Why don't they just say, we're rich and we want to be able to do whatever we want to get richer without having to worry about what's in the good for society. I enjoyed the interview but he said a lot of words but didn't basically say the root cause of why some of the wealthy turn to trump and the right. He could have just said greed.
Sounds like he was saying "San Francisco" as if it were a dirty word we were all supposed to know about. He did say that the tech companies are responsible for all the progress of the computer age. Wow! So many assumptions and so few details, as if he was speaking in code that only rich tech entrepreneurs could understand.
Muks and his neofeudalist techdweebs want to see the end of law and order in our time for the sake of chaos that will allow them to do any fuqqin thing they want to do with no consequence. They would like the downfall of western civilization so they could rule the ruins with an iron fist.
I would argue that their social and political weirdness comes from them being narcissistic sociopaths (or even outright psychopaths - Elon and Thiel being perfect examples)
Yes, they are idiots savants. Media idiotically lauds their narrow competence as though it were marvelous in all things where it’s actually abysmal from any humane or wholistic perspective. The scheisseschau which is the Eeore Musk persona in play since he bought Twotter illustrates it.
Trump will likely be surprised as to how strong the message is. At that "emergency" press conference he held at Mara Lago, he said that, by election time, abortion "...wouldn't be much of an issue...". All I could think when he said that was, "...buddy, you just sealed your fate." It also reminded me of something Gloria Steinem said in 1973, namely that if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
"Governments are skeptical regarding large companies they can't control"... Not really sir... The people are skeptical regarding large corporations controlling our governments. You haven't really been listening to the people, it seems...
This Moritz person is very detestable in his hyperfocus on HIS wealth and HIS liberty. As though California was just some location from which he extracted his wealth through exercise of his entitlement as a rich educated white man. This is the reason I had to cancel my subscription from The Economist, their habit of looking at the world in such an inimical way. Like, know thine enemy, people.
Sounds like he’s critical of the government breaking up AT&T. I worked in the telecom industry for many years. The break up did not destroy the business and created competition and lower prices for consumers. It doesn’t matter if these big companies “changed the world with their innovations “ if they follow that with high prices and squishing any competition-too much power is bad. Walter Issacson why didn’t you challenge him on this point?!?!? I hope it’s because you ran out of time and not just giving him a pass.
It’s literally governments job to protect consumers against monopolies. It’s not because government wants to control all of big business. Government actually does a very bad job of controlling big business and doesn’t have enough government auditors to do it. As a techie I’ve worked in many industries and the only one government seems to have any credible control over is banking and even that could do better. (Can you say Bitcoin?)
@@tammiepulley7167You must not have seen very many Isaacson interviews. He always gives people like this a pass. That’s how he keeps snagging these interviews!
This Moritz cat is a an investor, looking for the next big thing. He invests in 20 companies, hoping one is a big success. Say what you will about the VC class, but they encourage and invest in entrepreneurs.
They want entrepreneurship suppressed not entirely, but just enough and in the right ways so that they can buy up or steal the things which new entrepreneurs come up with.
I agree with much of what Moritz says, but his views on antitrust are just dead wrong. Corporations consolidating too much power over an individual or even multiple areas of the economy, industry, and technology is BAD for consumers, bad for society, and ultimately bad for the country. Monopolies are bad. There is not really any way to spin it that they are not. They are good for shareholders but not for the average worker or consumer. Let's not forget that lack of competition in the market does not just affect consumers, it affects workers as well. His statement that "politicians don't like challenges to their power" is projection.
I love the technological advances we've been given, but I'm not easily convinced they've made us better. Unmitigated greed, hackers and spammers, trafficking of youth, and the thirst for pornography come to mind. I believe we have essentially forsaken the necessity of compassion. We treat it as an option to our detriment.
Maybe they've just made communication more efficient. There are good and bad people, maybe the advances just makes it quicker to show who we are to the world.
The billionaires have their own cult: a sort of Hare Krishna of superwealth. Many of the bros are rallying around Trump and Vance in a sort of Peck's Bad Boy spirit of petulance--they hate the idea of abiding by the rules of civilized society, of being constrained by taxation, regulation, and the equal application of the rule of law. They'd like to see the common man crushed under an authoritarian boot while they themselves enjoy---what, some mad fantasy of total freedom, although only for themselves. Others have a dream of making a killing in crypto and becoming the first trillionaire. They're all quite mad, and quite spoilt.
They all are Mark Rylance in DON'T LOOK UP. Rylance caught something terrifying and completely real about who those guys are and how they operate. Scary.
ma4450,and if they are able to “crush the common man “, then they will be competing with each other for the race to the top,because they succeeded in vanquishing the “common man “.
Peter Thiel and alikes want a strong men to take care of them and somehow do what they cannot do for themselves: use Federal regulatory powers and money to favor their unrestricted business expansion (which is the definition of fachism). It can be said that politicians does not like monopolies and cartels because it impedes the necessary fairness and growth done by the smaller players who brings innovation and the creation of new businesses.
To me, this is so freakin’ obvious. Not only for billionaires but for everyone who currently supports it. Everyone acknowledges it is “transactional” but think it would never sell them out. 🙄
There are two roads that a person can take once they have enormous wealth. One tends towards megalomania and greed; the other towards humility and looking to make a positive impact on society.
Divine right of kings? At least some monarchs occasionally ruled for the betterment of their people. Hard to say the same for any billionaire. What he’s after is the divine right of monopolists.
I really wish that Michael Moritz would be more clear… He has not spoken two coherent sentences.We now live in a world in which so many foreign nationals that are billionaires have an uneven role in the politics of this nation. Big business in general has way too much power over the power that is needed for the majority’s interest. They seem to want even more overt power than they ever had and they are blatant with their distain for any control of their activities. Corporations should not control the world as they don’t do anything for the good of the people, but instead, their focus is to make more money!
@@toniblackman5640 the reason Michael Moritz sounded so muddled is that he was attempting to conceal the fact that he personally is part of the problem he appears to be criticizing. He doesn’t necessarily have a problem with what his “problem people” are doing; he just wants it to be him doing it, not them. He sounds like a liar lying, because that’s exactly what he is.
So tired of this narrative of people being "left behind". How about stop voting against your financial interests because of your cultural philosophies. You want to live in the past, you cant move ahead with the rest of us.
I can’t give you specifics, but starting a business creates a lot of red tape. Building permit approvals can be a headache, and some building regulations make building expensive, which makes low income housing less profitable. Zoning limits land available for multi family dwellings. How’s that for a start?
@@MarcosElMalo2 I’m a cook in a school, we are very regulated. And that’s a good thing. It protects our students/consumers. I’m glad when my house was built it required permits and inspections. Read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair.
Since housing is being mentioned, a major failing of the democrats in California has been never repealing prop 13. This created deep inequities in housing which in turn catapulted the "right kind" of homeowner into the RE value stratosphere. This amplified a lot of other problems with the state. Did you know that in SV (where Moritz is) the Superior Court of San Mateo County has been underfunded in its operations for years and runs on reduced hours? This is just one example of how all aspects of society that aren't regularly visited by the upper class have been made incredibly inefficient, which in turn trickles into all other areas of society as increased CoL, higher taxes, and lower quality of life. The latest budget, effective July 1, closed a $46.8 billion budget deficit by reducing ongoing funding for state government operations. Generally any public service is going to be subpar.
A surprising lack of details/evidence. Too many summary statements without examples to demonstrate, followed by rhetorical statements to back up the summary statements. Waste of time.
The issue in SF is not the progressive left. The progressive left would build shelters, and allow addressing homeless and social issues. The issue in SF is NIMBYs that don’t want anything that might reduce the value of their house.
