E20: Robinhood wrap up, Insiders vs. Outsiders, California's failing report card & how to fix it

1. 0:00 – 20:21

   Wrapping up the Robinhood situation: major lessons learned, Elon’s Clubhouse interview with Vlad, is the cash infusion to Robinhood a trade of the year candidate in 2021?

   1. NANarrator0:00

      I'm going all in. Where you'll be, where you'll be, where you'll be.

   2. JCJason Calacanis0:07

      Besties are back.

   3. NANarrator0:08

      I'm going all in.

   4. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:10

      Don't let your winner slide.

   5. JCJason Calacanis0:13

      Rain Man, David Sachs.

   6. NANarrator0:17

      I'm going all in.

   7. DSDavid Sacks0:18

      And I said- We open sourced it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it.

   8. JCJason Calacanis0:22

      Love you, West.

   9. CPChamath Palihapitiya0:22

      Queen of Quinoa.

   10. NANarrator0:24

       I'm going all in.

   11. JCJason Calacanis0:26

       All right, everybody. Welcome. It is the podcast you've been waiting for, the All In Pod Emergency, episode 20, the number 11 podcast in the world. Number one in tech, number 11 overall. Joe Rogan, Sway, Pivot, NPR, Rachel Maddow left in the dust. Welcome to-

   12. DFDavid Friedberg0:48

       (laughs)

   13. JCJason Calacanis0:48

       ... the number 11 podcast in the world. Can you believe it? Besties with us, the Queen of Quinoa himself, David Friedberg; Rain Man, David Sachs; hot off the banger by Young Spielberg, closing up episode 19; and of course, the Dictator, Chamath Palihapitiya. How we doing, boys?

   14. DFDavid Friedberg1:09

       Lovely. How are you, JCal?

   15. JCJason Calacanis1:12

       (laughs) Lovely. Friedberg?

   16. DFDavid Friedberg1:14

       Lovely, lovely. It's a lovely Tuesday. Emergency pod.

   17. JCJason Calacanis1:18

       And Sachs-

   18. DFDavid Friedberg1:19

       Nice to be with you guys.

   19. JCJason Calacanis1:20

       ... um, retired from Craft Ventures to pursue-

   20. DFDavid Friedberg1:23

       (laughs)

   21. JCJason Calacanis1:23

       ... his dream of being a-

   22. DFDavid Friedberg1:25

       (laughs)

   23. JCJason Calacanis1:25

       ... Fox News host. How's that going (laughs) for you, Sachs, now that you've got full media blitz?

   24. DSDavid Sacks1:31

       Well, yeah, I've been, I've been invited. I was on Bloomberg. I've been invited on CNBC tomorrow. I might even be on Fox on Thursday. So everybody-

   25. DFDavid Friedberg1:39

       Tucker?

   26. DSDavid Sacks1:40

       Maybe Tucker. Everybody wants a piece of the Besties. Everybody-

   27. JCJason Calacanis1:43

       (laughs)

   28. DSDavid Sacks1:43

       ... wants a piece.

   29. DFDavid Friedberg1:44

       (laughs)

   30. JCJason Calacanis1:44

       Unbelievable. (laughs) We were pariahs in our own industry.
2. 20:21 – 26:08

   Understanding short positions - why do firms short, more transparency & margin requirements

   1. JCJason Calacanis20:21

      here. We have been having a hard time understanding who's short, what that short interest is. There's a bunch of, like, data companies that are providing estimates, and maybe the data is only clear-

   2. DFDavid Friedberg20:32

      The best... You're right. The best source of data that I have access to is a company called Markit, M-A-R-K-I-T. They're, they're, they're, they're quite large. Um, but as of this Friday, the short interest was still, I think, about 50%, um, in GameStop, and so it's been, it's been ebbing down. I didn't check today.

   3. JCJason Calacanis20:51

      Well, the, the report was it got cut in half, um, again, uh, and that there was a very small short interest now.

   4. DFDavid Friedberg20:58

      But the stock dropped another 60% today. So obviously, if you're short the stock, you may start buying and cu- and taking your profit and your gains and going home at this point, right? Yeah.

   5. JCJason Calacanis21:06

      And, and moving on. So, do we need to... Is this gonna start a discussion of transparency in shorting, and should all that information be short? Should you be allowed to short more than the shares that are available or that are available in the float?

   6. DFDavid Friedberg21:20

      I think there's a-

   7. JCJason Calacanis21:20

      And should we re-address shorting in general?

