Trump's Big Week: Middle East Trip, China Deal, Pharma EO, "Big, Beautiful Bill" with Ben Shapiro
发布时间 2025-05-17 05:04:48 来源
All right everybody today on the All In Podcast we're joined by our friend Ben Shapiro and we have a full Docket including Trump's trip to the Middle East the executive order on Farmer benefits we talk a little bit about mock meat being banned in Montana and Friedberg is really upset. He drops at this box. Yeah on the tax bill being supported by Republicans all that and more on the number one podcast in the world not only in podcast stick with us.
好的，大家好，今天在“All In”播客中，我们的朋友本·夏皮罗加入我们，讨论丰富的话题，包括特朗普的中东之行、关于农民福利的行政命令、蒙大拿州禁止人造肉的问题，还有弗里德伯格对税收法案感到非常不满，他在节目中对此大发雷霆。而这个法案得到了共和党的支持。这些以及更多精彩内容都将在这个全球第一的播客中呈现，请大家继续收听。
What they got to try to figure out do daily mail stories actually end Because I've scrolled up like seven times. No, no, no, no, they never end those guys are like the methamphetamine of clicks It's like click crack. Yeah, they're like one more paragraph every time I see a daily mail article I'm like, okay Do I have 15 minutes here because I'm gonna put on one? I'm gonna look at the photos I'm gonna go to the right rail. I'm gonna click on the right rail. See that's disgracey odd.
他们要试着搞清楚《每日邮报》的故事到底有没有结束，因为我都翻了七次了。实际上，它们好像永远都没有结束。那些家伙就像点击量的毒品，就像点击版的海洛因。他们总是不断地加上一个新的段落。每次我看到《每日邮报》的文章，我都想，“我有 15 分钟吗？因为我要来次全方位浏览。”我要看看照片，再去看看右边栏，还要点击右边栏。你看，这真让人上瘾。
Yeah, you go on the right rail You're a true degenerate. Oh, I love you right. Well, the day we feel the carousel for hours. Oh my god They call it the carousel my favorite daily mail story one time that Jared and Vanka Were over in our house and the paparazzi were following them around They like can you give us a tour of the area? So drove them outside for a hot second and the paparazzi immediately captured a picture of them on the back of our golf cart Because we're in Florida and me and my son in the front and the daily mail it was daily mail paparazzi and so the headline was Jared Ivanka unnamed driver and small boy.
好的，你走在正确的轨道上，你真是个无可救药的家伙。哦，我真的喜欢你。那天我们在旋转木马上玩了好几个小时。天啊，他们称之为旋转木马，这是我最喜欢的每日邮报故事。有一次，贾里德和伊万卡来我们家，狗仔队一直跟着他们。他们说，能带我们参观一下这个地方吗？于是开车带他们出去了一会儿，结果狗仔队立刻拍到他们坐在我们高尔夫球车后的照片。因为我们在佛罗里达，我和我儿子坐在前面，那是每日邮报的狗仔队，所以报道的标题是“贾里德、伊万卡、无名司机和小男孩”。
If you want to come to our next event. It's the all-in summit in Los Angeles Fourth year for all-in summit go to all-in.com slash events to apply hold on one second. Let me do the intro properly Then this is gonna be so good right now. You're gonna feel so uncomfortable. It's gonna be amazing Go ahead and be creative. So look Ben has a hard out in an hour and 40 minutes So we're gonna get the show started. However, Ben. I we need to take a pause Jason will explain what happened last week. He is gonna issue a formal apology if that formal apology is not good enough I will step in over to you Jason.
如果你想参加我们的下一个活动，那就是在洛杉矶举行的第四届"All-In"峰会。欲报名参加，请访问all-in.com/events。稍等一下，我先来正式介绍一下——这个介绍会非常精彩，让你感到不适，又觉得很棒。发挥创意吧。事情是这样的，Ben必须在一个小时四十分钟后离开，所以我们要开始节目。不过，Ben，我们需要暂停一下，由Jason来解释上周发生了什么。他会正式道歉，如果他的道歉不够充分，我会介入。下面交给你，Jason。
Okay We remember so all-in podcast including Shamaf Polly Hapatia and myself Jason Kallikannis would like to Formally and respectfully apologize to poker legend Phil Helmuth for our previous comments about his relationship the polywood actor Timothy Shalamay and the Los Angeles celebrity community more generally on a previous episode of this podcast a number of inaccurate potentially legally actionable statements were made by the host regarding Mr. Helmuth It was strongly implied on this program that Mr. Helmuth was not acquainted with Mr Shalamay and it was further suggested that he had arrest and man held up the Oscar nominated performer during a social event In Miami Florida.
好的，我们记得要为之前的播客节目向扑克传奇人物菲尔·赫尔穆斯（Phil Helmuth）正式并郑重地道歉。这期节目包括了沙马斯·波莉·哈帕蒂亚（Shamaf Polly Hapatia）和我本人杰森·卡里卡尼斯（Jason Kallikannis）。在之前播客的一集中，主持人针对赫尔穆斯先生的言论中包含了一些不准确且可能承担法律责任的陈述。节目中强烈暗示赫尔穆斯先生不认识演员蒂莫西·夏拉梅（Timothy Chalamet），并进一步暗示他在佛罗里达州迈阿密的一个社交活动中对这位奥斯卡提名演员进行了逮捕和劫持。这些说法是不正确的，我们为此表示道歉。
This was a flagrant misrepresentation of the facts for which we are sorry We here at all-in are committed to journalistic Responsibility and integrity and we hope to use this time to correct the record in fact As a noted bond vivant and publicly visible representative of the gaming community Mr. Helmuth is acquainted with many celebrities from the world's film television athletics business modeling finance and beyond The list of sorrub celebrity friends It's far too vast to list here in its entirety But we have prepared this section.
这完全是对事实的公然歪曲，我们对此深表歉意。我们在All-in团队致力于保持新闻责任和诚信，希望利用这段时间来纠正记录。事实上，作为一位知名的社交名流和电子游戏界的公众代表，赫尔穆特先生结识了来自电影、电视、体育、商业、模特、金融等领域的许多名人。名人朋友的名单实在太长，无法在这里全部列出，但我们已准备了这个部分。
We feel demonstrates how his overwhelming popularity among This demographic Matt Damon Steve Martin Charles Barkley Bill Quentin Chloe Kardashian Mr. Beast the guy from Billions Tiger Woods Marlowe has Drake And of course Jay Z once again we here at all-in regret the era We should publicly apologize to Mr. Helmuth and recommit ourselves to truth and accuracy in reporting Thank you Jason that was great.
我们认为，这表明他在这个人群中有着压倒性的受欢迎程度，比如马特·达蒙、史蒂夫·马丁、查尔斯·巴克利、比尔、昆汀、科勒·卡戴珊、Mr. Beast、《亿万》里的那位、老虎伍兹、马洛、德雷克，当然还有杰·Z。我们在此，再次表示遗憾。我们应该公开向赫尔穆斯先生道歉，并重新承诺在报道中做到真实和准确。谢谢你，杰森，那很棒。
I would just like to add a couple of things Phil is my best friend Has been for a very long time I love him He does have a lot of Friends and he opens his role a dex To us And so to the extent that Phil was short because he was a little bit hurt last week Because we were ribbing him we rib him a lot we make jokes in the group chat a lot But it's because we enjoy it he enjoys it But I think the way that we said it really hurt his feelings. So Philly I love you.
我想补充几点。菲尔是我最好的朋友，这关系已经持续了很长时间。我爱他。他有很多朋友，他总是很乐意向我们敞开他的"角色指数"。上周菲尔有点不开心，因为他有点受伤，因为我们总是在群聊里开他玩笑。我们这样做是因为我们都喜欢这种互动，包括他。但我觉得我们说话的方式真的伤了他的感情。所以，菲尔，我爱你。
We love you. We love you Phil We're sorry sorry Specifically I'm sorry because to be honest I probably started the whole thing and got everybody Yeah, we just ran half of it. Oh, sorry. We love you love you I called you a panda eating eating bamboo and I did not mean to say that you put your meat hooks Into Timothy Shalmet And I didn't mean to say that you took credit for and you know, didn't have a major contribution to the All-in-Pockets obviously But honestly you're the best you you've been really instrumental in a lot of these Important relationships that have joined our group.
我们爱你，我们爱你，Phil。我们真的很抱歉，尤其是我，因为老实说，可能是我引发了这一切，并把大家都卷进来了。哦，对不起，我们只是参与了一部分。哦，抱歉。我们爱你，爱你。我把你称作吃竹子的熊猫，但我无意中这样说了。我不是想说你抢了提莫西·柴勒梅德的功劳，也不是说你在某些事情上没有作出重大贡献。其实，你是最棒的。你在我们团队中建立的重要关系里，真的起到了至关重要的作用。
So thank you and we love you and let's keep going Yes, absolutely and we wish you well in the world series of poker go get him Hope you hit go. get him rose grade is 17 18 19 who knows He's not playing in the main is not playing the main because the W so P are ridiculous and now they set up these tournaments is stupid We will do a better version by the way of the W SOP to analysis We will be doing an event during the f1 In Las Vegas where we will be launching our poker tournaments So for those of you who would like to have some quality high class poker tournaments and some ridiculous cash games Oh Let us know late November guys book it make sure you got five six days where you can pretend you have COVID The last race what about you Ben?
所以感谢你，我们爱你，让我们继续前进。是的，绝对的，希望你在世界扑克大赛中一切顺利，加油，希望你能取得好成绩。玫瑰的等级是17、18、19，谁知道呢。他没有参加主赛事，因为WSOP的安排很荒谬，他们现在的赛事设置很蠢。顺便说一下，我们会做一个比WSOP更好的版本分析。我们将在拉斯维加斯F1比赛期间举办一个活动，届时推出我们自己的扑克比赛。所以如果你想参加一些高质量、一流的扑克比赛或者一些刺激的现金游戏，请让我们知道。注意，晚十一月的时候安排好时间，确保你有五到六天时间可以假装自己得了新冠。关于最后一场比赛，你呢，Ben？
Do you like to gamble? You're playing the horses the ponies I can't say that I've been big on the gambling it hasn't worked out well for me I have I have an addiction so I wouldn't want that to get out of control, you know all right. Well, we will Absolutely take advantage of your addiction. Oh Ben have you ever have you ever rolled the dice? Have you ever rolled dice? No? I've never rolled dice. No, okay, so this is perfect. We have to take okay Ben.
你喜欢赌博吗？你在玩赛马，对吗？我不能说我对赌博很热衷，因为它对我来说效果不太好。我有一个瘾，所以我不想让它失控，你知道的。不过，我们绝对会利用你的这个瘾。哦，Ben，你有没有掷过骰子？你掷过吗？没有，我从来没有掷过骰子。好吧，那这就完美了，我们得抓紧机会，好吗，Ben。
We're you're coming to Our all-in-event in Vegas, and I'll tell you why You'll we'll do something on stage, but more importantly for me I'm done more importantly for me There is an incredible rule in crafts where when you have a virgin shooter somebody's never touched the dice Absolutely, I don't know what it is But you are the people that go off where you can make millions yes, I have seen this 20 times in my gambling life in Las Vegas.
我们非常期待你参加在拉斯维加斯举办的全员活动，让我来告诉你原因。我们会在舞台上一起做一些事情，但对我来说，更重要的是，我已经结束了一段让我更加看重的旅程。在赌博中有一个非常了不起的规律，当一个从未掷过骰子的初学者上场时，那些人绝对可以凭借好运赚得上百万。我在拉斯维加斯的赌博生涯中见过20次这样的情况。
I remember I took my father in life took my father in law and my kids Well, my wife was pregnant she was get out of the house My father in law took our three older kids to Vegas. He had never shot dice before he touched the dice broke the casino It is the most fun game Ben. I'm telling you so you need to come November 22nd. We'll make the arrangements We'll make sure you get out there. You'll have a really great time. You'll do something with us on stage and and Ben is gonna touch those little dice And he's gonna break the win And I'm going to be there to finance it So you are gonna get such great parenting and husband and vice from Shema Ben all of this dedication you have to your family.
我记得当时我和父亲、岳父、孩子们一起去了拉斯维加斯。我妻子当时怀孕，她需要呆在家里。我岳父带着我们三个大一点的孩子去拉斯维加斯，他以前从未掷过骰子。结果他一掷骰子就赢了赌场。这是最有趣的游戏，Ben，我告诉你，你一定要在11月22日来。我们会做好安排，确保你能来，保证你会玩得非常开心。你会上台和我们一起做点什么，而Ben，你会去掷那些小骰子，你会赢得很棒的奖励。我会在旁边提供资金支持。这样一来，你会从Shema Ben那里得到很好的为人父母、做丈夫以及生活上的建议，所有这些都是对你家庭的全心付出。
We're gonna teach you a new approach Just just go off to Vegas and yeah, take your kids and your father in law and leave your pregnant wife at home She's just got work to do all right everybody welcome back to the oil and podcast really excited to have Ben Shapiro back on the program Yeah, I'll listen to the Ben Shapiro show, you know about daily wire and Ben you've been covering this trump middle east trip all week
我们想要教你一种新的方式：去趟拉斯维加斯吧，把孩子和岳父都带上，至于怀孕的妻子就留在家里，她还有工作要忙。好了，大家欢迎回来收听我们的播客节目，非常高兴Ben Shapiro再次做客节目。是的，我会听Ben Shapiro的节目，你们都知道《每日电报》和Ben最近这一周都在报道特朗普的中东之行。
So let's get into that as our first topic here as everybody knows trump was in the middle east He secured a huge investment from the Saudis 600 billion dollars 140 billion for a defense partnership and MBS Said he wants to make it a trillion A bunch of high-profile CEOs joined trump including friends of the show Elon and of course Dara from uber and he jassy from amazon who else was there Alex carp jensen tons of people including Our fourth bestie here diva sex was there.
我们来讨论一下这个作为我们的第一个话题。大家都知道，特朗普最近访问了中东，他从沙特那边获得了一笔巨额投资：6000亿美元，其中1400亿美元用作防务合作。沙特王储穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼（MBS）表示，他希望最终将这个数字提高到1万亿美元。许多知名企业的CEO都和特朗普一起参加了这次活动，包括我们节目的朋友伊隆·马斯克，还有Uber的达拉·科斯罗萨西和亚马逊的安迪·贾西。现场还有谁呢？亚历克斯·卡普、詹森等很多人，以及我们节目的第四位好友Diva Sex也在场。
He also closed a 200 billion dollar deal with Qatar or gutter Which includes 96 billion from Boeing to send 160 planes there with an option of 50 more And he removed sanctions against Syria middle controversial. We'll get into that To quote give them a chance at greatness he gave a speech at a Saudi U.S. investment forum in re-od Where he powerfully Outland his vision for a new middle east basically rejecting 20 years of American interventions and forever wars
他还与卡塔尔达成了一项价值2000亿美元的协议或合作，其中包括波音公司提供160架飞机，总价960亿美元，并附带50架的购买选择。此外，他还取消了对叙利亚的制裁，尽管这在中东是一个有争议的举动。为了“给他们一个获得荣耀的机会”，他在利雅得的一个沙特阿美投资论坛上发表了一个强有力的演讲，阐述了他对新中东的愿景，基本上拒绝了美国20年的干预和无休止的战争。
And he gave big credit to a quote new generation of leaders including MBS For building better societies Ben what do you think here what we should take on the trip is this The best trump of all the versions of trump this did seem to me to be the best version seem to really comfortable with This category of leader In this region in particular where we go for sure.