Well here's what I see. The real estate industry is ham strung by Democrats' regulations and can't increase supply (meaning affordable housing too). So real estate prices are up. At the same time people don't want their home price to go down when they bought their scrawny town house for $600k ~ $1M. Who's problem is it really y'know?
The “Democrat’s” regulations aren’t progressive, they are a holdover from a more conservative CA that benefits landowners. Real estate prices are up because of several factors - NIMBY’s, corporate investors, people who sit on undeveloped land, greedy landlords, Zillow over inflation and the realtors association. Lived here since the 70’s, watched it happen. Regulation is just how they’re doing it.
The NIMBY issue (a.k.a. lack of affordable housing and homelessness, etc.) is spreading throughout North America. It’s happening in Canada as well as the United States. Where I live in Canada it is happening equally in progressive as well as more conservative cities and provinces. It is becoming increasingly clear that whether NIMBY is being enforced by regulations/zoning laws, or other means, the effect is still the same. Just like San Francisco, our West Coast was the first part of the country to be hit the hardest with lack of affordable housing and similar issues with homelessness, it was the combination of the attractiveness of the West Coast driving up demand, as well as the warmer temperatures that meant people could survive living on the street…. It’s always been the case, since at least the 1980s, that most homeless people on the prairies would move to the West Coast because they couldn’t survive living on the street in the winter if they stayed in the prairies. None of this had to do with progressive politicians. Yet, there are a lot in common between Vancouver, Victoria and San Francisco. We are having massive issues with lack and affordable housing throughout the country, but especially in Toronto (Canada’s version of New York) which is not a progressive or liberal city. It does have huge issues with NIMBY, and the province has a very conservative, pro business government and no one’s taking on the NIMBY issue and yet they wonder why none of their solutions are working right now. The same thing as other major cities in Canada, another example of Calgary, which is sometimes referred to as Texas North. It has one of the most conservative governments. Also net migration to that province is higher than any other province in the country. Until recently, it posted the lowest cost-of-living of the major cities, but this year with the increased housing costs. it’s increasingly having problems with homelessness due to the lack of affordable housing and a massive issue of NIMBY. it has the most socially regressive laws and it’s interesting because the progression from a lack of affordable housing to increased crime was the fastest there than any other location in the country. So that is my super long-winded way of saying that the issue absolutely is NIMBY contributing heavily to a lack of affordable housing. The resulting social issues that come with a higher homeless population, and eventual increase in crime, seems to happen faster in cities and regions that have less social supports, and are more conservative. (I need to point out that this is in Canada! The country that Republicans claim is socialist because we have a social safety net so if it’s like this here…)
There aren’t that many supporters of Trump left from my Silicon Valley circle. MAGA’s Project 2025 was simply not representative of their values in any way. His comments about not having elections anymore didn’t help. Democracy is great for business.
Exactly. The greater SFBA is just over 9 million residents. I'm guessing over 90% of voters are going to lean or fully go Democrat on the federal election. State elections will better-favor the republicans, but even those numbers are diminishing as even local republicans are proving to be trump/MAGA bootlickers.
@@claesvanoldenphatt9972 Yeah I agree in general terms, although it needs not be unstable. I reckon that what Thiel, Musk and some others want is some sort of feudal system. That's why they are so enamoured of Russia. In Russia you have an emperor (Putin) and oligarchs who control almost everything. With a bit of propaganda, a bit of fear and intimidation, a bit of apathy, and a survivable economy a system like that can last for a long time. Also bear in mind that some of the billionaires are preparationists. They want to guarantee their own survival, which is probably a lot easier in a tightly controlled society than in a free one.
Mr. Moritz: It is not just politicians who have a skepticism or are wary of powerful corporations. You may recall that corporations, by their own words and reputations, don't exist for the benefit of customers, consumers or citizens, but solely for shareholders. What thinking person would trust an unregulated corporation?
Egomaniacs (aka, narcissists) often assume that the rules do not and will not apply to them -- even the foundational predator/prey relationship rules by which authoritarians always operate.
They are incredibly smart - I'll bet smart, harder-working and better-educated than you - but that said, they're also entitled psychopaths who honestly believe they shouldn't be regulated in any way and as such have zero interest in doing anything for society - it's all about them.
Smart at tech, business and finance, certainly, but that doesn't translate well to public policy. The skills needed to succeed in tech have little to do with policy and politics. Plus, they're always going to want to promote policies that help them.
@@kovie9162 they are blind to most human and environmental issues and are hyperfocused on profit. That disqualifies them from having any say in our lives. But of course their mighty purses have so much sway, so we all suffer social distortion and depredation to the point of collapse. Big business cares only for itself.
Being that the Republicans have been against ANY sort of help for people to get ahead, i really really don't understand how supporting a billionaire Republican is supposed to help "those left behind"... Not rational people.
The thing is that these tech billionaires aren’t left behind, they just feel like they should be allowed to do whatever they want without any responsibilities or regulations. As for every day Americans who feel left behind … they’ve been left behind by large corporations and the billionaire class who try to control government via the Republican party. So by voting for the Republicans, they are voting against their own interests.
I believe he’s correct about the residents and employees who work in Silicon Valley being thoughtful about politics. Isn’t Trump dangerous to our economy or our global safety? He didn’t help it when in office. Is it about protecting personal wealth? Elon moved out of California for tax benefits elsewhere, in Texas.
It would have been helpful if Mr Moritz had been specific about the issues entrepreneurs face in CA. It's so frustrating when interviewers don't ask for details so everyone, including politicians, can hear precisely what issues could be addressed.
Anti trust laws are important. Too much power in the hands of a corporation whose only purpose is to generate profit is inherently dangerous and anti democratic. The power to govern belongs to the people, not greedy corporations.
kentcolgan6139, it was… until Citizens United was passed,because the Conservative leadership of SCOTUS is weakened by its own failure to check its greed.
kentcolgan6139: your opinion is common, but all too commonplace. Your body is 99 per cent water. Everything you touch and everything you do is 99 per cent controlled by a corporate entity, or will be in a flash.
I watched a video of a guy interviewing rich people on the street in different parts of our country, the latest taking place on Rodeo Drive. Of the 7 couples he spoke with, varied business sectors from banking to video producers and incomes ranging from the hundreds of thousands to over a billion, 5 of the 7 are voting for Trump. The recurring reason(s) were Trump's tax cuts and deregulation. The fact that Harris spoke of deregulation in her campaign tells me that these types of folks haven't kept up with her campaign or are not interested in finding out her positions because they believe and basically stated that the Democrats are not business friendly. What's scary is that their only reason to vote Trump is how his tax cut prospers them. No mention of his current campaign speeches, behavior, Project 2025....just his tax cuts and their income.
As usual the characterisation of progressivism, "leftism" etc reflects an era where the modern Democrats are largely driven by policies to the right of Ronald Reagan. US failures in healthcare and the autonomy of women is a function of the rightward march of US politics compared to the bulk of the Western world.
The rest of the western world chuckles at Americans claims about “leftism” and “progressivism”. Americans have no idea what leftism is. Heck Republicans accused Canada of “socialism” when it’s actually progressivism. The Democratic Party is absolutely to the right of center, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, being slightly left of centre, but still not even more progressive than left of centre political parties in the rest of the western world. Americans views on the political spectrum is so warped by the propaganda from the 1950s. It’s absolutely mind blowing.
This past month I traveled to rural areas in two western states. Yes, those small towns feel abandoned/left behind. IMO abandoned by our country's total surrender to capitalism and the almighty dollar. The only real support they have is from: the people left behind, after everyone else moves away for better economic opportunities; the churches supporting them (and vice versa); and any (higher prices) businesses for whatever livelihoods exist in the area. For anyone with children, I can't imagine any newly minted teacher, unless for altruistic reasons, would want to live or work there. What does that say for the future of their children? And, what hope do they have to thrive and grow outside of such an insular environment? Should we care? And, how, as a country, do we support these rural areas that feel overlooked? Progress is not leaving our rural neighbors/citizens behind or quasi-forcing them into cities/metropolitan areas.
