>> Let a thousand Nick Shirley's bloom.
01:18:43
>> Love.
01:18:43
>> Let's do it. Audit everything.
01:18:45
>> Audit everything. We need to normalize
01:18:47
independent audits across the board.
01:18:48
>> Whistleblowers. Let's go.
01:18:50
>> It is not acceptable for Gavin Newsome,
01:18:52
for example, to prohibit audits as he
01:18:54
did with homeless spending. All
01:18:56
government spending needs to be opened
01:18:58
up and audited by the public. We need
01:18:59
people to see where it's going.
01:19:01
And that that's just got to happen.
01:19:03
>> The Pentagon, when's the Pentagon's when
01:19:05
are they going to pass an audit, right?
01:19:06
I mean, that's one of our biggest line
01:19:08
items. Let's get them to be audited.
01:19:10
Hey, there's something President Trump
01:19:11
could do.
01:19:11
>> They're actually at least trying.
01:19:14
>> They're at least failing the audit.
01:19:16
>> They're at least failing the
01:19:18
>> Gavin N's prohibiting the audit.
01:19:19
>> Start where you're prohibiting them
01:19:20
first. How about that?
01:19:22
>> Yeah. I mean, just audit everything, I
01:19:23
think, would be I love it. What do you
01:19:25
got, Jim? I have a correlary to
01:19:27
Freebergs which is I think it's the
01:19:29
expansion of this Trump doctrine
01:19:31
independent of your politics. If you are
01:19:32
an economic actor, you own a business,
01:19:36
you invest in the stock market, whatever
01:19:38
it is, you speculate cryptocurrencies,
01:19:41
you must understand the movements on the
01:19:43
chessboard in 2026. The best framework
01:19:46
that I have used to organize myself is
01:19:49
this idea of unilateralism, economic
01:19:52
resilience. It's just a ginormous trend
01:19:54
and I think the output of it is going to
01:19:56
be massive GDP prints on top of
01:19:59
everything else.
01:20:00
>> Yeah. And I think I'm going to stick
01:20:02
with my last year's prediction going
01:20:05
into 2026 again. The wrath of Lena
01:20:07
ending. We saw the M&A train start with
01:20:10
Grock obviously uh Netflix and Warner
01:20:12
Brothers, Google and Whiz. So many deals
01:20:16
are ready to be done and they're
01:20:17
starting to pop off in M&A. uh we can
01:20:19
debate what structure they are and and
01:20:21
regulators etc. but they're happening
01:20:24
but I'll go with IPOs coming back right
01:20:26
now. You've got to anticipate one of the
01:20:29
following two will file. SpaceX, Andro,
01:20:32
Stripe, Anthropic, and OpenAI. I think
01:20:34
two of those file and it is going to be
01:20:36
gang busters. The public wants these
01:20:39
shares. They're buying them in the
01:20:40
secondary markets. We have half as many
01:20:42
publicly traded companies. the public
01:20:44
would like to participate and this is
01:20:46
something Trump can uniquely do that the
01:20:50
Democrats were trying to stop and slow
01:20:52
down which was M&A and IPOs. I think
01:20:54
this will be the year of the mega IPO
01:20:56
and it's going to be very exciting for
01:20:58
Silicon Valley. It's going to be very
01:20:59
exciting for the employees at these
01:21:01
companies and for the pension funds and
01:21:03
the endowments that own shares in these
01:21:06
companies. They're going to be able to
01:21:07
take that money and put it to good use
01:21:09
hopefully. So, SpaceX, Andrew, Stripe,
01:21:11
Anthropic, OpenAI, those are on the
01:21:13
short list obviously of ones that could
01:21:16
go public this year. All right, a fun
01:21:19
one we like to do is the most
01:21:21
anticipated media. That's a fun one. You
01:21:24
know, what are you looking forward to in
01:21:26
2026? Last year I said Superman and
01:21:28
Andor season 2. Turns out Superman did
01:21:30
great. Andor did amazing. It's the best
01:21:33
TV show of the 21st century. I think
01:21:35
Chimathu said, uh, enormity of the files
01:21:37
that will be declassified. Epstein
01:21:40
Files. Halfway there. JFK Files. We
01:21:42
haven't seen those. Gavin said 1923
01:21:44
season two. I don't even know what that
01:21:46
is, but Okay.
01:21:49
>> Taylor. That's a Taylor show.
01:21:50
>> Oh, that's the Taylor one. Yeah. Yeah.
