Jeff Bezos Midlife Crisis

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Hello Welcome to the Jeff bezos his midlife crisis edition of slate. Money or guide to the business and Finance News of the week in which Jeff bezos dropped one hundred sixty five million dollars on a Piha tear in Los Angeles and what else happened. Oh does a major fed chair brouhaha going on in Washington. We're going to talk about that. We're going to talk about antitrust issues. Not only as pertaining to telecoms but also as pretending to technology. We're going to talk about Jed. I if you don't know what Jed eye is you're about to find out but it also involves big tech and the power thereof and if you were slate plus member can. I just say you're in for a treat this week because there is a truly magnificent emily peck rant. So all I have to do now is just introduce ourselves. My Name is Felix Salmond of axios. Emily you I hear from her post island Szymanski. You are here from breaking views and we are going to be talking about. Mana of techno awesome things coming up on slate money. Let's talk about transfer wise the smartest way to send and receive money internationally. If you've ever had to move money across borders chances are haunted by hidden fees whether you used your bank or another provider. They likely hit an extra fee and the exchange rate and you paid too much and if you didn't notice well that's the whole point. Transfer wise is different. You always get the real rate when you send to over seventy countries or when you convert currencies using their multi-currency account you pay one super low fee and keep more of your money over six million customers already saving with transfer lies. Try them today and get your first transfer free by visiting transfer. Wise Dot com slash podcast? So let's talk about the hearing. That happened on Thursday in the Senate in front of the Banking Committee Pretty much fifty fifty Republicans and Democrats but I watched a bunch of it and it. Some of them are nice but most of them both sides would not nice to Judy Shelton. Who was one of the two nominees hitting that and then there was this other guy sitting two left who basically everyone ignored because they were like okay. You're you're you're respected fed economists. You've been at the Fed for years. Everyone kind of understands the Oh qualified. So why are you even here? And these are trump nominees for the Federal Reserve to be clear and what trump has done when he's nominated people to the federal because they really have fallen into two buckets. He's sometimes he just nominates the obvious technocrat. Who is good at their job? And probably Jay Powell would fall into that bucket but so Lael brainard and various other people who like sailed through the nominations had no problem and then yeah I mean I think we look at kind of early trump. It was still kind of normal and now we're moving a little bit into crazy trump. But but the point is that even with these two nominations. He's got one of each. Yes and that's true. Yeah the Was it Chris? Waller yes chriswell is. He's this Louis Fed He's always been on the dovish side He's buddies I believe with Larry Kudlow and they're both into the idea right now that they can keep on unemployment can go still much lower and it won't affect inflation so you know. This is a debate. That's happening in the Federal Reserve and basically every time that the Fed has worried. The unemployment has reached as low as it can go before inflation kicks in They've they've said like well. Let's try and see what happens if it goes even lower and then it goes even low. Inflation doesn't turn up so so it's an interesting debate in the central banking community. And there's lots of talk about this thing. Called the Phillips Curve and Chris Wallace right in that debate and he can add useful perspective to the Fed Board in terms of that debate and probably his conclusions are aligned with what Donald Trump would want them to be. Which is you can cut rates more. And that's fine but ultimately he's a relatively professional central banker and he'll be fine. Yeah the reason judy. Shelton is so worrying to people. I would say it's twofold. One is some of the things she said in the past specifically being a big fan of the gold standard believing that the Fed just shouldn't exist at all not believing in deposit insurance among just pause deposit insurance like Fdr deposit-insurance like the assurance. That I have that the money in the bank will be there tomorrow because I know that the federal government will make me whole. If I lose the money in my bank account who I was really surprised that a human person that is nominated for such an influential position. I mean I know. Gold bug is crazy too but for some reason I cannot stop thinking about that. This woman wants to get rid of the FDIC so as soon away by that. This is this is. This is not just by the way to fall point to be clear. This is not just something that she wrote once she this is something what she built her entire career around which is basically and this is not unique to Judy Shelton. This is a very very stand. The like hard libertarian view of monetary policy that the federal government should not be involved in monetary policy that we should just outsource the whole thing to a lump of gold and that Thanks and the banks. Should you know license full on their own merits? And they shouldn't be backed up by the federal government because the federal government like at interfering private comments and like the the crazy sort of rand's pool wing of the Republican Party has