Try visiting states in the East coast. Even worse outlook. The West is going to out-perform the East, Midwest and South for the next 50 years. Simple economic fact. As for supporting the rural depopulation in an age of corporate agriculture, mining and forestry (the three major industries that created all of those small rural towns), they will continue to die. Socio-economic evolution. There are some things you simply cannot change.
@@mattclark1278 Thanks for your comment, Matt. You correctly identified the past histories of both of those rural areas; one mining and the other lumber. None of them were quasi-ghost towns, but I can't help wondering how long they will continue to exist. Those within an hour (or two?) of a larger, "supporting" city may survive.
@@michelepayne3546Once you get beyond commuting distance to the major cities, Towns with Tourism attractions, or filled with 2nd homes for tech workers will survive. Towns that are not attractive as vacation destinations will wither. There will be some good jobs in construction. Most jobs will be in service industry. The workers will live in less desirable towns within commuting distance to the tourist destinations as they will not be able to afford to live in the quaint and beautiful places that act as the tourism magnet. The service workers will live in towns that vacationers drive by to get to the beautiful places. I do worry that farming cannot compete with housing needs in many areas within commuting distance to major cities. We need to preserve farmland to grow food but protecting that land for farming will come with significant secondary costs.
It is a huge drain on natural resources and human resources to support people living in the middle of nowhere. Our age of abundance (which grew out of global domination following WWII) is at an end. It will be increasingly necessary for Americans to re-learn how to be frugal like the rest of the world. Single family homes would be an example of NOT frugal.
He talks about the companies but not ONE WORD about the people whose hard work these companies rest upon. This is my issue with the entire tech industry. It is exploitative in a way few other industries are.
I would say, rather, that it is disappointingly exploitative of its workers in exactly the same way as every other industry. The difference being that we all thought high tech was different somehow. It’s not - witness the RTO craze, which is happening solely because the gray suits in the C-suites don’t want their golfing buddies’ commercial REIT stocks to crash.
“Capitalism and authoritarianism may be incompatible ultimately, but capitalists and authoritarianism are not incompatible.” Historian Robert Kagan, March 15th, 2024
Sachs and Thiel have been conservatives forever man. They ran the Stanford review while they were in school, pretty much the only conservative magazine we had on campus.
If we don’t change leadership in the US I fear our sons and daughters may be drafted into an overseas police action . It’s not the rich that will be drafted . It’s the rest of us .
Didnt governor Jerry Brown just balance a budget, and create a massive rainy day fund for California after years of Republicans selling us into debt??????????????????
I mean … *maybe* the judge ruled that Google has a monopoly on search because “politicians don’t like companies they can’t control” … but isn’t it a lot more likely (dare I say, reality-based) to think that the ruling reflects the fact that Google has an obvious monopoly on search? Honestly the knots that wealthy people tie themselves in to stay wealthy and justify their actions … must be kinda painful sometimes.
Centimillionaires and Billionaires complaining it's difficult to do business in California?? The lack of self awareness in such comments is boggling. California has probably generated more wealth in Silcon Valley than the entire US has generated in the last 100 years.
This guy talked and talked and said nothing. Everything is in coded language. What does "Product of Sanfrancisco" really mean to him? Never explained. What does it really mean to be a "Schwarzenegar Democrat"? No idea. What does being fiscally conservative mean to him? It could mean anything since republicans say that and yet they're the ones that always jack up the deficit. I give up.
Those smart, incredible accomplished, wealthy, individuals want authoritarian power in the tech world. They run out of things to buy with money so power is all that's left to gain.
This is embarrassingly bad weak journalism. It is very frustrating as an engaged person to watch Walter Isaacson episode after episode ask sophomoric questions and rarely follow-up with additional questions. PBS needs to do better. Will they do better ? I am not optimistic but this long-time viewer at some point will stop watching. I am probably not alone.
Since I moved to the EU, I’ve largely switched from PBS to France24 and Deutsche Welle for my video news habit. All of PBS’s programming now seems obsequious to corporate interests by contrast. And then there’s all the various über-wealthy foundation backing that they proudly announce at the start of every show. It’s almost like they’ve got a conflict of interest or something! Things that make ya go hmmm, as we used to say back in the day.
Oh! Are you referring to Musk being a self proclaimed technocrat? I found that quite disturbing when I looked into what it is. I wouldn’t be surprised if Thiel and the others share the same political beliefs. It would fit with a group of obscenely rich tech moguls who think that they are smarter and better than everyone else.
Three of 6 are white South African/lived in old South Africa+ Musk, Sacks and Theil (he lived in Namibia) And all of them have been chastised for their @racist works, Theil and sack wrote a book and later apologized for the r@cist views
Musk’s maternal grandfather moved to South Africa after leaving Canada because his political movement was banned by the Canadian government for being a threat to democracy. That political movement was technocracy. Musk is a self proclaimed technocrat. I wonder about Theil and the others…
Same kind of birds tend to flock together. If you are very rich but morally bankrupt, you will always look for someone who reflects your ideology, regardless how rotten it is !
It's not that large private corporations can't be controlled it's that they are controlled by unelected unaccountable private for profit groups. At least politicians have to answer questions and are subject to the freedom of information act.
I've been a social liberal and fiscal conservative forr 40 years. The wealthy should be paying their fair share of taxes. The issue is who's ensuring fiscal responsibility
Walter, Walter, Walter... I'm so disappointed by your interview .... so unlike you! You ask questions about California and SF going extreme left as if you believe that to be true AND you and the speaker give NO examples of such offensives. I walk away completely un- and under-informed! I do know California is a global leader in environmental progress (e.g.., transition to evs) but what are the offenses? And why do you not challenge the speaker on his unchallenged assertions? How about a do over of this interview .... although I don't love that the mega wealthy get more air time than the average (or above average) bear.
Unlike him? It seems exactly like every other interview I’ve seen him do. I don’t think I’ve ever seen Walter Isaacson truly challenge a tech/capitalist/Silicon Valley overlord, ever.
@@shinyshinythings this is the first video I’ve ever watched from this channel. It shows up in my feed periodically and I’ve had no interest in watching except this caught my attention… is it worth coming back again? I ask because this was a terrible interview with ridiculous assertions.
He never answered the question about the breaking up of monopolies. As consumers, we know the answered. They don't work for us and are in large part factors of high prices. Hopefully the FTC keeps doing what they have been doing. Albeit with conservative courts fighting the billionaires battles for them. Another reason to vote for Kamala.
Wrong. The ftc suit to break up Google actually started under trump. It's been going through appeals processes . Remember Clinton.? Yeah you can thank the Democrats for the banking monopolies. And it was the Republicans saying not to bail them out when Obama did.
I think the billionaires are deluding themselves into thinking that they’re doing all this investing and starting new companies and “being entrepreneurial” when, as “a little guy”it seems as though they’ll take a risk as long as they get the majority of the gain; consolidating firms is not being entrepreneurial and helping society.
Walter Isaacson fancies himself as a respected author. Overrated. 1. **Lack of Critical Depth**: Isaacson's biographies, such as those on Steve Jobs and Elon Musk, tend to be overly favorable or fail to sufficiently question the moral or ethical dimensions of his subjects’ actions. His works feel more celebratory than investigative. 2. **Oversimplification**: Isaacson’s accessible writing style, while making complex subjects understandable, sometimes leads to accusations of oversimplifying or glossing over important details, particularly when discussing the technical aspects of his subjects’ work. 3. **Focus on "Great Man" Narrative**: Isaacson often writes biographies that emphasize the achievements of singular figures, which has been critiqued as promoting a "great man" theory of history. Downplays the contributions of teams or collaborators, as well as the broader socio-economic contexts that contribute to innovation. 4. **Narrative Repetition**: Isaacson's books follow a similar narrative structure, formulaic across his different subjects.