   8. DFDavid Friedberg21:22

      No, there's a sym- there's an even s- I think shorting is a healthy component of the market, and I wouldn't, I would leave it alone. Uh, because there, I think there are some legitimate organizations that short for three reasons. Reason number one is that they are developing a market neutral strategy for their clients and people are, should be allowed to pay for that, right? Number two is people are directionally betting on a trend or investing on a trend, and they are trading that against potentially some other position where they are long. So that's an explicit view, less about being market neutral. And then the third is that some people see outright frauds and they're trying to vote loudly that, "Hey listen, there's something, uh-"

   9. Right.

   10. "... untoward happening here." So I think shorting is really good. I actually think the simpler solution, and lis- and tell me if you guys agree, is just go to T plus zero settlement. Why? All these margin requirements go away all together. The prob- the reason why we have all these margin requirements is all of a sudden you have this weird twen- 48-hour period that, you know, it's like, "Oh wait, who's got the shares? Do I have the shares? No, do you have the shares?" So they, "Did I lend them to you? Did you lend them to me? Are you gonna pay me first? Am I gonna pay you first?" And instead, you know, this is the kind of thing where it's like, in 2021, this should be real time and automatic. You know?

   11. JCJason Calacanis22:30

       Should it all be transparent?

   12. DFDavid Friedberg22:31

       Every, every share should be, every share should be ID'd, right?

   13. Boom.

   14. And then you should know exactly where it is.

   15. Boom.

   16. You know, by the way, there, there's another point that, there's another point that Chamath didn't make, which is that there is a benefit to the long holders in equities, um, when there is shorting of that equity in the market, which is that they're getting paid borrow on those shares. So for folks that don't realize, or their broker is, but you can access that borrow. If you own shares in a company that you're gonna keep holding, let's say you own some shares in Amazon, and someone else wants to short Amazon, they have to borrow those shares from someone, and they're paying a fee, an interest rate, to borrow those shares. And so the cost to short a stock is actually not zero, you have to pay a borrow to borrow someone else's shares. So if you're holding those shares in Amazon, you can actually make money, um, if you have the appropriate broker relationship, for those shares being sold short by someone else. And so this isn't just a people are coming in the market and slamming down stocks. They are paying the people that are longing the stock for the right to borrow their shares and, and, and sell them ahead of, you know, buying them back later. Um, and so in the case of GameStop, I think the cost to borrow got so high, uh, that you're basically paying 30, 40, 50, 60%, you know, interest rate to borrow GameStop shares to sell them short, because there was so much interest in, in selling short. But there, th- you know, there is a market dynamic in, in the cost to sell short that, um, you know, that doesn't, uh, come at a, at a, at a kind of negligible or free cost. So-

   17. The, my initial, my introduction to shorting, uh, in that example was when I first bought Tesla, um, that, m- you know, my broker said, "You know, Chamath, if you lend your shares out, you can make 24%." I remember this conversation. 24% a year interest.

   18. Right.

   19. And I thought, "Oh my God." And then I said, "Well, wh- what, what am I really doing?" And he's like, "Well, you're allowing people to bet against Tesla." And I said, "No."... and I just kept the shares. And I was like, "I'm never gonna allow people to borrow my-"

   20. Really?

   21. And, and since then, to be clear-

   22. Really? Wow.

   23. ... I've never, I've never, ever, ever allowed my shares to be borrowed. Ever. And it's just a philosophical decision. I don't like shorting, um, but I believe that you should be allowed to do it.

   24. I mean, if you're gonna be a long holder anyway and you're saying, "I'm gonna hold these shares for five years, 10 years, whatever,"-

   25. I just hate, I hate-

   26. ... you know, it's a way to juice your returns is kind of the-

   27. It's true.

   28. It's how a lot of people think about it, especially mutual funds that own-

   29. It's true.

   30. ... large positions in stocks. They'll, they'll make really good juiced returns because they're getting paid to, to borrow those shares, you know?
3. 26:08 – 31:45

   Sacks on the growing insider vs. outsider theme in politics & finance, importance of institutions in chaos

   1. DSDavid Sacks26:08

      a real issue. But let me, let me kind of up-level this and speak to the politics of this, because something really interesting happened. You had everybody from AOC to Ted Cruz basically denouncing what happened here, taking the side of Wall Street Bets against these Wall Street moguls. And so what you're seeing now is a new fault line in American politics in the post-Trump era. It's not just about left and right anymore. It's about insider versus outsider. And I think this is gonna be a major, major theme that we see. And let me actually, I wanna, I wanna share something. You know, I, I just wrote a, a blog post called The Insider's Game about this idea, and, uh, I found a passage in Elizabeth Warren, Elizabeth Warren's book, which is really interesting, because it describes how the insider's game works. And the person who described it to, to Warren is, um-

   2. DFDavid Friedberg26:58

      Larry Summers.