always had an affinity for this kind of thinking it has never been remotely. Mainstream is entirely counter to really the existence of Fed. And I would say what that's disturbing but I would argue that what's even more disturbing is her. Partisanship is the fact that she as you said. Felix built her career on this and then when she became clear that she was perhaps more aligned with trump that he was maybe going to appoint her now all of a sudden. She's a duff. When Obama was president she was out there saying that the Fed should raise rates and It was ruining the economy and now with trump residents. She wants the Fed to lower rate. And it's not just that she wants the Fed to lower rates he also seemingly wants the Fed to start getting in charge of the dollar in a way that like has historically been the rim of the Treasury Department and the Fed and she's like the Fed should lower rate specifically to weaken the dollar so that we can enter this currency war and expert model and this is a very very trump ist view and what is absolutely clear is that she has effectively jettison everything that she has ever said in the past after going to work for trump on the trump campaign in two thousand sixteen and is now a mouthpiece for whatever trump thinks this week and she would certainly just vote and act on the Fed Board in accordance with what trump wanted rather than in accordance with. Whatever wingnut libertarian ideals? She this would actually not so. I don't think it's so bad to keep rates low and keep juicing the economy and see how you can get unemployment for now. I guess the issue is trump wants. Trump leaves will the issue is twofold as one would say. I that she. If if trump gets reelected I think Felix has pointed out that she could be Put in charge of the whole thing could be mixed check next chair bad. And then second if trump gets voted out and she stays there then she and the Democrat. Who's president she could flip flop again and you know work. Put the brakes on the economy instead of using it the biggest issue is that she if she is on there and especially if she is the chair that starts to call into question the Independent. If is the chair. There is no funded infant. The rest of the board cut is I mean. It's not John me if she is shed. No I'm going to just come out and say if she is the chair then what the only way that she becomes the chairs trump is president so if she is a church the chair and trump is president there is no fed independence. The chair of the Fed just does the bidding of Donald Trump and maybe she has difficulty getting a majority of the votes on the Fed Board. Although at that point who knows you know on the Fed vote? But the fact is the multi decade history. Fed Independence has at that point. Come to an end and this is. This is incredibly dangerous like that to me. The reason why I think is actually won't happen is because of how dangerous that is. Having an independent central bank is so important for market participants to have faith in the dollar to have faith in our debt to have faith in the ability of our government to like have a function economy. It is so important when you look at times when the Fed independent owner when other countries have had their independence of their central banks questioned or clearly shown to be the case. The consequences are devastating. And we saw that even in the United States with other bands. You know when Fed independence goes that's harmful and what was super interesting in the hearing was at one point. Christopher Walla actually managed to get a wedding edgewise and he was talking about the ability of the Fed to keep on. Keep facing under control even when unemployment is very low and you have sort of full employment situation and he was like you know why we can do that. It's because no one expects inflation and no one expects inflation because everyone believes in head independent and everyone trusts the Fed and so long as people trust the Fed. No one's going to be like raising prices in expectation of inflation inflation to a large degree as a self self fulfilling prophecy like the the dynamics of inflation are the people ask for wage increases or increase their prices because they think that as inflation out there and they need to keep up with it and so long as you don't think that inflation is out there so long as you trust the Fed to keep inflation under control. Inflation doesn't appear well and also because I mean to be fair. Also you had a if you were just all of a sudden started printing money and you were printing money far in excess of increases into productive capacity the economy in theory. You would cause inflation right so that is why we have an independent central bank. So that governments won't do that because historically not necessarily always in the United States low can be in many other countries when countries want to print money so that they can spend more and then they degrade the value of the money and this is the dynamics of it. I mean so so yeah just to be clear here right now. Donald Trump. It's on a bit of a spending spree spending spree but suddenly like a fiscal stimulus free. He he cut taxes a lot and the way he's funding. That fiscal stimulus is by borrowing on the market and by issuing treasury bonds. It is conceivable if you lost the independent Central Bank. The he could just Clinton money instead. Instead of instead of going out and boring money from investors he would just say. Oh you know magic. I'm GONNA magic trillion dollars of you know new money out of thin air because you can do that when you have control of