Characterizing the reason governments don't like monopolies as "not being able to control them." Well, yes, there is that also, but the main reason is that without competition in the marketplace, there's no natural way to keep prices from skyrocketing. That doesn't just hurt government, it hurts everybody. Government is a way for the collective power of the people to be organized into a counter force either through penalties for collusion and price gouging or through anti-trust enforcement.
This can be summarized as “we are scared of our power as wealthy, greedy business people being undermined by the empowerment of the groups of people who’s backs we have traditionally built our wealth upon” - and I write this as a life long conservative! Honestly, one can close their eyes while listening to this and it sounds like any executive on Wall Street, yet the irony is that countries that are more socially progressive ARE FAR MORE SUCCESSFUL than countries that are more socially conservative, or regressive. It was the social progress of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s that fuelled the success of the United States and launched it to superpower status. It’s rather rich that the same groups of people who have profited from this, also clutch their pearls at social progress. These fears are no different than the fears of other ruling classes/groups with privilege that we have seen throughout hundreds of years…. Because the equality feels like oppression when you’re used to privilege. As for Musk, Peter Thiel and other “tech Bros” they want power. Musk in particular is not Republican or conservative, nor was he ever a Democrat. He is a self proclaimed Technocrat. If you don’t know what that is, I suggest looking it up. His maternal grandfather, was the Canadian leader of the Technocrat movement in the 1930s. It’s an interesting story that includes his grandfather being arrested after the Canadian government briefly outlawed technocracy due to its being a direct threat to democracy. Technocracy can be best described as a system of government where engineers and technologists run the government and make all decisions based on technical experts. (note there is no role for citizens).
Anything he doesn’t like. But seriously, it’s a joke that Americans don’t actually know what “the left“ is. The rest of the western world watches as the American political spectrum is right of centre, and how those were furthest on the right accuse those who are right of centre of being “leftist”. It’s actually quite funny to watch. That isn’t until they start calling Canadians “socialist” because of policies that are slightly left of centre. I think their mind would actually blow up if they spoke to someone who is actually socialist let alone a true leftist.
@@carlyar5281 I blame the years of right wing talk radio and their kind normalizing these attacks. Fact free, fear mongering and without any critical thinking.
I keep using the example of what’s going on with Boeing. Boeing was given the ability to self monitor because the FAA did not have enough staff to provide the same level oversight they have done over last 50 years. As an aerospace engineer who used to work in the field of regulations (in a different country) I am actually shocked at how quickly the gaps in oversight resulted in aircraft safety incidents.
His view of what Harris has learned in the Biden administration which has exposed her to experience which would moderate her far more liberal earlier political stances to a more centrist understanding of how she reaches the greater American voting public.
How terrible it would have to be for me , to be ‘robbed’ of 99 billion for taxes and there would be ‘only’ one billion left for me.... The rest of my life in a trailer or even a tent in Philadelphia....
In his book "On Tyranny," Timothy D. Snyder reminds us that the Holocaust would have been impossible without the complicity of businesses. Their focus was on money & power: taking Jewish businesses for pennies on the dollar or outright appropriation; using Jewish slave labor; stealing Jewish bank accounts; stealing their valuable art. The monied class cares not about the rights of others. They want to sit at the table of power, even when it means ignoring the slaughter of their fellow citizens. As long as they & their own families prosper, nothing else matters. Not justice. Not decency. Not humanity.
Why don't they just say, we're rich and we want to be able to do whatever we want to get richer without having to worry about what's in the good for society. I enjoyed the interview but he said a lot of words but didn't basically say the root cause of why some of the wealthy turn to trump and the right. He could have just said greed.
Greed & Power.
Careful, plenty will vote for exactly that.
That would be self-report!
Sounds like he was saying "San Francisco" as if it were a dirty word we were all supposed to know about. He did say that the tech companies are responsible for all the progress of the computer age. Wow! So many assumptions and so few details, as if he was speaking in code that only rich tech entrepreneurs could understand.
Walter's guest has a little trouble not naming "the elephant in the room", doesn't he?
It’s pretty simple. These are very rich people, and they know that the Republican Party has always been very good to very rich people.
Rich people support trump for self-interest nothing more
But how can they sell their country out when they already have more $ than they will ever need? It is not really helping them.
@@joycej9415because they personally are absolutely awful people. Just because they are rich doesn’t mean they are decent people. Blekkkl
generosity reserved for the rich.
The tech bros like Musk want unfettered power.
Muks. Call him Muks.
Muks and his neofeudalist techdweebs want to see the end of law and order in our time for the sake of chaos that will allow them to do any fuqqin thing they want to do with no consequence. They would like the downfall of western civilization so they could rule the ruins with an iron fist.
Sooner or latter all tycoons fancy themselves political geniuses. Almost none are.
They want power without responsibility which is exactly what they’ve been given for decades.
Nope , that is the Democrats that desire power . Just look at the wars in the world today . Open your eyes before it is too late .
This is simple to understand-GREED! Money over everything
They’re technically smart. They’re not socially or politically smart.
I would argue that their social and political weirdness comes from them being narcissistic sociopaths (or even outright psychopaths - Elon and Thiel being perfect examples)
Yes, they are idiots savants. Media idiotically lauds their narrow competence as though it were marvelous in all things where it’s actually abysmal from any humane or wholistic perspective. The scheisseschau which is the Eeore Musk persona in play since he bought Twotter illustrates it.
@lmenascojr yes, they have no emotional intelligence, but plenty of business “savvy”, or greed.
@@lauraw.7008 but Ronnie Raygun taught us that ‘greed is good’ so there’s that.
Your just jealous that you weren't smart enough to make billions or even a million!😊
It’s really repulsive that these billionaires only think about themselves.
“You’ve counted six people…” Six Billionaires can do a lot of damage. One can do a lot of damage, as we all know.
That's one "alleged" billionaire.
I am reading the book Dark Money, it makes that point for certain. 😢
96Even the pretenders.
People power. Numbers
Well there aren’t that many at all. What a scummy group of person
Women will be sending a very strong message
Trump will likely be surprised as to how strong the message is. At that "emergency" press conference he held at Mara Lago, he said that, by election time, abortion "...wouldn't be much of an issue...".
All I could think when he said that was, "...buddy, you just sealed your fate."
It also reminded me of something Gloria Steinem said in 1973, namely that if men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
gen -Z MUST all vote
Billionaires aren't being heard by politicians? Anyone who says this is out of touch with reality.
Billionaires literally get to have sit down meetings with the President.
Slo bro, money is seen not heard. LOL
"Governments are skeptical regarding large companies they can't control"... Not really sir... The people are skeptical regarding large corporations controlling our governments. You haven't really been listening to the people, it seems...
well said, sir
This Moritz person is very detestable in his hyperfocus on HIS wealth and HIS liberty. As though California was just some location from which he extracted his wealth through exercise of his entitlement as a rich educated white man. This is the reason I had to cancel my subscription from The Economist, their habit of looking at the world in such an inimical way. Like, know thine enemy, people.
Sounds like he’s critical of the government breaking up AT&T. I worked in the telecom industry for many years. The break up did not destroy the business and created competition and lower prices for consumers. It doesn’t matter if these big companies “changed the world with their innovations “ if they follow that with high prices and squishing any competition-too much power is bad.
Walter Issacson why didn’t you challenge him on this point?!?!? I hope it’s because you ran out of time and not just giving him a pass.
