WEBVTT - GMO's Jeremy Grantham Warns US Stocks Are About to Be Crushed

0:00:02.520 --> 0:00:09.600
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. Hi there, Maren Talks Money. Listeners.

0:00:09.680 --> 0:00:12.320
<v Speaker 1>Just a reminder that as well as listening to this podcast,

0:00:12.360 --> 0:00:15.280
<v Speaker 1>you really should also be reading the things that John

0:00:15.400 --> 0:00:18.240
<v Speaker 1>and I write. John has a daily newsletter, Money Distilled.

0:00:18.280 --> 0:00:20.360
<v Speaker 1>Do sign up that if you haven't already, and I

0:00:20.480 --> 0:00:23.360
<v Speaker 1>have a newish newsletter on Meren Talks Money.

0:00:23.360 --> 0:00:24.720
<v Speaker 2>It goes with the pod.

0:00:24.840 --> 0:00:27.640
<v Speaker 1>In this week's I've written about our conversation with Jawad

0:00:27.640 --> 0:00:30.120
<v Speaker 1>from last week. I've written about gold, I've written about

0:00:30.120 --> 0:00:34.160
<v Speaker 1>the energy transition, and I've written about the zeitgeist investment

0:00:34.280 --> 0:00:37.159
<v Speaker 1>of this decade ward is it? Is it the energy transition?

0:00:37.880 --> 0:00:41.680
<v Speaker 1>Is it defense stocks? Or is it just gold? Sign

0:00:41.760 --> 0:00:50.120
<v Speaker 1>up and the links below. Welcome to Meren Talks Money.

0:00:50.120 --> 0:00:52.720
<v Speaker 1>The podcast so much people who know the markets explain

0:00:52.840 --> 0:00:55.360
<v Speaker 1>the markets. I'm Maren zums that web. This week, we

0:00:55.360 --> 0:00:56.200
<v Speaker 1>welcome back to the show.

0:00:56.280 --> 0:00:57.200
<v Speaker 2>Jeremy Grantham.

0:00:57.440 --> 0:00:59.840
<v Speaker 1>Jeremy is the co founder of GMO and a member

0:00:59.880 --> 0:01:03.080
<v Speaker 1>of GMO's asset Allocation team, serving as the firm's long

0:01:03.160 --> 0:01:04.440
<v Speaker 1>term investment strategist.

0:01:04.760 --> 0:01:05.399
<v Speaker 2>He's more than.

0:01:05.240 --> 0:01:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Five decades of experience in investing and has earned a

0:01:07.640 --> 0:01:11.759
<v Speaker 1>reputation as a bubble hunter, quick to point out speculative excess.

0:01:11.400 --> 0:01:13.040
<v Speaker 2>On Wall Street and beyond.

0:01:13.400 --> 0:01:15.360
<v Speaker 1>So in our conversation we talk about where he sees

0:01:15.360 --> 0:01:17.559
<v Speaker 1>bubbles in the markets now, I mean, honestly, where aren't

0:01:17.560 --> 0:01:19.640
<v Speaker 1>there bubbles at the moment? Why we haven't seen that

0:01:19.720 --> 0:01:22.040
<v Speaker 1>correction in the market he's been predicting for a while,

0:01:22.040 --> 0:01:24.480
<v Speaker 1>as have we the green transition, and why he is

0:01:24.560 --> 0:01:33.280
<v Speaker 1>so bassionate about addressing population decline. Jeremy, thank you so

0:01:33.360 --> 0:01:35.640
<v Speaker 1>much for joining us again. We really appreciate it.

0:01:36.080 --> 0:01:37.440
<v Speaker 3>It's so pleasure to be here.

0:01:37.720 --> 0:01:39.560
<v Speaker 1>I know that there's many things that you and I

0:01:39.560 --> 0:01:41.320
<v Speaker 1>would both prefer to talk about, but we're going to

0:01:41.480 --> 0:01:44.600
<v Speaker 1>have to start with talking about the American dock market.

0:01:45.000 --> 0:01:47.320
<v Speaker 1>Last time you came on, you said, and I absolutely

0:01:47.360 --> 0:01:50.600
<v Speaker 1>agreed with you, that everything had run ahead of itself.

0:01:50.720 --> 0:01:54.880
<v Speaker 1>Valuations were too high and we should definitely expect although

0:01:54.880 --> 0:01:58.320
<v Speaker 1>we can't time when it might happen, a very serious

0:01:58.440 --> 0:02:02.720
<v Speaker 1>correction in the US market still hasn't happened. We keep

0:02:02.760 --> 0:02:05.840
<v Speaker 1>thinking it's going to happen. Various signs that they're stress

0:02:05.880 --> 0:02:08.120
<v Speaker 1>in the market, and for example, when the Deep Sikh

0:02:08.200 --> 0:02:10.040
<v Speaker 1>news came out, we looked that and we said that'll

0:02:10.080 --> 0:02:13.000
<v Speaker 1>be the end of the AI bubble, but no, it

0:02:13.160 --> 0:02:16.560
<v Speaker 1>never seems to end. It just keeps going. Has anything

0:02:16.680 --> 0:02:19.000
<v Speaker 1>changed in the way you look at that market.

0:02:19.200 --> 0:02:21.600
<v Speaker 4>I've always looked at it from the point of view

0:02:21.600 --> 0:02:25.320
<v Speaker 4>that the longer and the bigger, and the higher it goes,

0:02:25.960 --> 0:02:31.720
<v Speaker 4>the more exciting and dangerous it will be. And this

0:02:31.800 --> 0:02:36.720
<v Speaker 4>has moved up the rank of superbubbles, but it's nowhere

0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:41.640
<v Speaker 4>near Japan, the mother and father of all superbubbles in

0:02:41.800 --> 0:02:45.600
<v Speaker 4>eighty nine, and it's nowhere near their real Estate bubble

0:02:45.639 --> 0:02:49.200
<v Speaker 4>of the same era. They're the two great super bubbles

0:02:49.240 --> 0:02:53.160
<v Speaker 4>of history, but a decent way behind. I think this

0:02:53.280 --> 0:02:56.880
<v Speaker 4>is in third place, ahead of nineteen twenty nine, just

0:02:57.480 --> 0:03:02.600
<v Speaker 4>and ahead of December twenty TI twenty one, which actually

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:05.800
<v Speaker 4>met all the characteristics of a late stage super bowbl

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:08.760
<v Speaker 4>and one really should have expected it to blow up,

0:03:09.000 --> 0:03:11.720
<v Speaker 4>and it did. Twenty two was a good blow up

0:03:11.720 --> 0:03:17.120
<v Speaker 4>across a lot of asset classes. But AI chat GBT

0:03:17.320 --> 0:03:21.720
<v Speaker 4>came to the rescue in November of twenty two, and

0:03:22.040 --> 0:03:25.880
<v Speaker 4>initially for ten months, dragged by the mag seven and

0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:27.839
<v Speaker 4>the rest of the market going down a little bit.

0:03:28.560 --> 0:03:32.359
<v Speaker 4>That kept going for about a year and then in

0:03:32.680 --> 0:03:37.280
<v Speaker 4>October November of twenty three, the market said this looks serious,

0:03:37.320 --> 0:03:41.640
<v Speaker 4>we better join in, and the breadth became positive and

0:03:41.880 --> 0:03:46.600
<v Speaker 4>had a perfectly decent twenty four. And the net result

0:03:46.920 --> 0:03:51.840
<v Speaker 4>is that every measure of traditional value, the best of

0:03:51.920 --> 0:03:56.160
<v Speaker 4>the common ones being Schiller pe is at a record,

0:03:56.440 --> 0:03:59.400
<v Speaker 4>and most of the ordinary ones are in the top

0:03:59.400 --> 0:04:02.120
<v Speaker 4>one or two percent. And the best one of all,

0:04:02.840 --> 0:04:06.320
<v Speaker 4>which is a variant of of total market cap to

0:04:06.320 --> 0:04:10.360
<v Speaker 4>total value added in the economy, that has this one

0:04:11.040 --> 0:04:12.600
<v Speaker 4>the highest of any in history.

0:04:12.880 --> 0:04:14.120
<v Speaker 2>That's the buffet measure rate.