他高度赞扬了一批所谓的新一代领导人，包括MBS（穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼），认为他们在建设更美好的社会方面做出了杰出贡献。Ben，你怎么看？我们对此行的收获应该是什么？这是所有版本中最好的特朗普吗？在我看来，这确实是特朗普表现最好的一面，尤其是在这一地区，他似乎对这一类领导人感到很自在。
I mean there's no question about that right me. He likes MBS He obviously likes the the emerald Qatar. He likes the the folks in in UAE We've known that for a while and and he's he's really signaling a a shift away from the Obama Biden policy Tour a lot of these places where Biden like to say the word democracy and then immediately divide off from Saudi Arabia on the basis of that and Chide MBS and all this kind of stuff and then try to cut a deal with Iran for example at the same exact time
他显然很喜欢沙特王储穆罕默德（MBS），也很喜欢卡塔尔和阿联酋的人。这一点毫无疑问。我们早就知道，他在这些地方的立场明显不同于奥巴马和拜登的政策。拜登一方面以“民主”为旗帜，立刻与沙特阿拉伯分道扬镳，批评穆罕默德等，同时又努力想与伊朗达成协议。
Which of course pisses off the Saudis now trump is going over there and he's in deal-making mode And you can see he's in deal-making mode and his entire sort of approach to the Middle East is What he said in the speech commerce above chaos right? Let's do some business here And he understands that there are a lot of people in ksa Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and and also in Qatar UAE as well who are really looking to do business And I think there are a bunch of strategic aspects of this that are really good One of them obviously is driving these places away from China and the more business ties you have with places like Saudi Arabia or Bahrain UAE Qatar the further away they're going to get from China
当然，这让沙特人感到不满，因为特朗普现在去那里，而他正处于谈判状态。你可以看到他在谈判状态中，他对中东的整体态度就是他在演讲中所说的“商业高于混乱”，对吧？让我们在这里做些生意。他明白，沙特阿拉伯王国以及卡塔尔和阿联酋都有很多人非常希望做生意。我认为，这其中有许多战略方面的好处，其中之一显然是将这些地方从中国的影响下拉开。与像沙特阿拉伯、巴林、阿联酋、卡塔尔这样地方的商业联系越多，他们就会离中国越远。
I think you do have to be careful with Qatar in particular Which has some divided priorities shall we say when it comes to terrorism? Obviously Qatar that the case they will make to sort of steal man What what Qatar says about itself is that they have to have good relations with terrorists so that the West can talk with the terrorists on occasion To to not steal man the case they have two billion dollars to Hamas over the course of the last several years And have funded the American university systems that tune a six point three billion dollars for a country That has a grand total of two point six million citizens. It's smaller than the state of Connecticut in terms of its citizenship
我认为，对于卡塔尔需要特别小心，因为它在涉及恐怖主义时有着某些分歧的优先事项。显然，卡塔尔会为自己做出这样的辩护：他们需要与恐怖分子保持良好关系，以便西方国家能在必要时与恐怖分子对话。不过，从另一面来看，过去几年里，卡塔尔向哈马斯提供了20亿美元，并且资助了总额63亿美元的美国大学体系。而卡塔尔总人口只有260万，比美国的康涅狄格州的人口还少。
It's been something like two-thirds what China spends on lobbying which seems you know pretty weird But with that said the idea of bringing Dollars into the United States combining on things like AI to it David tax has been working on over there Like that stuff is all really really good the the warning that I'd issue to present in Trump is just make sure that That you have strings attached to meaning clearly there are strings attached from the other side when you're talking about Qatar So
这大约相当于中国用于游说的三分之二，这看起来有点奇怪。但话虽如此，将资金引入美国，并在人工智能等方面进行合作，正如David在那边一直在做的那些事情，都是非常好的。但是我要给特朗普总统的警告是，要确保对这些资金有附加条件，因为当你谈论卡塔尔时，显然对方也是有附加条件的。
Also the United States should have strings attached so you mentioned Syria there if you're talking about You know getting rid of the sanctions on Syria. There's an argument to be made obviously Erdogan and in Turkey would love that because basically The the leader of Syria now Alljolani he changed his name. He's kind of like the prince of terrorists right he like he's the artist formerly known as alljolani now He's all Shira I thank him to change his name to he was al-Qaeda then he was ISIS then he's HDS He basically works for the Turks and so obviously the Turks would love for alljolani to have sanctions removed That's fine. I mean, I think there's a case to be made for it But you have to make sure that he actually delivers on the other end of that which would be getting rid of the terrorists in his country
美国若要取消对叙利亚的制裁，应该附加一些条件。你提到叙利亚这个话题时，可以讨论这一点。显然，土耳其总统埃尔多安会非常乐意看到制裁解除，因为叙利亚现任领导人贾布哈特改变了名字。他就像恐怖分子的头领，之前以贾布哈特这个名字为人所知，现在改名为阿尔什拉。他曾经是基地组织、ISIS 以及HTS的一员，基本上为土耳其人工作。因此，土耳其人自然希望贾布哈特的制裁被撤销。这没有问题，我认为这是可以讨论的，但前提是需要确保他能兑现承诺，清除国内的恐怖分子。
What do you think bent about Qatar Qatar For people it's it's the same word just sent differently here in the west and in their country um Do you think we should have deep ties to them and is the steel man argument that their relationship with Hamas and the Muslim brotherhood Acceptable to you Ben Shapiro or do you think we should hold the line with them and say hey You got to cut off these relationships if you want to have a relationship with the United States I mean it seems to me that we have a lot more leverage in in the latter situation and and Qatar has obviously Paying some eight billion dollars to have this airbase on its own territory But then puts restrictions on how the United States can use that sort of airbase that airbase was previously located in Saudi
您对卡塔尔有什么看法？在西方和他们的国家，人们对这个词的发音是不同的。您认为我们应该与卡塔尔保持深厚的关系吗？对于卡塔尔与哈马斯和穆斯林兄弟会的关系，是否有合理的需要？或者您是否认为我们应该对他们强硬一点，告诉他们，如果想与美国建立关系，就必须切断这些联系？在我看来，我们在后一种情况下有更多的筹码。而卡塔尔显然为在其领土上的空军基地支付了大约80亿美元，但对美国如何使用这个空军基地设置了限制，这个空军基地以前位于沙特阿拉伯。
And so you know, it's my perspective that after October 7th for example The United States under Joe Biden should have gone to Qatar which which obviously has a deep relationship with Hamas as proven by the release of that American hostage While President Trump was in the Middle East which was done at the behest of Qatar That that probably the United States should have gone to Qatar and said listen the airbase goes away Unless all the hostages come out and the Hamas leadership goes into exile and you avoid the entire war So there is leverage that can be exerted I'm not sure that the leverage is being properly exerted on Qatar
在我看来，比如在10月7日之后，美国总统拜登应该前往卡塔尔。卡塔尔显然与哈马斯关系密切，这一点通过释放美国人质的事件得到了证明。而当特朗普总统在中东时，这件事是在卡塔尔的请求下完成的。美国或许应该对卡塔尔说，如果所有人质没有获释，哈马斯的领导层没有被放逐，美军在卡塔尔的空军基地就会被撤销。这样可以避免整个战争，因此这是可以施加的压力。我不确定美国是否正确地在卡塔尔身上施加了这种压力。
Let's put this way I'm much more enthusiastic about the ties that President Trump is fostering with Saudi and UAE Then I am the ties that he's fostering with Qatar. I mean back in 2017 There's nearly a war between Saudi and UAE and Qatar I mean, that's how mad the relations were back in 2017 and President Trump was on the Saudi UAE side of that So moving Yeah, let's just say trust but verify I think would be a much better strategy than just trust Here's some stuff. We'll hope that you you give us back on back end
可以这样说，我对特朗普总统与沙特和阿联酋建立的关系更感兴趣，而不是他与卡塔尔的关系。2017年时，沙特、阿联酋和卡塔尔之间几乎爆发了一场战争，当时的关系非常紧张，而特朗普总统是站在沙特和阿联酋那一边的。继续向前看，我认为“信任但要验证”会是一种比单纯信任更好的策略。希望您在之后能给予我们一些回报。
Shamaat, let's go to the business side here. Trump making a lot of deals. Little bit of a bruhaha over a four hundred million dollar playing given to Trump. Not sure how relevant that is or if he's even accepted it personally, and I'm sure you've got some thoughts on that. But what did we see there? I saw Send Deep, our friend from Grok. One of your investments was there. We're seeing a level of investment in collaboration between Saudi, UAE, and America and the West that, hey, let's face it, we haven't ever seen. They do seem to be leaning more towards, I wouldn't say democracy, but a lot of social reforms and a lot of women. What was pointed out by David Sacks in the business community there? I've made a couple trips there. It seems to have changed on a human rights basis more in the last three or four years than in the last, I guess, 20.
沙马特，我们来说说商业方面的事情。特朗普正在达成许多交易。有一点小争议是关于一项价值四亿美元的协议给予特朗普。不确定这有多大相关性，或者他是否亲自接受了，我相信你对此有一些看法。但我们看到了什么？我看到我们的朋友Send Deep来自Grok，那是你的一个投资项目。我们正在见证沙特、阿联酋与美国及西方国家之间的投资与合作达到了前所未有的水平。坦率地说，这是我们从未见过的。他们似乎在向更多的社会改革倾斜，其中包括很多关于女性的改革。我记得David Sacks在那里的商业社区中指出了这些。我曾去过那里几次，似乎在过去三四年里，在人权方面的变化比过去大约20年里更大。
So what's your take generally on this position? Ben has of, hey, better they be doing business with us and let's build and foster these relationships as opposed to have them fall into the arms of Russia, North Korea, or China. Let's just go do a little cleanup on a couple of these things and I'll give you my take. Sure, first thing is we announced almost a two billion dollar deal, 1.7, I think, but it was what it was. For a rock did it deal, yeah, for AI inference. We're starting to build some enormous data centers in Saudi. I'll get to why Saudi is a critical place to do that. But they've been exceptional partners. We are the only inference company in the world with the next portal license from the United States to do this. So yeah, it was great. That's why Sonny was there, and Jonathan Ross, our founder and CEO, so that was really big for us. This has been a company that Jonathan and I got off the ground 10 years ago. It's been a long, long slog.
你对这个立场总体怎么看？Ben 的观点是: “嘿，还是让他们与我们做生意吧，我们可以建立和培育这些关系，而不是让他们投向俄罗斯、朝鲜或中国。” 我们只需对其中的一些事情稍作清理，我会给你我的看法。首先，我们宣布了一项接近 20 亿美元的交易，准确来说是 17 亿美元。这是关于在沙特阿拉伯建立 AI 推理的数据中心的交易。我会讲到为什么沙特是建立这些设施的重要地方。但他们一直是出色的合作伙伴。我们是全球唯一拥有美国颁发的推理技术许可证的公司。所以这很棒。这也是为什么 Sonny 和我们创始人兼 CEO Jonathan Ross 会在场，这对我们来说意义重大。这家公司是我和 Jonathan 在 10 年前创立的，这一路走来非常艰辛。
So yeah, there's a lot of commercial activity that happened there. Our friend Brian Yuko, who was just announced as the head of the commercial plane development group of Boeing, who's making all the next generation planes, was there. Kelly or broke, they announced the 160 billion dollar deal for Boeing's and a bunch of other stuff. Elon announced that Saudi allows Starlink now from maritime and aircraft usage. He also announced robotaxis are coming to Saudi. So the business community, I think, was quite central to this trip, which is cool.
所以，是的，那边发生了很多商业活动。我们的朋友布莱恩·尤科刚被宣布为波音公司商用飞机开发集团的负责人，他负责制造所有下一代飞机，他也在那里。凯利·奥布罗克宣布了波音公司1600亿美元的交易和其他一些事情。埃隆也宣布，沙特现在允许在海事和飞机上使用Starlink。他还宣布无人出租车即将在沙特推出。所以我认为商业界在这次旅行中起到了相当重要的作用，这很酷。
With respect to the plane, just to do some cleanup, this is a gift that is being handled between the Department of Defense and the Department of Defense of Qatar. If and when that plane does get transferred over, it will then be scanned and retrofitted to military grade spec that then can be used by the then sitting president of the United States. And while people want to be up in arms, just to be clear, this has happened, and Qatar specifically has done this multiple other occasions. You may dispute the countries, you may not like the fact that it's happened, but they've given a plane as a gift to the leader of Iraq, to the then sitting leader of Turkey, to the then sitting leader, I believe, of Yemen. So there are customs, I guess. And again, who am I to judge these customs? But that's to us may seem excessive or untoward or maybe an attempt to graft, but to them is just that. Just a sign of deep respect or a relationship building.
关于这架飞机，仅作一些说明，这是美国国防部与卡塔尔国防部之间处理的一份礼物。如果这架飞机被移交，它将被扫描并改装成符合军事规格，以便未来美国总统使用。尽管有人对此感到不满，但需要明确的是，这种事情发生过，而卡塔尔也曾多次这样做。你可以质疑这些国家或者不喜欢这种情况，但他们曾把飞机作为礼物赠与伊拉克领导人、当时的土耳其领导人以及据我所知当时的也门领导人。所以，这是一种习俗吧。再说一次，我无意评判这些习俗。对我们来说，这可能显得过分、不合适或似乎是企图行贿，但对他们而言，只是一种深度尊重或建立关系的象征。
I think that we should not overjudge this thing and let the do-do do their job, and it's a gift to the United States of America. Move on. I don't think it's a particularly big deal. What is the big deal here is what Trump did that I think is historic. I think the most important thing to recognize is that we, America, has been a global hegemon since World War Two. But I think that what we did was we took our eye off the ball, and over the last 20 years, and particularly the last 17, we have seen China slowly erode our global influence through an initiative that they frankly were very open and honest about and branded called Belt and Road.
我认为我们不应该过度评判这件事，让有关部门做好他们的工作，这对美国来说是一种馈赠。继续前进。我并不认为这件事特别重要。重要的是特朗普所做的事情，我认为那是历史性的。最重要的是认识到自第二次世界大战以来，美国一直是全球霸主。但我认为我们没有集中注意力，在过去的20年，尤其是过去的17年里，我们看到中国通过一个非常公开和坦诚的计划——"一带一路"倡议，逐渐削弱了我们的全球影响力。
In Belt and Road 1.0, what China did was use the balance sheet of China to invest incredibly aggressively and thoughtfully in all these critical geographies of the world: Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Specifically in the Middle East and specifically between Saudi and Qatar, China, I think, has invested about 200 billion dollars over the last 15 years. What does that do? It allows them to exert influence and economic cooperation, hard power, and soft power, right?
在“一带一路”1.0阶段，中国通过利用自身财务优势，对世界上一些重要地区进行积极而有策略的投资，这些地区包括东南亚、中东和非洲。特别是在中东，尤其是沙特和卡塔尔之间，中国在过去15年里大约投资了2000亿美元。这种做法带来了什么好处呢？它使中国能够施加影响力，促进经济合作，同时展示硬实力和软实力。
In one week, the sitting president of the United States announced two trillion dollars of investment from those countries into the United States. What does that effectively do? I think what that effectively does is say that the Middle East is turning a page, that they are beyond these regional conflicts, that they want to thrive as a society and that they are 100 percent aligned with the United States. How do you know that? Because I don't think that there's another two trillion dollars of deals to be done with any other country other than America. That's number one. And then number two, the reciprocation of how American companies are investing in that region is to the tune of several hundred billion dollars.
在一周内，美国现任总统宣布这些国家向美国投资了两万亿美元。这实际上意味着什么呢？我认为，这表明中东正在翻开新的一页，他们超越了地区冲突，希望作为一个社会蓬勃发展，并且与美国完全一致。你怎么知道的呢？因为我不认为还有哪个国家能与美国达成价值两万亿美元的交易。这是第一点。其次，作为回应，美国企业在该地区的投资也达到了数千亿美元。
Now, why is that region critical? It's critical for two things. The first is that when you draw a thousand mile radius around Saudi Arabia you touch four billion human beings—four. Half the global population is within a thousand mile radius of Saudi. And so if you can establish cooperation and strategic alignment with that area it is an incredibly important thing to do. The Saudi coastline as an example is thousands and thousands of miles. These are all these huge strategic things that we've known in the context of other conflicts and other geopolitical things that we've done for decades.
现在，为什么这个区域如此关键呢？关键有两个方面。首先，如果你以沙特阿拉伯为中心画一个一千英里的半径，会覆盖到四十亿人——也就是全球一半的人口都在这个范围内。因此，如果你能在这个区域内实现合作和战略对齐，那将是非常重要的。以沙特的海岸线为例，它长达数千英里。这些都是极具战略意义的因素，几十年来在其他冲突和地缘政治事务中我们都已经很熟悉了。
But what Trump basically did was clean the slate he wiped the floor with all this neo-con establishment nonsense. That's what his speech did, which we can talk about in a second. But he created and forged an economic alliance that I think is going to be very difficult for any other country to undo. That is what I saw: two trillion dollars. That is an enormous bet for a country to make on it with another country; and I think the fact that he did that with Saudi and Qatar and UAE speaks a lot to a really important strategy.
但特朗普基本上做的是清理旧账，他彻底扫除了所有新保守派的陈词滥调。这就是他的演讲所做到的，我们稍后可以详细讨论这一点。但他创造并建立了一个经济联盟，我认为其他国家很难去打破。我看到的是两万亿美元的合作。这对一个国家来说，是在另一个国家身上下的巨大的赌注；而且我认为，特朗普能与沙特、卡塔尔和阿联酋达成这样的合作，说明了一个非常重要的策略。
Freeburg, your thoughts on this trip and the growing and deepening relationship between UAE, Saudi, and the United States, and apparently Qatar as well? I think the biggest moment was the speech that Trump gave; it underscored, I think, a really important narrative shift for me. This was a powerful embrace of Saudi, Qatar, of their choices, their way of life, their way of being. Basically showing I would say respect to those peoples without judgment, which I think is quite different from leadership of the past.
Freeburg，你对这次旅行和阿联酋、沙特、美国之间日益加深的关系有什么看法？显然现在卡塔尔也参与其中？我认为最重要的时刻是特朗普的演讲；这让我意识到了一个非常重要的叙事转变。这次演讲强有力地拥抱了沙特、卡塔尔，尊重他们的选择、生活方式、以及生存之道。我认为这是对这些民族的表现出尊重，而不带有评判，这与过去的领导方式有很大不同。
I'll just highlight the mainstream media narrative is, oh my gosh, Trump goes to Russia, Trump goes to China, he goes to North Korea, he goes to Saudi, he embraces dictators. For the narrative has been that these individuals in leadership positions in these countries are dictators, and Trump embraces dictators. He loves Xi, he loves Putin, he loves Kim Jong-un, he loves MBS. That's a bad thing because the liberal view, and I would say largely the American view in the past, has been that there's right and there's wrong.
我就来强调一下主流媒体的说法：他们总是惊呼，天哪，特朗普去俄罗斯，去中国，还去北朝鲜和沙特阿拉伯，他拥抱这些国家的独裁者。媒体的叙述是，这些国家的领导者是独裁者，而特朗普则拥抱这些独裁者。他喜欢习近平、喜欢普京、喜欢金正恩、喜欢穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼（MBS）。这被看作是不好的，因为自由主义的观点，也是过去很大程度上美国的观点，是觉得有对与错之分。
There's our way of governing, and then there's the other way of governing; and the other way of governing is always wrong, that our form of American democracy is the only model that is right and all the others have to be wrong. And fundamentally that's a colonial mindset is what he's highlighting in the speech. He's saying that the point of view that all others are wrong means that they should come around to our point of view, our model of democracy, our model of governing.
我们有我们自己的管理方式，而其他的管理方式总是错的。我们的美国民主制度是唯一正确的模式，其他所有制度都是错误的。从根本上来说，这是一个殖民心态。他在演讲中强调，这种认为“其他都是错的”的观点意味着他们应该接受我们的观点，我们的民主模式和管理方式。
In the speech, he basically underscored that that's not really the case anymore. We are no longer going to be colonizers where we are going to enforce our view of government on the rest of the world and say this is the only good path. But there are other paths, and we can respect them. We can work together so long as we aren't harming one another so long as terrorism goes away, which he underscored in his speech has gone away.
在演讲中，他主要强调情况已不再是这样了。我们不再是殖民者，不会再向世界强加我们的政府观点，并宣称这才是唯一正确的道路。事实上，还有其他的道路可走，我们应该尊重这些选择。只要我们不互相伤害，只要恐怖主义已经消失，我们就可以合作。而他在演讲中特别提到，恐怖主义已经消失。
And by the way, I'm not trying to highlight or kind of prop Trump up for the speech itself. But I do think that this underscores a shift in the political viewpoint that has now come to power in America—that we are no longer going to have this kind of moral or socio-political framework that says it's our way or the highway, but we are now going to go to folks like Xi, like North Korea, like China and say we can respect your way of living, we can respect your way of governing, and we can have partnership and continue to build a world together without saying that if you don't follow our path, we're never going to be true partners.
顺便说一下，我并不是想为特朗普的演讲本身进行宣传或支持。但我确实认为，这反映了美国政治观点的一个转变——我们不再采用那种“要么按我们的方式来，要么就别来”的道德或社会政治框架。相反，我们现在会对像习近平、朝鲜、中国等国家表示，我们可以尊重你们的生活方式和治理方式，我们可以建立伙伴关系，并继续共同建设一个世界，而不是说如果你们不遵循我们的道路，我们就永远不会成为真正的伙伴。
So for me, the biggest thing that came out of this whole visit was that shift in narrative that I think really is different than before. what we've seen in the past and it counters a lot of how The mainstream media has kind of you know, framed his quote embrace of you know, different ways of governance And this was obviously a Republican position as well You know, just we're going to have a hard line on human rights and democracy and in fact The entire Republican position in terms of en globalist Clinton too Was hey, let's embrace China and we will lean them towards democracy that obviously didn't happen They did build a vibrant economy and took 400 500 million people out of poverty into a middle class
对我来说，这次访问最大的收获是叙事的转变，我认为这与以往确实不同。过去我们所见以及主流媒体所框定的，其实在某种程度上扭曲了他的看法，尤其是对各种治理方式的接受。这显然是共和党的一种立场，即对人权和民主采取强硬态度。实际上，整个共和党的立场，包括全球主义的克林顿时期也是这样的：让我们接受中国，然后推动他们走向民主。但显然这没有发生。他们确实建立了一个充满活力的经济体，并成功将四五亿人从贫困中提升到中产阶级。
But here we're seeing something different You know, I've spent a lot of time in the region maybe four or five trips in the last couple years Less couple times I was there Women doing business dancing music and now there's alcohol in the kingdom in some select locations There's a casino coming to ua e we're actually seeing maybe this strategy of less judgment more engagement Actually result in more modernization.