   3. DSDavid Sacks26:59

      Na, no, yeah, none other than Larry Summers, who was, uh, the former Treasury Secretary under Obama. He was president of Harvard. He's the consummate insider, and he taught the insider's game to generations of Harvard students. So, here's what he said. He, he presented Warren with a choice. He said to, uh, to her, well, she, she said, "I could be an insider or I could be an outsider." This is from her, uh, memoir in 2014, A Fighting Chance. She, she wrote, "Outsider..." Quoting Larry Summers, "Outsiders can say whatever they want, but people on the inside don't listen to them. Insiders, however, get lots of access and a chance to push their ideas. People, powerful people listen to what they have to say. But insiders also understand one unbreakable rule. They don't criticize other insiders." That is the insider's game. It's a protection racket where these powerful insiders, these powerful elites of Wall Street, of, uh, big business-

   4. JCJason Calacanis27:59

      Politics.

   5. DSDavid Sacks27:59

      ... big media, and politics, they get together and they protect each other no matter how incompetent they are, how corrupt they are.

   6. JCJason Calacanis28:06

      Silicon Valley?

   7. DSDavid Sacks28:07

      Si- Silicon Valley, they're involved in this too, with big tech. And this is the revolution I think that's gonna happen. I think Trump was kind of a, a forerunner of that, is that we are gonna see a movement of people across this country who are sick and tired of the insider's game, and they're gonna rise up and vote these insiders out of office and put in some new people who aren't beholden to these powerful special interests.

   8. DFDavid Friedberg28:31

      What you're speaking to is populism, right, Sacks?

   9. DSDavid Sacks28:34

      You can call it populism. I call it insiders versus outsiders.

   10. DFDavid Friedberg28:39

       I think it's, uh, it's going to be very important for folks to not be a career anything, meaning career executive, career politician, um, career regulator, career... What, if, if ever you're in sort of like, if you can put that word in front of your sort of existence, I think what people will see is someone who, as you said, thrives on being an insider. And I think that there's just gonna be a ton of distrust. Career school administration official, you know, career admissions person. Career anything now is not what you wanna be. You wanna be sort of a little bit more dynamic because you can have multiple arcs to your life and you're not beholden to anybody.

   11. I mean, I think it's, uh, it's not as black and white as institutions are bad or institutions are good. There, there are, there are many examples where, uh, the institutional framework allows for continuity and performance over time. You know, a lot of Trump's rhetoric, uh, and I, you know, I, I know that we're, um, we're past the Trump era at this point, but, um, there, there was a lot of conversation about this notion of a deep state because there was frustration with how some of, or many of these institutions, government institutions were operating. But if not for that deep state, we may f- have found ourselves in a lot of very ugly situations over the last four years, that there really were layers and layers of career public servants that did incredible and incredibly heroic things to preserve democracy, to preserve the rights that we all hold dear in the Constitution. And those were, um, you know, really important roles, and the institution played a really important role in, in providing continuity and providing trust and, and, and security.Um, and so I, I think it's easy to bash institutions when things aren't working perfectly, but we also have to keep in mind that it's not that all institutions are always bad. It is absolutely true that there is corruption, but there are certainly benefits that we have to kind of not, not allow populism to become a runaway framework for how we deal with everything we're frustrated with.

   12. I'm not saying that. I think, I think what I'm saying is institutions are t- e- critically important, but now I think we have to change the rules for how you can be a part of them and then how long you can stay. So for example, like, if the rule was, you know, you can only be a two-term politician, wow, that would be... What a cleansing effect that would have on anybody that chose to serve in politics, up and down the board. You know, at the federal level, at the state level, two terms, in and out. You know?