0:04:15.080 --> 0:04:19.480
<v Speaker 4>It's a variant if you take out financials and you

0:04:19.560 --> 0:04:22.640
<v Speaker 4>tweak this, and you tweak that. Hussman has a good

0:04:22.720 --> 0:04:25.320
<v Speaker 4>variant of that, and they make it clear that this

0:04:25.400 --> 0:04:29.159
<v Speaker 4>has overtaken twenty nine and twenty twenty one and moved

0:04:29.160 --> 0:04:33.479
<v Speaker 4>into first place on the American record, still way behind

0:04:33.920 --> 0:04:36.560
<v Speaker 4>the Japan. And then Ben Inca at GMO and I

0:04:37.000 --> 0:04:40.119
<v Speaker 4>twenty five years ago did a behavioral model which says,

0:04:40.440 --> 0:04:44.080
<v Speaker 4>forget all the logic about the efficient market or how

0:04:44.120 --> 0:04:47.400
<v Speaker 4>it should work, and dividend discount models and all that,

0:04:47.760 --> 0:04:51.160
<v Speaker 4>just let's see what actually explains, and what has that

0:04:51.240 --> 0:04:54.520
<v Speaker 4>explained since nineteen twenty five and explained very well. Indeed,

0:04:55.200 --> 0:04:58.839
<v Speaker 4>is low inflation, the market loves it. High inflation it

0:04:58.880 --> 0:05:03.000
<v Speaker 4>hates margins. Of course, the market loves it. Growth rate

0:05:03.080 --> 0:05:06.560
<v Speaker 4>has no correlation at all, But stability of GDP growth

0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:09.640
<v Speaker 4>the market likes. And that's way in third place. So

0:05:09.680 --> 0:05:13.640
<v Speaker 4>the things that make a portfolio manager feel comfortable, that's

0:05:13.680 --> 0:05:17.160
<v Speaker 4>what decides what the PE will be. And even on

0:05:17.200 --> 0:05:20.880
<v Speaker 4>that model that had a nearly perfect record, the market

0:05:20.880 --> 0:05:23.919
<v Speaker 4>could drop fifty percent to get back to the normal

0:05:24.360 --> 0:05:30.479
<v Speaker 4>response of flaky human beings. The normal behavioral responses would

0:05:30.480 --> 0:05:35.000
<v Speaker 4>have this market at a perfectly respectable eighteen pe on Schiller.

0:05:35.640 --> 0:05:39.200
<v Speaker 4>And it's actually just over twice. It's thirty seven.

0:05:39.720 --> 0:05:45.560
<v Speaker 1>And the argument that the introduction of AI and the

0:05:45.839 --> 0:05:48.360
<v Speaker 1>enormous progress that's been made there and the way that

0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:51.719
<v Speaker 1>AI is going to permeate through our economies and change

0:05:51.760 --> 0:05:55.520
<v Speaker 1>our lives as we know them, is a justification for

0:05:55.600 --> 0:06:00.000
<v Speaker 1>the market staying this high. Evaluations will grow into reality.

0:06:00.080 --> 0:06:02.839
<v Speaker 1>Your reality will grow into valuations. Should I say make

0:06:03.200 --> 0:06:06.520
<v Speaker 1>this level okay? That that doesn't resonate with you at all.

0:06:07.320 --> 0:06:10.839
<v Speaker 4>This is the argument used for every important new technology.

0:06:10.920 --> 0:06:15.400
<v Speaker 4>Every really important new technology has had a bubble around it.

0:06:16.279 --> 0:06:20.280
<v Speaker 4>A classic example in the old days was the railroads,

0:06:20.720 --> 0:06:23.560
<v Speaker 4>where it was so obviously going to change everyone's life,

0:06:23.600 --> 0:06:27.080
<v Speaker 4>and it did so that everyone could see it clearly.

0:06:27.960 --> 0:06:30.359
<v Speaker 4>Everyone could put their money in it because they knew

0:06:30.400 --> 0:06:32.839
<v Speaker 4>it was going to change the world, and so they

0:06:33.120 --> 0:06:39.279
<v Speaker 4>started to build and design six railroad lines between Leeds

0:06:39.400 --> 0:06:44.520
<v Speaker 4>and Manchester, and of course there was an almighty crash

0:06:44.960 --> 0:06:47.000
<v Speaker 4>and everyone lost their shirts. It was one of the

0:06:47.000 --> 0:06:51.200
<v Speaker 4>more spectacular bus that didn't say that railroads weren't important,

0:06:51.279 --> 0:06:52.960
<v Speaker 4>or railways in Britain.

0:06:53.320 --> 0:06:54.760
<v Speaker 3>They were incredibly important.

0:06:54.800 --> 0:06:59.920
<v Speaker 4>They did change everyone's life, they did elevate GDP in productivity,

0:06:59.720 --> 0:07:03.479
<v Speaker 4>but they were so obvious that in the early stages,

0:07:03.520 --> 0:07:06.720
<v Speaker 4>of course they attracted everyone's capital and a bust. And

0:07:06.760 --> 0:07:10.920
<v Speaker 4>then you fast forward to the more recent example, and

0:07:10.960 --> 0:07:14.400
<v Speaker 4>that is the Internet. The Internet again was obviously going

0:07:14.440 --> 0:07:17.840
<v Speaker 4>to change everything, and it sucked in lots of money,

0:07:17.920 --> 0:07:21.880
<v Speaker 4>lots of pet dot coms and everything had a spectacular

0:07:21.920 --> 0:07:25.480
<v Speaker 4>blow up. And let me just focus on Amazon. Amazon

0:07:25.800 --> 0:07:29.160
<v Speaker 4>went up over a couple of years twelve fourteen times.

0:07:29.240 --> 0:07:32.840
<v Speaker 4>It was wonderful, and then when the market broke, it

0:07:32.960 --> 0:07:35.960
<v Speaker 4>dropped a spectacular ninety two percent. You can check this,

0:07:36.480 --> 0:07:40.880
<v Speaker 4>and Amazon went down ninety two percent, and then out

0:07:40.880 --> 0:07:43.440
<v Speaker 4>of the wreckage. It was one of the handful that

0:07:43.560 --> 0:07:47.280
<v Speaker 4>inherited the earth and gobbled up the retail market as

0:07:47.320 --> 0:07:50.400
<v Speaker 4>others gobbled up other things, and all the pet dot

0:07:50.400 --> 0:07:55.320
<v Speaker 4>coms got washed away. It's precisely the importance and the

0:07:55.520 --> 0:07:59.680
<v Speaker 4>obviousness of the importance. It guarantees a bubble, and very

0:07:59.680 --> 0:08:03.400
<v Speaker 4>few have been as obviously important as AI. It will

0:08:03.440 --> 0:08:06.680
<v Speaker 4>of course change our world. It is of course impossible

0:08:06.720 --> 0:08:09.240
<v Speaker 4>to know in what ways and whether it will be

0:08:09.440 --> 0:08:14.520
<v Speaker 4>entirely beneficial or not. And one day one suspects we

0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:21.200
<v Speaker 4>will end up with something like a world run by automatons, cyborgs,

0:08:21.200 --> 0:08:23.880
<v Speaker 4>whatever we want to call them. It may take three

0:08:23.960 --> 0:08:28.120
<v Speaker 4>hundred years, it may take fifty, and I lean towards

0:08:28.280 --> 0:08:31.520
<v Speaker 4>the three hundred, as long as civilization hangs together, which

0:08:31.600 --> 0:08:35.200
<v Speaker 4>is another big story we could discuss. But when you

0:08:35.240 --> 0:08:40.520
<v Speaker 4>get to that point, you have to always remember productivity produces.

0:08:40.840 --> 0:08:45.840
<v Speaker 4>It has no offsetting consumption. So the way to think

0:08:45.880 --> 0:08:48.200
<v Speaker 4>of that is just skip right to the end. One

0:08:48.240 --> 0:08:53.520
<v Speaker 4>hundred percent cyborgs, no workers. What happens to demand? The

0:08:53.559 --> 0:08:56.080
<v Speaker 4>answer is, of course, the whole system is totally unbalanced.

0:08:56.480 --> 0:08:58.679
<v Speaker 4>There's no demand and therefore there's no need for the

0:08:58.760 --> 0:09:04.359
<v Speaker 4>cyborgs production unless you take the value that the cyborgs

0:09:04.520 --> 0:09:08.880
<v Speaker 4>are producing and pass it through to the average people.

0:09:09.160 --> 0:09:13.440
<v Speaker 4>So you have to have a very decent guaranteed minimum wage,

0:09:14.040 --> 0:09:16.840
<v Speaker 4>and as long as you do that, everything balances. And

0:09:16.880 --> 0:09:19.280
<v Speaker 4>in the old days, by the way, from nineteen thirty

0:09:19.320 --> 0:09:23.320
<v Speaker 4>five to seventy five, the productivity was three percent, and

0:09:23.360 --> 0:09:25.800
<v Speaker 4>the rich people got richer by three percent a year,

0:09:25.880 --> 0:09:28.200
<v Speaker 4>and the poor people got richer by three percent a year,

0:09:28.440 --> 0:09:31.400
<v Speaker 4>and everybody was happy as a clam. And that turns

0:09:31.400 --> 0:09:34.960
<v Speaker 4>out to be from economics and social point of view,

0:09:35.040 --> 0:09:38.200
<v Speaker 4>the golden era, and then from nineteen seventy five, particularly

0:09:38.240 --> 0:09:42.000
<v Speaker 4>in the US, all of that productivity, which dropped from

0:09:42.040 --> 0:09:43.920
<v Speaker 4>three percent to say two and a half and then

0:09:43.960 --> 0:09:47.560
<v Speaker 4>to two all went to the top ten percent one percent.