the printing presses and that you know as Anna says is super dangerous on a economic level you know. Do I worry that the Fed would be cut loose so much independence that they would go? That far probably not be. You never know I mean I agree with you. I'm not saying that I think that is my base case. I'm just saying that. That is the danger like when people say. Why does it matter if we have an independent? That is one of the reasons. The other reason is because let's say all of a sudden inflation for whatever reason does start to move up and if we do not have an independent fed they may be much less apt to actually act because the president will be like no if you raise rates. You're going to hurt the economy. I don't WanNa do that. So that's what the classic idea of. What what central bankers do they take away the punch bowl? Nobody likes the person who takes the punch bowl so they can't be body. The bigger picture here is that everything has become politicized. The Supreme Court is politicized which you know is meant to be like this the branch of government but has become just as his d in the way that it was never meant to You know the Senate was never really meant to be an office de body it has now become that and Justice. I think is a really apt example of justice. We know is happening this week. And if the Fed becomes politicized if you put Ponti political hacks onto the Fed such as Judy Sheldon though Stephen Moore Herman Cain that votes are going to be very very simple and very very predictable which is a simple if then if there's a Democrat in the White House I want to raise rates. If that's a Republican in the White House I wanted to raise and the Fed if you have that then what you wind up with is a fed whose basic job is to re elect Republican presidents and to make me crap so that democratic presidents wind up getting kicked out. You know conceivably it would be possible. I actually don't believe that there's anyone who would vote the other way like be like a Democratic Party hack and always for the to raise rates under Republican president. I can't think of any human being who would act that way but like ability of the possibility of the Fed board breaking along offices dealines rather than across lake hawks versus Devlin's is is so terrifying to any kind of economists that they just wanted to prevent that and I think that is ultimately. Why Judy shells and is going to withdraw nomination. She has got much further than the previous party. Hacks who who Trump nominated and the reason why they pulled out. I'm Cain and more previously was actually not because they were party hacks at least face but it was because they had like a personal problem and this is I actually think what's interesting is that because they had some kind of like me to issues that was kind of a fig-leaf that could be used so they didn't have to actually talk about the kind of independent issue or their their actual beliefs whereas with Shelton. You don't have that so then you really do have to say we are not nominating her. Because if you know we don't we think our ideas are not within the mainstream and we do not think she would hope hold the independence of the Fed and by doing that they now are going to raise the eye of Donald Trump. Which obviously people don't want to do. I guess the question is when people are listening to this episode. Is she still hanging around? We're not Also she did say something insane about she compared Some frauds financial fraudster to Rosa parks because of his audacity because he wanted to try to print his own currency and he went to jail and again in this late bonkers libertarian worldview. Everyone should be able to print around currency. The federal government shouldn't have monopoly on printing currency. And so she's like Y-. This man is the Rosa Parks Monetary Policy and that went down the stretch. We have that And I guess what I was GonNa say is it's interesting that more in can't like everything is partisan congress. The Senate will do whatever the president wants now. Doj is totally seems seems to be corrupt at this point. Bill Bar does whatever trump wants and his only upset if trump actually tweets about it. So it makes it harder to do it. Trump wants and the cord is partisan like like veal said but there's seems to be a slight line in the sand for a financial policy like what's his name. The guy with the gloves and the the wife that instagram Steve. Mnuchin still around. And he's like kind of a normal side is a super interesting one right. Is that like on the one hand? He is the most reliable trump surrogate puppet he will happily appear in front of television cameras and defend statements in shut off the Charlottesville or building wolves or pulling troops out of Syria or whatever like crazy from woke up this morning and wanted to do. Mnuchin can be relied upon to completely take. That is the most genius thing he's ever had in his life and this has made him slightly less credible in financial markets. But the one thing you are right about is that somehow treasury itself doesn't seem to have become that politicized. This is what I'm saying. There is some kind of you can do a lot in American politics and people don't care but if you you just don't mess with like the rich people system way to economic system to be to be generous the economic system. That's like the line you can't write for and I think I think you're right about that and I think you're right about that in almost any kind of pregnant mess with women. You can mess with minorities you can mess with racist you. Can you can do pretty much anything. But