但是在这里我们看到了不同的情况。你知道，我在这个地区花了很多时间，过去几年可能去过四五次。最近几次去那里，我看到女性在从事商业活动，跳舞、音乐表演，现在在这个国家的一些特定地点已经有酒精饮料供应。阿联酋还将迎来一家赌场。我们实际上可能正在看到一种新策略：减少评判，多一些互动，结果是促进了更多的现代化发展。
So what's your take on this? I mean, I think that one one of the things that's happened in the media coverage of president Trump speech is this sort of false binary That isn't really what's going on So it was sort of posited as Neoconism versus isolationism and he mentioned both of those sorts of concepts in his speech But the reality is that I think we should be careful about how we define these terms What we really mean is that will Sony an interventionism has been completely rejected by the American people and my president Trump
你怎么看这件事？我的意思是，在媒体对特朗普总统演讲的报道中，存在一种虚假的对立，这并不是事情的真实情况。演讲被描述为新保守主义与孤立主义的对立，而他在演讲中也提到了这两种概念。但实际上，我认为我们应该谨慎定义这些术语。真正的意思是，威尔逊式的干预主义已经被美国人民和特朗普总统完全拒绝了。
President Trump is is saying that we are not going to go into these like to pretend that president Trump is being isolationist Is obviously not true. I mean, he's literally cutting trillion dollar deals with foreign countries and traveling there and making common bonds with them It's the opposite of isolationism in a lot of ways. It's a realism right he's a foreign policy realist who wants to make deals where he can make deals And he wants to make the best deal for America opposite of isolation if they're doing projects, you know in the Trump family and the plane This is the opposite of isolationism right exactly
特朗普总统表示，我们不会假装他是在采取孤立主义政策。这显然是不正确的。事实上，他正在与外国签署数万亿美元的交易，并亲自前往那些国家，与他们建立共同关系。在很多方面，这与孤立主义截然相反。这是一种现实主义。他是一位现实主义的外交政策制定者，愿意在可能的地方达成协议，并力求为美国达成最佳协议。如果特朗普家族正参与这些项目，这就恰恰不是孤立主义。
And so I think that all the debates that are currently happening within sort of the Republican ecosystem Are sort of which version of realism are we pursuing right there? There's a more hawkish version of realism That suggests that you ought to be more skeptical I mean, I think that's where I am of you know what you want from these countries in addition to the money And then there's a sort of more dovish realism that says you know Basically as long as the deals go forward maybe no strings attached and that's it That's an interesting debate and it depends on sort of what levels of trust you have in various countries And again, I think it differs country to country
我认为目前在共和党生态圈内进行的所有辩论，基本上是在探讨我们要追求哪种版本的现实主义。有一种更为鹰派的现实主义，它认为我们应该对其他国家保持更高的警惕，也就是说，除了金钱外你还希望从这些国家得到些什么。我大概更倾向于这种观点。然后，还有一种较为温和的现实主义，它基本上认为只要交易得以推进，或许就不需要附加条件，仅此而已。这是一个有趣的辩论，这取决于你对不同国家的信任程度。而且，我认为这在国与国之间是有所不同的。
How would you be like that? I want to Ben I want to build on what you're saying and just ask a question because I completely agree that that rejection has all of these downstream consequences The most interesting consequence for me, but I would just like your opinion on this is Trump goes there cuts all these deals announces all of it. There's just an incredible show of force frankly, right? Economic force and political alignment And then within one or two days Iran case
你怎么会这样？我想以您所说的为基础，提一个问题，因为我完全同意拒绝会产生一系列后续影响。对我来说，最有趣的后果是——但我也想知道您的看法——特朗普到那里后达成了一系列交易，并公开宣布所有成果。这真是一次展示力量的事件，坦白说，是一种经济力量和政治联盟的展示。然而，一两天内，伊朗方面就有了反应。
Now we don't know what the final contours of that deal are going to look like But that also has incredibly important implications to the safety and security not just of that region But for everybody I don't know what you thought about just how I mean again That there was a capitulation, you know, so I this is where again I remain pretty skeptical I think that that one of the issues that we have when it comes to negotiations with the Ron that this sort of phrase that's been used by Saudi Israel UAE with regard to Iran is the Ron has never won a war or lost a piece
我们目前还不清楚这项协议最后会是什么样子。但无论如何，这都对那个地区以及所有人的安全有着极为重要的影响。我不知道你是怎么想的，但在我看来，好像出现了某种让步。这是我保持怀疑态度的原因之一。我认为，在与伊朗的谈判中，我们面临的一大问题是，沙特、以色列和阿联酋常用一句话来形容伊朗：伊朗从未赢得过战争，也未曾失去和平。
So Iran is very good negotiation They're quite sophisticated and how these they approach these issues and when President Trump says they can't have a nuclear weapon That's all we need to know all the rest is details But actually when it comes to things like negotiating a nuclear deal the devil is the details because Is it going to be JCPOA part two which is basically you can enrich to civilian levels with a certain level of transparency But also you get money and the money can be used for terrorism or for ballistic missile development or rebuilding your air defenses
所以，伊朗在谈判方面非常擅长，他们在处理这些问题时相当老练。当特朗普总统表示他们不能拥有核武器时，这就是我们需要知道的全部，其他都是细节。但实际上，在谈判核协议这样的事情时，关键就在于细节。会不会成为类似于JCPOA第二部分的协议，即可以在一定透明度下进行民用水平的铀浓缩，但同时获得资金，而这些资金可能被用于资助恐怖活动、发展弹道导弹或重建空防系统？
And what what do those details actually look like and and you know obviously Qatar is very very close with the with the Islamic Republic of Iran and so they they've been negotiating again as sort of a representative of Iran in in those negotiations And so I'm going to hold off. Let's just say I'll be I'll be I'll be Until I agree with you they need to be in the penalty box for some number of years because they have not earned the trust of the world in that they that they can conform to these things and they're not going to do The various things once they get access to capital and funds or to you right So I think they have to earn their way out that that's right.
这些细节实际上是什么样的呢？你知道，卡塔尔与伊朗伊斯兰共和国非常接近，他们在这些谈判中一直在代表伊朗进行谈判。所以我暂时不做评价。只能说，我认为他们需要被限制一段时间，因为他们还没有赢得世界的信任，即他们能够遵守这些协议。而且，一旦他们获得资金或与你合作，他们不会做出种种不当行为。所以我认为，他们需要通过自己的努力来重获信任。
And I think that when when you look at Saudi Arabia I think that one of the things that that would would be interesting to see is President Trump said in his speech in Saudi Arabia that he would he would consider it an honor If they would join the Abraham Accords. I his signal accomplishment. Obviously during his first administration was the Abraham Accords the the notion that he again Continue to press forward that commerce matters more than sort of ideological conflict, right? That's why you a an Israel for example now have a pretty solid relationship that's with stood a lot of the the the stressors that have been created by October 7th and the and the ensuing war.
我认为，当你观察沙特阿拉伯时，会有一件有趣的事情。特朗普总统曾在沙特阿拉伯的演讲中表示，如果沙特能加入亚伯拉罕协议，他将感到十分荣幸。在他第一任期内，亚伯拉罕协议显然是一个显著成就。他强调商业比意识形态冲突更为重要。这就是为什么阿联酋和以色列现在有了一种较为坚固的关系，即使面临着十月七号后的战争等压力，这种关系依然保持稳固。
The question of whether Saudi actually does that is an interesting one because if you're looking for a new region in which commerce really does take the four Then obviously UAE Saudi they're they're very close. I mean that essentially UAE is a There's no I don't think there's no distinction. There's no distinction. There's no better place. I think in the world right now If you're trying to find it and net new place to put capital to work than the UAE and then Saudi.
这个问题很有趣，即沙特是否真的这样做，因为如果你在寻找一个新的地区来进行商业活动，那么阿联酋和沙特显然是非常接近的。我认为，在全世界范围内，没有比阿联酋和沙特更好的地方了，如果你想寻找一个全新的地方来投资的话。
Yeah, no, I mean I agree with that and I think that that you know obviously Integrating the region across religious boundaries would be a very very good thing And I think President Trump also has an interest in that so it'll be interesting to see how things develop from here I could it's it'll be again I remain skeptical of sort of the idea that that just commerce alone is going to usher in a new era.
是的，不，我的意思是我同意这一点，我认为显然在宗教界限间实现区域整合是非常好的事情。我觉得特朗普总统对此也很感兴趣，所以接下来看事情如何发展会很有趣。不过，我对单靠商业往来就能开启新时代的想法持怀疑态度。
I do think that that the United States typically when it's when it's brokering these deals does put its thumb on the scale in particular ways And those ways are not just putting money into KSA or taking money out of KSA, which again I'm I'm great with that. I think it's brilliant when President Trump is doing I know a number of businesses obviously They're working in Riyadh and doing wonderful work in Riyadh and and I'm I think what MBS has done transformatively to KSA is incredible if what you're looking for is a broader sort of regional calm that's going to last the course of time.
我确实认为，美国在进行这类交易时，通常会以特定的方式施加影响。这种影响不仅仅是向沙特阿拉伯投入资金或者从中撤资——对此我其实很支持。我认为特朗普总统的做法很出色。我知道有很多企业在利雅得开展业务，并且做得非常出色。我也认为沙特王储穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼在沙特阿拉伯所做的变革是非常了不起的，尤其是如果你希望看到更广泛的地区性稳定并且希望这种稳定能够长久持续下去的话。
What you don't need is an upsurgent Muslim brotherhood or a resurgent Iran or the rebuilding of terrorist groups that threaten both Saudi Arabia as well as as Israel and other Sunni allies in in the region and so you know I think that there are a couple of ways to see what President Trump is doing One of them is I hope that there's a step two, right, which is okay now Saudi Arabia We have a great relationship with you it would be really great if you did join in Abraham Accords.
你不需要的是一个崛起的穆斯林兄弟会，一个复苏的伊朗，或者是那些威胁沙特阿拉伯、以色列以及该地区其他逊尼派盟友的恐怖组织的重新建立。因此，我认为可以从几个角度来看待特朗普总统的行动。其中之一是希望有第二步计划，也就是说，现在我们和沙特阿拉伯的关系很好，如果你们能加入《亚伯拉罕协议》，那就再好不过了。
And now you have this very strong regional block that economically is more interdependent Which is of course what he pursued during his first administration or is he moving in the direction and this is also plausible Or he's basically saying listen everybody sort of on their own We're going to cut independent deals with each one of these nations in bilateral fashion with the United States.
现在，你拥有一个经济上更加相互依存的强大地区联盟，这当然是他在第一任期内追求的目标。或者，他也可能正在朝这个方向发展，另一种可能性是，他基本上在说：大家各自为政，我们将与这些国家中的每一个分别与美国进行双边交易。
And I think it's sort of remains to be seen which strategy President Trump is taking sort of bilateral approach to relations with each one of these countries individually or whether he's attempting to forge more of an interdependent regional economic block. Two questions for you Ben rapid fire Abraham Accords was brought up will the Saudi sign it will be a sign it and Trump sort of alluded hey, they're going to do it in their own time. What's holding it up in your mind and if they if and when they do sign it what impact we'd have on the region? The number two euro thoughts on this Qatar plain kerfluffle and the media sort of obsessing over it. Are they over indexing on it? Or not?
我认为现在还不清楚特朗普总统将采取哪种策略：是与每个国家单独建立双边关系，还是努力形成一个更具互依性的区域经济集团。对此我有两个问题：首先，关于亚伯拉罕协议，沙特会签署吗？阿联酋会签署吗？特朗普似乎暗示说，他们会在适当的时候这样做。你认为是什么原因阻碍了这一进程？如果他们签署了，这会对该地区产生什么影响？
第二个问题是关于卡塔尔飞机事件，媒体对此大加报道。你觉得他们对此是否过度关注了？
So as far as the Abraham Accords, yeah, again, I think that this is it is a shift in tone for President Trump. Abraham Accords was considered sort of his signal foreign policy accomplishment during term one and is my belief if he'd been reelected in 2020 by February 2021? I think Saudi would have been in the Abraham Accords. Obviously, one of the obstacles continues to be the war in Gaza what actually ends up emerging there. But one ironically one of the things that actually has undermined the kind of incentive for Saudi to join the Abraham Accords is Israel's complete devastation of all of the proxies of Iran.
关于《亚伯拉罕协议》，是的，我认为这标志着特朗普总统在外交政策上态度的转变。《亚伯拉罕协议》被视为他第一个任期内的主要外交政策成就。如果他在2020年再次当选，我相信到2021年2月，沙特阿拉伯可能会加入《亚伯拉罕协议》。显然，目前的一个障碍是加沙战争及其可能带来的结果。但具有讽刺意味的是，以色列对伊朗代理势力的彻底打击，实际上削弱了沙特加入《亚伯拉罕协议》的动力。
So one of the things that was driving Saudi and Israel together was the fact that there was this really giant threat in Iran. And so now it appears it could be at least plausibly read that one of the reasons why President Trump is selling $150 billion worth of military hardware 2ksa is provided defensive barrier against Iran while assuming that maybe Iran does end up going nuclear.
沙特和以色列走到一起的一个重要原因是伊朗构成的巨大威胁。而现在，似乎可以合理地认为，特朗普总统向沙特出售价值1500亿美元的军事装备的原因之一就是为沙特提供对伊朗的防御屏障，同时为可能伊朗最终掌握核武器做好准备。
So, you know, what happens with Iran does have serious ramifications for the possibility of an Abraham Accord including Saudi Arabia. It that seems like it's more distant than it was a couple of years ago. And it may take more time than I think that special envoy Steve Whitcough and the Trump administration would like it to be.
所以，你知道，与伊朗有关的情况确实对包括沙特阿拉伯在内的《亚伯拉罕协议》的可能性产生严重影响。似乎这个协议比几年前更加遥远，可能需要比特使史蒂夫·惠特考夫和特朗普政府希望的时间更长才能实现。
As far as the as far as the plane kerfluffle on my show I said that it looks skeasy. You know, and I will I will maintain that position. It doesn't have to be that it's illegal in order for it not to look particularly good. Because of course the other half of the deal is that once the plane is retrofitted and used by the president for a certain period of years, it then goes to the Trump presidential library, and that was one of the conditions of the gifting.
关于我节目中提到的飞机事件，我说它看起来很可疑。对此，我会坚持这个观点。事情不一定非得是非法的才能显得不太好看。因为其中一半的原因是这架飞机经过改装并由总统使用了一定年限后，会转交给特朗普总统图书馆，这是捐赠的条件之一。
Qatar is quite famous for putting a lot of money in a lot of various pockets ranging from the attorney, I mean the current attorney general of the United States Pambandi was a foreign registered agent for Qatar for a while, being paid by Qatar to do that sort of lobbying work. Qatar is pretty famous for putting its money in a variety of pockets.
卡塔尔以向各方投入大量资金而闻名。例如，美国现任总检察长Pambandi曾经是一名为卡塔尔工作的外国注册代理人，卡塔尔付钱给他进行这种游说活动。总之，卡塔尔非常出名的是将资金投入到各种不同的渠道。
Just just just to put a number on that Qatar in sovereign wealth fund the QIA, the investment authorities about a half trillion dollars of capital, about 50 billion of which is invested in US funds. And many of the folks in and around the circles that are associated with the White House obviously have QIA as an LP or have had funds that they're affiliated with that have QIAs and I'll and my point about this is that put aside whatever moral quums You know anybody has about this sort of stuff which again you can argue either way.
为了让这个数字更具体一些，卡塔尔的主权财富基金QIA（卡塔尔投资局）拥有大约半万亿美元的资本，其中约500亿美元投资于美国的基金。显然，在白宫周围的人士和圈子里，很多人都将QIA作为有限合伙人（LP），或者他们所关联的基金中也与QIA有关联。我的观点是，撇开任何可能存在的道德疑虑不谈，关于这些事情的讨论其实可以是双方面的。
The key to me is if you like president Trump's agenda the biggest obstacle to president Trump's agenda They're basically two obstacles one is the economy goes south right that's an obstacle to any president's agenda That's why it's really important what he's doing in the Middle East. It's why it's important what he's been doing backing off at the terra for in a lot of ways Is why do regulation passing the tax cut is important all that's important and then the second thing that can really hurt any administration Is corruption and even allegations of corruption can be incredibly damaging.
对我来说，关键在于如果你喜欢特朗普总统的议程，那么特朗普总统议程最大的障碍有两个。首先是经济下滑，这对任何总统的议程来说都是一个障碍。这就是为什么他在中东所做的事情非常重要，也是为什么他在许多方面减少关税、通过税收减免和进行去监管的重要原因。所有这些措施都是至关重要的。其次，腐败问题和哪怕是有关腐败的指控，都可能对任何政府造成极大的损害。
So for example There's a crypto bill that was on the floor of the Senate or is about to enter onto the floor of the Senate just last week And it ended up being killed by Democrats plus a couple of Republicans and Democrats at least publicly maintained the reason they killed the crypto bill was specifically because of allegations surrounding the Trump family and Trump coin Trump meme coin world liberty financial and all this sort of stuff.
例如，美国参议院上周有一项加密货币法案正在审议或即将被审议，但最终被民主党和几位共和党议员否决。至少在公开场合，民主党表示他们否决这项加密货币法案的原因，特别是因为围绕特朗普家族及其相关的“特朗普币”、特朗普模因币、世界自由金融等相关指控。
And so the question is in as a Trump supporter who raised money for president Trump and campaign with president Trump and campaign for president Trump As a person what I want is his agenda to be successful If an obstacle to that agenda is the optics of a thing like taking a $400 million jet from Qatar which does amount to the single biggest monetary gift ever given to the United States even if you consider it to just be a gift to the United States generally not to the Trump Library personally or anything like that.
所以问题是，作为一个支持特朗普的人，我曾为特朗普总统筹款，并与他一起竞选。作为一个人，我希望他的议程能够成功实现。如果有一个障碍阻碍了这个议程，比如从卡塔尔接受一架价值4亿美元的飞机，这确实是美国历史上最大的一笔经济馈赠，即便你把它单纯看作是给美国的礼物，而不是给特朗普图书馆或个人的赠予，这样的事情在视觉上可能造成一定的影响。
Is that is that the kind of thing that harms him in the public mind and if that ties into a broader narrative that his political opponents are trying to drive that he is corrupt or the people around him Is that a win for him right just on a practical efficacious level is that a win for him is that a win for his agenda because The media coverage this week you could have all been about him doing deals in these various places and bringing money back home to the United States unnecessary distraction.
这是否会影响他在公众心目中的形象？如果他的政治对手试图推动一种更广泛的叙述，认为他或他周围的人腐败，这对他来说是否是个问题？从实际效果来看，这对他或他的议程是否有利？因为本周的媒体报道本可以聚焦于他在各种地方达成的协议，以及他为美国带回的资金，而不是这些不必要的干扰。
That's kind of that's kind of my view of it at the very least appearance of impropriety Yeah, I agree amongst half the country who doesn't like him and he's now tipping into You know almost as unpopular as his first term They're just going to weaponize that in the midterms and it's going to scuttle the important agenda doge. You know and this is one of the things that I'm absolutely preyed on You know, this is this is the thing that also ties into the economic problem right the right now everybody is is basically like uh Who cares about this kind of I think a lot of people who cares about this kind of stuff as long as the number goes up into the right And all this sort of stuff doesn't matter very much.
这大概是我的看法，至少从表面上看是不当行为。我同意，这种看法在不喜欢他的一半国家中很普遍，而他的受欢迎度几乎回到了他第一任期时的低点。他们会在中期选举中利用这一点，这将会对重要议程产生不利影响。这是让我非常担心的事情之一。这也与当前的经济问题有关。现在基本上每个人都想的是，不管这些事情，只要经济指标往上走就行，这些问题都无所谓。
If the number starts going down Then you start having all these kind of corruption allegations rise to the surface in a new way right Because that's what happens with with presidents very often is what you see is there a kind of a bunch of little dents That are in the vehicle and then there's a car crash and suddenly you know All the dents are very evident to the naked eye and that's what I like from no void.
如果数字开始下降，那么各种腐败指控就会以一种新的方式浮出水面。这是因为对于总统来说，这种情况经常发生。通常会看到一些小问题，这些小问题就像车上的小凹痕。当发生车祸时，所有这些凹痕就会突然变得非常明显。这种情况我觉得就像从无到有一样。
What if he loses the midterms and then we start impeachment three four and five and investigation three four five Now we're back to law fair and insanity which nobody wants to be in let's talk about another win It was a pretty great week objectively for Trump on Sunday treasury secretary Bessent announced a trade deal with China in Geneva the details were basically here we go another pause tariffs will go down from 145 percent to 30 percent maybe that's managed both China's cutting their tariffs for the US from 125 to 10 percent.