0:09:47.920 --> 0:09:50.840
<v Speaker 4>The average worker hardly made any progress of all since

0:09:50.920 --> 0:09:53.640
<v Speaker 4>nineteen seventy five for an hour worked, and that of

0:09:53.679 --> 0:09:58.200
<v Speaker 4>course generates a lot of disgruntlement and complications, which we

0:09:58.320 --> 0:10:03.160
<v Speaker 4>see everywhere really including the US. Despite our brilliant stock market,

0:10:03.440 --> 0:10:07.480
<v Speaker 4>the underlying frustration is very high, and the same in Europe.

0:10:08.160 --> 0:10:11.280
<v Speaker 4>And how that manifests itself is you vote against the

0:10:11.280 --> 0:10:14.360
<v Speaker 4>party in power, doesn't matter whether it's right wing like

0:10:14.400 --> 0:10:17.360
<v Speaker 4>the Conservatives in the UK, doesn't matter if it's left

0:10:17.400 --> 0:10:19.640
<v Speaker 4>wing as in France and so on. You kick them

0:10:19.640 --> 0:10:22.360
<v Speaker 4>all out, and you kick them out. It's a manifestation

0:10:22.480 --> 0:10:25.160
<v Speaker 4>of the fact there's a very high level of disappointment

0:10:25.559 --> 0:10:28.760
<v Speaker 4>amongst the broad band of workers. They're simply not doing

0:10:28.760 --> 0:10:31.160
<v Speaker 4>as well as they expected, not doing as well as

0:10:31.200 --> 0:10:31.960
<v Speaker 4>their parents did.

0:10:32.120 --> 0:10:33.320
<v Speaker 3>Sorry, long answer, It.

0:10:33.360 --> 0:10:34.520
<v Speaker 2>Was a long answer, but it was a good one,

0:10:34.559 --> 0:10:34.960
<v Speaker 2>thank you.

0:10:35.000 --> 0:10:38.800
<v Speaker 1>So that rather suggests that a successful adoption of AI

0:10:39.000 --> 0:10:41.960
<v Speaker 1>needs a huge level of government input.

0:10:42.679 --> 0:10:46.960
<v Speaker 4>If the government does not smooth out the benefits of AI,

0:10:47.559 --> 0:10:50.560
<v Speaker 4>you will have either starvation or revolution.

0:10:51.040 --> 0:10:54.400
<v Speaker 1>So it's interesting, isn't it, because we feel like we're

0:10:54.400 --> 0:10:58.040
<v Speaker 1>moving into an era, particularly perhaps in the US, where

0:10:58.120 --> 0:11:00.800
<v Speaker 1>smaller government is valued over big govern which I would

0:11:00.840 --> 0:11:03.240
<v Speaker 1>generally agree with that a smaller government might be better

0:11:03.280 --> 0:11:06.520
<v Speaker 1>than an overbearing government. But your suggestion is that as

0:11:06.520 --> 0:11:09.600
<v Speaker 1>we move into an AI era, if the government doesn't

0:11:09.600 --> 0:11:13.520
<v Speaker 1>take huge steps to well redistribute, it won't work.

0:11:13.960 --> 0:11:16.880
<v Speaker 4>And by the way, that doesn't take much government. You

0:11:16.920 --> 0:11:20.000
<v Speaker 4>could have a few hundred people tucked away in DC,

0:11:20.720 --> 0:11:26.280
<v Speaker 4>making sure that income is redistributed. That's not the part

0:11:26.320 --> 0:11:30.239
<v Speaker 4>of government that chows up all the workers. It's pretty straightforward.

0:11:31.000 --> 0:11:34.800
<v Speaker 4>You have a high minimum requirement to keep people alive

0:11:35.679 --> 0:11:39.599
<v Speaker 4>and to keep people reasonably content away from the barricades

0:11:40.040 --> 0:11:40.760
<v Speaker 4>in the high street.

0:11:41.200 --> 0:11:43.200
<v Speaker 1>Okay, so let's go back a little bit to the market.

0:11:43.280 --> 0:11:45.320
<v Speaker 1>I can feel we're heading off on tangents. We both

0:11:45.320 --> 0:11:46.680
<v Speaker 1>want to go down, but we've got to deal with

0:11:46.720 --> 0:11:49.040
<v Speaker 1>the core first. Is there any part of the US

0:11:49.080 --> 0:11:52.320
<v Speaker 1>market where you would feel safe? Obviously we would agree

0:11:52.320 --> 0:11:56.160
<v Speaker 1>that the AI stocks, AI adjacent stocks, tech in general

0:11:56.640 --> 0:12:00.000
<v Speaker 1>is very overvalued, but it's not necessarily the case across

0:12:00.080 --> 0:12:02.560
<v Speaker 1>the board. So if you wanted to stay in the

0:12:02.679 --> 0:12:05.000
<v Speaker 1>US and on this huge part of the investing community,

0:12:05.040 --> 0:12:07.600
<v Speaker 1>they find it very difficult to think at all about

0:12:07.720 --> 0:12:10.720
<v Speaker 1>leaving the US market or even rebalancing away from the

0:12:10.800 --> 0:12:14.040
<v Speaker 1>US market if they were to stay in it.

0:12:14.080 --> 0:12:15.040
<v Speaker 2>Is there any.

0:12:14.800 --> 0:12:16.760
<v Speaker 1>Sector, any part of it where you would say you'll

0:12:16.800 --> 0:12:18.120
<v Speaker 1>probably be okay if you stick with that.

0:12:19.200 --> 0:12:19.480
<v Speaker 3>Yes.

0:12:19.880 --> 0:12:24.520
<v Speaker 4>Obviously the future for greening the economy is going to

0:12:24.559 --> 0:12:28.360
<v Speaker 4>be a long and bumpy one. But physics cannot be

0:12:28.440 --> 0:12:33.040
<v Speaker 4>bullied away into hiding, and four years is only four years.

0:12:33.679 --> 0:12:37.920
<v Speaker 4>But the remorseless damage that we have all seen in

0:12:37.960 --> 0:12:43.400
<v Speaker 4>the last two years, the escalation of fires, floods, just sensational,

0:12:43.960 --> 0:12:47.160
<v Speaker 4>obvious to everybody except one or two percent who are

0:12:47.200 --> 0:12:51.520
<v Speaker 4>blinded by political beliefs. I would say that will just

0:12:51.679 --> 0:12:55.640
<v Speaker 4>march on if we do not solve that. The civilization

0:12:55.720 --> 0:12:58.280
<v Speaker 4>as we know it fails. How long it will take

0:12:58.400 --> 0:13:03.120
<v Speaker 4>is almost anybody's get But it's happening pretty fast, pretty remorselessly,

0:13:03.160 --> 0:13:05.679
<v Speaker 4>and we have to fix it. I think we probably

0:13:05.679 --> 0:13:10.320
<v Speaker 4>will fix it. And to do that to green the

0:13:10.520 --> 0:13:15.200
<v Speaker 4>entire global economy is a massive, challenging job that will

0:13:15.240 --> 0:13:18.120
<v Speaker 4>take lots of investment, lots of workers.

0:13:18.280 --> 0:13:19.280
<v Speaker 3>And it will be done.

0:13:19.320 --> 0:13:23.640
<v Speaker 4>I think since the psychology has smashed these stocks down,

0:13:24.200 --> 0:13:28.320
<v Speaker 4>and since the logic of the physics is inevitable, unlike

0:13:28.360 --> 0:13:30.680
<v Speaker 4>most things in the stock market, I would say that

0:13:30.800 --> 0:13:34.080
<v Speaker 4>is an area that we'll have sooner or later a

0:13:34.200 --> 0:13:39.120
<v Speaker 4>massive regrouping and a huge outperformance of the rest of

0:13:39.160 --> 0:13:39.560
<v Speaker 4>the market.

0:13:39.640 --> 0:13:41.520
<v Speaker 3>Secondly, I believe.