01:21:52
You watching Land Man? Land man's pretty
01:21:54
great. Um Freeberg, you said AI video
01:21:56
games.
01:21:58
>> What do you got this year,
01:22:00
>> Freeberg? You you love the media. You're
01:22:02
you're a cinnophile.
01:22:04
>> What are you looking forward to in media
01:22:06
in 2026? This isn't as much as what I'm
01:22:08
looking forward to, but I do think the
01:22:10
big trend in media is going to be the
01:22:11
citizen journalism doing exposees. I
01:22:14
think that we're just at the beginning
01:22:15
of the expose
01:22:18
man on the street.
01:22:19
>> Man on the street pushing stuff, getting
01:22:21
cameras in people's faces. The work of
01:22:24
journalism has been decentralized
01:22:27
and I think there's going to be so much
01:22:29
more that's going to be kind of shared
01:22:30
and uncovered this year.
01:22:32
>> Okay. Do you have one? Uh,
01:22:34
>> and by the way, the the difference I
01:22:36
would say in terms of what Nick Shirley
01:22:37
is doing and what we've seen maybe in
01:22:39
the past, but it's going to be the new
01:22:40
trend is much of the citizen journalism
01:22:43
in the past has been to some degree a
01:22:44
little bit more passive. It's sort of
01:22:45
like, hey, I caught this thing and I
01:22:47
observed it. But now there are people
01:22:49
that are going to actively take a camera
01:22:50
and say, "Hey, I'm going to go discover
01:22:51
this thing. I'm going to go deep on it."
01:22:53
And that's what I think we're going to
01:22:54
see happen in a big way this year.
01:22:55
>> Well, and there's a monetization path.
01:22:57
You have Substack where people can give
01:22:58
donations, GoFundMes and uh on top of
01:23:02
that YouTube allowing you and X allowing
01:23:04
you to share revenue on this particular
01:23:06
category which they previously did and
01:23:08
as Nick Shirley pointed out means there
01:23:09
is a path to profitability there get
01:23:12
more clicks get more views you make more
01:23:14
money and then you can reinvest it. So I
01:23:15
think I like your choice a lot Chimath
01:23:17
you have something you're anticipating
01:23:19
>> exact same thing as Freebrook I'll just
01:23:21
double down in
01:23:22
>> Okay. And what about you Sax? You got
01:23:24
something you want to double down on?
01:23:25
investigative journalism.
01:23:28
>> No, I thought we were talking about
01:23:29
entertainment here.
01:23:31
>> Well, yeah, I thought I It's okay. These
01:23:32
guys went these guys zigged where we
01:23:34
zagged. But
01:23:34
>> one of my weird like things that I watch
01:23:37
on Tik Tok that I got stuck on and Tik
01:23:39
Tok just keeps showing me them is these
01:23:40
auditing videos. Have you guys ever seen
01:23:42
these first first amendment auditors?
01:23:44
So, these are people who take a camera,
01:23:46
they stand on the street, and they just
01:23:48
point the camera into someone's store or
01:23:50
into a bank's window, and they just film
01:23:52
the people in the bank.
01:23:54
>> And then they wind up spraying each
01:23:55
other.
01:23:57
>> There's always people that come out.
01:23:59
They're like, "You can't do that. You're
01:24:00
not allowed to do that." They're like,
01:24:00
"Okay, I think I would like you to
01:24:02
leave. I don't want to talk to you." And
01:24:04
they just do this and they instigate
01:24:05
people to call the police. And what
01:24:07
they're doing is they're auditing
01:24:08
whether the police understand First
01:24:09
Amendment rights. And then how the
01:24:11
police react is basically the end of the
01:24:13
video. Sometimes the police are like,
01:24:14
"You can't do that." And they're like,
01:24:15
"Yes, I can call a supervisor." And then
01:24:17
they teach the police officer that
01:24:18
you're allowed to stand in public places
01:24:19
and film. Otherwise, they're just like,
01:24:21
"Hey." They go to the business owner and
01:24:23
they tell the business owner, "This
01:24:24
guy's allowed to do this. Leave him
01:24:25
alone." I don't know why, but these
01:24:27
videos are so entertaining.
01:24:30
>> Well, there's tension. There's a lot of
01:24:31
tension there. And there's something
01:24:32
freedom of speech, which is the first
01:24:34
amendment for a reason. stoner. The
01:24:36
stoner comes out sometimes tries to
01:24:38
physically confront the guy, but then
01:24:39
you'll have like a woman walking with
01:24:41
her like 2-year-old child and then
01:24:43
she'll get into it and she'll be like,
01:24:44
"Hey,
01:24:45
>> exactly.