like don't mess with the money now. I mean I think you're right. I mean I think you're right you know and to me that's why. I I just have a very hard time imagining. Donald trump actually putting people like shelton or others because I think the market reaction would be so negative. And yet he did. He did nominate an reaction yet. But I think that's also because no one thinks it's really going to happen but maybe it will. I feel like anything goes now and like this post and well it also like everyone seems to have given up a little bit. It also depends on if she's just like one of the members or if she's the chair I think that's a big well. I mean it is a big difference. But let's not kid ourselves that if she is in those fed board meetings she will immediately turn around Intel Donald Trump. And Larry cudlow exactly what happened in those meetings. It's true but like just to maybe the last thing I'll say emily's making faces got now it's really bad and like maybe just last thing here like I don't want to try to say that the Fed is in no way political or that. There's not there's always been political pressure on the Fed but this this would be different. This you know this would really really be. Yeah I mean I think there is a conceptual and quite easy to understand. The difference between the Fed is an independent agency which is subject to political pressure on the one hand versus the the. Fed is a political agency on the other. And that's why we none of us want to go. If you can't see the whole picture how can you tell what you're looking at? Microsoft dynamics three sixty five brings the data of your entire business together on one platform for manufacturing and logistics to customer analytics and sales. And use his a I to help you unlock better. Business outcomes when you can see the whole picture. You can create your own possibilities. Learn more at Microsoft dot com slash dynamics slate? Money is sponsored this week by door dash which has something for every lifestyle if you are running around and you have no time and you need to eat door. Dash. Is that for you. It is more than just delivery. You can even just take out. You don't need to wait for people to come to you. You can just run up to pick up and PASTA LION though. That has everything I mean. It has pizza. Which is probably what you're GONNA wind up ordering but it has three hundred and forty thousand restaurants in three thousand three hundred cities and most of them are not pizza so whatever it is whether it's a major national chain or whether it's just your local friendly restaurant go to door dash and help them out right now you can get five dollars off your first order of fifteen dollars or more when you download the APP and enter the Promo Code money. That's five thoughts. I feel I order when you download the door dash APP from the APP store and enter the Promo Code money. That's Promo Code money for five dollars off your first order from mergers amway one of those things that used to be a big deal in the financial markets and Maybe we'll we'll be again The big news this week a couple of big news is this week. I'm one of which was the FTC coming out and saying you know all of those mergers that big tech is done over the past fifteen years. We're going to go back retroactively. Look at the mall and say well. Maybe facebook shouldn't have been allowed to buy instagram off tool which is so mind blowing and I I con. Imagine where that's GonNa end up and I'm fascinated way you guys think that's GonNa wind up. Meanwhile over the objections of various state attorney generals the courts ruled in favor of T. mobile being able to merge with sprint and thereby reducing competition in the cell phone space. Emily what's your take on all this. It's about time the FTC woke up and paid attention to the attack mergers. So even though they're doing it too late and it's a little weird and maybe it goes nowhere. Someone had to start thinking about what antitrust looks like in two thousand twenty some regulators? Did I mean other people have been thinking about it for a long time and I guess the inst- facebook instagram or Amazon. Whole food stuff like that. They weren't traditionally the kinds of things to get antitrust attention. Because you know it's not like standard oil owning all the the was hunt to prove consumer hard to thank you hard to prove consumer harmon. They're using the bork doctrine and there's no consumer harm than it's a good thing so they kind of like ignored this while everyone you know economists and others have been saying like you can't ignore this. These things are getting too powerful. You nuts and so finally it seems like people are starting to pay attention and think about what monopolies and what antitrust like. I Love I love the idea The FTC going back retroactively. And saying you know what Google should not have been allowed to buy Youtube now. Youtube is totally integrated technologically and manage early into Google Google. It's not a separate company in any way shape or form. When Google Youtube they went like we will operate as Adams lengthen. It will have its own no they. You know they using all of the data from Youtube as we talked about last week to inform their entire business And that is giving them a huge competitive advantage internationally And it is easy to with. Hindsight look at much like that or look at facebook buying instagram. And say yeah like that's given you an enormous amount of power and probably too much power and we would be better off if you hadn't been able to but then what do you do right because I think that's