如果他在中期选举中失利，我们可能会启动第三、第四和第五次弹劾，以及第三、第四和第五次调查。这样一来，我们又回到了法律战和疯狂状态，这是没人想经历的。让我们来谈谈另一个胜利。对特朗普来说，这是一个相当不错的星期。周日，财政部长贝森特在日内瓦宣布与中国达成一项贸易协议。具体细节是这样的：关税将从145%降至30%，这算是一种管理。中国也将对美国的关税从125%降至10%。
And they're gonna end this diminimous rule also known as the like garbage fashion rule t-moo sheen all that kind of stuff When they drop shift you stuff that's under I think the numbers 800 or so The market love the news don't don't make America dress well again don't do it I think this is like an important part of this is like this You know ridiculous garbage fashion.
他们也将取消这个微小价值规则，也就是所谓的垃圾时尚规则，比如T-moo和 Shein之类的。当他们发货给你那些价值大约在800美元以下的东西时，市场对此消息很喜欢。别尝试让美国重新穿得得体，不要这么做。我认为这件事的重要部分在于这些荒谬的垃圾时尚。
I hate it the market was up massively But you know the down the Nasdaq are basically a flat to slightly negative our partners over a polymarket You know have a nice market on the chances of a us recession that peaked at 66 percent during the Liberation day Chaos fallout and hey here we go now.
我讨厌这一情况：市场大幅上涨，但纳斯达克基本上是平稳或略微下跌的。我们的合作伙伴在Polymarket上有一个关于美国经济衰退几率的市场，在"解放日混乱"事件后，这个几率曾达到66%。所以，现在就是这样。
It's 38 percent. So we're kind of Maybe cleaning up the chaos. He shook the globe The economic globe freedberg and now maybe as I think a lot of people are predicted He found an exit ramp. Maybe that was the plan all along. Maybe it's 40 chess. Maybe he's reacting to the market Maybe all that doesn't matter, but here we are Dave freeberg when we look back on This whole trade trump tariff Turm oil or what are we going to look back on this a year from now and think was it just a distraction? Or is it actually going to create a trillion dollars in tariff revenue and we're going to get rid of 150 People playing taxes who make under a hundred fifty thousand dollars. What's going to happen with this? And we look back on it a year or two from now Well, I don't know where the tariff deals are going to end up so we don't know yet.
这是38%。所以我们有点像是在清理混乱。他动摇了经济的格局，也许正如很多人预测的那样，他找到了一个退出的途径。或许这一直都是计划，可能是4D象棋，也可能他是在对市场做出反应，也许这些都不重要，但我们现在就处在这里。戴夫·弗里伯格，当我们回顾整个特朗普关税、动荡或其他事情时，一年后我们会怎么看这件事？我们会认为它只是个分心的因素？还是它真的会创造出一万亿美元的关税收入，并且免除收入低于15万美元的150人的税收？未来几年我们再回头看这件事情会发生什么？我不知道关税协议最终结果会是什么，所以我们现在还不知道。
Yeah, it's asking for a guess right now Yeah, and so I don't know I don't know Like I said, I think one of the biggest things that needs to happen that is being discussed in these trade deals is regulatory parity such that U.S. companies can participate Evenly in foreign markets. I kind of highlighted a few examples of why it's challenging for U.S. companies to set up and do business in the local jurisdictions for a lot of our trade Partners across multiple industries. I think that's being heavily negotiated so that doesn't make the headlines. That's not kind of the top of the news everyone talks about the tariff number the tariff number the tariff number But at the end of the day the access to foreign markets for U.S. companies You can even think about I mean a good example for us Is a lot of the fines that happen to U.S. tech companies in the EU and there are just billions and billions of dollars of fines being paid out of our companies.
是的，现在是在要求一个猜测。对，我也不知道。我之前提到过，我认为在这些贸易协议中正在讨论的最大问题之一是实现监管平等，这样美国公司才能在外国市场上公平竞争。我举了一些例子来说明为什么美国公司在许多贸易伙伴国家和多个行业中开展业务时面临挑战。我认为这些问题正在被深入谈判，但这并没有成为头条新闻。大家总是谈论关税数字，关税数字，关税数字。但最终，对于美国公司来说，进入外国市场的机会更为重要。一个很好的例子是，美国科技公司在欧盟面临大量罚款，涉及数十亿美元的支出。
That's another form of taxation The fact that China won't allow U.S. tech companies to operate but we allow Chinese tech companies to operate here So the regulatory parity is kind of the biggest thing that I think needs to kind of be identified in these deals before we have a real sense jk because This again could be a real economic growth driver for American businesses and that could have a real effect on our gdp So that's the biggest thing I'm looking for versus just the tariff number Is parity and access to global markets for U.S. companies I don't think we know and those are the details of the deals that are going to take several months normally These are multi-year trade negotiations with you know big trade teams that go back and forth over several years to figure these deals out.
这是一种变相的税收。中国不允许美国科技公司在其境内运营，而我们却允许中国科技公司在美国运营。这种监管公平性是我认为在签署这些协议之前最需要明确的方面之一，因为这可能成为推动美国企业实际经济增长的重要因素，并对我们的GDP产生真实影响。因此，相比于单纯的关税数额，我更关注的是美国公司在全球市场的公平准入。我认为我们还不了解这些协议的细节，而通常这些需要数月来敲定。这些是为期数年的贸易谈判，与由大型贸易团队经过多年反复磋商来敲定的协议。
So to create maximum leverage and accelerate outcomes it seems like A lot of this trade hype got everyone to the negotiating table now the hard work's being done to figure out the details of these deals. And hopefully we end up in a better place for American businesses because of it Tremoth I know where you stand on this he creates that big pothole crater everybody gets excited It creates a lot of attention and then maybe the real negotiation starts. So a year from now when we look back on this what would success look like For the Trump administration in Tremoth Poghapatia's mind and assessment I think this goes back to what I said at the beginning I think tariffs have the potential To be the on ramp to our version of belt and road and I think that that is an incredible jujitsu move Of what was an exceptionally well executed and methodical program By the Chinese government To cement hard and soft power all around the world while the United States wasn't looking and obsessed with cheap garbage that they could buy a target.
为了最大化杠杆效应并加速成果的实现，看起来这场贸易炒作让所有人都走上了谈判桌，现在则需要做艰苦的工作来确定这些协议的细节。希望因此我们能为美国企业创造一个更好的环境。Tremoth，我知道你的立场，他制造了一个大坑，让大家都很激动，引起广泛关注，然后或许真正的谈判才开始。因此，一年后当我们回顾这个问题时，特朗普政府在Tremoth Poghapatia心中的成功将是什么样子？我想这回到我一开始所说的，我认为关税有潜力成为我们版本的“一带一路”的入口。这是一个极具智慧的策略，是对中国政府执行得极为有效和系统的计划的一种回应，中国在全球巩固硬实力和软实力，而美国却忙着买便宜货而忽视了这点。
Hmm, okay So this should be a wake up called to us. We don't need all this cheap nonsense We can live with fewer things Those things could be of higher quality. They may be of higher price, but more importantly We need to make sure that we're cementing bilateral deals with as many countries in the world and building the next phase Of Pax America of American hegemony we need to do it So the fact that we Are negotiating with China. I think is very good. I think that they are a necessary partner of ours But we can't take our eye off the ball the tariffs was a way of ripping the bandaid of all this globalist free trade nonsense And now we need to reset this in a methodical calm way.
嗯，好吧，这应该是对我们的一个警醒。我们不需要这些廉价的无聊东西，我们可以生活得更简单一些。那些东西可以是更高质量的，可能价格会更高，但更重要的是，我们需要确保与世界上尽可能多的国家建立双边协议，来构建下一个阶段的“美式和平”或美国霸权。我们必须做到这一点。因此，我们与中国进行谈判，我认为是非常好的。我认为他们是我们必要的合作伙伴。但我们不能掉以轻心。关税是撕掉全球化自由贸易创可贴的一种方式，而现在我们需要以有条不紊和平静的方式重新设定这一切。
Now some markets we're not going to get right and in some industries we have some very complicated thinking to do. As an example, which we'll get to later the pharma eo is very complicated and very nuanced, okay. But this is the hard and necessary work. So my perspective is this is the beginning of Belt and Road 2.0. I think we started with a real bang in the Middle East. And I just encourage the administration to go and finish the job and get as many bilateral deals done as possible and reset how important the United States is as a partner? We always knew it. But we allowed that hard influence and hard power to get frittered away with all kinds of nonsensical idealistic thinking that was just wasteful.
现在，有些市场我们可能无法完全掌握，而在某些行业，我们需要进行非常复杂的思考。比如说，制药行业（Pharma EO）的情况就非常复杂且微妙。不过，这是艰难但必要的工作。我认为，这标志着“一带一路”2.0的开始。我认为我们在中东取得了一个真正的突破。我只是鼓励政府继续完成这项工作，尽可能多地达成双边协议，并重新确立美国作为合作伙伴的重要性。不久前我们一直知道这一点，但我们任由这种强大的影响力和实力因各种不切实际的理想主义想法而逐渐消散，这完全是浪费。
Now we just need this also globalists who wanted to make money right? It's like easier to make cheap stuff over there and then sell it here. And it's harder to make money. I think that was once, I think that was short-term and non-strategic thinking by many of those companies. I think that we've created dynamics that we can change. We can change the incentives for how consumers consume in the United States. And I think it's worth thinking about how to do that.
现在我们只需要让那些想赚钱的全球主义者也这样做，对吧？就好像在那些地方生产便宜的东西更容易，然后在我们这里卖。但是这样其实更难赚钱。我认为许多公司过去只关注短期利益和缺乏战略思维。我认为我们已经形成了一种可以改变的动态。我们可以改变美国消费者的消费激励机制。我觉得值得考虑一下如何做到这一点。
All right, well here is the polymarket on tariffs generating greater than 250 billion in 2025 that we set or polymarket set basically no chance that that's gonna happen. So we will see here. I think everybody coming to the table and reciprocity bad. I don't even know how you're gonna settle this Jason because what does it mean will tariffs generate? I think it's a really interesting bet. But the real question is on the measurement there is not gonna be some number that OMB or somebody else puts out that says it generated X. Well, I think let Nick was saying he was tracking that but we'll see.
好的，这里是关于2025年关税收入超过2500亿美元的Polymarket预测，我们或Polymarket基本上认为这一概率非常小。所以我们拭目以待。我认为大家都会参与进来讨论公平的问题。Jason，我都不知道你怎么解决这个，因为关税收入达到某个数额是什么意思呢？我认为这是一场很有趣的赌注。但真正的问题在于如何测量，不会有OMB或者其他机构发布一个明确的数字来说产生了多少收入。我想Nick之前说他在跟踪这个，但我们还要看看结果如何。
I mean because if it's reciprocity and we see us making more money or getting charged less fines to the examples we had earlier then you could include those in it, but yeah, it's hard it's a hard bet to settle. But I think people believe it's not gonna generate a massive amount of revenue. The relationship with China and this sort of changing concept of consumerism you think that's a possibility for America to Americans just want cheap stuff on Amazon and unlimited number of Amazon boxes in their recycle bin.
这段话的大意是：我认为，如果是互惠关系，并且我们看到自己能赚更多的钱或者减少之前提到的一些罚款的话，那么可以把这些纳入考虑中。不过这确实是个难以确定的选择。但我觉得大家认为这不会产生大量收入。关于与中国的关系，以及这种消费理念的变化，你认为这对美国来说是可能的吗？因为美国人似乎只想在亚马逊上买便宜货，并让他们的回收箱里永远有无限量的亚马逊包装盒。
I mean, I'm not sure the tell consumers have ever thought about this sort of stuff. You know, I remember when I was younger there was a lot of talk about made America cars. You know by made American and that just kind of failed because it turns out that the American cars just weren't as good as the stuff that you could get elsewhere. And it turns out that Americans are both producers and consumers and yeah, it's easy to say don't buy cheap crap from China. But it turns out a lot of stuff that actually is not all that cheap also was manufactured in China.
我的意思是，我不确定消费者是否曾考虑过这些事情。你知道吗，我记得我年轻的时候，大家常常讨论“美国制造”的汽车。大家鼓吹购买美国制造，但这并没有长久，因为事实证明，许多美国车并没有其他地方的车好。事实是，美国人既是生产者也是消费者。虽然说不买中国的便宜货听起来很简单，但实际上很多并不便宜的东西也是在中国制造的。
Hopefully now it'll be manufactured in Vietnam or or manufactured in India or in other third-party countries. The idea that we're gonna be you know reshoring all that stuff to the United States. We're not gonna be making t-shirts in the United States. That's not a thing. Um, but you know, I do think that right now my read is that we it's too early to tell meaning that this this just reminds me the old Yiddish joke where the couple isn't getting along so they go to the rabbi and they say what do we do rabbi?
希望现在这些产品能够在越南、印度或其他国家生产。我们并不是要把所有的制造业都搬回美国。比如说，我们不会在美国生产T恤衫，这是不现实的。不过，我认为目前判断为时过早。这让我想起一个犹太笑话：有一对夫妻关系不好，于是他们去找拉比（犹太教领袖）商量该怎么办。
So I want you to bring a chicken into your house. They bring the chicken in their house and still isn't working and go back to the rabbi. So I want you to bring a calendar house so bring a calendar to their house and they say it's still isn't working rabbi. It's just terrible. They go back to the rabbi says I want you to bring two goats in your house. They do that they come exit the husband says this is awful. I can't handle this is take everything out of your house to take all the things out of their house and like oh my god this is this is just fantastic because that that's basically what Trump did here.
所以，我要你把一只鸡带到家里。他们把鸡带回家后，情况仍没有好转，于是又去找拉比。拉比说，带本日历回家，他们照做了，但还是觉得不行，又去找拉比。这太糟糕了。他们再次回去找拉比，拉比说要把两只山羊带回家。他们又照做了，结果丈夫说这太糟糕了，无法忍受。于是，拉比说把家里的所有东西都拿走，他们照做后，惊呼道："哦天哪，这真是太好了。" 这基本上就是特朗普做过的事情。
Ready put the chicken and cow and the two goats in the house. I still think he left the chicken right and so it's kind of it's gonna be you know a question is to how much impact the chicken has. Meaning the 10% tariff rate that we still have on the rest of the world is you know more than quintuple what it was at the very beginning of this process.
准备把那只鸡、一头牛和两只山羊放进屋里。我仍然认为他把鸡放在右边了，所以，会存在一个问题，就是鸡会产生多大影响。这个问题的意思是，目前我们对世界其他地区维持的10%关税，比这个过程刚开始时的税率高了五倍多。
I mean the average tariff rate and not to use a you know a number of David doesn't like but the average tariff rate right now is higher than it's been anytime since the 1930s. Is that gonna have some carryover effect? I mean Walmart is already suggesting they're gonna have to start increasing their prices. So I don't think they were out of the woods and I do think that the biggest threat with regards to this sort of stuff is less the tariffs than the feeling of uncertainty for investors as to what comes next.
我的意思是，我指的是平均关税税率，而不是使用一个你知道大卫不喜欢的数字。现在的平均关税税率比上世纪30年代以来的任何时候都要高。这会有什么延续效应吗？我的意思是，沃尔玛已经表示他们可能会开始提高价格。所以我不认为我们已经摆脱困境，我确实认为与这类问题相关的最大威胁不是关税本身，而是投资者对于接下来会发生什么感到的不确定感。
And that's where the pharmaceutical EO starts to come in or the negotiations over the tax bill what actually makes it in what doesn't make it in well when it comes to you know the stuff that makes investors sanguine and one of the reasons why investors are sanguine about Saudi Arabia is because Saudi Arabia is a kingdom And that kingdom is very wealthy and that very wealthy kingdom doesn't have to worry about the next election They don't have to worry about the next policy that they just have to throw out there for public consumption President Trump because of the rapid shifts in policy the feeling if the feeling comes away is we're now back on a solid path This was all a tactic and and we're hunky-dory great.
这段文字的意思是：
这就是制药行业的行政命令开始发挥作用的地方，或者是关于税收法案的谈判，哪些内容会被纳入，哪些不会被纳入。当涉及到让投资者感到乐观的因素时，其中一个原因是投资者对沙特阿拉伯持乐观态度，因为沙特阿拉伯是一个非常富有的王国。这个富有的王国不必担心下一次选举，也不需要为了公众舆论而随意改变政策。而特朗普总统因为政策的快速变化，使得人们现在感到事情回到了一个稳定的轨道上，这一切只是一个策略，而我们一切都很好。
You're gonna see the markets go up You're gonna see more investment and all the rest if the feeling and basically more Scott Bessent and fire Peter Navarro into the ocean via catapult with you might Vice to the Trump administration And you do that actionable suggestion, man, I really really what predictability you know we were sitting here a couple weeks ago and I was as I was mentioning I would I know a lot of e-commerce folks and they were saying layoffs coming we don't have predictability and the really hard part is How do you invest in a business? You know you're running daily wire. It's a nine-figure business You want to hire people you know you need to have advertisers many of the advertisers you probably have are somehow related to consumption in America.
你会看到市场上涨，会看到更多的投资，等等。这种感觉基本上是更多的斯科特·贝森特，而把彼得·纳瓦罗用弹射器送入海洋如果你可能会建议给特朗普政府这样做。这是个可行的建议，老兄，我真的真的需要可预测性。你知道，我们几周前还在讨论这个问题，我提到我认识很多电子商务行业的人，他们说裁员要来了，因为我们缺乏可预测性。真正困难的是，你要怎样投资于企业呢？比如说你经营的Daily Wire，这是一个价值数亿美金的企业。你想要招聘员工，你需要广告商，而你可能有很多广告商是以美国消费市场为基础的。
What's the first thing they're gonna pause they're gonna pause advertising right why am I advertising this? You know mattress and why am I Matt you know advertising eight-sleeve the best mattress in the world I happen to be an investor from little bias But why am I gonna market eight-sleeve if I can't get it to the country or if the price is too high You know, it's like it causes all these downstream Issues I guess during all of this now Talking about like shaking the globe and the in the economy here Republicans are working hard on the big beautiful bill. It's it's big and it's beautiful Ben I don't know if you want to get into your Trump doing Trump's But it's a big beautiful so big so beautiful many people are saying and many haters Nancy Pelosi nasty woman She bet on Walmart bad bet GOP's plan is to push this bill via reconciliation so they can avoid the Senate fellow buster with 51 votes instead of 60.
他们首先会暂停什么？他们会暂停广告。为什么我还要打广告？比如床垫，为什么我要推广八睡这个最好的床垫？我正好是个小投资者，所以有点偏爱。但如果我连把八睡运到该国家的能力都没有，或者价格太高，那我为什么还要推广呢？这会引发很多后续的问题。说到经济和全球局势的震荡，共和党正在努力推动一个大而美丽的法案。这个法案又大又美，据说很多人都这么认为，尽管也有很多批评者。南希·佩洛西，她是个难相处的女人，她在沃尔玛上押错宝了。共和党的计划是通过协调程序推进这个法案，以便避开参议院的阻挠，只需51票就能通过，而非60票。
The Trump bill would extend the 2017 tax cuts and jobs act through 2034 That's kind of the big piece here is these tax cuts And there's a bunch of campaign stuff like no taxes on tips or overtime Things that Trump promised to you know in some cases swing states like Nevada those are trying to get in there And an increase on universities in down in tax and the tax foundation This is a nonprofit that analyzes tax policy estimates the tax cuts would reduce revenues by 4.1 trillion over 10 years So 400 billion a year and the bill also aims to cut 1.5 trillion and spend over the next decade.