01:24:46
>> Don't violate his constitutional rights.
01:24:47
He's allowed to be." That's the best.
01:24:50
That's the best.
01:24:50
>> It's so good. You never know what's
01:24:52
going to happen. Each one of them is
01:24:53
like a whole new adventure. I don't know
01:24:55
why it's such an interesting form of
01:24:57
content. I like love watching it.
01:24:58
>> It's a uniquely American phenomenon to
01:25:01
>> Yeah. um establish your freedom, your
01:25:04
your first amendment rights and and they
01:25:06
even go into like the really dicey ones
01:25:09
or where they go to like the parking lot
01:25:11
of a prison or into the lobby of a
01:25:14
police station and do it and it gets
01:25:15
pretty spicy. What do you got, Sax? You
01:25:18
got you got any media you're looking
01:25:19
forward to? These guys are going first
01:25:21
amendment investigative journalism, yada
01:25:23
yada. What do you got, S?
01:25:24
>> Well, the new Christopher Nolan movie is
01:25:25
coming out. The Odyssey looks
01:25:27
interesting.
01:25:28
>> Great call. Great call.
01:25:29
>> Yeah,
01:25:29
>> that's mine. Great call. I went with the
01:25:32
Odyssey.
01:25:32
>> What is that? What is that about?
01:25:33
>> The Odyssey.
01:25:34
>> Oh, come on.
01:25:35
>> Come on.
01:25:35
>> No. Homer's Odyssey.
01:25:38
>> Yes. But as interpreted by the great
01:25:40
director of our time, Christopher Nolan.
01:25:42
>> Have any of you idiots actually read the
01:25:44
Odyssey? This is not great. I'm sorry,
01:25:47
but
01:25:48
>> The Odyssey is a terrible book.
01:25:52
>> All right.
01:25:54
Okay. So, we're going to get some good
01:25:55
comments there.
01:25:55
>> You guys are all such wannabe poser
01:25:58
intellectual.
01:25:58
>> Just Christopher Nolan is just great.
01:26:00
It's IMAX. It's going to be epic. It's
01:26:03
trash. That book is blleh.
01:26:05
>> Okay. You know,
01:26:06
>> you don't like amic pentameter.
01:26:10
>> So, so the idea of some confused person
01:26:13
making a movie about it is also just how
01:26:15
do I short that? Okay. That is actually
01:26:17
Can I short that?
01:26:19
>> Can I short that movie on a poly market?
01:26:21
I'm sure there will be. You could
01:26:23
probably bet on the box office. Pull it
01:26:25
out, Nick.
01:26:25
>> I bet zero.
01:26:26
>> Okay. It's gonna be a lot more than
01:26:28
zero, I'm sure.
01:26:30
I I'm uh also a um a big fan of Timothy
01:26:34
Shalabay and Doom part 3 is coming out.
01:26:36
I also like Avengers Doomsday.
01:26:38
>> Dune 3.
01:26:39
>> Oh, I love Dune.
01:26:41
>> Doom part three.
01:26:42
>> I love Doom one and two so so much.
01:26:44
>> Two was great. I think one was a little
01:26:46
bit of
01:26:47
>> Doomsday will be good. Doomsday actually
01:26:49
I go with that.
01:26:50
>> Avengers Doomsday is going to be I think
01:26:52
fantastic. Robert Downey Jr. as Dr. Doom
01:26:54
setting up secret wars and then you're
01:26:56
going to tie up all the previous Marvel
01:26:59
strings.
01:27:00
>> Look at look at the Odyssey Zero.
01:27:02
>> They're going to use They're going to
01:27:03
use Doomsday to bring back all the
01:27:05
characters they killed.
01:27:06
>> Hey, besties. Uh here's a little
01:27:08
something
01:27:10
I think we're about to hit today 1
01:27:13
million YouTube subscribers before we do
01:27:16
our Netflix deal and take the show off
01:27:17
of YouTube. We hit a million uh before
01:27:20
we
01:27:20
>> Yeah. Wasn't it supposed to happen like
01:27:21
a year and a half ago? We're gonna have
01:27:23
like a million subscriber party a year
01:27:25
and a half ago. You know why?
01:27:26
>> Ask me. Ask me what I do.
01:27:27
>> Tell me why. Tell me why. Sucks.