It’s literally governments job to protect consumers against monopolies. It’s not because government wants to control all of big business. Government actually does a very bad job of controlling big business and doesn’t have enough government auditors to do it. As a techie I’ve worked in many industries and the only one government seems to have any credible control over is banking and even that could do better. (Can you say Bitcoin?)
@@tammiepulley7167You must not have seen very many Isaacson interviews. He always gives people like this a pass. That’s how he keeps snagging these interviews!
If anybody wants to suppress entrepreneurial activities, it is successful big corporations.
You described Bezos exactly!
This Moritz cat is a an investor, looking for the next big thing. He invests in 20 companies, hoping one is a big success. Say what you will about the VC class, but they encourage and invest in entrepreneurs.
@MarcosElMalo2 using money from the stock markets pumped up by the 401k's of Joe Sixpacks, who make pennies while this guy makes millions.
They want entrepreneurship suppressed not entirely, but just enough and in the right ways so that they can buy up or steal the things which new entrepreneurs come up with.
Delete my post and then send me a notification that someone replied to the thread?
I agree with much of what Moritz says, but his views on antitrust are just dead wrong. Corporations consolidating too much power over an individual or even multiple areas of the economy, industry, and technology is BAD for consumers, bad for society, and ultimately bad for the country. Monopolies are bad. There is not really any way to spin it that they are not. They are good for shareholders but not for the average worker or consumer. Let's not forget that lack of competition in the market does not just affect consumers, it affects workers as well. His statement that "politicians don't like challenges to their power" is projection.
Well said, thank you.
I love the technological advances we've been given, but I'm not easily convinced they've made us better. Unmitigated greed, hackers and spammers, trafficking of youth, and the thirst for pornography come to mind. I believe we have essentially forsaken the necessity of compassion. We treat it as an option to our detriment.
Maybe they've just made communication more efficient. There are good and bad people, maybe the advances just makes it quicker to show who we are to the world.
The billionaires have their own cult: a sort of Hare Krishna of superwealth. Many of the bros are rallying around Trump and Vance in a sort of Peck's Bad Boy spirit of petulance--they hate the idea of abiding by the rules of civilized society, of being constrained by taxation, regulation, and the equal application of the rule of law. They'd like to see the common man crushed under an authoritarian boot while they themselves enjoy---what, some mad fantasy of total freedom, although only for themselves. Others have a dream of making a killing in crypto and becoming the first trillionaire. They're all quite mad, and quite spoilt.
Libertarians on steroids.
They all are Mark Rylance in DON'T LOOK UP. Rylance caught something terrifying and completely real about who those guys are and how they operate. Scary.
ma4450,and if they are able to “crush the common man “, then they will be competing with each other for the race to the top,because they succeeded in vanquishing the “common man “.
@@luckyleprechaun-e7hI *knew* Michael Moritz reminded me of a movie character, I couldn’t think of which one! Thank you.
Absolutely---and how delightful it is to read a literate and thoughtful post. Thank you.
Peter Thiel and alikes want a strong men to take care of them and somehow do what they cannot do for themselves: use Federal regulatory powers and money to favor their unrestricted business expansion (which is the definition of fachism). It can be said that politicians does not like monopolies and cartels because it impedes the necessary fairness and growth done by the smaller players who brings innovation and the creation of new businesses.
They would be stupid to back Trump. He will take them to the cleaners. They will wish they didn't.
To me, this is so freakin’ obvious. Not only for billionaires but for everyone who currently supports it. Everyone acknowledges it is “transactional” but think it would never sell them out. 🙄
NO, I THINK IT IS THE BEST DECISION THEY WILL EVER MAKE IF THEY WILL VOTE FOR TRUMP. WAKE UP NOW, AMERICA IS RETURNING TO THE RIGHT PATH.
@@cherylb6755exactly!
There are two roads that a person can take once they have enormous wealth. One tends towards megalomania and greed; the other towards humility and looking to make a positive impact on society.
Divine right of kings? At least some monarchs occasionally ruled for the betterment of their people. Hard to say the same for any billionaire.
What he’s after is the divine right of monopolists.
If California's policies have been so bad for 20+ years, how did all these tech companies become so incredibly wealthy and powerful?
I really wish that Michael Moritz would be more clear… He has not spoken two coherent sentences.We now live in a world in which so many foreign nationals that are billionaires have an uneven role in the politics of this nation. Big business in general has way too much power over the power that is needed for the majority’s interest. They seem to want even more overt power than they ever had and they are blatant with their distain for any control of their activities. Corporations should not control the world as they don’t do anything for the good of the people, but instead, their focus is to make more money!
Yes, and regardless of how much they make it’s never enough. Bezos has $280B, yet he’s using Amazonmilking the world with.
@@toniblackman5640 the reason Michael Moritz sounded so muddled is that he was attempting to conceal the fact that he personally is part of the problem he appears to be criticizing. He doesn’t necessarily have a problem with what his “problem people” are doing; he just wants it to be him doing it, not them. He sounds like a liar lying, because that’s exactly what he is.
Voting blue 💙 for democracy!!!!
👍❤️
WELL, KAMALA HAS NOT DONE ANY INTERVIEW ABOUT HER POLICY, WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT SHE WILL BE? RETHINK YOUR VOTE, DON'T WASTE IT ON KAMALA.
So tired of this narrative of people being "left behind". How about stop voting against your financial interests because of your cultural philosophies. You want to live in the past, you cant move ahead with the rest of us.
Is Donald Trump Mentally Fit to Be President ? . Dr Bandy X Lee Question Trump's Capacity to Govern
JD Vance: “Mr. Trump is UNFIT for our Nation’s Highest Office”.
Capitalists don’t care one whit.
There is a total lack of responsibility among these money mongers. They don’t even care what they’ve done to their children much less their nation.
They want government contracts and subsidies 😮
As a 40 year tech professional, the movement of "tech bros" to the far right is beyond disgusting to me.
What did the Ds do in California? Regulation is completely necessary for consumers at least to some degree. I’d legit like some concrete examples Mr.
L😅😅😅
I can’t give you specifics, but starting a business creates a lot of red tape. Building permit approvals can be a headache, and some building regulations make building expensive, which makes low income housing less profitable. Zoning limits land available for multi family dwellings. How’s that for a start?
@@MarcosElMalo2 I’m a cook in a school, we are very regulated. And that’s a good thing. It protects our students/consumers. I’m glad when my house was built it required permits and inspections. Read The Jungle by Upton Sinclair.
Since housing is being mentioned, a major failing of the democrats in California has been never repealing prop 13. This created deep inequities in housing which in turn catapulted the "right kind" of homeowner into the RE value stratosphere. This amplified a lot of other problems with the state. Did you know that in SV (where Moritz is) the Superior Court of San Mateo County has been underfunded in its operations for years and runs on reduced hours? This is just one example of how all aspects of society that aren't regularly visited by the upper class have been made incredibly inefficient, which in turn trickles into all other areas of society as increased CoL, higher taxes, and lower quality of life. The latest budget, effective July 1, closed a $46.8 billion budget deficit by reducing ongoing funding for state government operations. Generally any public service is going to be subpar.
@@MarcosElMalo2Sounds like municipal ordinances is your worry, not state wide laws. These complaints about California over-regulating ring hollow.
A surprising lack of details/evidence. Too many summary statements without examples to demonstrate, followed by rhetorical statements to back up the summary statements. Waste of time.
The issue in SF is not the progressive left. The progressive left would build shelters, and allow addressing homeless and social issues.
The issue in SF is NIMBYs that don’t want anything that might reduce the value of their house.
Well here's what I see. The real estate industry is ham strung by Democrats' regulations and can't increase supply (meaning affordable housing too). So real estate prices are up. At the same time people don't want their home price to go down when they bought their scrawny town house for $600k ~ $1M. Who's problem is it really y'know?