   13. California, California has that. You know, we have a 12-year limit, right, um, in the, the state, uh, assembly and senate. Um, and so, you know, I think we're seeing that happen i- in progressive places like California. Um, you know, obviously a good segue, uh, but, uh, (laughs) very, um... I, I think very much agree that, uh, that the notion that there needs to be, um... You know, we talked about this last time. W- we need to ensure that the institutions don't become beholden to special interests and, um, uh, a- and that there is an accountability. 'Cause, 'cause the failure, the, the lack of accountability i- is really, um, where things bloat over time because you just add stuff on. You don't ever take stuff apart and, uh, and ultimately you have kind of an inept fun- i- i- non-functioning

4. 31:45 – 1:02:04

   Breaking down California’s report card, why the state is such a mess, what structural problems plague it & how to fix them

   1. DFDavid Friedberg31:45

      institution.

   2. So let me give you the report card on California and then we can figure out if term limits can't fix it, what can fix it? So, he- here's just some-

   3. Okay.

   4. ... some data points. Uh, first I'll do one section, for section number one, economy and jobs. Nearly the highest unemployment rate in the US at 8% plus, highest poverty rate in the US, 18 and a half percent of all Californians. Highest income taxes in the US, 13.3%. $30 billion of potential fraudulent unemployment benefits f- from 2020, 11 billion already determined fraudulent. Doubled the oi- doubled the oil and gas drilling permits instead of incentivizing, you know, maybe, uh, climate or biotech or tech jobs. A $227 billion spending pan f- s- spending plan for 2021 in terms of quality of life, highest homelessness in the country, worst graduation rate in the country, around 17% of students in California don't graduate. The worst slash highest cost of living in the country and the worst wildfires in the country, 1.8 million plus acres burned. On COVID-19, third highest rate of COVID-19 infections in the world, 658 cases per a 100,000 people, and then the worst vaccination deployment in the US around 50%. And then culturally, I didn't know this, I don't know if you guys know this, but, um, here are the number of companies, this is just a subset, that have left California, Toyota, Charles Schwab, Tesla, and Oracle, in some way, shape, or form, which is estimated now to have cost California $77 billion of future revenues and 300,000 jobs. Over the l- past few years, nearly three million people have left the state. 53% of Californians want to leave the state and 63% of Californians believe the American dream is dead. Okay, so if... Let's, let's go and figure out... Okay, so if, if, if term limits at 12 years don't work, what do we do?

   5. DSDavid Sacks33:34

      Well, I think, I think we have to have politicians who stand up to special interests and aren't in the pocket of special interests. I mean, the problem we have in California, the biggest problem, the reason why, uh, California is such a mess is that we have government of the special interests, by the special interests, for the special interests. I mean, the politicians in Sacramento, they... We have a one-party state effectively and they are beholden completely to the special interests. Look at the deals, uh, they make. I mean, so example, in California we have, uh, over 340,000 public employees who make over $100,000 a year that cost taxpayers over 45 billion, okay? And, you know, we have lifeguards making a quarter million dollars a year. It's crazy, right? I mean, because th- the people making these deals, um, are, are in the pocket of these, of these government unions. They are the biggest contributors to California politicians and, you know, this is my, uh, fundamental, I guess, concern or, or, or beef with, with Gavin Newsom, um, is that, you know, fundamentally, you know, he's worked his way up the, the ladder of California politics by, you know, by basically benefiting from these special interests. He threw out his rise, you know, th- y- step by step, he's never challenged the insiders or any special interests. Um, he just kind of caters to this political class and so that's why I think fundamentally he's not gonna be part of the solution. Uh, it just feels like every job he's had in politics is just a stepping stone to the... Get to the next step and even the governorship now is just his stepping stone to get to whatever's next. And I think, you know, Californians are tired of being stepped on in this way.