important because I don't think this exercise is in any way designed at this point to undo these mergers. I think this is more informational exercise of looking back but I do think obviously if you look back and you say well. Many of these things were mistakes. Now number one. That's obviously going to affect what happens. Moving forward and number two than it does raise the question. Okay well if you can prove now that there is some type of harm that we didn't see before does that mean then you do have to act. I mean I think people are thinking about it. We have some of the Democratic candidates talking about breaking up some of these companies. We Have David Cecil Leans you know subcommittee on antitrust having hearings about Amazon where small businesses come in. And they're like this is how Amazon destroyed my small business And I think there's like conversations at least about in Amazon's case Lake separating the platform from the the vendors right because that's the issue. The antitrust issue with Amazon is that it controls controls. Both where you sell the stuff and the stuff the so yes so this is Elizabeth Warren's big thing about Amazon which is that on the one hand anyone can sell on Amazon but on the other hand Amazon sales on Amazon and Amazon is giving itself an unfair advantage versus everybody else Which is probably fat. But it doesn't it doesn't it isn't as compelling to me as something like like completely stifling turmoil youtube well yeah but it is really stifling to any innovation or new business because not only is it like is it. I mean do we have actual evidence of that? There has been some testimony in the in the hearings where it's like. Some company has some device that they've invented like I think one example was You know those things as you put on the back of your phone. Pop-up thingamajig is the proper packaging is yeah so and then. I mustn't started telling pop thing. The thing which company started losing sales. Yeah I mean all birds. His the classic example of this right is that they started making the sneakers and then Amazon has knockoff right. I mean that happens all the time in the real world too but I think what's interesting with Amazon and we can turn back to facebook and instagram. And everything is that. They have control over the data. They really have granular. Deep Knowledge of of how these companies operate who buys the stuff and they know more about the market. I think than just your average. I think that that's actually been a decent point that it does make it a little different than the normal world is that they have so much information on their competition in a way that would be very hard and kind of an yeah log probably illegal but also this as retail becomes increasingly digital. This is going to become a bigger and bigger issue right now. It's about ten percent retail sales around line which means that ninety percent of retail sales not online and you can run a small business without relying on online sales but at the same time You know if it's clear that if you're starting an online business right now you're going to want to be primarily online. That's where the big money is. You know that's how Kylie Jenner becomes a billionaire. And if you're going to be selling things online then you aren't going to be reliant on Amazon or else you're going to have to make a very very consequential decision to Amazon. Either way you're Amazon. Is The elephant in the room. And so either you just say and by the way if you avoid Amazon if you decide that you're not going to sell an Amazon then what that forces you to do is to run straight into the arms of instagram. That the only other way to sell things online is just a huge amount of money on instagram ads Which works and you know people can make a lot of money by signing things on instagram. I the way I the you wind up being reliant on Amazon. All your reliant on facebook and it doesn't feel like I feel like the Internet in some because I'm old and I remember when the Internet wasn't controlled by big trillion dollar companies. You ought to be able to just go onto the internet and sell things on the Internet without relying on Amazon facebook bad. So that gets US BACK TO I. Guess these antitrust probes Should we touch back on? Sprint and T. Mobile like do we care that? They'll be fewer cell phone honestly sprint a good cell phone company. No that that's not. The whole point sprints what would have died anyway. I honestly think this was completely ruled correctly. Sprint would have died anyways you still and they also do have to sell Part of the business to I believe dish it's on. I don't think this is a bad thing. Okay so there was the super interesting experiment which I wrote about in my newsletter. This week the ruling was a surprise to the market sprint. Stock Literally went up by seventy five percent after the ruling came out like three dollars to find but but the point is the win win. A major piece of news hits the market and the market reacts. You can see whether the market like the old didn't like it and specifically what you can do is you can look at the share prices of. At and T. in verizon if the merger is good for competition it should reduce the prophets of eighteen variety. Neshat price should go down. If it's bad for competition then that prices would go up because they will get to make more money because there's competition and so we get to then look at what happened to the verizon chef rises in the wake of this surprising court ruling and kind of nothing. It was kind of inconclusive. They went up after hours when they