The “Democrat’s” regulations aren’t progressive, they are a holdover from a more conservative CA that benefits landowners. Real estate prices are up because of several factors - NIMBY’s, corporate investors, people who sit on undeveloped land, greedy landlords, Zillow over inflation and the realtors association. Lived here since the 70’s, watched it happen. Regulation is just how they’re doing it.
The NIMBY issue (a.k.a. lack of affordable housing and homelessness, etc.) is spreading throughout North America. It’s happening in Canada as well as the United States.
Where I live in Canada it is happening equally in progressive as well as more conservative cities and provinces. It is becoming increasingly clear that whether NIMBY is being enforced by regulations/zoning laws, or other means, the effect is still the same.
Just like San Francisco, our West Coast was the first part of the country to be hit the hardest with lack of affordable housing and similar issues with homelessness, it was the combination of the attractiveness of the West Coast driving up demand, as well as the warmer temperatures that meant people could survive living on the street…. It’s always been the case, since at least the 1980s, that most homeless people on the prairies would move to the West Coast because they couldn’t survive living on the street in the winter if they stayed in the prairies. None of this had to do with progressive politicians. Yet, there are a lot in common between Vancouver, Victoria and San Francisco.
We are having massive issues with lack and affordable housing throughout the country, but especially in Toronto (Canada’s version of New York) which is not a progressive or liberal city. It does have huge issues with NIMBY, and the province has a very conservative, pro business government and no one’s taking on the NIMBY issue and yet they wonder why none of their solutions are working right now.
The same thing as other major cities in Canada, another example of Calgary, which is sometimes referred to as Texas North. It has one of the most conservative governments. Also net migration to that province is higher than any other province in the country. Until recently, it posted the lowest cost-of-living of the major cities, but this year with the increased housing costs. it’s increasingly having problems with homelessness due to the lack of affordable housing and a massive issue of NIMBY. it has the most socially regressive laws and it’s interesting because the progression from a lack of affordable housing to increased crime was the fastest there than any other location in the country.
So that is my super long-winded way of saying that the issue absolutely is NIMBY contributing heavily to a lack of affordable housing. The resulting social issues that come with a higher homeless population, and eventual increase in crime, seems to happen faster in cities and regions that have less social supports, and are more conservative. (I need to point out that this is in Canada! The country that Republicans claim is socialist because we have a social safety net so if it’s like this here…)
There aren’t that many supporters of Trump left from my Silicon Valley circle. MAGA’s Project 2025 was simply not representative of their values in any way. His comments about not having elections anymore didn’t help. Democracy is great for business.
dictatorships can be even better for business, to be fair.
Exactly. The greater SFBA is just over 9 million residents. I'm guessing over 90% of voters are going to lean or fully go Democrat on the federal election. State elections will better-favor the republicans, but even those numbers are diminishing as even local republicans are proving to be trump/MAGA bootlickers.
@@move2003nyonly for a few players though, and only for a little while. Which is exactly what monopolists want in an economy.
You people are delusional, these people are waking up and know that kamala would be a failure!😊
@@claesvanoldenphatt9972 Yeah I agree in general terms, although it needs not be unstable. I reckon that what Thiel, Musk and some others want is some sort of feudal system. That's why they are so enamoured of Russia. In Russia you have an emperor (Putin) and oligarchs who control almost everything. With a bit of propaganda, a bit of fear and intimidation, a bit of apathy, and a survivable economy a system like that can last for a long time.
Also bear in mind that some of the billionaires are preparationists. They want to guarantee their own survival, which is probably a lot easier in a tightly controlled society than in a free one.
Kamala is the best of us! I’ll walk through hot coals to D. C. For her and our country💙💙💙💙
🤮. You might have to
Mr. Moritz: It is not just politicians who have a skepticism or are wary of powerful corporations. You may recall that corporations, by their own words and reputations, don't exist for the benefit of customers, consumers or citizens, but solely for shareholders. What thinking person would trust an unregulated corporation?
Egomaniacs (aka, narcissists) often assume that the rules do not and will not apply to them -- even the foundational predator/prey relationship rules by which authoritarians always operate.
The notion that Silicon Valley tech people are 'smart' was your first delusion.
They are smart at what they know. They have become so powerful that they think they know everything, and deserve everything
They are incredibly smart - I'll bet smart, harder-working and better-educated than you - but that said, they're also entitled psychopaths who honestly believe they shouldn't be regulated in any way and as such have zero interest in doing anything for society - it's all about them.
@@Mykey404megalomaniacs
Smart at tech, business and finance, certainly, but that doesn't translate well to public policy. The skills needed to succeed in tech have little to do with policy and politics. Plus, they're always going to want to promote policies that help them.
@@kovie9162 they are blind to most human and environmental issues and are hyperfocused on profit. That disqualifies them from having any say in our lives. But of course their mighty purses have so much sway, so we all suffer social distortion and depredation to the point of collapse. Big business cares only for itself.
Being that the Republicans have been against ANY sort of help for people to get ahead, i really really don't understand how supporting a billionaire Republican is supposed to help "those left behind"... Not rational people.
The thing is that these tech billionaires aren’t left behind, they just feel like they should be allowed to do whatever they want without any responsibilities or regulations.
As for every day Americans who feel left behind … they’ve been left behind by large corporations and the billionaire class who try to control government via the Republican party. So by voting for the Republicans, they are voting against their own interests.
I believe he’s correct about the residents and employees who work in Silicon Valley being thoughtful about politics. Isn’t Trump dangerous to our economy or our global safety? He didn’t help it when in office. Is it about protecting personal wealth? Elon moved out of California for tax benefits elsewhere, in Texas.
He moved Twitter (and the atrocity of the "X" sign) out of SF because they sought to enforce laws he scoffed at. And the rent was too high :D
@@Civilizashum Elon is destroying texas already..they are bowing down to him..
It would have been helpful if Mr Moritz had been specific about the issues entrepreneurs face in CA. It's so frustrating when interviewers don't ask for details so everyone, including politicians, can hear precisely what issues could be addressed.
Anti trust laws are important. Too much power in the hands of a corporation whose only purpose is to generate profit is inherently dangerous and anti democratic. The power to govern belongs to the people, not greedy corporations.
kentcolgan6139, it was… until Citizens United was passed,because the Conservative leadership of SCOTUS is weakened by its own failure to check its greed.
kentcolgan6139: your opinion is common, but all too commonplace. Your body is 99 per cent water. Everything you touch and everything you do is 99 per cent controlled by a corporate entity, or will be in a flash.
I watched a video of a guy interviewing rich people on the street in different parts of our country, the latest taking place on Rodeo Drive. Of the 7 couples he spoke with, varied business sectors from banking to video producers and incomes ranging from the hundreds of thousands to over a billion, 5 of the 7 are voting for Trump. The recurring reason(s) were Trump's tax cuts and deregulation. The fact that Harris spoke of deregulation in her campaign tells me that these types of folks haven't kept up with her campaign or are not interested in finding out her positions because they believe and basically stated that the Democrats are not business friendly. What's scary is that their only reason to vote Trump is how his tax cut prospers them. No mention of his current campaign speeches, behavior, Project 2025....just his tax cuts and their income.
Selfish, self-centered, greedy people whose wealth is never enough.
why billionaires should not be .. they go beyond, for power, become weird, oligarchic, arrogant, toxic.
As usual the characterisation of progressivism, "leftism" etc reflects an era where the modern Democrats are largely driven by policies to the right of Ronald Reagan. US failures in healthcare and the autonomy of women is a function of the rightward march of US politics compared to the bulk of the Western world.
The rest of the western world chuckles at Americans claims about “leftism” and “progressivism”.
Americans have no idea what leftism is. Heck Republicans accused Canada of “socialism” when it’s actually progressivism. The Democratic Party is absolutely to the right of center, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, being slightly left of centre, but still not even more progressive than left of centre political parties in the rest of the western world.