0:13:41.240 --> 0:13:44.839
<v Speaker 4>That the wider environment that we will get to talk

0:13:44.880 --> 0:13:49.560
<v Speaker 4>about is much deteriorated, and that we will have to

0:13:49.600 --> 0:13:53.280
<v Speaker 4>get used to many more short shocks to the system,

0:13:53.720 --> 0:13:56.600
<v Speaker 4>and many more big shocks to the system than have

0:13:56.840 --> 0:14:01.360
<v Speaker 4>characterized the last seventy five years. In that environment, you

0:14:01.480 --> 0:14:03.960
<v Speaker 4>do not want to be caught with a lot of leverage.

0:14:04.360 --> 0:14:07.680
<v Speaker 4>Leverage is going to be light the nineteen thirties. Leverage

0:14:07.720 --> 0:14:09.800
<v Speaker 4>is just going to take you out of business. You

0:14:09.920 --> 0:14:14.959
<v Speaker 4>have to be able to withstand shocks unexpectedly arriving, and

0:14:15.040 --> 0:14:18.160
<v Speaker 4>to do that you need no little or no debt.

0:14:18.559 --> 0:14:21.360
<v Speaker 4>And secondly, if you want to survive, you want to

0:14:21.400 --> 0:14:25.400
<v Speaker 4>have decent profit margins to give you some resilience. Marginal

0:14:25.440 --> 0:14:29.760
<v Speaker 4>Company's Cheap at Hell in nineteen twenty nine did not

0:14:29.960 --> 0:14:33.520
<v Speaker 4>outperform the Coca Colas, who were brutally expensive. The Coca

0:14:33.560 --> 0:14:38.320
<v Speaker 4>Colas went down seventy five percent, but the very cheap stocks,

0:14:38.560 --> 0:14:41.680
<v Speaker 4>the number seven, eight, nine, automobile companies and so on,

0:14:41.960 --> 0:14:43.960
<v Speaker 4>they all went out of business, and the ones that

0:14:44.040 --> 0:14:47.760
<v Speaker 4>survived went down ninety six percent. And when you're starting

0:14:47.800 --> 0:14:50.680
<v Speaker 4>from four out of one hundred, to go back and

0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:53.560
<v Speaker 4>catch up the Coca Colas, who are still at thirty,

0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:56.280
<v Speaker 4>you have to go up six or seven times just

0:14:56.320 --> 0:14:58.560
<v Speaker 4>to get back in the game. The thirties was a

0:14:58.600 --> 0:15:03.200
<v Speaker 4>pretty good ultimate room that things are cheap, usually for

0:15:03.240 --> 0:15:05.320
<v Speaker 4>a pretty good reason, so you have to tread carefully.

0:15:05.600 --> 0:15:07.440
<v Speaker 4>If you're going to play the cheap game, you've got

0:15:07.440 --> 0:15:10.840
<v Speaker 4>to make sure it is armor plated with high with

0:15:10.960 --> 0:15:12.840
<v Speaker 4>as much quality as you can get into it.

0:15:14.400 --> 0:15:16.040
<v Speaker 1>Can I take you back to what you were saying

0:15:16.080 --> 0:15:19.320
<v Speaker 1>about the green transition and greening the economy, etc. Even

0:15:19.360 --> 0:15:22.640
<v Speaker 1>if you put aside the next four years and what

0:15:22.760 --> 0:15:25.200
<v Speaker 1>might or might happen around your noble energy and climate

0:15:25.280 --> 0:15:28.640
<v Speaker 1>change during that during the Trump period, it is still

0:15:28.680 --> 0:15:33.520
<v Speaker 1>the case that the national grid in the UK, across Europe,

0:15:33.560 --> 0:15:36.560
<v Speaker 1>the electricity grid everywhere and including in the US, still

0:15:36.760 --> 0:15:41.040
<v Speaker 1>has to be massively upgraded and massively improved because of AI.

0:15:41.640 --> 0:15:44.680
<v Speaker 2>So even if you were to put aside.

0:15:44.240 --> 0:15:46.720
<v Speaker 1>The discussion about climate change at the moment, it still

0:15:46.760 --> 0:15:50.680
<v Speaker 1>seems that there's a lot of scope for that build

0:15:50.720 --> 0:15:52.680
<v Speaker 1>out to be a good area to be invested in.

0:15:52.880 --> 0:15:57.480
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, I think AI will improve all the aspects of

0:15:57.560 --> 0:16:02.520
<v Speaker 4>the economy that you're trying to improve. So it's very

0:16:02.560 --> 0:16:06.480
<v Speaker 4>helpful for green tech in general. The problem is it

0:16:06.920 --> 0:16:10.480
<v Speaker 4>helps everybody, and so you have to ask yourself a question,

0:16:11.600 --> 0:16:16.400
<v Speaker 4>is this society acting quickly enough in general, or is

0:16:16.440 --> 0:16:20.560
<v Speaker 4>it heading towards the cliff just simply moving too slowly,

0:16:20.960 --> 0:16:25.280
<v Speaker 4>protecting its corporate profits too much, and allowing the carbon

0:16:25.360 --> 0:16:28.440
<v Speaker 4>count and the methane count to just rise too high,

0:16:28.520 --> 0:16:31.640
<v Speaker 4>and seeing tipping points any minute now as tundrad melts,

0:16:31.680 --> 0:16:34.280
<v Speaker 4>and so on and so forth. And I think the answer

0:16:34.360 --> 0:16:37.920
<v Speaker 4>is we're not looking too good. And what AI does

0:16:38.040 --> 0:16:41.600
<v Speaker 4>is accelerates and makes more efficient the process that you're on.

0:16:42.760 --> 0:16:45.800
<v Speaker 4>And unless we're lucky, what that will mean is that

0:16:45.880 --> 0:16:48.960
<v Speaker 4>the system will run quicker and more efficiently towards the

0:16:48.960 --> 0:16:53.560
<v Speaker 4>cliff edge. And for every one item that you improve,

0:16:54.440 --> 0:16:57.560
<v Speaker 4>there will be the usual five in the current system

0:16:57.640 --> 0:17:03.200
<v Speaker 4>that are improving to make more and better useless consumption goods.

0:17:03.360 --> 0:17:06.159
<v Speaker 4>And we see this, by the way, in the inordinate

0:17:06.280 --> 0:17:10.159
<v Speaker 4>increase in electric demand and the coal and gas that

0:17:10.240 --> 0:17:14.240
<v Speaker 4>goes with that around the world in order to fuel AI,

0:17:14.960 --> 0:17:18.200
<v Speaker 4>along with those other cryptocurrency dangers.

0:17:18.560 --> 0:17:19.720
<v Speaker 2>We might come to that later.

0:17:20.040 --> 0:17:27.200
<v Speaker 4>Finally, after decades of moderate, actually flat use of electricity

0:17:27.320 --> 0:17:30.600
<v Speaker 4>is now not only rising rapidly, but predicted to rise

0:17:31.240 --> 0:17:36.560
<v Speaker 4>steadily and rapidly into the future because of AI and cryptocurrencies.

0:17:36.560 --> 0:17:40.159
<v Speaker 1>But it was rising before the whole AI boom electricity

0:17:40.160 --> 0:17:43.119
<v Speaker 1>demand had started to rise the result of the electrification

0:17:43.320 --> 0:17:46.080
<v Speaker 1>of various things as a result of the attempt to decarbonizers.

0:17:46.160 --> 0:17:47.800
<v Speaker 2>It was already happening.

0:17:47.600 --> 0:17:52.199
<v Speaker 4>Prey hardly, and if you took out cryptocurrency, it was

0:17:52.840 --> 0:17:56.080
<v Speaker 4>most drifting outwards. And now no one would accuse it

0:17:56.119 --> 0:17:57.000
<v Speaker 4>of drifting outwards.

0:17:57.040 --> 0:17:58.240
<v Speaker 2>No, definitely not drifting.

0:17:58.720 --> 0:18:00.920
<v Speaker 1>Let's look if we can about other stock markets, and

0:18:01.000 --> 0:18:03.080
<v Speaker 1>now I said earlier that the lot of investors find

0:18:03.119 --> 0:18:06.080
<v Speaker 1>it difficult to imagine moving any waiting out of the US,

0:18:06.160 --> 0:18:09.080
<v Speaker 1>but there has actually been a shift towards Europe this year,

0:18:09.320 --> 0:18:12.199
<v Speaker 1>and there's also a growing discussion about the cheapness of

0:18:12.280 --> 0:18:15.439
<v Speaker 1>China and whether this might finally be the time to

0:18:15.480 --> 0:18:18.479
<v Speaker 1>invest in the Chinese stock market. Do you have any

0:18:18.600 --> 0:18:21.879
<v Speaker 1>positive feelings towards any other global like CAREW markets.

0:18:22.359 --> 0:18:26.840
<v Speaker 4>I have had no argument with the non US markets.