01:27:29
>> Cuz we never tell our subscribers to hit
01:27:32
the like button or smash the subscribe
01:27:34
button, whatever.
01:27:35
>> Yeah. Every other podcast I watch on
01:27:38
YouTube, and I watch them all, they're
01:27:39
always like, "Hit the like button. Hit
01:27:41
the like button."
01:27:41
>> Oh god. Well, you know what too is the
01:27:44
the the big trend now is to just do
01:27:46
10-minute quick hits as news breaks. So
01:27:48
you you this is people are flooding the
01:27:51
channel.
01:27:51
>> Ask me ask me what I think about getting
01:27:52
to a million subscribers.
01:27:54
>> Any thoughts on this seinal moment for
01:27:56
the all-in pod hitting 1 billion
01:27:58
subscribers on YouTube? Go ahead. I'm
01:28:00
sorry. 1 million.
01:28:01
>> You're welcome.
01:28:04
>> You're welcome. You're welcome.
01:28:07
>> You're welcome.
01:28:08
>> What's this week at?
01:28:11
>> Oh, this week in Sus is quarter million.
01:28:13
Don't worry about it. Um it's a niche
01:28:15
show. Don't worry about it. Not bad.
01:28:15
Just a frag. Not bad. Not bad. Hey,
01:28:17
listen. I love doing it. Uh, the reason
01:28:19
there's four of us
01:28:20
>> there's four of us, one of you. So, we
01:28:22
have four times the subscribers.
01:28:25
>> Yeah. Something like that. Yeah. They
01:28:26
listen. One of the great things you you
01:28:28
learn in media is when you build a super
01:28:30
team, a super band, you know, it can
01:28:33
actually do better than everybody
01:28:35
individually. So, collectively, we can
01:28:38
do better. And listen, it's not for me
01:28:39
to say.
01:28:40
>> Listen, you I think you've adjusted to
01:28:42
being Ringo Star.
01:28:44
Uh, listen, I everybody says the same
01:28:47
thing to me. Without the show, this
01:28:49
would be propaganda and it would be uh
01:28:53
the Trump's personal uh
01:28:54
>> who says that to you.
01:28:56
>> Everybody wants to walk moose. Everybody
01:28:59
says the drink. That's I'm the stir in
01:29:01
the drink. I'm the I'm the stirs the
01:29:03
drink.
01:29:03
>> You're keeping the private equity wives
01:29:05
watching. Great job.
01:29:06
>> Absolutely. I'm keeping them in. All the
01:29:08
private equities love it. For every left
01:29:09
winger you that you keep watching the
01:29:11
pod,
01:29:12
>> we probably lose five
01:29:15
>> MAGA people
01:29:17
show.
01:29:17
>> The people the MAGA people they love
01:29:20
hating me. They love hating me and they
01:29:23
love they come back every week to hate
01:29:24
watch me and my takes.
01:29:26
>> Hate watch.
01:29:26
>> They do. They just like they hate watch
01:29:28
you Jamal
01:29:30
>> the watch for a reason.
01:29:32
>> They tune in to hate you and hate me. Uh
01:29:35
well listen it's been a great year. It's
01:29:36
been a great year. Great job. Besties,
01:29:39
we kept the band together for one more
01:29:40
year. Let's do a poly market. Chances
01:29:43
the All Podcast makes it to 2027.
01:29:46
>> Honestly, honestly, it's not 100%.
01:29:49
>> It's not
01:29:50
>> It's never 100%. Um, it's never 100%.
01:29:53
We'll do the best we can. You guys love
01:29:54
the show,
01:29:56
>> smash the like button, comment, link,
01:29:58
subscribe, whatever you want to do.
01:30:00
Write a review. Tell everybody how much
01:30:02
you love Jamat Sweaters. and we'll see
01:30:04
you next week on another amazing allin.
01:30:09
>> Bye-bye.
01:30:12
>> Let your winners ride.
01:30:20
>> We open sourced it to the fans and
01:30:21
they've just gone crazy with it.
01:30:32
>> Besties are gone.
01:30:35
That is my dog taking on a share
01:30:36
driveway.
01:30:40
>> Oh man, my habitasher will meet up.
01:30:42
>> We should all just get a room and just
01:30:44
have one big huge orgy cuz they're all
01:30:46
just useless. It's like this like sexual
01:30:47
tension that we just need to release
01:30:49
somehow.
01:30:56
>> We need to get merch.
01:31:05
I'm going all in.