Americans views on the political spectrum is so warped by the propaganda from the 1950s. It’s absolutely mind blowing.
This past month I traveled to rural areas in two western states. Yes, those small towns feel abandoned/left behind. IMO abandoned by our country's total surrender to capitalism and the almighty dollar. The only real support they have is from: the people left behind, after everyone else moves away for better economic opportunities; the churches supporting them (and vice versa); and any (higher prices) businesses for whatever livelihoods exist in the area. For anyone with children, I can't imagine any newly minted teacher, unless for altruistic reasons, would want to live or work there. What does that say for the future of their children? And, what hope do they have to thrive and grow outside of such an insular environment? Should we care? And, how, as a country, do we support these rural areas that feel overlooked? Progress is not leaving our rural neighbors/citizens behind or quasi-forcing them into cities/metropolitan areas.
Money rules.
Try visiting states in the East coast. Even worse outlook. The West is going to out-perform the East, Midwest and South for the next 50 years. Simple economic fact. As for supporting the rural depopulation in an age of corporate agriculture, mining and forestry (the three major industries that created all of those small rural towns), they will continue to die. Socio-economic evolution. There are some things you simply cannot change.
@@mattclark1278 Thanks for your comment, Matt. You correctly identified the past histories of both of those rural areas; one mining and the other lumber. None of them were quasi-ghost towns, but I can't help wondering how long they will continue to exist. Those within an hour (or two?) of a larger, "supporting" city may survive.
@@michelepayne3546Once you get beyond commuting distance to the major cities, Towns with Tourism attractions, or filled with 2nd homes for tech workers will survive. Towns that are not attractive as vacation destinations will wither. There will be some good jobs in construction. Most jobs will be in service industry. The workers will live in less desirable towns within commuting distance to the tourist destinations as they will not be able to afford to live in the quaint and beautiful places that act as the tourism magnet. The service workers will live in towns that vacationers drive by to get to the beautiful places.
I do worry that farming cannot compete with housing needs in many areas within commuting distance to major cities. We need to preserve farmland to grow food but protecting that land for farming will come with significant secondary costs.
It is a huge drain on natural resources and human resources to support people living in the middle of nowhere.
Our age of abundance (which grew out of global domination following WWII) is at an end. It will be increasingly necessary for Americans to re-learn how to be frugal like the rest of the world.
Single family homes would be an example of NOT frugal.
A man of reason in a sea of insanity and vulture capital greed.
He talks about the companies but not ONE WORD about the people whose hard work these companies rest upon. This is my issue with the entire tech industry. It is exploitative in a way few other industries are.
all companies are like that!
Plus, they cheat the very people who helped to make them rich…their customers.
I would say, rather, that it is disappointingly exploitative of its workers in exactly the same way as every other industry. The difference being that we all thought high tech was different somehow. It’s not - witness the RTO craze, which is happening solely because the gray suits in the C-suites don’t want their golfing buddies’ commercial REIT stocks to crash.
“Capitalism and authoritarianism may be incompatible ultimately, but capitalists and authoritarianism are not incompatible.” Historian Robert Kagan, March 15th, 2024
Sachs and Thiel have been conservatives forever man. They ran the Stanford review while they were in school, pretty much the only conservative magazine we had on campus.
They want to be oligarchs.
Many are already Oligarths especially here in Texas. We have two who control Governor Abbott.
This is the right answer.
Crass greed combined with self-obsession and a feeling that both Trump and Vance are the same.
Antitrust enforcement is mandatory for democracy. Corporate consolidation is good for shareholders, not stakeholders.
Democracy is good for capitalism, but authoritarianism is good for capitalists.
These tech billionaires aren’t interested in democracy.
If we don’t change leadership in the US I fear our sons and daughters may be drafted into an overseas police action . It’s not the rich that will be drafted . It’s the rest of us .
Didnt governor Jerry Brown just balance a budget, and create a massive rainy day fund for California after years of Republicans selling us into debt??????????????????
What a pompous non-answer to the Google question.
The Silicon Valley types think they're smarter than they are: everyone only sees part of the picture.
I'm not really hearing a strong rebuke of the migration to the Right here.
I mean … *maybe* the judge ruled that Google has a monopoly on search because “politicians don’t like companies they can’t control” … but isn’t it a lot more likely (dare I say, reality-based) to think that the ruling reflects the fact that Google has an obvious monopoly on search? Honestly the knots that wealthy people tie themselves in to stay wealthy and justify their actions … must be kinda painful sometimes.
Centimillionaires and Billionaires complaining it's difficult to do business in California?? The lack of self awareness in such comments is boggling. California has probably generated more wealth in Silcon Valley than the entire US has generated in the last 100 years.
This guy talked and talked and said nothing. Everything is in coded language. What does "Product of Sanfrancisco" really mean to him? Never explained. What does it really mean to be a "Schwarzenegar Democrat"? No idea. What does being fiscally conservative mean to him? It could mean anything since republicans say that and yet they're the ones that always jack up the deficit. I give up.
Those smart, incredible accomplished, wealthy, individuals want authoritarian power in the tech world. They run out of things to buy with money so power is all that's left to gain.
Look into technocracy. Musk is a self proclaimed technocrat.
This is embarrassingly bad weak journalism. It is very frustrating as an engaged person to watch Walter Isaacson episode after episode ask sophomoric questions and rarely follow-up with additional questions. PBS needs to do better. Will they do better ? I am not optimistic but this long-time viewer at some point will stop watching. I am probably not alone.
Since I moved to the EU, I’ve largely switched from PBS to France24 and Deutsche Welle for my video news habit. All of PBS’s programming now seems obsequious to corporate interests by contrast. And then there’s all the various über-wealthy foundation backing that they proudly announce at the start of every show. It’s almost like they’ve got a conflict of interest or something! Things that make ya go hmmm, as we used to say back in the day.
This is the first video I have ever watched on this channel and it will most likely be the last.
I think a closer look at the political beliefs of this small group of powerful and obscenely rich tech moguls is required. It is quite distirbing
100%!
Oh! Are you referring to Musk being a self proclaimed technocrat? I found that quite disturbing when I looked into what it is.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Thiel and the others share the same political beliefs. It would fit with a group of obscenely rich tech moguls who think that they are smarter and better than everyone else.
Good interview. However, your guest’s assertion that the political class has “forgotten” or disenfranchised Silicon Valley entrepreneurs is absurd!
Three of 6 are white South African/lived in old South Africa+ Musk, Sacks and Theil (he lived in Namibia)
And all of them have been chastised for their @racist works, Theil and sack wrote a book and later apologized for the r@cist views
The I L virtually raised JDVance paid his school got him jobs, even paid for his Senate Seat 2 years ago! The I L is Vances Oligarch
Inherited blood diamond fortunes converted to tech
Part of the worldwide international White fascist movement.
@@mattclark1278Oh. That explains SO much.
Musk’s maternal grandfather moved to South Africa after leaving Canada because his political movement was banned by the Canadian government for being a threat to democracy. That political movement was technocracy. Musk is a self proclaimed technocrat. I wonder about Theil and the others…
San Fransisco is more right than left
Same kind of birds tend to flock together. If you are very rich but morally bankrupt, you will always look for someone who reflects your ideology, regardless how rotten it is !
Your guest seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth …
No different from the Tycoon barons of the past, only motivated by greed.
It's not that large private corporations can't be controlled it's that they are controlled by unelected unaccountable private for profit groups. At least politicians have to answer questions and are subject to the freedom of information act.
Greed and hypocrisy is what drives them.