0:18:27.160 --> 0:18:31.000
<v Speaker 4>They've been reasonably priced, perhaps a little overpriced most of them,

0:18:31.040 --> 0:18:35.600
<v Speaker 4>but nothing much for a long time, and they still are.

0:18:36.000 --> 0:18:40.280
<v Speaker 4>Of course, they are much less dangerous to own, and

0:18:40.359 --> 0:18:46.320
<v Speaker 4>they will very likely over five or ten years, crush

0:18:46.400 --> 0:18:48.960
<v Speaker 4>the US market, as has happened several times.

0:18:48.960 --> 0:18:49.800
<v Speaker 3>That's how it happens.

0:18:49.840 --> 0:18:52.440
<v Speaker 4>The US market will have a great decade, and then

0:18:53.359 --> 0:18:55.760
<v Speaker 4>fire markets will have a great decade and close the

0:18:55.800 --> 0:19:00.879
<v Speaker 4>gap a bit. And that's what will happen this time. Sure, Now,

0:19:01.000 --> 0:19:03.720
<v Speaker 4>will they be sympathetic in a major decline in the US,

0:19:04.040 --> 0:19:07.360
<v Speaker 4>which I suspect is waiting for us. Yeah, they can

0:19:07.359 --> 0:19:12.280
<v Speaker 4>be sympathetic. My just to remind you of how untidy

0:19:12.320 --> 0:19:16.440
<v Speaker 4>the world is, the emerging markets with a volatility one

0:19:16.440 --> 0:19:20.200
<v Speaker 4>point three times the market. In two the third year

0:19:20.240 --> 0:19:22.200
<v Speaker 4>of the decline, the S and P went down twenty

0:19:22.200 --> 0:19:24.320
<v Speaker 4>two percent. This was not pleasant for a third down

0:19:24.400 --> 0:19:27.600
<v Speaker 4>year in a row, and you might have expected emerging

0:19:27.640 --> 0:19:29.200
<v Speaker 4>markets to go down thirty but they.

0:19:29.119 --> 0:19:29.760
<v Speaker 3>Went down two.

0:19:30.320 --> 0:19:33.240
<v Speaker 4>They were just about flat, and a twenty point out

0:19:33.240 --> 0:19:37.160
<v Speaker 4>performance like that on the downside is completely a reflection

0:19:37.280 --> 0:19:40.639
<v Speaker 4>of different values. It does happen, and it probably will happen.

0:19:40.640 --> 0:19:43.920
<v Speaker 4>They will probably be sympathetic, and there will be periods

0:19:43.920 --> 0:19:48.080
<v Speaker 4>when they drop quite frighteningly to show sympathy. But in

0:19:48.160 --> 0:19:52.200
<v Speaker 4>between they will regroup, and they'll regroup faster, and after

0:19:52.320 --> 0:19:56.719
<v Speaker 4>the passage of a decent time, they will be way ahead.

0:19:57.240 --> 0:20:00.800
<v Speaker 4>I am very confident putting time on these. As we've

0:20:00.800 --> 0:20:04.080
<v Speaker 4>always discussed, it's pretty much impossible. But to go back

0:20:04.119 --> 0:20:07.119
<v Speaker 4>to the main event here, the longer and the higher

0:20:07.160 --> 0:20:11.240
<v Speaker 4>they climb, the worse it is. And we were hanging

0:20:11.280 --> 0:20:14.480
<v Speaker 4>out with a zero weight in Japan for three years

0:20:14.600 --> 0:20:17.880
<v Speaker 4>as it went from forty five times earnings to sixty five.

0:20:18.960 --> 0:20:21.399
<v Speaker 4>That is a whole lot worse than the US it's today,

0:20:22.040 --> 0:20:25.840
<v Speaker 4>And what was the price they paid? That was a

0:20:25.920 --> 0:20:29.840
<v Speaker 4>unique event, and they uniquely suffered for it. They spent

0:20:30.160 --> 0:20:34.280
<v Speaker 4>twenty years getting to a low, and they became a

0:20:34.359 --> 0:20:37.919
<v Speaker 4>cheap country. From sixty five times earnings, they became a

0:20:38.000 --> 0:20:38.760
<v Speaker 4>cheaper one.

0:20:38.560 --> 0:20:41.120
<v Speaker 1>When twenty years is extraordinary, isn't it. If you were

0:20:41.160 --> 0:20:43.560
<v Speaker 1>to sit down with any major investor at the moment

0:20:43.600 --> 0:20:46.840
<v Speaker 1>and say there's a distinct possibility that the US market

0:20:47.000 --> 0:20:49.840
<v Speaker 1>will fall by that amount and it'll take twenty years

0:20:49.880 --> 0:20:53.240
<v Speaker 1>for you to be evans, no one will accept.

0:20:52.880 --> 0:20:56.440
<v Speaker 4>That, absolutely, not than they never have and they never will.

0:20:56.800 --> 0:20:59.080
<v Speaker 4>Doesn't mean it hasn't happened every time we've had a

0:20:59.119 --> 0:21:02.280
<v Speaker 4>major bubble light now eighteen twenty nine, even in nineteen

0:21:02.280 --> 0:21:05.760
<v Speaker 4>seventy two and two thousand and the housing bubble. The

0:21:05.800 --> 0:21:07.760
<v Speaker 4>housing bubble, by the way, was a bigger bubble than

0:21:07.800 --> 0:21:13.800
<v Speaker 4>the current US stock market. Statistically, it was very impressive.

0:21:13.880 --> 0:21:17.520
<v Speaker 4>There'd never been a national bubble like that. Housing used

0:21:17.560 --> 0:21:21.760
<v Speaker 4>to crash in California while it bubbled in Chicago, but

0:21:21.840 --> 0:21:23.640
<v Speaker 4>that was the first time it did it, and that

0:21:23.680 --> 0:21:25.880
<v Speaker 4>made it a real outlier statistically.

0:21:26.600 --> 0:21:28.919
<v Speaker 1>I remember being told over and over again during that

0:21:28.960 --> 0:21:31.800
<v Speaker 1>bubble that American house prices had never fallen and they

0:21:31.840 --> 0:21:32.359
<v Speaker 1>never would.

0:21:33.320 --> 0:21:36.720
<v Speaker 4>And by the way, Bananke said that, yes, the US

0:21:36.760 --> 0:21:40.520
<v Speaker 4>house prices had never declined, and to which I wrote

0:21:40.520 --> 0:21:43.880
<v Speaker 4>in a quarterly letter, but they had never bubbled before,

0:21:44.320 --> 0:21:48.560
<v Speaker 4>and whenever anything has bubbled, it has always declined, and

0:21:48.960 --> 0:21:51.080
<v Speaker 4>of course it did. It was very well behaved, the

0:21:51.119 --> 0:21:54.159
<v Speaker 4>housing bubble. It declined in three years exactly what it

0:21:54.200 --> 0:21:56.520
<v Speaker 4>had gone up in three years, much to the cost

0:21:56.640 --> 0:21:59.280
<v Speaker 4>of some poor unfortunates who got sucked into the housing

0:21:59.320 --> 0:22:00.560
<v Speaker 4>market for the time.

0:22:00.920 --> 0:22:01.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:22:01.240 --> 0:22:03.639
<v Speaker 1>No, that hurt an awful lot of people, and actually

0:22:03.720 --> 0:22:06.080
<v Speaker 1>this current bubble may have hurt an awful lot of people.

0:22:06.440 --> 0:22:08.359
<v Speaker 1>Maybe not in the same way because most people won't

0:22:08.359 --> 0:22:11.560
<v Speaker 1>be leveraged into it, but nonetheless there's an entire generation

0:22:11.640 --> 0:22:13.960
<v Speaker 1>of people who now believe in this, as is the

0:22:14.000 --> 0:22:16.960
<v Speaker 1>case in every bubble, that what they've done is brought

0:22:16.960 --> 0:22:17.760
<v Speaker 1>into a sure thing.

0:22:17.840 --> 0:22:19.119
<v Speaker 2>So there is a lot of disappointment.

0:22:19.160 --> 0:22:22.919
<v Speaker 4>I heard right, Yeah, my cryptocurrency for one, which is

0:22:22.960 --> 0:22:24.760
<v Speaker 4>now four trillion dollars.

0:22:25.000 --> 0:22:27.639
<v Speaker 1>When you talk about cryptocurrency, are you talking about bitcoin

0:22:27.760 --> 0:22:29.960
<v Speaker 1>or are you talking about currencies as a whole, And

0:22:30.040 --> 0:22:32.240
<v Speaker 1>do you make a division between the two.