went back down again when the markets opened. And so probably yeah. It's it's it's a kind of toss up so they did. They did good. Bear antitrust went the right way and but I know that they win. The white right way if. At and T. chess had fallen. And I didn't. It didn't fall right. And then in the case of just two because it seems like in the world of antitrust were moving away from being concerned about things like sprint t mobile and moving towards being concerned about things like Google Youtube or Instagram fading in the easy thing is like the. Ftc also just came out and said they were going to prevent the magic of Shit crisis. With Harry Razors. What's up with that? And that's that's just like good old fashioned man. He drafted that has four raise companies. And you can't just merge three of them together and say the Oakland percents from what they did with T. Mobile and sprint. There was four cell phone companies. Fine when you die the idea there with the sprint wasn't really helping consumer competition because it was such a crap half company. Yeah Yeah Fascinating. I do wonder if they're Kinda if there's a sense of looking back to with the dollar Shave Club Unilever. I mean that was obviously a while ago I I was looking about. How can you justify barring edge? Welcome buying Harry's and still be okay with Unilever Buying dollarshaveclub. Why is because you didn't make raises? Yeah wasn't actually anticompetitive in that way and do you think that the maleness of the FTC makes them overly concerned with a razor company. Harry is in cooled singled Flamingo. Harry's also has razors that women can use because Harry's razors. I don't use the stupid female brand because it having razor Flamingo Racist Razor Prefer Orange so I like my razor. Can you imagine a world where women US paying a slate? Money is sponsored this week by Cola they make all manner of appliances for your home but most fabulously they make intelligent toilets. Do you want an intelligent toilet? Yes you do every moment that you spend in your bathroom can be dumb or it can be intelligent. Make it smart. Your Cola. Intelligent toilet comes with an APP. You can personalize your toilet. You can adjust the temperature. The pressure this pray the seat temperature the dryer the soothing ambient light for nighttime way finding and automatic air freshening. You can go hands three. You can have automatic flushing matic liberation touch the seat operation. Whatever you want from your toilet you can program it. So for the ultimate pampering relax and cleanliness. Discover what you've been missing at COLA DOT com slash intelligent toilets sleep. Money is sponsored this week by linked in learning. You want your employees to stop learning things to get smarter to learn more trying to get employees to use online. Learning tools is really hard. It's one of those things they also go. Yeah I want to do that. And then they never do it. Thinking lending is different because employees. Actually use it. This is why seventy eight of the fortune one hundred companies already use linked in lending it teaches skills. People can use right away and in those employees need because it has insights which they get directly from the linked in community. It all feeds down from Lincoln so visit linked in learning dot com slash slate money and sign up for a demo. Today that's linked in learning dot com slash sleet money. It's the return if the company we thought we thought that the thing had been set that the government said. I'm going to give this ten billion dollars. Cia intelligence contract to Microsoft. I'm not going to give it to Amazon. Everyone kind of new. That Amazon had the better bid. Kind of knew that the government awarded it to Microsoft just because Donald Trump Gates Jeff bezos. And yet somehow like this was just understood as this life under trump a now according to come along and said wait. Hang on site really. This is an instance where honestly. I don't think there's anything wrong with giving this to Microsoft like number one government contracts are always political. Always have been always will be now. This one is more publicly political. And that's not good but the idea that they're like oh no their politics and how you give out government contracts. I kind of Rome is at that and second. You already have Amazon. Having such a large market share in cloud computing and already being essentially in charge of I believe the cloud competing for the CIA in. Who actually think it makes more sense to have more than one company in there. Yeah this is one of those confusing title like everyone to lose yeah. I definitely didn't want Amazon to win. They're ready control too much. They have the majority of the cloud as Anna. Just said They're huge and like why should they have this ten billion dollar deal that could actually amount of forty billion dollars over you know if they get more and more business? Why not let Microsoft have it? Yeah I mean we just talking about Of things and now we're saying that it's okay to be political announcing it's okay. I'm saying it using I. Guess what I'm arguing. Is that look in theory of course procurement that none of this should be political whatsoever. But I guess I'm just saying like it always is so yes if they can find proof which with Donald Trump. It's entirely possible. We'll be able to or he is saying like I have this email. That says you can't do this then. That's bad and then they shouldn't allow it to go forward. I mean Mattis. His book that trump told him. I don't want I don't want Amazon to get that contract right but from what we've seen