   6. DFDavid Friedberg35:19

      There's... I mean, there are some structural challenges in the state, right guys? I mean, like, we should not for- forget the fact that there are some, um, voter-mandated, uh, supported propositions that have passed over the last couple of decades, um, that really create a structural challenge in terms of how do you allocate resources and capital and how can you effectively govern in this state? Um, you know, the, the three that are often highlighted is Prop 13, uh, which passed in 1978, uh, which is the state, uh, property tax, uh, limit. So we've talked about that one, uh, I believe in the past. There was a Proposition 4 in 1979 that limits the amount of money that states, uh, can appropriate, uh, um, that the state can appropriate. And then Prop 98, which pa- passed in 1988, and this is the big one. Um, Prop 98 has been challenged in courts and there, there have been, you know, many, many kind of, um, uh, efforts at finding loopholes and getting around it and, and litigating it, but it mandates funding levels in the state from pre-K through community colleges.Um, and it creates a, a structure that is really difficult to navigate around and really difficult to operate or manage. It's almost as if you guys were running a, a, a private company and your board said, "Here's how much you, as the CEO, have to spend this year, and here's how you have to spend it." It is such a difficult decision, um, uh, you know, for the, uh, uh, for the governor to have to kind of say, "Well, you know, I'm gonna make some changes to that," because he'll end up in court. Um, and so, you know, I wanna just kind of highlight that there, there are structural challenges to the way the state operates. And obviously, to get a lot of things done, you still have to pass through the State Assembly and the State Senate. Um, and it's not as, as simple as making, you know, better decisions in the governor's mansion. I think there's, uh, there's a lot that we have to kind of resolve structurally in the state that's gonna take a long friggin' time and a lot of cooperating parties, um, to get there. And so, you know, I know for those of us who are very much about making fast, quick, um, and accurate decisions, you know, good decisions, this is a really difficult place to do that, uh, the state. The way, the way the laws have been set up and, and the way that, uh, um, that the legislature has oversight.

   7. DSDavid Sacks37:28

      Well, I mean, look, you're, you're right, but this is why we need real leadership. We need somebody who's gonna come forward and say, "Listen, we need to change this proposition." Another one we need to change is Prop 47 that decriminalized a whole bunch of behavior. I mean, crime is exploding in the state. That proposition needs to be looked at as well.

   8. DFDavid Friedberg37:44

      Right.

   9. DSDavid Sacks37:44

      I mean, we, we need somebody who's gonna come at government from a completely different perspective, which is to think about the citizens of California. First of all, to pay attention to the middle class of California, and to think about us as consumers of government services, uh, who need to be satisfied. And right now, we have, uh, if you were to think about, uh, the services government's providing, people are churning off of it. We had, uh, net immigration of 135,000 people net left the state, right? You know, 40,000 families in California pay about half the taxes. If, say, 10,000 of them leave, we've got a giant hole in the budget that no one knows how to replace, and we have no idea how many people have even left, how many families have left the state. So, we really need leadership here to, to not just go along with the special interests who are in power and who are willing to stand up and, and push for some of these, these reforms.

   10. DFDavid Friedberg38:40

       By the way, I think it's worth just highlighting some of these numbers 'cause they, they also speak to the structural challenge in the state. The state of California generates about $140 billion in revenue. 70% of that comes from personal income tax and as Sax pointed out, half of that comes from the top 1% or 40,000 households. Um, it is, uh, it, it is, uh, you know, a heavy weighting on... And by the way, that, um, that top tax rate of 13.3% applies to households over $1 million of income. And for those that don't know, you know, there's income strata that are defined by the state and depending on what strata you in, you, you, you pay a different tax rate. The highest strata is making over $1 million a year where you pay 13.3%, and that's where these 40,000 households cover most of that budget. Um, and 20% is sales and use tax, and 10% is corporate tax. To speak to the corporate tax rate for a second, you know, that's 10% of our revenue as a state. We charge a 9% average corporate tax rate in the state to operate. That's, um, incredibly high, and it's one of the reasons besides kind of the challenge that, that Elon and others kind of made very public here over the past year. Um, but, uh, that, that corporate tax rate, um, makes it very difficult to operate in the state relative to other states that are offering no tax rate, lower employ, uh, lower cost of, uh, uh, of labor, um, and less, uh, of a regulatory burden to operate. And it's why we're seeing an exodus not just of people from the state because the services are obviously not being well managed, but also, um, of businesses-

   11. DSDavid Sacks40:08

       Canada-

   12. DFDavid Friedberg40:08

       ... you know, finding a, a better place to operate.

   13. In, in Canada, um, there is an approach that I think is really useful here which is that, um, you know, the Canadian government, um, uh, offers credits called SR&ED credits. I g- I can't remember if it's at the federal level, but it's definitely in the state of Ontario 'cause I've used this for, for some of our companies. You hire engineers and you can basically capitalize their salary and you can offset their costs so that when you're a young company, you're effectively paying zero tax. Or if you're a small company, you effectively pay zero tax. And that seems really right, you know? Where you're a small business person and, you know, you're holding, um, you know, five, ten employees and you're making, you know, a million bucks a year in revenue, whether you're a restaurant or a software company, you basically pay nothing. But then at the other end of the spectrum, uh, you know, when those credit, when those credits burn off, theoretically if you're a Facebook or a Google or an Amazon, now all of a sudden, you know, you can pay a much larger percentage of, uh, of, of what's due.