0:22:32.480 --> 0:22:35.320
<v Speaker 4>I was talking about all of them added together. But

0:22:35.880 --> 0:22:39.280
<v Speaker 4>none of them produce anything, and none of them are

0:22:39.640 --> 0:22:43.680
<v Speaker 4>a medium of exchange materially, but they are a wonderful

0:22:43.720 --> 0:22:50.560
<v Speaker 4>speculative medium. And with the stimulus program of Biden and COVID,

0:22:51.359 --> 0:22:54.560
<v Speaker 4>three trillion dollars to play with in a system that

0:22:54.600 --> 0:22:57.359
<v Speaker 4>had never had that kind of money locked up at home,

0:22:58.000 --> 0:23:01.280
<v Speaker 4>nothing to do but learn how to speculate, and learning

0:23:01.680 --> 0:23:04.400
<v Speaker 4>to speculate, it's pretty darn easy. You just buy what's

0:23:04.440 --> 0:23:07.320
<v Speaker 4>moving and what everyone is shouting about. And I did

0:23:07.320 --> 0:23:09.920
<v Speaker 4>that myself as a young man, and made a quick

0:23:09.960 --> 0:23:13.920
<v Speaker 4>fortune in the two years out of business school, enough

0:23:13.960 --> 0:23:16.640
<v Speaker 4>to buy a couple of nice houses without a mortgage.

0:23:17.240 --> 0:23:20.520
<v Speaker 4>I know, but I didn't buy the houses. I bought

0:23:20.600 --> 0:23:25.280
<v Speaker 4>silly sucks that all blew up. And we went from

0:23:25.600 --> 0:23:28.959
<v Speaker 4>that equivalent, which today would be two million dollars a

0:23:28.960 --> 0:23:31.560
<v Speaker 4>million dollar house in the suburbs of Boston.

0:23:31.240 --> 0:23:31.720
<v Speaker 3>Et cetera.

0:23:32.080 --> 0:23:35.320
<v Speaker 4>And we went back to twenty thousand and with that

0:23:35.760 --> 0:23:37.800
<v Speaker 4>nest egg that I had, I had the courage to

0:23:37.840 --> 0:23:41.840
<v Speaker 4>start a business with a partner in the investment business

0:23:42.280 --> 0:23:44.600
<v Speaker 4>because I could live on my loot, which I managed

0:23:44.640 --> 0:23:47.800
<v Speaker 4>to lose so quickly that even before we got our

0:23:48.040 --> 0:23:49.399
<v Speaker 4>office set up, I had lost it.

0:23:49.760 --> 0:23:51.720
<v Speaker 2>And you still managed to get some clients. It's a merror.

0:23:52.240 --> 0:23:54.440
<v Speaker 4>We didn't actually get any clients for quite a while,

0:23:54.720 --> 0:23:58.160
<v Speaker 4>but it did, of course teach me a very powerful

0:23:58.240 --> 0:24:01.560
<v Speaker 4>lesson that even in my own account, on the frivolosand

0:24:02.040 --> 0:24:04.080
<v Speaker 4>speculating and crazy stuff.

0:24:04.640 --> 0:24:06.000
<v Speaker 3>But it was not a great idea.

0:24:06.119 --> 0:24:08.800
<v Speaker 4>So I reverted to my Yorkshire roots of waste not,

0:24:08.960 --> 0:24:11.480
<v Speaker 4>want not and value for money big.

0:24:11.280 --> 0:24:13.840
<v Speaker 2>Time, and that's worked out pretty well.

0:24:13.880 --> 0:24:16.360
<v Speaker 4>But to be slapped around the head by the way,

0:24:16.560 --> 0:24:19.040
<v Speaker 4>dear listener, when you're still young and don't have that

0:24:19.119 --> 0:24:22.400
<v Speaker 4>much money to lose, is a terrific idea, rather than

0:24:22.800 --> 0:24:24.919
<v Speaker 4>having it happen to you when you get carried away

0:24:25.280 --> 0:24:27.399
<v Speaker 4>at safety when you're about to retire, as it can

0:24:27.440 --> 0:24:27.879
<v Speaker 4>be brutal.

0:24:28.800 --> 0:24:31.199
<v Speaker 1>Let's let's not get let's not worry too much I

0:24:31.200 --> 0:24:33.679
<v Speaker 1>can feel myself getting stressed about all the people who

0:24:33.760 --> 0:24:37.080
<v Speaker 1>may find themselves in a difficult situation as your correction comes.

0:24:37.320 --> 0:24:40.520
<v Speaker 1>So let's move on to talk about other difficult things.

0:24:40.800 --> 0:24:42.200
<v Speaker 1>One of the things that I know you think about

0:24:42.240 --> 0:24:45.440
<v Speaker 1>a lot of we were talking about earlier is population dynamics.

0:24:45.480 --> 0:24:47.639
<v Speaker 1>And we say in the world of journalism that you

0:24:47.720 --> 0:24:51.040
<v Speaker 1>must never ever write about demographics. Never, because if you

0:24:51.080 --> 0:24:54.360
<v Speaker 1>write about demographics, everything becomes clear, and then you can't

0:24:54.359 --> 0:24:57.359
<v Speaker 1>write any more columns. Once you've written the demographic demographics column,

0:24:57.440 --> 0:24:59.280
<v Speaker 1>you have the answer, and then you're stuffed after that,

0:24:59.320 --> 0:25:02.119
<v Speaker 1>you can't write enough column Now you're looking at the

0:25:02.200 --> 0:25:06.240
<v Speaker 1>way that population is changing around the world, and that's

0:25:06.600 --> 0:25:08.840
<v Speaker 1>giving you a sense of the future as well.

0:25:08.920 --> 0:25:12.919
<v Speaker 4>Right, Yeah, First of all, let me say I didn't

0:25:12.960 --> 0:25:18.320
<v Speaker 4>know that was the watchword in journalism, but certainly my

0:25:18.440 --> 0:25:21.199
<v Speaker 4>colleague and I have discovered that it's the same in

0:25:21.240 --> 0:25:24.560
<v Speaker 4>the financial world. I've had a pretty decent following for

0:25:24.880 --> 0:25:28.000
<v Speaker 4>twenty five years. When I write a quarterly letter, people

0:25:28.240 --> 0:25:30.439
<v Speaker 4>have tended to refer to it. And this was the

0:25:30.440 --> 0:25:34.200
<v Speaker 4>first paper we produced very well researched. I thought it

0:25:34.359 --> 0:25:37.159
<v Speaker 4>took a lot more time and effort and we dropped

0:25:37.160 --> 0:25:40.800
<v Speaker 4>it into the black hole. Nobody even acknowledged that it

0:25:40.840 --> 0:25:44.400
<v Speaker 4>had been posted, and for a few months it sent

0:25:44.440 --> 0:25:46.639
<v Speaker 4>me into a bit of a kind of psychological funk.

0:25:47.000 --> 0:25:49.640
<v Speaker 4>But what has happened is why you're describing people don't

0:25:49.640 --> 0:25:54.119
<v Speaker 4>want to hear about certain topics and declining population and

0:25:54.160 --> 0:25:58.080
<v Speaker 4>their consequences and why the population is declining. These are

0:25:58.080 --> 0:26:01.040
<v Speaker 4>not topics people want to talk about. It makes them

0:26:01.040 --> 0:26:03.840
<v Speaker 4>profoundly uneasy, and they wish you'd shut up and write

0:26:03.840 --> 0:26:07.480
<v Speaker 4>about something else. That's exactly having said that, Yeah, so

0:26:07.760 --> 0:26:11.400
<v Speaker 4>I see it as the fastest moving potential threat out there.

0:26:12.040 --> 0:26:15.399
<v Speaker 4>And how we're going to try and make the point

0:26:15.600 --> 0:26:19.680
<v Speaker 4>felt is try and relate it more to the short

0:26:19.760 --> 0:26:24.639
<v Speaker 4>term mentality, which is, dudes, you'd better realize that a

0:26:24.720 --> 0:26:31.359
<v Speaker 4>declining workforce is bad for economics, really bad. And it

0:26:31.400 --> 0:26:34.800
<v Speaker 4>turns out not just to be bad directly. Fewer hours

0:26:35.000 --> 0:26:37.879
<v Speaker 4>come straight off GDP. If you're growing at one and

0:26:37.880 --> 0:26:41.120
<v Speaker 4>a half percent a year, in which they were when

0:26:41.119 --> 0:26:44.639
<v Speaker 4>I arrived in America in the sixties, and then you

0:26:44.760 --> 0:26:48.320
<v Speaker 4>go down to minus a half a percent, which they

0:26:48.320 --> 0:26:52.560
<v Speaker 4>have done in Europe for the last fifteen years. It

0:26:52.640 --> 0:26:55.760
<v Speaker 4>has averaged a little shy of minus half a percent.