over the past month. We know that that's not going to do it like that. Will that will open the colds flu. I mean they can they can. They can cool maths a witness. That's true and so look if you can find actual evidence of it than yes. Of course you need to say like no. We don't allow. I guess what I'm saying is that is that. I just all government contracts or political. It's always about who's giving money to WHO and who has connections with here. It's just I don't believe I believe if maybe since it's less political than it was in the past but it certainly is the level of local government and you know it certainly is on the level of like international governments. You know the Europeans will give contracts to Airbus in. The Americans will give contracts to Boeing. There's Anna's right there's always a political overlay when it comes to government spending and often it's explicit and written into law that you know that if the American government spending money they need to spend it with American companies and and that kind of thing is often you know not just implicit or explicit. Amazon's really having a hard time this year. I mean there's the whole debacle doesn't your heart of lead. Well it does seem like Bezos by buying the Washington Post is kind of like made himself a target and a little bit of a new way with the president and the Jedi contract losing it and then a little bit. I mean even I guess. The Washington Post Angle doesn't really fit with what happened to him in New York. That was more just like we. Can we talk a little bit about Jeff Bezos Midlife crisis? Because it's kind of amazing. He's becoming John Lewis apart. He's spot that David Geffen House in Los Angeles. He bought the Old Wall Mr Estate in La for one hundred sixty five million there by beating the record for most expensive property purchase in L. A. Which had been held for just a couple of months by Lachlan Murdoch? He reportedly dropped fifty three million dollars. Which is a record for an ED? Reshape Painting Christie's last November bought a Cams Marshall at the same time and because I'm the him he's never been known as an art collector before you know you really do. This is super billionaire wins. He win. Let the first painting you by fifty three million dollars most of us. Yeah like a couple of hundred bucks extending twenty dollars. Poster probably But the the soup interesting thing to me about him. Buying A in Kerry. James Marshall at Christie's is the same Kerry James Marshall at both still alive and there are basically three different ways. You can buy out if you're an art collector. One is you can buy out by dead artists who are established in the Canon. And then if you're buying from that others but but we'll must by definition you're buying from someone who owns that And so whoever owns the gets the money in a trade you. They get the money. Alternatively with living on this you can go. Oh wow you have really like what you do. I like your work so I'm GonNa pay you money if you'll work and then that money get split between the artist and gallery only and then the autism. You'll supporting the artist and doing that. And then there's this new thing which is only really. It hasn't been around that long Just a few decades really where you can buy the work of living artists on the secondary market and auction houses. And stuff like that and so you go along you. By the Ad Rousse at Christie's and then all of that money goes to whoever just you know whoever selling me adversary and and you know if this doesn't see any of it and that's kind of the weird way to collect. It's like if you're going to collect living artists. Do you want to support the living artists and yet based off? That's how he's doing he's like. I'm going to spend this money on art by not going to spend any money on artists. That's just my model ran. Yeah no and I think it's a very very valid. I think probably also goes to the point that I don't think he cares anything about whatsoever. I think he's just like I guess. This is what you do. I mean he's truly seems to be having some kind of. I don't WANNA say MIDLIFE CRISIS. But it seems like he got his divorce and now he's just out there. Jeff bezos on the town buying mansions. He's like out in the teeth soldiers. That would parties. You sold four billion dollars Amazon stock in one week. He's like I just need some spending money so he's going out he's got to have the cash you know. He's got to buy the bottle and he's busy guy. This is why Bernie GonNA end up being our president but there was this great story which which we should link to about sort of inside the whole crazy. Hq To fiasco where the whole thing. Why Jeff bezos decided that he was going to run around trying to get massive. Subsidies from in North America was basically driven by Elon. Musk envy here's Elon. Musk actually subsidies if he can get subsidies why can I get subsidies? I'll grow up. And then he just took way over the top but that's how he's run his business all along in a way like no competitor. He can have no competitor. He buys them and push them out of business. Dominates everything like it is interesting. Like you've read biographies of previous entrepreneurs and early errors. I mean he fits the models so much you know which probably means at some point. He is going to run into an antitrust and he is. There are going to be real consequences because you. He doesn't seem to have any thing inside of him. That knows when to stop. I mean I think used to have a wife. Maybe she was. Yeah I mean maybe that explains it you know maybe she was like Hagia holding him