   14. Yeah.

   15. And I th- I think that there's all kinds of progressive tax schemes that work on the corporate side. There's a bunch of tax credits that you can use to sort of incentivize certain kinds of jobs. And I- I- I think you're just much better off because then, you know, these companies can't leave if all the people want to stay in one place.

   16. I wanna highlight one more structural problem. So, even if you do resolve that, even if you do resolve these propositions that have passed, uh, that have passed in the past and are causing us problems in terms of budgeting and, and, and ability to budget adequately going forward, one of the other challenge... A- and even if you do resolve the tax structure to generate a more balanced, um, revenue model that allows for innovation and allows for employment and allows for opportunity, we have a, a... This is an interesting stat I found this week. Um, h- what, what... (laughs) How many Americans... I'll just say the number. One out of nine Californians are, um, a member of a public pension fund in the state of California. One out of nine. And the public pension funds in California, as of the last reporting, are roughly $250 billion underfunded relative to the payment obligations they have to their members. Think about that for a second. So, not only does the state has a lot of debt. We've got a $250 billion hole.... for paying people money that they believe they're owed in the future. And that is creating a massive problem where the state needs to figure out, how do we fill that hole? How do we meet these obligations to our citizens who worked, who earned what they believe to be a fair income stream for the rest of their lives, that they may not ever get.

   17. CPChamath Palihapitiya42:36

       Totally.

   18. DFDavid Friedberg42:36

       You know? And so, so we've, we've got both the, the, the legislative problem in terms of how the state is structured. We've got these propositions that have passed that kind of, um, you know, buckle down the governor and buckle down the decision-makers in terms of what they can and can't do legally. We've got, um, an income generation problem with respect to concentration, and we've got some of these, you know, heavy burdens on us, like health services, but also this underfunded pension liability that is almost, like, such a priority and no one's really paying attention to it because the sirens are going off. And meanwhile, the service providers in the state are completely effing up the service that they're supposed to be providing. You know, Chamath highlighted a bunch of great ones in terms of fire response and whatnot at the beginning, and obviously the vaccine rollout we know is, is, is just completely flawed. But, um, you know, here- here's another interesting stat. The California EDD... This is the, the link I just sent out, by the way, on our, on our Zoom chat. But there's $114 billion in unemployment claims paid since COVID. This is an insane statistic, but it looks like roughly 27% or $30 billion of fraudulent claims were paid by the EDD, um, on those, uh, unemployment claims. So the folks that are actually running these institutions themselves aren't even operating well. Um, you know, not to mention the actual huge liabilities the state has accrued over the years and the structural deficiencies. So as much as I would love to, um, you know, kind of propose that we could all come up with a simple solution, this is a complex frigging set of problems that probably require several books to resolve. And I just want us to be honest and real about that. That this is, um, you know, this is gonna be a challenging issue probably for decades to come, for this state to get itself out of the holes it's dug itself into.

   19. JCJason Calacanis44:12

       You know, one thing I'll say is, as goes California, so goes every other state and so goes America. Because if there's one state that theoretically you think would have been positioned from a human capital perspective to figure this out-

   20. DFDavid Friedberg44:23

       Totally.

   21. JCJason Calacanis44:23

       ... and political will, it's this state. And if this state can't figure it out, we're in a whole fuck ton of trouble.

   22. DSDavid Sacks44:30

       Well, we're, we're, we're not doing a very good job figuring it out right now, that's why we need to make a change. I mean, David, you're right about the magnitude of the problems and the challenges, but it all starts with some sort of, you know, outsider rebellion. And that's what's going on with this recall, that's why we have to support it. That's why I support it. It's not gonna be the end of the, the... It's not the... It's the beginning of the solution, not the end of the solution.

   23. JCJason Calacanis44:50

       It's the beginning of the beginning.

   24. DSDavid Sacks44:51

       It's the beginning, it's the beginning of the beginning.

   25. DFDavid Friedberg44:53

       But we need to create an institution to solve the problems over time, right? It's, it, it's gonna be, it's gonna be the coalescence of what you're pointing out, Zach, which is the, the, the, you know, the, the, the will of the strong, the will of the, the rebellion, uh, to figure this out and, and resolve it over time.