特朗普的法案将把2017年的减税和就业法案延长至2034年。这里的重点是这些减税措施。此外，还有一些竞选承诺，比如对小费和加班费不征税。这些承诺是特朗普为了吸引选民，尤其是在像内华达这样的摇摆州。此外，法案还计划增加对大学的税收。根据一个名为税收基金会的非营利组织的分析，他们估计这些减税措施将在未来十年内减少4.1万亿美元的政府收入，平均每年减少4000亿美元。该法案还计划在未来十年内削减1.5万亿美元的支出。
Some Republicans think this is weak and are pushing for 2 trillion in cuts or more Notable cuts include a stricter snap rules tighter Medicaid taps and removing taxpayer benefits from illegal Gosh freeburg you actually hey, I understand from our group chat did a deep dive here And you I think are responsible in many ways for bringing the issue of our national debt to the forefront especially Particularly with this administration in doge which we give you a lot of credit for you being a single issue voter for this.
一些共和党人认为这有些软弱，并推动削减2万亿或更多。其中显著的削减包括更严格的食品券规则、更紧的医疗补助资金，以及取消非法移民的纳税人的福利。天哪，弗里堡，你真的在这方面做了深入的研究。我了解到你在群聊中对此有深入探讨。我认为，你在很多方面促使了国家债务问题的突出，特别是在本届政府时期。我们非常赞赏你在这一问题上的专注，你为此做出了突出贡献。
Are you worried about The budget now we're we're 100 plus days into Trump do you think he's got any chance of cutting the deficit? I'll talk about the House tax bill which I think is To use your term jcal absolute discratiate I Oh Wow, it is absolute discratiate if you're an American You should feel shame that your elected officials are proposing that this is the bill that gets passed That we vaporize this much money that we put ourselves this much further in debt that we do not treat the situation as the fiscal emergency That it is the bill ultimately yields No real change in the annual deficit the annual deficit could climb to 2.5 trillion dollars being added to the federal debt load every single year Going forward in fact if you look at the treasury yields the 30 years now kissing 5% So the United States has called 37 trillion dollars of debt At 5% we're paying close to two trillion dollars a year just in interest On our debt.
你是否担心预算问题，现在特朗普上任已超过100天，你觉得他有没有可能削减赤字？我要谈谈众议院的税收法案，我觉得这简直是个耻辱。如果你是美国人，你应该感到羞愧，因为你所选出的官员居然提议通过这样一项法案。我们消耗了这么多钱，加重了负债，却没有把这种情况视为财政紧急状态。这个法案最终并没有带来年度赤字的实质性改变，年度赤字可能会增加到每年2.5万亿美元，进一步加重联邦债务负担。实际上，如果你看看国债收益率，30年的国债收益率接近5%。美国有大约37万亿美元的债务，按5%的利率计算，我们每年仅利息就要支付接近2万亿美元。
As this debt gets refinanced free but it's a favor for the audience if you could explain why it's going up Why it's so high and what that means why the debt or the interest rates the interest rates Yeah, well the interest rates are going up because the probability that the US will default on its debt payments Which is what you're buying when you buy US treasuries you're getting the US government To pay you some number of dollars with interest over time And the market is now demanding that that interest rate be as high. as 5% Because of this fiscal situation that the United States finds itself in We are now burning an additional 2.5 trillion dollars a year adding to our debt load We are in a fiscal crisis and we're not willing to admit it And I've said this from day one that doge can only do so much and clearly that's the case where they're now talking about sub 300 billion dollars a year and potential annual savings from doge action at the end of the day Congress needs to take action And this bill from Congress doesn't take much action.
随着这债务被重新融资，如果您能解释一下为什么它在上升，为什么它这么高以及这意味着什么，对观众来说将是一个好处。是债务还是利率？是利率。嗯，利率正在上升，因为美国有可能会违约其债务支付。当你购买美国国债时，你实际上是在购买美国政府未来支付的本金和利息。而现在市场要求这个利率高达5%，这都是因为美国目前所处的财政状况所致。我们每年额外花费2.5万亿美元，增加我们的债务负担。我们正处于财政危机之中，但却不愿意承认这一点。我从一开始就说过，加密货币像狗狗币能做的有限，而现在显然的情况是，他们在谈论每年不到3000亿美元的节省潜力，但归根结底，国会需要采取行动。然而，国会提出的这项法案并没有采取多大行动。
I will tell you that if you look across the board all of these programs are still being proposed to be run at a cost That is well in excess of their pre-COVID levels And so I would set who guiding principles if I was to be the benevolent dictator of the United States of America My guiding principle number one would be that any program that we intend to continue to persist Have its budget level cut to pre-COVID to 2019 levels Second would be and if we did that by the way we would be in a much better fiscal situation The second would be that we had no new programs in the moment There's a whole bunch of new sh** thrown into this bill as well as increasing the cost and a few cuts here and there.
我想告诉你，如果你全面观察这些项目，会发现它们的运行成本仍然远高于疫情前的水平。所以，如果我是美国的仁慈独裁者，我会制定一些指导原则。我的第一条原则是，任何我们打算继续坚持的项目，其预算水平都要削减到疫情前、即2019年的水平。顺便提一下，如果我们这样做，我们的财政状况会好得多。第二条原则是，目前不设立新项目。这个法案中已经加入了一大堆新东西，并且增加了成本，虽然也有一些小的削减。
I'll just highlight a couple that I think are worth noting You know, there's a cut in the snap program which is the supplemental nutrition and assistance program That's food stamps And I talked about this with Brooke Rollins in the interview I did a few weeks ago You can watch it on YouTube and we talked a little bit about how this snap program has absolutely exploded in size From 60 billion a year in 2019 to 120 billion a year today So in this budget proposal, they're actually cutting it back By about 30 billion so to 90 billion so it's still 50% higher than it was pre-COVID And there's a lot of kind of stories we could go through on what happened during COVID that caused this thing to blow up the way it did But political wrangling pulled money out of the government into people's pockets and that is persisting today.
让我来简要说明一下我认为值得注意的几点。首先，食品券计划，即补充营养援助计划（SNAP）正在被削减。我在几周前与布鲁克·罗林斯的采访中谈到过这一点。你可以在YouTube上观看那个采访，我们讨论了这个SNAP计划规模是如何迅速膨胀的。从2019年每年600亿美元增加到如今的1200亿美元。在这个预算提案中，他们实际上将其削减了大约300亿美元，所以变成900亿美元，仍然比新冠疫情前高出50%。在新冠疫情期间发生了许多事情，使得这个计划迅速扩大。政治上的权谋将资金从政府中抽出，放入人们的口袋中，这种情况一直持续到今天。
I'm a big believer in cutting taxes Obviously, I'm probably more libertarian than anyone else on the show or that we've ever had on the show But at the end of the day, you can't just say hey, let's cut taxes and spend more than we're making It doesn't make sense a lot of the stuff's going to be exploitable the tips and overtime exclusions Are a way to pander to people to get votes and now keeping your promises on those votes I think at the end of the day the tips and overtime rule could invite a lot of gamesmanship and loopholes That will be created and people will wake up and be like uh-oh For example, if I'm an independent contractor I will enter into a contract with someone that says here is the service I'm providing you for 50 bucks And then there's an optional tip you can give me at the end and then I will pay taxes on that tip And I can give you a hundred other examples that this will create in an ordinate number of crazy insane loopholes.
我是一个坚定的减税支持者。显然，我可能比节目中其他人，甚至是我们曾经邀请过的人都更倾向于自由主义。但归根结底，你不能只是说“嘿，让我们减税”然后又花费超过我们所赚取的。这不合理。许多政策都会被利用，比如小费和加班费的豁免，是为了迎合某些人以获取选票，但现在要兑现这些选票承诺。最终，小费和加班费规则可能会引发大量投机和漏洞。
举个例子，如果我是一个独立承包商，我可能会和某人签订合同，提供价值50美元的服务，然后可以在结束时选择给我小费，我再对小费缴税。我还可以给出一百个其他的例子，这些规则将会产生许多奇怪离谱的漏洞。
The interest on the debt at $1.9 trillion a year Equates to 7% of GDP that means 7 cents of every dollar that moves in every transaction in this country Is being used to pay down interest on money we overspent in the past it has become an absolute crisis I think that there's a few folks that should be shout out on this which is senator Paul And senator Ron Johnson who both highlighted how ridiculously under impressive The spending cuts are in this bill I think we've got a lot of work to do. I'm deeply disappointed I'm scared and I hope that um that this all gets kind of fixed up and Do you think that we should line item out all the new spending irrespective of what all new spending line itemed out That's that's rule one and rule two is all existing programs got to go back to pre-COVID levels You do those two things we're in a great place.
每年1.9万亿美元的债务利息相当于GDP的7%。这意味着，在这个国家发生的每一笔交易中，有7美分都用来支付我们过去超支所产生的利息。这已经成为一个绝对的危机。我认为应该为此发声的人有几位，比如参议员保罗和参议员罗恩·约翰逊，他们都指出这项法案中的开支削减是多么地不足。我觉得我们还有很多工作要做。我感到非常失望，也很害怕，我希望这一切能够得到解决。你认为我们是否应该逐项列出所有新的开支，无论是什么新的开支都要列出来？这是第一原则，第二原则是所有现有项目都要恢复到COVID-19之前的水平。如果做到这两点，我们就会处于一个非常好的状态。
Yeah, I'm just to put some numbers and some charts behind it here is the debt back to Clinton era. Clinton obviously balanced the budget. So you get this nice flatness there. Clinton added 392 billion in the years. It's barely noticeable on the chart 40 50 billion a year. Bush 5.4 trillion four years about 1.3 trillion a year. Obama a trillion a year and then we get to Trump 1.0 2 trillion a year. Suddenly we decided we would double it. Biden same thing they added almost exactly the same amount. To the right way the year and yeah the right way to do the same. Yeah, it's not total dollar amount. It's percent. of GDP that you're adding and you know right now at two and a half trillion dollars a year of deficit we're talking about a deficit to GDP of like 8% yes 8% a year. This is like Argentina. This is like insane at the fact that we don't treat this like a fiscal emergency.
好的，我来把这段内容翻译成中文并使其更易读：
是这样的，我只是想用一些数据和图表来说明一下这里面的情况。这里显示了自克林顿时代以来的债务情况。克林顿显然是平衡了预算，所以你会看到一个比较平稳的趋势。克林顿在任期间的债务增长了3920亿美元，每年大约增幅是40到500亿美元，这在图表上几乎不明显。而布什在四年里增加了5.4万亿美元，平均每年大约是1.3万亿美元。奥巴马时期每年差不多增加1万亿美元，然后到了特朗普，每年增加1.02万亿美元。忽然之间，我们决定把它翻倍。拜登也是同样的情况，他们增加的数额几乎完全一样。
关键的问题是增加的不是总的美元金额，而是占 GDP 的百分比。目前，我们每年有2.5万亿美元的赤字，这意味着赤字占 GDP 的比率大约是8%。对，就是每年8%。这就像阿根廷的情况一样。令人难以置信的是，我们竟然没有把这当作财政紧急事件来对待。
Everyone goes up and they tout Oh, we're gonna make 60 billion in cuts and Medicaid. That's out of 820 billion dollars of annual spend. You know, oh, we're making 30 billion in cuts and snap that's still 50% higher spend in total than we were in 2019 a few years ago when we didn't have that much of a problem. This has become like Such a reset of expectations and I worry again that we went into this I think in a very optimistic way thinking that this administration was gonna treat things differently. We had doge we had alignment on the importance of the budget. That's in his highlight at it and then it's kind of back to gamesmanship in DC.
每个人都在宣称要削减600亿美元的医疗补助，这跟每年总支出8200亿美元相比，说削就削了3%。他们声称在食品券计划（SNAP）上削减了300亿美元，但这仍然比我们在2019年的总支出高出50%。当时经济问题还不像现在这么严重。这种情况已经改变了我们的期望，而我担心我们曾抱着非常乐观的态度认为这个政府会以不同的方式处理问题。我们之前有共识，将预算作为重点，但现在华盛顿又回到了政治游戏的状态。
All these representatives from Congress show up and trying to get money for their constituents in a way that is not sustainable. We're not going to be able to keep this up and we're not really having the hard and tough conversations we need to be having. And every year everyone wants to get elected by keeping programs and keeping money flowing that their constituents elected them to do and they want to add new programs so they can go on CNBC I say look at this cool new program. I stood up. It's great. It's gonna create the future of America. And meanwhile there's no future of America because we're burning two and a half trillion dollars a year.
所有来自国会的代表都来争取资金给他们的选民，但这种方式不可持续。我们无法一直这样下去，也没有进行真正艰难的对话。每年，每个人都想通过保留项目和资金流动来连任，因为这是选民选他们来做的。同时，他们还想增加新项目，好上电视说：看看这个很酷的新项目，是我推动的。它很棒，会创造美国的未来。然而，实际上美国并没有未来，因为我们每年烧掉2.5万亿美元。
So would you call this the best it wants the three three three plan you'd call this the three three eight plan? I don't know if there's a three. But yeah, it's definitely the eight. This is eight almost nine. Yeah, I think I think all of this is right. I mean the reality is the US debt to GDP ratio is extraordinary already. It's only going up from here and we have to acknowledge here that the Republican majorities in the House and the Senate are incredibly narrow that for every Ron Johnson who's saying the right things you have a Josh holly who's saying the wrong things in Missouri and writing full-scale op-eds in the New York Times talking about Not a buck should be cut from Medicaid under any circumstances.
那么你会称这为最佳方案吗？是“三三三计划”，还是“三三八计划”？我不知道有没有“三”，但肯定是“八”，几乎是“九”了。我觉得这些说法都对。实际上，美国的债务与GDP比率已经非常高了，而且只会继续上升。我们必须承认，众议院和参议院的共和党多数是非常微弱的。虽然有像罗恩·约翰逊这样的人说着正确的话，但同时也有像乔什·霍利在密苏里州发表文章，大谈特谈在任何情况下都不应该削减医疗补助。
And this you know does run a headlong up against a reality Which is that the one one of some signal changes from the old Republican party was not just a change away In terms of foreign policy toward a more realism and less in less you know interventionism but it really was a change away from the Paul Ryan Tea Party Republican party as well. And whatever you think about Paul Ryan on a lot of other issues Paul Ryan was on your side of this David when it came to actually trying to fix Fiscal problems with the United States and I'm old enough to remember the Tea Party when we were out protesting literally in the streets about government Overspending as a response to Obamacare and that's gone completely by the wayside.
这段话的大意是：你知道，这与现实产生了直接的冲突，这种现实是旧共和党的一些显著变化之一，不仅是从外交政策向更加现实主义、减少干预主义方向的转变，而且也是从保罗·瑞安的茶党共和党转变。而无论你如何看待保罗·瑞安在其他许多问题上的立场，至少在试图解决美国财政问题上，保罗·瑞安是和你意见一致的。作为一个年龄足够大的人，我还记得茶党时代，我们曾在街头抗议政府过度开支，作为对奥巴马医改的回应，但这些都已完全被抛在脑后。
And so when you're looking at Republicans today arguing over whether to zero out waste fraud and abuse the problem is not in the end waste fraud and abuse the problem is the programs themselves as they are currently structured. And unless you're willing to make serious systemic changes Like Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security you're not going to solve any of these problems and here's the sad reality is nobody is willing to do that. So just as we were saying earlier maybe Americans are addicted to cheap goods from abroad Americans are certainly 100% addicted to government sustenance. They are they're absolutely addicted to this all in that taxes in this country I paid by the top quintile all of them because below the top quintile you're getting as much back from the government or more than you are paying into the system.
当你看到现在的共和党人在争论是否要彻底消除浪费、欺诈和滥用问题时，请注意，问题的根本并不在这些方面，而在于现有的项目结构本身。如果你不愿意对医疗保险、医疗补助和社会保障等项目进行重大系统性更改，你将无法解决任何这些问题。可悲的现实是，没有人愿意做出这些改变。正如我们之前所说，也许美国人对廉价的外国商品上瘾了，但美国人显然已经完全依赖于政府的支持。实际上，美国的税收主要由最高的五分之一收入群体承担，因为在这一群体之下的人，从政府获得的利益往往与他们缴纳的税款相当，甚至更多。
And we are also gaming out to the future paying away our kids fiscal future because of all of this. So you know when people ask me what's going to happen I mean the answer is we're going to either wildly inflate our currency or we're going to go into massive austerity measures, you know five to ten years from now. There's not going to be a third choice. I mean and so maybe the politicians keep kicking it down the road Maybe that's what this is. But even the kind of cuts that are being talked about by some of the people in Congress. who I like Are not going to be enough to actually put us back on the right fiscal road.
我们正在赌博我们的孩子们的财政未来。因为这些问题，当人们问我未来会发生什么时，我的回答是：要么我们的货币会大幅贬值，要么我们将在五到十年内采取大规模紧缩措施。没有第三种选择。也许政客们会一再推迟问题的解决，也许这就是目前的状况。但即使是我喜欢的一些国会议员谈论的削减措施，也不足以让我们真正回到正确的财政轨道上。
Even if the Republicans do what they're talking about with regard to work requirements For example on Medicaid they're saying there should be an 80 hour a month work requirement a month a month Well, that's that's crazy. That's crazy right that five hours a four hours a week day For for a month to get your Medicaid requirement if you're an able-bodied person in the United States of working age You know that sort of stuff is not sustainable. But nobody's actually going to take that on and so the question for president Trump is going to be Is he willing to actually go to the barricades and not just make the case that the tax cuts have to be maintained because they absolutely do.
即使共和党人按照他们所说的，在医疗补助等政策上引入工作要求，例如：他们提议每月需进行80小时的工作。每个月需要工作80小时，这太疯狂了。一周4天，每天5小时的工作以获得医疗补助资格，对美国有劳动能力的合适年龄人群来说，这种要求是不可持续的。但实际上没有人真正去应对这个问题。因此，问题在于特朗普总统是否愿意真正站出来，不只是主张必须保持减税政策，因为减税政策绝对需要维持。
But also that Republicans need to get on board with some of these cuts because you're going to have a lot of pushback From the purplish Republicans from from the Josh Halleys in Missouri and from the Michael Lawyers in New York And all of the people who are afraid they're going to lose their seats if there are any cuts. That's right and existential cuts I mean it is like an existential crisis that no one's willing to stand up and highlight just how critical this emergency is Two and a half trillion dollars of deficit spending on a 28 trillion dollar GDP Tell me when in history that's actually worked out at the end of the day except when you're in a some war.
但共和党人也需要支持这些削减措施，因为来自偏中立立场的共和党人的反对会很大。像密苏里的乔什·霍利和纽约的迈克尔·律师，他们都担心如果有任何削减措施，他们可能会失去席位。确实，这是一种生存危机，我是指没有人愿意站出来强调这个紧急情况有多么重要。两万八千亿美元的GDP却有两万五千亿美元的赤字开支，告诉我在历史上这什么时候真正奏效过，除非你在进行某种战争。
You're gonna end up taking over some country and getting all their resources And as you mentioned this actually this has you know Knock on effects with regards to things like de-dollarization Why are you investing in the American dollar if you believe that's what you're going to This is the debt this is the debt debt spiral that we find ourselves in because what happens is people stop owning Treasuries when they start to question whether or not 30 years from now the US government is going to meet its debt obligations.