0:26:56.080 --> 0:26:59.480
<v Speaker 4>That's a two percent drop that comes straight off your

0:26:59.520 --> 0:27:05.960
<v Speaker 4>GDP growth. But secondly, we stumbled across the thought that

0:27:07.359 --> 0:27:12.719
<v Speaker 4>those societies with falling workforces will find they're working in

0:27:12.760 --> 0:27:16.400
<v Speaker 4>a lower productive world. So if you run a correlation

0:27:16.480 --> 0:27:20.240
<v Speaker 4>which we've just done, with the decline in the workforce

0:27:20.280 --> 0:27:23.920
<v Speaker 4>on one side and productivity per capita on the other,

0:27:24.440 --> 0:27:28.119
<v Speaker 4>you find there's a positive correlation between a decline in

0:27:28.119 --> 0:27:30.640
<v Speaker 4>the one and a decline in the other, and it's

0:27:30.720 --> 0:27:34.080
<v Speaker 4>aboutzero point three, which means you can see it pretty

0:27:34.080 --> 0:27:37.440
<v Speaker 4>easily as you plot the countries across the chart, the

0:27:37.440 --> 0:27:40.200
<v Speaker 4>ones that have the better population have the better productivity.

0:27:40.600 --> 0:27:42.720
<v Speaker 1>Can I interrupt you briefly there to say that, to me,

0:27:42.800 --> 0:27:48.360
<v Speaker 1>that's completely counterintuitive because I would have expected in a

0:27:48.640 --> 0:27:53.640
<v Speaker 1>falling working population there being an imperative for productivity improvement.

0:27:53.680 --> 0:27:55.399
<v Speaker 1>And as one of the conversations has been had in

0:27:55.440 --> 0:27:57.920
<v Speaker 1>the UK for some time now, is it the case

0:27:57.920 --> 0:28:00.600
<v Speaker 1>that because we have so much cheap labor available, or

0:28:00.640 --> 0:28:03.000
<v Speaker 1>have done over the last couple of decades because of

0:28:03.000 --> 0:28:06.840
<v Speaker 1>our migration policies. Is it that availability of cheap labor

0:28:06.840 --> 0:28:09.439
<v Speaker 1>that has meant that our productivity has been so bad,

0:28:09.800 --> 0:28:12.680
<v Speaker 1>and if we restrict that, or if we make labor

0:28:12.720 --> 0:28:15.200
<v Speaker 1>more expensive, for example with their rich or Reece's most

0:28:15.200 --> 0:28:19.520
<v Speaker 1>recent increase in employer nancial insurance, will we see an

0:28:19.560 --> 0:28:23.439
<v Speaker 1>improvement in productivity if we tighten the labor market. And

0:28:23.520 --> 0:28:26.639
<v Speaker 1>so I'm surprised that it's that way round, because I

0:28:26.640 --> 0:28:28.920
<v Speaker 1>would have expected it to be the opposite.

0:28:29.320 --> 0:28:33.600
<v Speaker 4>Economics being complicated, It may very well be in certain situations,

0:28:33.640 --> 0:28:39.160
<v Speaker 4>if you tighten the labor market, you will increase the productivity. Okay, granted,

0:28:40.280 --> 0:28:44.760
<v Speaker 4>the problem here is the reason I believe the productivity

0:28:44.840 --> 0:28:49.680
<v Speaker 4>drops is mainly what Caines would call animal spirits.

0:28:49.960 --> 0:28:50.720
<v Speaker 3>If you are.

0:28:52.480 --> 0:28:57.040
<v Speaker 4>Living in a world where you see children basically becoming

0:28:57.080 --> 0:29:02.240
<v Speaker 4>scarce behind you, Kindergarten's closing Grammars goals, closing applications to

0:29:02.280 --> 0:29:06.840
<v Speaker 4>college dropping rapidly you start, it starts to affect you

0:29:06.880 --> 0:29:10.200
<v Speaker 4>a bit, and as you get into the corporate system,

0:29:10.680 --> 0:29:15.360
<v Speaker 4>it's not expanding rapidly. Promotions are not anywhere near where

0:29:15.440 --> 0:29:18.640
<v Speaker 4>they were thirty forty years ago, not as rapid. The

0:29:18.720 --> 0:29:23.200
<v Speaker 4>thing is constant tinering downwards, and you become less aggressive,

0:29:23.400 --> 0:29:27.280
<v Speaker 4>less willing to borrow money, less willing to get into

0:29:27.280 --> 0:29:30.920
<v Speaker 4>a venture capital situation. Why wouldn't you be Why wouldn't

0:29:30.960 --> 0:29:35.840
<v Speaker 4>you be more dynamically thinking in an economy expanding rapidly

0:29:36.400 --> 0:29:39.160
<v Speaker 4>than you are when you're and you're not used to it,

0:29:39.400 --> 0:29:43.680
<v Speaker 4>And managing downwards in an economy is brutally difficult. As

0:29:44.160 --> 0:29:47.240
<v Speaker 4>you speak to the guys running Detroit sort of thing,

0:29:47.400 --> 0:29:51.440
<v Speaker 4>or Japan, it's much more difficult. It is falling off

0:29:51.480 --> 0:29:54.920
<v Speaker 4>a log to manage for growth. Capitalism does it in

0:29:54.920 --> 0:29:58.160
<v Speaker 4>its sleep, But when you're declining, you have a situation

0:29:58.240 --> 0:30:00.880
<v Speaker 4>where there are ten shops and four of a shut it.

0:30:01.440 --> 0:30:04.920
<v Speaker 4>What is it like for the other six any industry

0:30:05.120 --> 0:30:08.360
<v Speaker 4>where people are going out of business because they're over capacity?

0:30:08.520 --> 0:30:10.400
<v Speaker 4>What is it like for profit margins to have too

0:30:10.480 --> 0:30:15.120
<v Speaker 4>much capacity? To have one industry, one major company flailing

0:30:15.120 --> 0:30:18.800
<v Speaker 4>at the edge to stay alive. It inflicts wounds on everybody.

0:30:19.480 --> 0:30:20.760
<v Speaker 3>And it's very.

0:30:20.880 --> 0:30:24.080
<v Speaker 4>Easy to see how managing downwards is a tough business.

0:30:24.840 --> 0:30:28.000
<v Speaker 4>When you close a railroad station, how do you downsize this,

0:30:28.120 --> 0:30:30.840
<v Speaker 4>that and the other. This is not a happy go

0:30:30.960 --> 0:30:35.640
<v Speaker 4>lucky society, and as a consequence, I think people become disappointed.

0:30:35.680 --> 0:30:39.200
<v Speaker 4>And we've seen in America how easy it is to

0:30:39.240 --> 0:30:41.960
<v Speaker 4>have a society go from quite a brilliant to an

0:30:41.960 --> 0:30:46.400
<v Speaker 4>optimistic to disappointed. When you're disappointed, you're disgruntled, and when

0:30:46.440 --> 0:30:49.560
<v Speaker 4>you're disgruntled, you vote against the party in power. And

0:30:49.680 --> 0:30:52.720
<v Speaker 4>all over Europe for the last three years we've seen

0:30:52.760 --> 0:30:58.360
<v Speaker 4>a very consistent, unprecedentedly consistent move against the party in power,

0:30:58.520 --> 0:31:01.160
<v Speaker 4>doesn't matter whether it's right wing or left wing. Kick

0:31:01.200 --> 0:31:04.760
<v Speaker 4>the fellows out. And in point of fact, Biden had

0:31:04.760 --> 0:31:08.120
<v Speaker 4>a smaller swing against the party then by a decent

0:31:08.160 --> 0:31:12.320
<v Speaker 4>margin than the average European election for the last dozen

0:31:12.920 --> 0:31:17.760
<v Speaker 4>which is an interesting subtopic in itself. Anyway, So you

0:31:17.920 --> 0:31:22.640
<v Speaker 4>become discouraged, it's bad for productivity, it's bad for everything.

0:31:22.840 --> 0:31:25.360
<v Speaker 4>Kane's made the point that you could line up all

0:31:25.400 --> 0:31:30.120
<v Speaker 4>your economic stimuli, everything a wonderful plan. But if for

0:31:30.240 --> 0:31:35.360
<v Speaker 4>whatever reason people became pessimistic, they sat on their money

0:31:35.400 --> 0:31:38.040
<v Speaker 4>and they did not spend. Your toast said, do you

0:31:38.320 --> 0:31:41.640
<v Speaker 4>very quickly fall into a major recession or a depression,

0:31:41.880 --> 0:31:43.960
<v Speaker 4>which he experienced.