   26. DSDavid Sacks45:06

       Well, the, the, the institution may be the all-in pot, but, um...

   27. JCJason Calacanis45:09

       (laughs)

   28. DSDavid Sacks45:09

       But, uh, but, but let me, let me-

   29. CPChamath Palihapitiya45:12

       All-in party.

   30. DSDavid Sacks45:13

       Yeah. But let me, let me build on... Yeah, I would... Actually, J Cal, you posted a tweet saying, "What should we call our party?" And, uh, anyway, my suggestion was The Outsiders, but-
5. 1:02:04 – 1:12:19

   Chamath’s Aziz Ansari story, Governor potential, top ways to save California

   1. JCJason Calacanis1:02:04

   2. DSDavid Sacks1:02:04

      I have an idea. Chamath, how about you run for governor?

   3. DFDavid Friedberg1:02:07

      (laughs)

   4. JCJason Calacanis1:02:07

      Yeah, Chamath. Here's an idea.

   5. DSDavid Sacks1:02:09

      (laughs)

   6. JCJason Calacanis1:02:09

      Why don't you...

   7. DFDavid Friedberg1:02:10

      Isn't that why we're doing the emergency pod?

   8. Sax, Sax, Sax, I think you should run for governor.

   9. JCJason Calacanis1:02:14

      We'll be right behind you.

   10. DSDavid Sacks1:02:16

       (laughs)

   11. DFDavid Friedberg1:02:16

       Have we disparaged you too much or has this been too difficult to get through the, uh, yeah.

   12. I, uh... Let me... Le- le- speaking of politics though, I do, I do need to tell the story. Um, this is a complete s- complete non sequitur. In 2012, '12 or '13, I can't remember which year, Mike Bloomberg invites, uh, a bunch of us from technology to, uh, to the White House Correspondents Dinner. We're like, "Yes, the White House Correspondents Dinner. We're coming."

   13. Did you go? That's awesome.

   14. Of course. I went once a year. It's so hilarious.

   15. Oh, my God.

   16. You know, myself, uh, Ian Osborne, Hosain Rahman, the founder of Jawbone. And I have two amazing stories about this, my experience at the White House Correspondents Dinner. Number one... Well, three. Number one is like, the dinner itself is kind of like a prom just 'cause there's just so many people, right? And so, you know, you have to have a rubber chicken dinner 'cause there's like a thousand people in the room. But the second was that Ella McPherson was there. And I've never seen more incredible hair in my life. Just, I have this image of this person's hair, and it was like the thickest... Like, it was, like, curly, but, like, it looked so soft. And I was just like-

   17. JCJason Calacanis1:03:19

       (laughs)

   18. DFDavid Friedberg1:03:20

       ... this is the most incredible hair I've ever seen.

   19. JCJason Calacanis1:03:21

       I think those are called extensions or a wig, but go ahead. (laughs)

   20. DFDavid Friedberg1:03:24

       It didn't look like that. It looked like real hair, but it just, it looked incredible.

   21. JCJason Calacanis1:03:28

       They're mental. (laughs)

   22. DFDavid Friedberg1:03:29

       Uh, like, like a lion. Like the mane of a lion. And then the third story is, I... We're, we're at a r- reception. There's an after-party at the French Ambassador's place. I start talking to this person randomly, and there's, like, all these stars everywhere, but I just start talking to this, to this person. And, you know, she, she's, she's very chatty, and I'm... Chatty, chatty, chatty, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. We're talking, talking, talking. And then, at the end of this, like, sort of, like, five-minute conversation, and we had not really introduced each other, uh, she just kinda said, "Hey." And I said, "Hi." And so we started talking. (laughs) And she says to me, um, "Do you mind if we take a picture?" And I'm like, "Yeah, of course." And I, and I, and I had no idea what was coming, so I was like... So we take a picture, and she says to me and she says, "You know, I think you're really fantastic in Parks and Recreation." (laughs)

   23. JCJason Calacanis1:04:15

       (laughs)

   24. DSDavid Sacks1:04:15

       (laughs)

   25. DFDavid Friedberg1:04:15

       (laughs)

   26. Oh, my Lord. You worked so hard, Chamath.

   27. You thought I was Aziz Ansari?

   28. DSDavid Sacks1:04:21

       Yeah.

   29. DFDavid Friedberg1:04:21

       Jesus Christ. How does this happen?

   30. Yeah. (laughs)

Episode duration: 1:20:32