你最终会接管一些国家并获取他们的所有资源。而且，如你所提到的，这实际上会产生连锁反应，比如去美元化的问题。如果你相信这些会发生，为什么还要投资于美元呢？这是我们所处的债务螺旋状态，因为一旦人们开始质疑美国政府在30年后能否履行其债务义务时，他们就不再持有美国国债。
Even the smallest marginal question of that drives interest rates up 1% 2% suddenly your 30 your treasury yields at 6% 7% And then your interest rates climb and then your deficit spending climbs and that's how it becomes a spiral. So now the debt goes up even more than it did the year before and then the next year it goes up even more per year than it did the year before That's why it's called a debt death spiral.
即使是最小的边际问题，也可能导致利率突然上升1%到2%。于是，30年期国债收益率就会达到6%到7%。然后，利率随之攀升、赤字支出增加，这就是螺旋上升的形成过程。这样一来，债务比之前一年增长得更多，接下来的一年增长得比之前的一年还要多。这就是为什么会被称为“债务死亡螺旋”。
And I will say that let me sorry Let me say one thing one of the things I've heard in a lot of members of cabinet that I've met with Over the last couple of months is we've got all these new sources of revenue I had an interview with Doug Bergen. He talked about unlocking America's assets. We've got this balance sheet with lots of assets We're gonna do land leases and all sorts of other things We took we met with Latinx. He's gonna sell the trump gold card the immigration card.
让我说一句，在过去几个月里，我与很多内阁成员会面时听到的一件事情是，我们获得了很多新的收入来源。我曾采访过道格·伯根，他谈到了如何解锁美国的资产。我们有一份拥有大量资产的资产负债表，我们将进行土地租赁以及各种其他事情。我们还与Latinx会面，他将出售特朗普金卡和移民卡。
We met with best and he's got these ideas on how we're gonna drive Everyone's got great theory on how we're gonna grow GDP and actually grow government revenue But until those dollars start to flow in we have to get our fiscal house in order We have to cut spending when those dollars start to flow in then you can start to spend. But you can't spend ahead because otherwise the cost of the debt and the economics uncertainty is gonna limit our ability to execute on the back end That revenue generation.
我们与最优秀的人会面了，他对如何推动我们前进有一些想法。每个人都有一个关于如何增长GDP并实际增加政府收入的好理论。但在钱开始进来之前，我们必须将财政状况理顺。我们需要削减开支，当资金开始流入时，才能开始支出。但你不能提前消费，否则债务成本和经济不确定性将限制我们在后期执行产生收入的能力。
And I'm very worried about no one kind of paying enough attention to this So I just you know, I feel very passionate having seen this bill that we're just not on the right track. It's really it's really frustrating Let me pull up a tax chart here Nick from the chat and get Tremoffeer comments on this a bar chart here Just who's paying taxes as you can see you know the top 1% Which I think is this panel here and the top 5% paying the majority of the taxes in the country.
我很担心，似乎没有人对此给予足够的关注。我看过这项法案后，真的感到非常关注，因为我们显然没走在正确的轨道上。这真的让人很沮丧。让我在聊天中拉出一个税收图表，邀请Tremoffeer对此发表意见。这是一个柱状图，显示谁在缴税。正如你所看到的，收入排名前1%的人（我想是这个部分）和前5%的人承担了该国大部分的税收。
Is there any way to increase revenue and is there any way for politicians to say hey, let's cut military That hasn't come up yet as a concept, but maybe cut a little bit of military spending And maybe put in some modest austerity measures now before as Ben's pointing out we get to you know Spain and You know Greece I don't know what was that 10 years ago when they had to Portugal and they had to do Like intense things so you're your home country Chimoffe of Italy like With austerity measures Americans. I don't think we've had to ever face austerity measures and certainly not in our lifetime.
有没有办法增加收入，以及政客们有没有可能提出减少军事开支的建议？这个想法还没有被提出来，但或许可以考虑稍微削减一些军事支出，并在现在实施一些适度的紧缩措施，这样就能避免像本提到的，我们来到西班牙和希腊那样的局面。大约十年前，西班牙和希腊还有葡萄牙不得不采取非常严格的措施。就像你的祖国意大利那样，实施紧缩政策。而对于美国人来说，在我们的有生之年似乎从未经历过真正的紧缩政策。
So income taxes can we get more revenue in Where is that our realistic and then cutting military maybe on the margins Chimoff or do you not see this as a major issue It's easy to catastrophize. Okay, I think I think that is easy Because I think there's enough data there The harder thing if you're going to make a directional bet is to try to find the nuance So what is the nuance the nuance is you can point to all of these countries But what is singularly different between all of those countries in the United States of America? Is that a question it's not a no it's a story. It's a story. Okay. The difference is We're the shining city on a hill and every other country is not And as much as we want to believe that there is equality there isn't there's a hierarchy and America is the most important country in the world period full stop into story What does that give us the ability to do it gives us very different parameters with which to solve this problem It gives us I think the parameter of time And it gives us the parameter of Acceptance from a lot of other foreign governments Why because they need America to also succeed.
为了增加收入，我们是否可以从所得税中获得更多资金？这是否切合实际？削减军事开支，可能只是一点边缘上的调整，您是否认为这不是一个重大问题？我们很容易陷入悲观主义。我认为这样说是容易的，因为有足够的数据支持。更难的事情是，如果您要做一个方向性的判断，就需要找到其中的细微差别。那么，细微差别是什么呢？细微差别在于，您可以指向所有这些国家，但这些国家与美国之间的显著不同是什么？这不是一个问题，而是一个故事。不同之处在于，我们是山巅之城，而其他国家不是。尽管我们想相信世界各地存在平等，但实际上并没有，每个国家和美国之间存在一个等级体系，而美国是世界上最重要的国家。这给予了我们解决问题的不同条件。我们拥有时间作为一个参数，以及其他许多外国政府的接纳。为什么？因为他们也需要美国取得成功。
There's this very funny quote which is when you owe the bank a million dollars It's your problem, but when you owe the bank a billion dollars. It's their problem This is true here and I think that we have to recognize that The right thing to do is obviously what Ben and Dave are saying. I don't disagree with that But if you panic I think you're going to start a cascade that is unnecessary And by moving to a place where you're all of a sudden trying to cut entitlements incredibly aggressively I don't think sets the stage for thriving American population that then allows This problem to actually be solved. So what is my proposal? I do think we have to monetize the balance sheet of America I do think we own probably 100 trillion to 150 trillion of assets All of us as citizens we own that.
有一句非常有趣的名言：当你欠银行一百万美元时，这是你的问题，但当你欠银行十亿美元时，这是他们的问题。在这里，这句话是正确的。我认为我们必须认识到，显而易见的正确做法就是本和戴夫所说的。我对此并不反对。但如果你恐慌，我认为你会不必要地引发一系列问题。如果你突然极力削减津贴，我认为这不会为一个兴旺的美国人口创造条件，从而解决这个问题。那么我的建议是什么呢？我确实认为我们需要将美国的资产平衡表货币化。我相信我们拥有大约100万亿到150万亿美元的资产，作为公民，我们共同拥有这些资产。
And I do explain what those assets are so people listening because they may not know So the largest landowner in the United States is the United States of America The ability to allow you to drill is given by the United States of America The ability to do many things. By the way, Chimac, I'll just give you the numbers from my interview with Bergam The federal government owns 500 million acres of land And they have control over 3.2 billion acres in the outer continental shelf Which is the land under the ocean around North America the resource availability In that land under the water and in the the kind of main land Is in the kind of immeasurable trillions of dollars of value And their business model Bergam stated business model in the interview I did with him Is land leases and royalties so enter into private partnerships and then participate in the value version I've talked to talk about this so I agree with him.
我来解释一下这些资产是什么，因为听众可能不太了解。美国是美国最大的土地所有者。允许你进行钻探的权力是由美国政府授予的，还有许多其他事情的能力。顺便说一下，从我与博格姆的采访中得到的一些数据：联邦政府拥有5亿英亩的土地，并且控制着北美大陆架之外的32亿英亩海域。这些海底土地和大陆上的资源价值以难以估量的数万亿美元计。在我与博格姆的采访中，他提到联邦政府的商业模式是通过土地租赁和特许权收入来进行。他们与私人企业合作，参与价值转换。对此，我表示认可。
We're talking about a balance sheet again. I said 100 trillion You could probably make the case that it's two or three or four hundred trillion But let's just use 100 trillion My point is that our balance sheet is much larger than our debt obligations Number one, number two, we owe $33 trillion dollars It's as much their problem as our problem And number three, every country that owns that Does so in part because they need America to be successful so that they themselves can be successful So I think if you look at all of these interdependencies the right thing to do is we need to Monetize the balance sheet of America much more aggressively than we've looked at before.
我们再次谈论资产负债表。我提到过100万亿。你也可以说是200万亿、300万亿，甚至400万亿。但是，我们先用100万亿来讨论。我的重点是， 我们的资产负债表比我们的债务义务大得多。首先，我们欠了33万亿美元。其次，这不仅是我们的问题，也是他们的问题。还有，第三，持有这些债务的每个国家这样做的部分原因是，他们需要美国成功，以便他们自己也能成功。所以，我认为如果你看所有这些相互依赖关系，正确的做法是，我们需要比以前更积极地利用美国的资产负债表。
And two what Dave and Ben said we must do which is we need to draw a firm line And say no new spending I completely agree with that idea But I think if you do both of those two things at once You have meaningful inflows That can fund a lot of the tax cuts that people want to propose It'll also allow us to show that we have some level of discipline by not overspending in all of these other random pork barrel projects And I think it allows us to set a path towards this three three three plan just to be clear to everybody what's got Besson's three three three plan is it's three percent dollio dollio's plan It's three percent inflation It's three percent GDP growth And it's a three percent deficit to GDP percentage And if we do that That's the Renaissance in the United States mathematically okay, we can quibble about the politics But it would be a economic and mathematical Renaissance.
根据Dave和Ben的建议，我们必须划清一条明确的界限，停止任何新的开支。我完全同意这个观点。但我认为，如果你同时做到这两点，就会有意义重大的资金流入，这可以支持很多人想要提出的减税措施。这也让我们能够展示出一定程度的财政纪律，不会在其他任意的利益项目上超支。我认为，这使我们能够朝着所谓的“三三三计划”迈进。为了让大家更清楚这个计划是什么，Besson的“三三三计划”包括：3%的通货膨胀率、3%的GDP增长率和3%的财政赤字占GDP的百分比。如果我们做到这些，那么美国将迎来一次“文艺复兴”。从数学上来说，我们可以对政治因素进行讨论，但这将是一次经济和数学上的复兴。
So that's what I would do if this is the best plan that Jason Smith and Mike Craypo can get done between the House and the Senate. If this is the best plan, I urge the United States government to figure out how to start aggressively and quickly monetizing our balance sheet. I'll just respond to two things. Let me just ask one question: The land we're talking about here, Friedberg, and the oil, I guess, or the minerals that are under the ocean floor—everything. Well, I mean, what else is there under the ocean floor? I go to the question: Where are our assets? Yeah, so, who's gonna buy the—um, yeah, okay, who is the customer? I think is what we're all wondering.
如果这是Jason Smith和Mike Craypo在众议院和参议院之间能完成的最好计划，那么这就是我会采取的行动。我敦促美国政府想办法积极且迅速地货币化我们的资产负债表。 我只想回应两点。让我先问一个问题：我们所讨论的土地、Friedberg，还有石油，我猜，或者海底的矿产——所有这些。那么，海底还有什么呢？我的问题是：我们的资产在哪里呢？对了，谁会买——嗯，好吧，谁是客户？这应该是我们都在想的问题。
Of this land in the United States and for what purpose? The private companies that would then use those resources to manufacture critical requirements for the United States and other countries who are buying. For example, the US is now the largest exporter of methane. We have four pipelines that go to this facility that I visited with Doug in the interview I did in Louisiana. They liquefy that natural gas, which is methane. They put it on ships. Those ships go to India, they go to Taiwan, they go to Japan. So, US companies are selling liquid methane that we’re playing out of the ground to those countries that they then use to heat their homes and power electricity production.
在美国的这片土地上，这些资源被私营公司使用来制造满足美国和其他购买国家需求的重要产品。举个例子，现在美国是甲烷的最大出口国。我们有四条管道连接到我和道格在路易斯安那访问时看到的设施，他们在那里将天然气（也就是甲烷）液化。然后把它装上船，这些船运往印度、台湾和日本。因此，美国公司正在将从地下开采出来的液态甲烷出售给这些国家，而这些国家随后用它来为家庭取暖和发电。
We don't necessarily need to go back today and say, hey, let's cut entitlement programs deeply. We should certainly make entitlement programs more efficient. We don't need to. All we have to do is take all the other programs and reset them to COVID or pre-COVID level and, secondly, get rid of all the new programs. What's wrong? Okay, so we all agree on the new program. No, my wife—she says she texted me. She's sitting there and she does things to tilt me. She says this morning in this serious moment, my wife last week I was gonna find last night and I just sent her a very quick text that said I'm really sorry about last night.
我们并不一定需要今天就回去说：嘿，让我们大幅度削减福利项目。我们当然应该让这些福利项目更高效。我们不需要这样做。我们需要做的只是将所有其他项目重置到疫情期间或疫情之前的水平，其次，取消所有新项目。有什么问题吗？好吧，所以我们都同意关于新项目的看法。不，事实上，我的妻子——她给我发了短信。她坐在那里，总是做些让我心烦的事。今天早晨，在这个严肃的时刻，我的妻子让我想起上周我打算昨晚再找她谈谈，然后我只是发了一条非常简短的短信给她，说我对昨晚的事真的很抱歉。
She says I've moved on. Just the plane comes from the—Did you send her that text? She moved on while I was talking about— I was your last fight with your wife over. Let's get it all out on the—you know, by the way. To a fight, it's like with them. I'm gonna play with them flying back. Oh my God, I asked how do you—you were talking to a—a—who are anxious, and you are the way you look at the way—No, it's more serious and that it's like when you're in it, like in a coffee house or coffee shop in Europe, and there's this like European couple speaking some language you don't understand.
她说我已经走出来了。只是飞机来自——你给她发那个短信了吗？当我在谈论的时候，她已经走开了——那是你和你妻子的最后一次争吵吗？我们把一切都摊开来说吧——顺便说一下。这就像是一场争吵，和他们在一起。我打算和他们一起玩，飞回去。天啊，我问你是怎么——你在和一个——一个焦虑的人说话，你看的方式是——不，这更严肃，就像你在其中，比如在欧洲的咖啡馆里，有一对欧洲夫妇说着你听不懂的语言。
The more you hang out with us, there will be a moment where you will observe me in that fighting. It will be a multi-hour affair. It is not initiated by me. It's not I want to keep it going. It does end with a passionate love-making from a 12, 12, 36. It's a full of six minutes of a—exibiltion. Honestly, right now, six minutes feels like a long time. But I'm still as I'm— We eat them at leftover managot. It's an incredible tradition in Italy. We fight three hours, but we make love for four minutes and then we eat.
越是与你们相处，就越有可能见到我卷入那种争吵。这会是一场持续数小时的事情，但并不是由我发起的，而且我也不想让它持续下去。最终，它会以一次热情的亲密结束，从12到12再到36。这可能是一场总共持续六分钟的表现。说实话，目前六分钟对我来说感觉已经很长了。而在此期间，我们还会吃剩下的意大利面管面。这是一种在意大利的独特传统：我们吵架三个小时，然后相爱四分钟，之后再吃东西。
Get the thing back on track on the routes. I want to ask you an important question, Dave, if I may. Are you, as a man of science who believes in global warming and who cares about the environment—is it a great idea? Is what a lot of people are thinking here: great, great idea first to rip everything out of the ocean shelf in Alaska and sell all this incredible land we have that's preserved with nature and trees to far end governments and people who own our debt? Is this a great idea? You have concerns about this very question, austerity, and maybe not buying as many bombs?
把事情重新引回正轨。我想问你一个重要的问题，戴夫，如果可以的话。作为一个相信全球变暖并关心环境的科学家，你觉得这是一个好主意吗？很多人都在想：首先把阿拉斯加海洋架上的一切都移走，然后把我们保存着自然和树木的土地卖给远方的政府和拥有我们债务的人，这真的是一个好主意吗？对于这个问题，你有顾虑吗，比如紧缩政策，以及可能不再购买那么多武器？
Here's the economic argument: Energy demand, heating demand, power demand is growing globally with or without the United States. Okay, does the United States, which produces that energy cleaner than anyone else, want to participate and benefit from that energy demand? Or do we want to leave it to other countries that are going to do it in a dirtier way? And what do I mean by that? So, natural gas is methane. I'll just give you the natural gas story real quick.
以下是经济学方面的论点：无论有没有美国，全球的能源、供暖和电力需求都在增长。那么，美国作为全球最清洁的能源生产国之一，是希望参与并从这种能源需求中获益呢，还是将其留给其他以更不环保方式生产能源的国家？我所说的“更不环保”是什么意思？让我简单介绍一下天然气。天然气主要成分是甲烷。
We pull it out of the ground—we figured out a technique for putting pressure into the ground that pressure forces the methane to come up through the rocks. And then we capture that methane, and then we liquefy it—so reduce it down by like 800 times size. So now it's liquid. It's negative 160 degrees Celsius, and we can transport it. Methane, when it burns to create electricity, is 60% less carbon into the atmosphere than burning oil or coal.
我们从地下提取天然气——我们找到了一种技术，通过向地下施压，使压力迫使甲烷气体通过岩石上升。然后我们捕捉到这些甲烷，并将其液化，使体积减少到大约原来的800分之一。这样，甲烷就成了液体，温度为零下160摄氏度，便于运输。甲烷在燃烧发电时，相比于燃烧石油或煤炭，碳排放量减少了60%。
So the first argument is methane is a cleaner way of producing electricity than oil or coal, which would be alternatives. However, when methane leaks, it's 80 times more heat capture than CO2. So you've got to make sure that your methane production, your methane extraction systems are tight, aren't leaking methane, and that makes it cleaner. And we've been that regulation in America, and other countries don't. And other countries don't do it's good a job Etc. Etc. And then that power is going to be generated and someone's going to make that energy somewhere. So if it is a cleaner power source and we can make it cleaner and we can do it better, then it's certainly the case the United States should be, as we are today, an LNG or liquefied natural gas or liquid methane exporter.
第一个观点是，甲烷比石油或煤炭这种替代品产生的电力更清洁。然而，当甲烷泄漏时，它产生的热量捕获能力比二氧化碳高出80倍。因此，你必须确保甲烷的生产和提取系统是严格密封的，不会泄漏甲烷，这样才能算作更清洁。在美国，我们已经实施了相关的法规，而其他国家并没有做到这一点，或者没有做得那么好。以及这电力总是要被产生出来，由某处的人来生产。因此，如果甲烷是一种更清洁的能源，而我们能够将其做到更清洁，更高效，美国就有理由成为液化天然气或液化甲烷的出口国，就像我们今天一样。
So that's like also can I can I build on this. Can I also it's like can Americans grow up? I mean these are industries that have to exist, have the courage to have some hierarchy and some priorities please. Like we are talking about a potential debt spiral on the one hand we're talking about cutting entitlements on the other, and people want to run around and basically say don't do anything. Well, don't do anything is not an option.
所以，这就像说，我能不能在这个基础上发展一下。我能不能也说说，美国人能不能成熟一点？我的意思是，有些行业是必须存在的，但我们需要有点勇气去建立一些层级结构和优先顺序。我们一方面在谈论可能的债务螺旋问题，另一方面又在讨论削减福利，而人们却四处奔走，基本上在说什么都别做。但无所作为不是一个选项。
So yeah monetize the assets. Okay, you may not like the way that Trump says it when he says drilled baby drill, but the actual outcome is the same. We need to monetize, we need to generate revenue in the United States as quickly as possible. We need to do the things that maintain technical supremacy. We need to do the things that maintain political supremacy. If we don't, we will be a second and third tier country. Why does anybody in America want that? If you're an American citizen that wants that, go to another country.