back from something already. Have one hundred billion dollars. We don't need another one hundred million dollars. You are cramping lifestyle. I need to trade you in for someone else. There is a piece in the Times. I think I talked about this. A bunch a few weeks ago That talked about like married as os would like go online to make reservations at restaurants. Single bezos would never do that because that's so cheesy Murray Basil's had had said Hair married as US didn't have those hulking swollen. Is that what they call it? Swollen arms which nothing wrong with that. It's just interesting contrast little social experiment in front of our eyes. Sleep money is sponsored this week by. Hp S Kost H P is a leading global investment firm. In fact it is one of the most successful credit investment firms in the world and with hps cussed podcast. They will help you learn how they managed to get there. They have how I built this segment about the careers of successful business leaders. Aps class is presented by Colbert Cannon. Who's the managing director at HP INVESTMENT? Partners he interviews guests and worked sound. How business leaders drive value creation? They share stories advice and insights from successful careers. You can subscribe the hps cursed now for free wherever you download the podcast. How about a numbers round. I'll stop for change. One hundred fifty four dollars which the new price of a single to to Disneyland. If you WANNA go to Disneyland for the day it will cost you one hundred fifty bucks. What does that get you? It gets you into the park on a on a day and then I guess that I have to admit I haven't done the Disneyland thing in a while but yeah I think on the rise but you have to queue up. Yeah get to pay extra to like beat. The line is that a lot seems reasonable. Disneyland's Great Right. I don't have kids. I don't know what what's cheap expensive. My number is three hundred and sixty thousand dollars per week. That is the cost if you are going to charter. Daniel Yacht O. Three hundred sixty. That's like that's much definitely. Yeah so I mean I know million dollar week yachts like tweet sixty you get two-thirds off that's the reason we actually kind of. No this is because there's a bit of a scandal because someone who chartered. It apparently was putting their. They were in a UNESCO World Heritage site in this in Belize this coral and they actually had the anchor in the coral wrapped around it. Oh yeah that's that's awful. My number is really big. It is one trillion where wait hang on a second. I just want to follow up on this question. So when you say the person who taunted it lake correct me if I'm wrong here but when you hear about it comes with the captain and the crew. So it's Dan captain had I don't think we can blame. The person who taught to do that is true. Yeah okay. My number is large. It is one trillion. It is a number. I can't even conceptualize. Well in my brain to conceptualize one trillion. It's one trillion. That is the number of trees that President Charlton trees. Yeah into that endeavor. Wasn't he yes? He said he would plant a trillion trees to help the environment and there was A piece in the Times about this. That Mark Benny off the founder and CEO of salesforce. It was kind of like his doing he basically he said. I'm going to get trump to support this. I think L. SUPPORT IT I. It's it's devastating out in hotel. You're together and he he well. Benny off went through Kushner to do it and he said trees are the ultimate bipartisan issue. Everyone is pro tree. I don't know I agree. I'm not pro. I'm Ana I know of people who come chair. I mean there is there was him from. Reagan lays at once. You've seen one you've seen them. I mean I guess I mean I'm anti tree in the perimeter of my house. 'cause they don't want them to fall a house but apparently planning more trees is really good for the environment. It's a form of carbon capture would take like a century for the trees to actually start doing the carbon capture so trump would actually have to do other things besides plant the trees. But like I'll take what I can get right now and I'm not cynical. I'm just GONNA come out and say that like mathematically it's impossible to reach a trillion trees but it's just not exactly a bit late just just thinking about it. I mean like you. Should we do a quick back of the envelope? Good about the tree thing but fine go ahead. Sounds like one of the interview questions you get it like Goldman. Is it possible to let us Huma punting one tree a second? Okay and I'm just GONNA get Syria this pretty quick if you've ever planted a report scatter some seeds anyway. But let's now you have to do the whole Siri. How many years is one trillion seconds? That would be thirty. One thousand six hundred eighty eight point seven four years so one tree effect and it would take thirty thousand years just one person right across the globe. Twenty million trees a second. Ask theory that okay. If anyone has any idea whether it's remotely realistic than anyone will ever be able to plant and truly injuries. Please write in on slate money at slate dot com and we will Weed out the best. I'm just I'm just GONNA I'm here to dash your dreams. Emily blame Syria. I and yeah. Please good at answering every time we ask her a question at home. She's just like let me Google that for all right. Thanks Emily trillion number. And thanks for coming on things JESSICA PRODUCING. Thanks all of you. People listening keep those emails about how bigotry and everything else coming on eight as DOT COM. A week we'll talk you free late money.

Coming up next