I've been a social liberal and fiscal conservative forr 40 years. The wealthy should be paying their fair share of taxes. The issue is who's ensuring fiscal responsibility
Walter, Walter, Walter... I'm so disappointed by your interview .... so unlike you! You ask questions about California and SF going extreme left as if you believe that to be true AND you and the speaker give NO examples of such offensives. I walk away completely un- and under-informed! I do know California is a global leader in environmental progress (e.g.., transition to evs) but what are the offenses? And why do you not challenge the speaker on his unchallenged assertions?
How about a do over of this interview .... although I don't love that the mega wealthy get more air time than the average (or above average) bear.
My thoughts about this interview exactly.
Unlike him? It seems exactly like every other interview I’ve seen him do. I don’t think I’ve ever seen Walter Isaacson truly challenge a tech/capitalist/Silicon Valley overlord, ever.
@shinyshinythings thanks... I've only seen a handful and hadn't noticed that. I defer to you!
@@shinyshinythings this is the first video I’ve ever watched from this channel. It shows up in my feed periodically and I’ve had no interest in watching except this caught my attention… is it worth coming back again? I ask because this was a terrible interview with ridiculous assertions.
Brilliant interview...thanks!
He never answered the question about the breaking up of monopolies. As consumers, we know the answered. They don't work for us and are in large part factors of high prices. Hopefully the FTC keeps doing what they have been doing. Albeit with conservative courts fighting the billionaires battles for them. Another reason to vote for Kamala.
Wrong. The ftc suit to break up Google actually started under trump. It's been going through appeals processes .
Remember Clinton.? Yeah you can thank the Democrats for the banking monopolies. And it was the Republicans saying not to bail them out when Obama did.
Also, rich enough to pay in advance so as not to become his enemy and get their windows broken later.
I think the billionaires are deluding themselves into thinking that they’re doing all this investing and starting new companies and “being entrepreneurial” when, as “a little guy”it seems as though they’ll take a risk as long as they get the majority of the gain; consolidating firms is not being entrepreneurial and helping society.
I’m a busker, and it’s great to have many, small donations. But just a few big donors makes all the difference in the world.
Entrepreneurs ≠ oligarchs.
Also...never assume that your financial backing will ever give you control or influence over the wannabe autocrat.
The last 30 years of Russian history prove you COMPLETELY wrong, pal.
... goes both ways. The German Industrialists found that out 1932-45.
Walter Isaacson fancies himself as a respected author. Overrated.
1. **Lack of Critical Depth**: Isaacson's biographies, such as those on Steve Jobs and Elon Musk, tend to be overly favorable or fail to sufficiently question the moral or ethical dimensions of his subjects’ actions. His works feel more celebratory than investigative.
2. **Oversimplification**: Isaacson’s accessible writing style, while making complex subjects understandable, sometimes leads to accusations of oversimplifying or glossing over important details, particularly when discussing the technical aspects of his subjects’ work.
3. **Focus on "Great Man" Narrative**: Isaacson often writes biographies that emphasize the achievements of singular figures, which has been critiqued as promoting a "great man" theory of history. Downplays the contributions of teams or collaborators, as well as the broader socio-economic contexts that contribute to innovation.
4. **Narrative Repetition**: Isaacson's books follow a similar narrative structure, formulaic across his different subjects.
Dear oh dear. I’m not a huge fan of Isaacson, but it’s pretty sad to critique a published author by generating a comment with ChatGPT.
So what exactly HAS the Democratic Party done to California? Explain it for an outsider, please?
Are they paying this man by the word? It's simple: GREED.
DonOLD
And his sidekick Shady Vance.
DonTheCon
Ok enough of this Moritz person. He’s got nothing but a class-based gripe that he’s not getting richer fast enough.
Characterizing the reason governments don't like monopolies as "not being able to control them." Well, yes, there is that also, but the main reason is that without competition in the marketplace, there's no natural way to keep prices from skyrocketing. That doesn't just hurt government, it hurts everybody.
Government is a way for the collective power of the people to be organized into a counter force either through penalties for collusion and price gouging or through anti-trust enforcement.
Being an entrepreneur is always difficult
If you want that prize, you go for it anyway
What fools. Silicon Valley billionaires.
This is EXACTLY why we need diversity in EVERY part of American life
Get on the blue wave 💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙💙
Greed and selfishness direct their actions.
I come here for Walter. One of the most principled journalists in American history.
This is an excellent interview. Thanks to both of you.
This can be summarized as “we are scared of our power as wealthy, greedy business people being undermined by the empowerment of the groups of people who’s backs we have traditionally built our wealth upon” - and I write this as a life long conservative!
Honestly, one can close their eyes while listening to this and it sounds like any executive on Wall Street, yet the irony is that countries that are more socially progressive ARE FAR MORE SUCCESSFUL than countries that are more socially conservative, or regressive. It was the social progress of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s that fuelled the success of the United States and launched it to superpower status. It’s rather rich that the same groups of people who have profited from this, also clutch their pearls at social progress.
These fears are no different than the fears of other ruling classes/groups with privilege that we have seen throughout hundreds of years…. Because the equality feels like oppression when you’re used to privilege.
As for Musk, Peter Thiel and other “tech Bros” they want power. Musk in particular is not Republican or conservative, nor was he ever a Democrat. He is a self proclaimed Technocrat. If you don’t know what that is, I suggest looking it up. His maternal grandfather, was the Canadian leader of the Technocrat movement in the 1930s. It’s an interesting story that includes his grandfather being arrested after the Canadian government briefly outlawed technocracy due to its being a direct threat to democracy. Technocracy can be best described as a system of government where engineers and technologists run the government and make all decisions based on technical experts. (note there is no role for citizens).
Have heard his name, but I’ve never seen him speak. Highly impressed with his pragmatic centrism.
I don't hear specifics from the guest. Labeling left!! So, what about left
Anything he doesn’t like.
But seriously, it’s a joke that Americans don’t actually know what “the left“ is. The rest of the western world watches as the American political spectrum is right of centre, and how those were furthest on the right accuse those who are right of centre of being “leftist”. It’s actually quite funny to watch. That isn’t until they start calling Canadians “socialist” because of policies that are slightly left of centre. I think their mind would actually blow up if they spoke to someone who is actually socialist let alone a true leftist.
@@carlyar5281 I blame the years of right wing talk radio and their kind normalizing these attacks. Fact free, fear mongering and without any critical thinking.
Complaining about "crippling regulations" ... (anyone saying this wants to sell counterfeit airplane parts)
I keep using the example of what’s going on with Boeing. Boeing was given the ability to self monitor because the FAA did not have enough staff to provide the same level oversight they have done over last 50 years. As an aerospace engineer who used to work in the field of regulations (in a different country) I am actually shocked at how quickly the gaps in oversight resulted in aircraft safety incidents.
His view of what Harris has learned in the Biden administration which has exposed her to experience which would moderate her far more liberal earlier political stances to a more centrist understanding of how she reaches the greater American voting public.
Because they want to have no Environmental Restrictions , or Labor Restrictions .
I don’t think that they’re drifting to the right…I think that they’re “drifting” to less taxes and scrutiny.
How terrible it would have to be for me , to be ‘robbed’ of 99 billion for taxes and there would be ‘only’ one billion left for me.... The rest of my life in a trailer or even a tent in Philadelphia....
So where are the others - the good ones, why don t they show them selfs. Why are they not being patriots defending the memory of our patriot heroes?
They don’t want their companies broken up by monopoly.
In his book "On Tyranny," Timothy D. Snyder reminds us that the Holocaust would have been impossible without the complicity of businesses. Their focus was on money & power: taking Jewish businesses for pennies on the dollar or outright appropriation; using Jewish slave labor; stealing Jewish bank accounts; stealing their valuable art.
The monied class cares not about the rights of others. They want to sit at the table of power, even when it means ignoring the slaughter of their fellow citizens. As long as they & their own families prosper, nothing else matters. Not justice. Not decency. Not humanity.