好的，那就对资产进行变现吧。你可能不喜欢特朗普说“开采吧，开采”的方式，但实际结果是一样的。我们需要变现，需要尽快在美国创造收入。我们需要做那些能保持技术优势的事情，保持政治优势的事情。如果我们不这样做，我们将成为二流或三流国家。为什么会有美国人希望这样呢？如果你是希望这样发展的美国公民，那就去其他国家吧。
Ben, as we're saying here, do you think maybe we do solar or maybe clean gas here, drill baby drill? Or probably some people in the audience are thinking, well, why don't you rich guys pay one percent more taxes and cut the military 5% and then a little bit of austerity measures on the margin sound like a better strategy? How would you respond to that argument that many people in the audience are probably thinking right now?
本，我们在这讨论的是，你认为我们应该发展太阳能还是清洁天然气，比如“钻探吧，宝贝，钻探”？也许观众中有人在想，为什么你们这些有钱人不多缴1%的税，把军费削减5%，再采取一些边际上的紧缩措施，这听起来不是一个更好的策略吗？对于这个很多观众可能在想的观点，你会怎么回应呢？
So I mean if the numbers added up that might be plausible but the numbers just don't add up. I mean the idea that if you just incrementally increase the top tax bracket that's going to pay off the massive Nationals that we have racked up or the national deficit that we're racking up every year, the numbers don't add up in any way like that. And when you take a look at energy production the same thing is true. So there's not going to be making up for LNG anytime soon. That's for sure true globally.
我的意思是，如果数据对得上，这个想法可能有道理，但事实是数据根本对不上。就是说，仅仅通过小幅提高最高税率就能还清我们积累的大量国债或每年增加的财政赤字，这在数据上根本说不通。再看看能源生产，情况也是一样的。所以，短时间内不可能弥补液化天然气的不足，这在全球范围内都是肯定的。
And you know when it comes to America's role in the world, which is the biggest thing here, when it taught when we talk about cutting the military budget, that always sounds sexy, but the reality is that undergirding things like for example the big deals the president Trump is cutting in Saudi and UAE is the giant American airbase that we have in Qatar and the ability of the United States to provide the defense mechanisms for those countries. I mean let's be very clear about what's going on in the Middle East. If the United States did not exist, there's a solid shot that the Saudi monarchy, the Qatar Emirates and the UAE would not exist in their current form and you would have something like a Muslim brotherhood running many of those nations.
当谈到美国在世界上的角色时，这是最重要的事情。很多人认为削减军费听起来很吸引人，但实际上，比如说，在沙特阿拉伯和阿联酋，特朗普总统签订的大型协议背后支持的，是美国在卡塔尔的巨大空军基地，以及美国为这些国家提供的防御机制。也就是说，我们必须清楚地了解中东的局势。如果没有美国的存在，沙特的君主制、卡塔尔的酋长国和阿联酋可能无法以它们现在的形式存在，很可能会有类似穆斯林兄弟会的政权在这些国家中掌权。
And so the reality is that always backing American soft power is the threat of American hard power. And this is for sure true when you look at things like what's going on in Taiwan. I mean one of the ways that we, you guys know much more about this than I do, one of one of the ways we've been talking about getting out of the possible debt spiral is massive increases in productivity due to AI. Well, if China out competes us in AI or if China were to take Taiwan like right now, that would basically crush the hope of that.
事实是，美国软实力总是以美国硬实力为后盾。尤其是在涉及台湾的问题上，这一点显而易见。我想你们可能比我更了解这个问题，其中一个我们讨论过的摆脱可能的债务螺旋的方法就是通过人工智能带来的大幅度生产力提升。然而，如果中国在人工智能领域超过我们，或者如果中国现在拿下台湾，这种希望基本上就会破灭。
And the reason that China is not doing that right now is because number one we actually are building up the American naval assets President Trump is working on that, but number two because we are rapidly scaling with regard to our own energy production. I mean you have to be an energy intensive nation in order to produce AI. And so the United States has to play this game. If we're not playing this game, we're losing. I mean China is out producing us that energy about leaps and bounds right now.
翻译如下：
中国目前没有这样做的原因有两个：首先，我们正在加强美国的海军力量，特朗普总统正在致力于此。其次，我们正在迅速提高自己的能源生产能力。一个国家要想生产人工智能，就必须是一个能源密集型国家。因此，美国必须参与这场竞争。如果我们不参与，我们就会输掉比赛。现在，中国在能源生产方面远远超过了我们。
So my simple request for Americans is don't be mathematically illiterate and let's all grow up together come on. Yeah, yeah, and I'll just say like no just to go back a couple comments to Chimoff's point. Number one monetize our assets, totally agree. There's opportunities, we got to do it in a clean way, we follow the law, we follow the EPA's there to make sure that these methods and systems that we use are not in danger, species or the planet or whatever other kind of acts were important. But I'm not sure that the ramp up is gonna make up for the deficit. that's really important as I it's great to say that at a high level There's a north star there we can monetize our assets.
因此，我对美国人的简单请求是，不要在数学上无知，让我们一起成长。是的，是的，我只是想回应一下齐莫夫的观点。第一，资产变现，我完全同意。我们有很多机会，但必须以合规的方式来做，我们需要遵循法律和环保局的规定，以确保我们使用的方法和系统不会对物种、地球或任何其他重要法案造成危害。但是，我不太确定这种加速能否弥补赤字。这一点非常重要，高层次地说，我们可以将资产变现是好的指导方向。
But as you build out the annual plan over the next 10 to 15 years first of all Political cycles are gonna affect this If the Democrats come back into power in this next election cycle they'll put a blockade on this stuff It's not gonna be persistent so again, we have to fix the spending problem And this idea that we have to cut in tidalments to fix the spending problem I don't even think that that's step one. I think step one is don't add new programs step two go back to covid level spending And then step three is you can address the entitlements and all the other kind of spending and step four as you execute as quickly as you can On monetizing America's assets.
在未来的10到15年中制定年度计划时，首先要考虑到政治周期的影响。如果在下一个选举周期中民主党再次掌权，他们可能会阻止这些行动。 这种情况不会是持久的，因此我们必须解决开支问题。关于削减福利来解决开支问题的想法，我甚至不认为这是第一步。我认为第一步是不再增加新的计划，第二步是回到疫情期间的开支水平，然后第三步才是处理福利和其他各类开支。第四步则是尽快执行并充分利用美国的资产。
But I'm not sure that the ramp up is gonna be fast enough to make up for the deficit of the next one One quick comment here also that I think is important and that that is that the American people We're gonna have to get used to the idea that we can't just spend every dollar that comes in. So if you take a look at the the Spanish Empire in the 16th century Spanish Empire in the 16th century is a dominant power in Europe And then they discover all the gold in the new world and so suddenly They are easily the richest power on earth because of the amount of money that's coming in and they immediately start spending all of it and they immediately start Expending all of that capital in order to build up and build up and do different projects and pretty soon They're bankrupt and they're defaulting on their debt routinely.
但我不确定增加速度是否足够快以弥补下一个缺口。这里有一个重要的点要提一下，那就是美国人民需要习惯不能随便花进来的每一分钱。就像16世纪的西班牙帝国，那时候它是欧洲的强权，然后在新大陆发现了大量黄金，突然间它成为全球最富有的国家因为大量金钱的涌入。西班牙立刻开始花光这些钱，用于各种建设和项目。但很快，他们就破产了，债务还经常违约。
I mean it there's there's not a correlation between your asset base and inability to go bankrupt I mean we all know very rich people who go bankrupt because they Outspend their asset base and then in the United States We can expand our asset base for sure and we should do that of course But if we don't wean ourselves from the addiction to spending particularly on social programs because that's what's gonna bankrupt us. Then all we will do if we increase our asset base and say hey look how much more money We now get to spend because there just so you know Chimoff did hit the brakes before he hit that situation He hit the brake pump the brakes and I touched a couple billion but I learned a couple lessons.
我的意思是，资产基础和无法破产之间并没有直接的关联。我们都知道有些非常富有的人仍然会破产，因为他们的开销超过了他们的资产。在美国，我们当然可以扩大我们的资产基础，并且应该这么做。但是，如果我们不摆脱对消费的依赖，尤其是对社会项目的过度消费，这将导致我们破产。即使我们的资产基础增加了，我们也不能因此就增加花费，否则会陷入更深的困境。顺便说一下，Chimoff在即将遇到这种情况时踩下了刹车，他反复认真思考并从中学到了几个教训。
He almost flipped the car. I Not not really, but I think I just want to pick up on what Ben and Dave said This is a great opportunity for us to grow up as a society collectively to have some priorities The problem that we have right now is we allow all kinds of fringe belly aching and we don't have a good sense making mechanism to prioritize that belly aching And so everything seems like a class five hurricane And everything is not a class five hurricane and how we respond should be Proportion we need to React proportionally to the actual challenge at hand and I think what Maybe it's just said differently is this is a class five category issue.
他差点把车翻了。我不是这个意思，但我想接着本和戴夫的话题说，这对我们整个社会来说是一个很好的成长机会，让我们明确一些优先事项。我们现在的问题是，我们允许各种无关紧要的抱怨，没有一个好的机制来判断和优先处理这些抱怨，所以看上去一切都像是五级飓风。然而事实并非如此，我们的反应应该与面临的实际挑战成比例。我觉得，换个说法，这确实是一个五级飓风级别的问题。
How we spend and our revenues are completely completely broken So we need a new way of addressing it and the people that Would have issues with how that salt need to have the maturity to actually point to what the alternative is Because there is no way to quickly raise several trillion dollars without selling land and without giving land leases and without taking royalties for drilling. And so they should say explicitly I would rather the country Go into a debt spiral and go bankrupt. Okay, then just say that Yeah, I mean and to the point of taxes if you even if you raise taxes 20% on the rich it's gonna like impact three talking about the year It's not impossible.
我们的支出和收入机制已经完全出了问题，因此我们需要寻找新的解决方法。如果有人对解决方案有异议，他们应该有足够的成熟度来明确指出他们的替代方案。因为我们无法快速筹集数万亿美元，而不出售土地、不进行土地租赁、不收取钻井特许权使用费。所以，如果他们宁愿看到国家陷入债务螺旋并最终破产，那就直接说明。如果谈到税收，就算对富人增税20%，这对整年来说影响也不大。
It's the pimple on the dogs ass people We have to stop the spending train. Hey, let's talk about um You want to go farmer? Do we want to go science coordinator? I don't want to have you Mr. Science quenna there free My science governor today is just a rant against the governors who are signing laws banning cellular meat And I'll just hit on it real quick. Oh, this is a this is a your this is your take-to on this because you've done this once this rant Correct governor de Santis did this in Florida since then Alabama Mississippi, Indiana. What's your issue with the cellular meat sir? Cover it Like a little pepperoni This week this week Montana's governor Greg G on forte signed a law house bill 401 banning cellular meat That bill goes into effect on October 1st you guys can.
这是狗屁股上的粉刺，我们必须停止消费浪潮。嘿，我们来聊聊吧。你想当农夫还是科学协调员？我今天不想让你这种所谓的科学家来干扰我的想法。今天我对那些签署禁令细胞肉法案的州长进行了一番抱怨，我会简单快速地说一下。这是你第二次谈论这个话题，因为你之前已经讨论过一次。没错，包括佛罗里达州的德桑蒂斯在内的州长已经开始这样做了，之后阿拉巴马州、密西西比州、印第安纳州也跟进了。你对细胞肉有什么意见？简单扼要地讲解一下，例如像小片意大利辣肠那样。本周，蒙大拿州州长格雷格·吉安福特签署了众议院法案401，禁止细胞肉，这项法案将在10月1日生效。你们可以...
laugh all you want if it was in a market that you were an investor in In innovation or technology for example if they said we ban AI in our state How would you guys react what sort of opinion or commentary would you guys have over? Move around move around the state let the state go to zero and then come pick up the average We have 49 other and I think that's really important and now by the way There's a house bill being proposed to do the same thing throughout the United States Meanwhile China and Europe are building cellular meat systems that are rocketing ahead They're actually economic drivers because they make the cost of food cheaper.
笑吧，如果在一个你投资的市场里，比如说创新或技术领域，他们宣布在该州禁止人工智能，你们会有什么反应？会有什么看法或评论？我们还有49个州，可以四处走走，让那个州自生自灭，然后再回来拾取平均值。我觉得这真的很重要。顺便说一下，现在有一个众议院法案正在提议在整个美国执行类似的禁令。与此同时，中国和欧洲正在快速推进细胞培育肉类系统，这些系统实际上成为了经济的驱动因素，因为它们降低了食品成本。
They're creating new industries There's a lot of supply chain that goes into these industries Whether consumers like or want to buy the product or not should be left to the consumer It should be a free market the market should decide as long as they're regulated check for health check for safety as they all are today The FDA the USDA and others are all involved in regulating these systems They shouldn't be banned because in every single state what is it the reason we're banning them is to protect our ranchers our cattle ranchers And so in all these cases they're saying that that's making no protectionism no, but that's I look I take this very different view I mean These are okay.
他们正在创建新的产业，这些产业涉及大量的供应链。消费者是否喜欢或愿意购买这些产品应该由他们自己决定。市场应该是自由的，只要有健康和安全的监管，比如目前由FDA、USDA等机构负责的监管。这些产品不应该被禁止，因为在每个州，禁止的原因都是为了保护我们的牧场主和养牛场主。在所有这些情况下，有人说这不是保护主义，但我持有不同的观点，我觉得这样做是合理的。
Let's ban Uber to protect the cap drivers But what we just did 90 What's I guess the cap is easy? Yeah, I don't like the benevolent dictatorship model of running a country each of these 50 states have the ability to make decisions Some are good some are bad some are neutral if they want to make fundamentally bad decisions for themselves Let them if they want to make fundamentally good decisions for them let them at the end of the day Those populations in those places are making those decisions.
让我们禁止优步，以保护出租车司机，但是我们刚刚做了90，这是怎么回事？我觉得做出限制很简单？是的，我不喜欢那种仁慈独裁的国家管理模式。这50个州中的每一个都有能力做决定，有些决定是好的，有些是不好的，有些是中立的。如果他们想为自己做出原则上不好的决定，就让他们做。如果他们想为自己做出原则上好的决定，也让他们做。归根结底，这些地方的人们在做这些决定。
I don't see it as a big deal Yeah, and I think the reason is that most of the consumers 95% of them don't give a shit about the product Whereas Uber and others were different many people did care about the product But fundamentally it unlocks economic opportunities that they don't see today And I think that's what's really frustrating about this is a small cohort that's created regulatory capture mechanisms By getting these laws passed in these states these are this rancher industry can I say something cattle as somebody who's tried this that meets success? Okay, yeah, the meat was delicious That's fine. Just be honest with you No, this is my point.
我不认为这是什么大问题。我觉得原因在于，大多数消费者（95%）对这个产品毫不在意。而像Uber这样的公司则不同，有很多人关心他们的产品。但从根本上来说，这些产品能够打开他们今天尚未意识到的经济机会。我觉得让人感到沮丧的是，有一小部分群体通过在一些州推动立法，建立了监管垄断机制。这是这个牧场行业的现状。能不能从尝试过成功的人的角度来说一下？好吧，我试过，这肉很好吃。没问题，只是实话实说。这就是我的观点。
I've never had it. I don't give it about the meat. It's not let me make my point If this product was exceptionally delicious It would be widely consumed all over America and this would never come to pass because there were taxi drivers in Montana But the reality was Uber was better in Montana And there were taxi drivers in Florida, but Uber was better in Florida And my point is that when the product is so good It allows adoption and it quels The naysayers at the fringes.
我从来没有吃过它。我对肉本身并不在意。我想表达的重点是，如果这个产品真的特别美味，它就会在整个美国广泛流行，这种质疑就不会出现。就像在蒙大拿州有出租车司机，但因为Uber更好，所以人们选择Uber。在佛罗里达也是一样，虽然有出租车司机，但Uber更受欢迎。我想说的是，当一个产品足够优秀时，它会被广泛接受，同时让那些边缘的反对者也无话可说。
Okay, let me point to you when the product is a little bit more man But what if someone banned Uber before it had a chance to get there? That's a good point I mean, I think your point is there was no offer to be developing technology. It's early stay on And they're stopping it because what would happen is there were places that banned Uber and what happened? They all flipped that's because because Unforward and broke the law No, no, we reinterpreted regulation even tried I was there of what's right for the people of America what I'm saying is not in the place that it was banned But there were enough places around it.
好吧，让我指给你看，当产品更加成熟时，但如果有人在Uber还没有机会发展起来之前就禁止了它呢？这是一个很好的观点，我觉得你的意思是，当时并没有被提供去发展这项技术的机会。它还处于早期阶段，他们因此就阻止了它。但是你看看那些禁止了Uber的地方，后来发生了什么？他们都改变了立场，因为Uber勇往直前并突破了法律。不是的，我们重新解释了法规，甚至尝试找出对美国人民有利的解决方案。我想说的是，不是在被禁止的地方，而是在它周围有足够多支持的地方。
Yes, where the product value could be demonstrated and government But tomorrow that doesn't mean you pass a law banning it. You should still let the country do it It's right for capture Ah who cares if this was some one of your companies, Chimalt and they were banning some Farma company or social media or some bullshit that you'd started or gotten vested in you'd be all up in arm saying They're blocking us. They're keeping us from developing. We're early stay in I wouldn't try. No, I don't I don't cry. I'm not an investor and anything that's going to benefit from this. I think it's tough Well, I don't think so because it happens all the time I would say get over it grow up figure out the markets where you can make it and Make the product excellent so that then all these people in these states at You know, I have a very different point of view on regulatory capture capitalism and free markets Chimalt That's a fact.
是的，当产品价值可以被证明时，政府就会参与。但是，这并不意味着你可以通过法律来禁止它。你仍然应该让国家去做，才是正确的选择。谁在乎这是否是你的某家公司，像Chimalt，他们禁止了一家制药公司或社交媒体公司，或者是你创立或投资的某个项目，你会大发雷霆，说他们在阻碍我们，阻止我们发展。我们处于早期阶段，我不会尝试的。不是的，我不抱怨。我不是这个事件中会受益的投资者。我认为这很困难。不过我不这么认为，因为这种情况经常发生。我会说，克服它，成熟一点，找出你能够成功的市场，把产品做好，让这些州的人们看到。对监管俘获资本主义和自由市场，我有非常不同的看法。Chimalt，这就是事实。
No, no, no, no I mean, would you need a pork that's made in a fermentation tank? It's just make this is Jewish you got to bring up poor I'm actually curious about this. I'm sorry. Oh, this is the only reason I'm interested in this topic at all This is like it's not to get into extrude Jewish law But this is like an actual open question is that if you grew pork in a tank and it didn't come from an actual pain What did then become kosher and is it considered a vegetable as opposed to a meat because I talked to my brother about it Right, it's like like this stuff to me is really interesting and hey if it gets me to be able to eat bacon I'm all for it like that's it.
不不不不，我的意思是，你需要在发酵罐里生产出来的猪肉吗？这么说可能有点犹太色彩，但我真的对此很好奇，对不起哦。这是我对这个话题感兴趣的唯一原因。这个问题还挺值得探讨的：如果猪肉是在罐子里培育出来的，而不是直接来源于实际的猪，那它是否就符合犹太教的饮食规矩呢？它算是蔬菜而不是肉吗？我和我哥哥讨论过这个问题，对我来说，这是非常有趣的。如果这样让我能吃上培根，我完全支持！就是这样。
I've heard amazing things the reviews are excellent on bacon Yeah, okay, let's go to farm here shout out to Long Hill Bacchina steaks will send you Oh, I just made an order from Long Hill I just bought five hundred dollars worth of stuff. I got a discount though They I don't know if you got the email, but if you put the Memorial Day promo code you get 10% off. Oh I have to get paid for the order with long Hill Wagyu While I mix and mix it up. I mix up the kind no, I do the pecania, but I do some Denver steaks sometimes I mix them Nice, yeah, I like the New York strip.
我听说关于培根的评价非常好，是啊，好，我们去农场那里，感谢Long Hill Bacchina，他们会寄给你牛排。我刚从Long Hill下了一笔订单，买了价值五百美元的东西。不过我有拿到折扣。我不知道你有没有收到邮件，但如果你使用纪念日促销代码，可以享受9折优惠。哦，我得付Long Hill Wagyu的订单，我会混合购买不同的种类。我有时候会买pecania，有时候买一些Denver牛排来混合。不错，我喜欢纽约客牛排。
We'll send just a Ben you eat steak right of course of course of course I'll try this place called Long Hill Wagyu. It kicks us right by me and Austin it is incredible And you know Freiburg doesn't eat meat and you know It's just the nature of it. Okay, let's wrap on farm. Okay, Trump signed an executive order to slash drunk prices on Monday I mean, this is like a great week for Trump.
我们会派一个叫本的人，你当然可以吃牛排，当然，当然。我会尝试一个叫长山和牛的地方。这个地方就在我和奥斯汀附近，真的很棒。而你知道，弗莱堡不吃肉，这没办法。好吧，我们来聊聊农场的事。哦，特朗普在星期一签署了一项行政命令，旨在大幅降低酒类价格。对特朗普来说，这真是个好星期。
I like everything Trump did this week The goal is to cut prices 30 to 80% by giving the US MFN if you don't know This stands for most favored nation status. That's a generic term in business It means we get to pay the same price of whichever country gets the lowest price for a specific drug This executive order would cut out the famous middleman He's talking about pbms you've heard more Cuban friend of the pod talk about that a whole bunch Here's rfk juniors quote Congress is controlled in so many ways by the pharmaceutical industry. This was an issue The people talked about but nobody wanted to do anything because it was radio active It's radioactive obviously Chimoff because Listen, so many politicians are getting donations and lobbyists What's your take on this obviously?
我喜欢特朗普本周所做的一切。目标是通过给予美国“最惠国待遇”来将价格降低30%至80%。如果你不清楚，“最惠国待遇”是个商业术语，意味着我们可以以获取特定药品最低价格的国家相同的价格购买这些药品。这项行政命令将淘汰著名的中间商，他指的是药品福利管理者（PBMs），你可能听过我们的朋友Mark Cuban多次提到过。这里引用一下RFK Jr.的话：“国会在很多方面被制药行业控制。这个问题人们谈论很多，但没人敢做什么，因为这就像放射性物质。”显然是放射性，因为很多政客都收到捐款和游说。你对此有何看法？
Amore is in this business and is in pharmaceutical so she has some great insights I'm sure as you do yeah, let me Start by talking about the specifics of the EO the really interesting thing about this EO was that there was a very detailed Report that was published in the national bureau of economic research a few years ago that study this exact thing so The president used the term MFN, but the concept here is called international reference pricing.
Amore在这个行业工作，并且从事的是制药领域，所以我相信她有很多很棒的见解，当然你也有。让我先从行政命令（EO）的具体内容说起。这个行政命令相当有趣，因为几年前国家经济研究局曾发表了一份详细的报告，正是研究这一主题。所以总统用到了“MFN”这个术语，但这里的概念实际上是国际参考定价。
Anyways, there was an extremely detailed study that said okay What happens to drug prices when you use this irf pricing mechanism? okay, and What they showed in that study was a very interesting takeaway which is If you set the irf with only one country Typically what happens is for the United States The change is about minus 2% If you do it with a basket the actual profitability of the pharma companies would go up slightly If you had a required comparison meaning it had to be a like for like opportunity Profits fall about 20% and if you use the US bargaining framework then profits could fall about 27.5% so this is the impact Of that but there are a lot more nuances of it.
有一项非常详细的研究探讨了使用国际参考定价机制（IRF）对药品价格的影响。研究显示了一个非常有趣的结果：如果只与一个国家进行对比，美国的药价通常会下降约2%。如果使用一篮子国家进行对比，制药公司的实际盈利能力会略有上升。如果需要进行同类比较，即要求机会相提并论，利润可能下降约20%；而如果使用美国的谈判框架，利润可能下降约27.5%。这就是这种机制的影响，但其中还有很多细微差别。
So the question would be what does this all mean then to the downstream impact of pharma the thing to keep in mind is that We are in a very complicated situation on the rnd side of the house And what this chart shows is clinical trial enrollments in China versus the United States Now this has been happening well before the EO But what this effectively shows is a really important comment which I'll come back to China a few years ago very smartly Completely reformed the way that it does trials And the procedures and as a result what they saw when they had this regulatory reform Was an explosion in the number of clinical trials And there are as many clinical trials now in China as there are in the United States and oftentimes They're bigger which is to say That the amount of innovation And the surface area there is already exceeding what's happening in the west
这个问题的关键是，这对制药行业的下游影响意味着什么。我们需要记住的是，在研发方面，我们所处的情形非常复杂。这个图表展示了中国与美国的临床试验参与情况。这种情况其实在行政令出台之前就已经存在了。实际上，这揭示了一个非常重要的观点：几年前，中国非常聪明地全面改革了试验方式和程序。由于这一监管改革，中国的临床试验数量激增。现在，中国的临床试验数量与美国相当，且规模往往更大。这意味着，中国的创新程度和影响范围已经超越了西方的现状。
So that's where we are now why does this all matter if you go to the next chart To tie it all together As you saw at the beginning International reference pricing has an impact to profits Prophets can have an impact on rnd As we stand today R&D we are neck and neck with the Chinese What is more important to understand is that actually the last 10 years has been very complicated for western pharmaceutical businesses when you look at the average rate of return As an industry These things used to be extremely profitable businesses But as of the last decade It's been very very hard in fact I think like the Delight study that I saw was that the can you believe this the average ROI for broad-based farmers 1.5% as of 2022 per year So if you invest a billion dollars or making back 10 million a year you'll make 10 million bucks Which is not enough to fight this rnd battle
所以，现在我们所处的位置正是如此。为什么这些事情如此重要？如果你看下一张图表来将所有信息串联起来。正如你在开始看到的，国际参考定价会影响利润，而利润则会影响研发（R&D）。以我们目前的状况来说，研发方面我们与中国不相上下。更重要的是，要理解在过去10年里，西方制药企业经历了非常复杂的时期，从整个行业的平均回报率来看。这些企业曾经是非常赚钱的，但在过去十年里，情况变得非常困难。事实上，我看过的一项德勤研究报告显示，截止到2022年，综合制药公司的平均投资回报率仅为1.5%。这意味着，如果你投资10亿美元，每年只能赚回1000万美元，这并不足以支撑这场研发战。
So if you then further affect the profitability scale of pharma The impact is probably that we push rnd to different places So I bring all of this up basically to say I think that what trump did in one vein was brilliant why He took A plank of the democratic party like if you guys think about like what Bernie Sanders ran on yeah It was this and he took it and he jiu jitsued it and now he owns it He'll be able to take credit for it And the democrats are robbed of a very critical Political plank that they had which they'll have to fill in with something else And if you saw by the way Rokana and other folks said oh we agree with this and we'd like to do this via You know some bill so even they had to kind of flip and say yeah This is kind of a good idea
所以，如果你进一步影响药企的盈利能力，可能的影响是我们将研发转向其他地方。我提到这些基本上是为了说，我认为特朗普在某种程度上很聪明。为什么呢？他采用了一个民主党的一项政策主张，比如你们想想伯尼·桑德斯在竞选时的纲领，对吧？就是这个。特朗普巧妙地将其据为己有，并且能够因此获得赞誉。而民主党失去了一个非常关键的政治支柱，他们将不得不用其他事情来填补。而且顺便一提，Rokana和其他一些人都表示同意这个想法，并希望通过某种法案实现这一点，所以他们甚至也不得不转而说，这确实是个不错的主意。
So politically it's good the execution of this is going to be complicated because of what I showed We were already at this Delicate balancing act of how to make sure that there could be a lot of domestic rnd that's was still economically viable The last thing I'll say is We still need to do one important thing Which is I think that this eo is an important start But it doesn't yet address the much bigger problem which is that there is a lot of money That goes to many other things other than drugs so when you look at a dollar of health care spend Which is you know almost 20% of GDP I think the number is that you know there's 30% that is administrative complexity 20% that is pricing failures which is effectively to say PBMs failure of care coordination is 5% over treatment is 10% fraud and abuse is almost 10%
从政治角度来看，这项措施的实施将会很复杂，因为我们已经处在一个如何确保大量国内研发仍具经济可行性的微妙平衡状态。我最后想说的是，我们仍需完成一项重要的任务，我认为这个行政命令是一个重要的开端，但它尚未解决一个更大的问题，即大量资金流向药物以外的许多其他领域。以医疗费用为例，它接近GDP的20%，据我了解，其中30%是由于行政的复杂性，20%是定价失败，换句话说就是药品福利管理的失误，5%是医疗协调不力，10%是过度治疗，几乎10%是因为欺诈和滥用。
So there's a lot of other organizations in this value chain that kind of eat out of that dollar Before it gets to the sense that goes to pharma And so it's important to make sure we don't overlook those the biggest ones being the pBMs Ben your thoughts on this e9% goes to pharma Yeah, but what are your thoughts a ban on this broadly speaking? I mean, I have a general rule if Bernie Sanders likes a policy. I don't like the policy And so the and so when it comes to when it comes to this particular eo I mean the the real problem here for using mfn status as president trump is calling it Is that if we are going to use the kind of tariff tools the president trump has talked about to even the playing field It seems to me this is where you actually should put pressure on places like Canada or Mexico
在这条价值链中，有许多其他组织在每一美元的传递过程中获利，而这些资金还未到达制药公司前已经被分走了大部分。因此，我们必须注意不要忽视这些中间环节，其中最大的就是药品福利管理公司(PBMs)。本，你对此的看法呢？说百分之九的利润归制药公司。是的，但是你对此有些什么广泛的看法呢？总体上，我有一个基本原则：如果伯尼·桑德斯喜欢一项政策，那我通常不喜欢这项政策。所以在这个行政命令（EO）的情况下，我觉得使用特朗普总统所说的国家最惠国待遇（MFN）地位的问题在于，如果我们打算使用特朗普总统所谈论的那些关税工具来平衡竞争环境，那么似乎应该对加拿大或墨西哥等地施加压力。
Or the EU is for them to actually pay their fair share. For the drugs that they are getting from the United States because we're patenting all the drugs over here. And then we're selling it at discount prices to all of these nationalized health care systems. And so if you do that with Medicaid what you will probably get is number one a lot of these pharmaceuticals just won't be used by Medicaid. Pharma won't sell it to them instead you'll have to go into the private sector, which means it's going to be more expensive in the private sector than it would have been otherwise. If you're covered by private insurance, your pharma bill is actually going to be higher than it otherwise would be. What we should be doing is getting other countries to pay their fair share, drive up the price on those other places, and then you can actually do something that looks more like an mfn status because you're not artificially.
或者说，欧盟应该承担他们应付的公平份额。因为他们从美国获取药物，而这些药物的专利都是在美国注册的。然后，我们以折扣价将药物卖给这些国家化的医疗系统。如果这种情况发生在医疗补助中，可能的结果是，这些药物就不会被医疗补助使用。制药公司不会卖给他们，你将不得不在私人市场上购买，这意味着在私人市场上的价格会更高。如果你有私人保险的话，你的药品费用会比本来更高。我们应该做的是让其他国家支付公平份额，提高那些地方的价格，然后你可以实现一些类似于最惠国待遇的做法，而不是人为地...
You're basically squeezing the balloon here and you're inflating the balloon here, the inflation side being the private health care insurers in the United States and private consumers in the United States. And so if you're talking about, you know, just artificially lowering prices by basically clocking pharma, I mean the reality is if you want to kill R&D, this is a great way to kill R&D. People in the United States I don't think have a clue as to how much money gets spent on R&D that crops out because what you see is the big winners. Right, it's like going to a casino and only watching the guy who's got the hot hand with the dice, right? I'm the version with the dice about the hot hand, right? Me. But you don't see the other hundred guys, the casinos absolutely cleaning out.
你可以把这个比作是在这里挤压气球，在那里给气球充气。充气的一方是美国的私人医疗保险公司和私人消费者。也就是说，如果你想通过打击制药行业来人为地降低价格，实际上这就是抑制研发的办法。美国人可能不了解到底有多少钱花在了研发上，因为大家看到的只是那些大赢家。这就像是去赌场，只关注那个手气非常好的掷骰子的人，而看不到其他几百个被赌场清空口袋的人。
And the reality is the vast majority of biotech companies and pharmaceutical startup companies, and people who are trying to do this sort of stuff spend literally billions of dollars and then crap out at phase three of the way after a trial. Then just to build on this because you're making an excellent point, did you guys know what the cost of the average trial was in the early 90s? It was about 250 million dollars. The average cost of that same trial in 2025 is 2.3 billion dollars, 10x. And effectively what happened in that 30-year period was a thousand regulations became a hundred and fifty thousand regulations. And so to your point, one thing that we could do is if this EO, you know, is going to continue and really be implemented in a forceful way, the other side of it is we have to find a way of decreasing the regulatory burden so that then the cost of the trial isn't all the administrative, but it's the core science.
现实情况是，绝大多数生物科技公司、制药初创公司以及从事这类工作的人员，会花费数十亿美元，然后在实验的第三阶段失败。而且，为了补充这个观点，你们知道 90 年代初一个试验的平均成本是多少吗？大约是 2.5 亿美元。到 2025 年，相同试验的平均成本将达到 23 亿美元，是十倍。在这 30 年间，实际上发生的事情是，法规从一千条增加到了十五万条。因此，为了回应您的观点，我们可以做的一件事情就是，如果这一行政命令（EO）会持续并有效实施，那么另一方面，我们必须找到减少监管负担的方法，以便试验的成本不再全部是行政开支，而是核心科学。
And isn't the issue here Friedberg that there is a free market for drugs outside of the United States where they seem to negotiate really well? And then inside the United States, we don't seem to negotiate our prices for drugs as aggressively as Canada, Mexico, and European countries do. As is the case with the cost of education and the cost of housing, the cost of drugs is largely inflated because of the federal government's role in being the primary buyer or capital provider to that market. So similar to how the US government provides all the capital through the federal home loan program and all of the capital through the federal student loan program, the cost of tuition has no market check, and the cost of housing doesn't have a great market check because there's an unlimited, endless supply of capital coming from the federal government.
问题不就在于此吗，Friedberg？在美国以外的地方有一个自由的药品市场，他们似乎在谈判中表现得很好。而在美国，药品价格的谈判似乎没有加拿大、墨西哥和欧洲国家那么积极。与教育和住房成本的情况一样，药品成本大幅上涨，主要是因为联邦政府在这个市场中扮演了主要买家或资本提供者的角色。就像美国政府通过联邦住房贷款计划提供所有资本，以及通过联邦学生贷款计划提供所有资本一样，学费和住房的成本很难受到市场的制约，因为政府提供的资本几乎是无限的。
Similarly, through our purchases of prescription drugs, the federal government as a buyer doesn't have any incentive to keep prices low. There's no individual, there's no shareholder, there's no one that has um check that says you know what we're actually not going to buy that drug because it costs too much or hey we need an alternative. If every individual had to pay for their drugs or private insurance was the only way to get your drugs, was through private insurance, we would have a much more dynamic marketplace. So the way that we negotiate drug prices is pretty messed up. There's also this construct in the market, these PBMs are pharmacy benefit managers. If they got cut out of the market it would save a lot.
同样地，通过购买处方药，联邦政府作为买方并没有动力去压低药品价格。没有个人，没有股东，没有人能够说，"你知道吗，我们实际上不会购买那种药，因为它太贵了"，或者提出"嘿，我们需要一个替代方案"。如果每个人都必须自己支付药物费用，或者私人保险是获得药物的唯一方式，我们的市场将更加活跃。所以，我们目前协商药品价格的方式是存在很大问题的。市场上还有一个叫做PBM（药房福利管理者）的结构，如果能将它们从市场中移除，会节省很多成本。
I'll just give you guys some numbers on these PBMs. There's three major PBMs: CVS Caremark, Express Scripts, and Optum Rx. These three companies make on average approximately three bucks in operating profit per prescription claim processed. They make money in markups; the FTC's been investigating them and have several open cases between 2017-2022. The estimate that these companies generated seven point three billion dollars in excess profit by marking up prices on specialty generic drugs.
让我给大家提供一些关于这些药品福利管理公司的数字。目前有三大药品福利管理公司：CVS Caremark、Express Scripts 和 Optum Rx。这三家公司平均每处理一个处方请求，就能赚取大约三美元的营业利润。他们通过价格加成来赚钱；联邦贸易委员会（FTC）一直在调查他们，并在2017年至2022年间有几个未结案件。据估计，这些公司通过提高特殊仿制药的价格，产生了73亿美元的额外利润。
The list goes on on kind of the egregious behavior and the role that they play as middlemen in the industry. Their job and I'll kind of describe it is to be the managers of prescription drug benefits on behalf of the health insurers, large employers, Medicare Part D plans, and other payers. So as an intermediary, they provide this role where they coordinate between the health insurer, the pharmacy which dispenses the drugs, and the drug manufacturing allowed to be owned by the payer, which is crazy.
这个清单中列举了他们作为行业中间人时极端行为的种种例子。他们的工作，我简单描述一下，就是代表健康保险公司、大型雇主、Medicare Part D计划和其他支付方来管理处方药福利。作为中间人，他们在健康保险公司、提供药品的药房以及被支付方所拥有的药品制造商之间进行协调，这种安排简直让人难以置信。
And now they're allowed to be owned by the payer and there's a lot of obfuscation of the true cost of the drugs. There's a lot of markups, a lot of spread taking. And so if you took the PBMs out of the market that would solve one of the problems. But at the end of the day, I've said this many many times before anytime the federal government is involved as a payer in any market-based system it creates a distortion and the market is no longer free or efficient.
现在，付款方被允许拥有药物，并且药物的真实成本变得更加不透明。价格大幅上涨，存在价格差的现象。因此，如果将药品福利管理公司（PBMs）从市场中移除，这可以解决其中一个问题。但最终，我已经多次说过，只要联邦政府作为付款方参与任何市场经济系统，就会导致市场失衡，市场将不再自由或高效。
All right for Ben Shapiro of the Ben Shapiro Show in Daily Wire, Smoth Polyhapatia, and David Friedberg. I am Executive Producer for Life. We'll see you all next time. Love you boys. You all bye bye. Bye. And it said we open source it to the fans and they've just got crazy.
好的，来自每日连线（Daily Wire）《本·夏皮罗秀》（Ben Shapiro Show）的本·夏皮罗、斯莫斯·波利哈帕蒂亚（Smoth Polyhapatia）和戴维·弗里德伯格（David Friedberg）。我是终身执行制片人。我们下一次再见。爱你们，伙计们！再见，再见。节目说我们将其开源给粉丝们，而他们已经疯狂了。
Oh, that's my dog. We should all just get a room and just have one big huge or two because they're all just like this like sexual tension. But we just need to release. You, I'm doing.
哦，那是我的狗。我们都应该找个房间，然后聚在一起，因为我们之间好像有一种类似性张力的东西。我们只需要释放一下。我知道我在做什么。