0:31:43.400 --> 0:31:46.800
<v Speaker 1>And animal spirits, as you say, disappear completely Okay, So

0:31:46.880 --> 0:31:50.000
<v Speaker 1>how reversible is this? We can see, as you say,

0:31:50.040 --> 0:31:54.120
<v Speaker 1>across Europe, population is declining. Fertility rates in particular, fertility

0:31:54.160 --> 0:31:57.600
<v Speaker 1>rates fully, almost bizarrely fast, and we see that in

0:31:57.640 --> 0:32:00.200
<v Speaker 1>the UK as well, and you can, of course, you

0:32:00.280 --> 0:32:03.160
<v Speaker 1>can mitigate that with migration, but is that a long

0:32:03.240 --> 0:32:06.120
<v Speaker 1>term solution or not. It doesn't appear that the populations

0:32:06.120 --> 0:32:09.600
<v Speaker 1>of post European countries consider it to be an acceptable

0:32:09.840 --> 0:32:10.760
<v Speaker 1>long term solution.

0:32:11.240 --> 0:32:13.600
<v Speaker 4>If you see the long term battle plans to twenty

0:32:13.600 --> 0:32:18.280
<v Speaker 4>one hundred, which I was looking at yesterday, Europe is

0:32:18.320 --> 0:32:21.720
<v Speaker 4>not going to be necessarily a basket case on population

0:32:22.280 --> 0:32:25.680
<v Speaker 4>because it will have a couple of one hundred million

0:32:26.080 --> 0:32:30.720
<v Speaker 4>immigrants over that time span and its native workforce will

0:32:30.800 --> 0:32:32.719
<v Speaker 4>drop by a couple of one hundred million. It's not

0:32:32.920 --> 0:32:35.640
<v Speaker 4>really out of balance, and a couple of one hundred

0:32:35.680 --> 0:32:39.920
<v Speaker 4>million over seventy five years is not enormous. And the

0:32:39.960 --> 0:32:42.640
<v Speaker 4>politics I think will shift is the one or two

0:32:42.720 --> 0:32:46.560
<v Speaker 4>countries that try and hold out with no immigrants start

0:32:46.600 --> 0:32:50.840
<v Speaker 4>to implode. Will There'll be a lot more talk on

0:32:50.880 --> 0:32:54.560
<v Speaker 4>this topic, a lot more study articles published. It'll become

0:32:54.600 --> 0:32:59.480
<v Speaker 4>pretty obvious pretty quickly that you need immigrants. Now where

0:32:59.480 --> 0:33:02.720
<v Speaker 4>are the immigran is coming from? In about forty five years,

0:33:03.840 --> 0:33:06.680
<v Speaker 4>at the current rate of drop, African fertility will be

0:33:06.720 --> 0:33:10.640
<v Speaker 4>about replacement two point one, So you have a window

0:33:11.320 --> 0:33:13.960
<v Speaker 4>of seventy five years or so if you can handle

0:33:13.960 --> 0:33:18.400
<v Speaker 4>the politics sensibly where it will be a potential help,

0:33:18.760 --> 0:33:21.040
<v Speaker 4>and after that not so much.

0:33:21.280 --> 0:33:22.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that's the other thing.

0:33:22.520 --> 0:33:27.760
<v Speaker 1>Fertility rates in pretty much every country have persistently consistently

0:33:27.800 --> 0:33:30.479
<v Speaker 1>fallen faster than expected. Right, So when you give a

0:33:30.520 --> 0:33:33.600
<v Speaker 1>timeframe for when Africa will be at replacement rate, the

0:33:33.680 --> 0:33:37.200
<v Speaker 1>way things have worked out so far suggest it'll probably

0:33:37.200 --> 0:33:39.960
<v Speaker 1>be quite a lot sooner than that. Everything in population

0:33:40.040 --> 0:33:42.080
<v Speaker 1>seems to be happening faster than we expected.

0:33:42.840 --> 0:33:47.200
<v Speaker 4>No, Africa actually has been dropping faster than Europe, but

0:33:47.520 --> 0:33:50.600
<v Speaker 4>people don't notice it because it's dropping from six point

0:33:50.640 --> 0:33:54.040
<v Speaker 4>five to four point two. But that gap of two

0:33:54.120 --> 0:33:58.160
<v Speaker 4>point three is faster. And if they maintain that rate,

0:33:58.200 --> 0:34:01.880
<v Speaker 4>which as you say, we think it's pretty likely, they

0:34:01.920 --> 0:34:04.200
<v Speaker 4>may very well get there in as little as forty

0:34:04.200 --> 0:34:06.040
<v Speaker 4>five years. And maybe it will be forty, maybe it

0:34:06.080 --> 0:34:08.920
<v Speaker 4>will be fifty, but it will be pretty quick, and

0:34:08.960 --> 0:34:11.440
<v Speaker 4>it will be a lot faster than most people realize.

0:34:11.320 --> 0:34:13.920
<v Speaker 1>Now, So you need a much longer term solution to

0:34:14.120 --> 0:34:18.640
<v Speaker 1>population decline because it's at one point all populations will

0:34:18.680 --> 0:34:21.759
<v Speaker 1>be declining and there won't be the option to move

0:34:21.840 --> 0:34:25.160
<v Speaker 1>populations around the place to solve one dunts problem. So

0:34:25.320 --> 0:34:27.960
<v Speaker 1>that's a very temporary solution. And as we always say

0:34:27.960 --> 0:34:31.600
<v Speaker 1>in the UK, immigrants age two. So it's all very

0:34:31.600 --> 0:34:34.160
<v Speaker 1>well bringing in lots of people because you have an

0:34:34.200 --> 0:34:37.160
<v Speaker 1>aging society, but that generation also ages.

0:34:37.239 --> 0:34:38.440
<v Speaker 2>You haven't solved your problem.

0:34:39.040 --> 0:34:41.400
<v Speaker 4>No, you bore yourself some time.

0:34:42.120 --> 0:34:44.239
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, you've put some time, but you still have to

0:34:44.320 --> 0:34:48.319
<v Speaker 1>find a way as a global population to deal with

0:34:48.360 --> 0:34:51.239
<v Speaker 1>the dynamics of low fertility and decline.

0:34:52.360 --> 0:34:53.840
<v Speaker 3>There are two issues.

0:34:54.840 --> 0:34:59.120
<v Speaker 4>One is we've created a toxic environment, so the fertility

0:34:59.600 --> 0:35:02.319
<v Speaker 4>rates are going to drop because of that, as they

0:35:02.360 --> 0:35:06.080
<v Speaker 4>have been doing, particularly for the last fifteen years, and

0:35:06.719 --> 0:35:10.480
<v Speaker 4>that will continue. There's no reasonable hope that we will

0:35:10.520 --> 0:35:12.920
<v Speaker 4>clean up the world fast enough to.

0:35:12.920 --> 0:35:14.840
<v Speaker 3>Stop that for a few decades.

0:35:15.320 --> 0:35:18.000
<v Speaker 4>Some areas like the EU are doing so well it

0:35:18.040 --> 0:35:22.080
<v Speaker 4>will eventually act as a break. And the other thing

0:35:22.280 --> 0:35:26.400
<v Speaker 4>is what I like to call as propaganda toxic capitalism.

0:35:26.719 --> 0:35:32.160
<v Speaker 4>We've created an anti natal culture and for whatever reason,

0:35:32.239 --> 0:35:37.120
<v Speaker 4>people quite reasonably have been given incentives not to have children.

0:35:37.280 --> 0:35:40.640
<v Speaker 4>It's a better life for them individually, often not to

0:35:40.680 --> 0:35:44.080
<v Speaker 4>have children, to have fewer children, and In the end,

0:35:44.239 --> 0:35:47.960
<v Speaker 4>we will only change the fertility rate by changing the stimuli.

0:35:48.320 --> 0:35:52.640
<v Speaker 4>So we have got to end up some time I

0:35:52.680 --> 0:35:55.440
<v Speaker 4>would guess at least a few decades from now, where

0:35:55.480 --> 0:35:59.680
<v Speaker 4>the culture has been changed to one of nurturing family

0:36:00.200 --> 0:36:04.440
<v Speaker 4>and two point one well educated, healthy children.

0:36:04.640 --> 0:36:06.000
<v Speaker 3>That is a part of the commons.

0:36:06.000 --> 0:36:08.560
<v Speaker 4>By the way, if you don't have two point one children,

0:36:09.120 --> 0:36:11.920
<v Speaker 4>humans go out of business pretty dim fast. And I

0:36:11.920 --> 0:36:14.880
<v Speaker 4>could show you some statistics how quickly it happens, much.

0:36:14.760 --> 0:36:17.719
<v Speaker 3>Faster than you think. But you need it.

0:36:17.840 --> 0:36:21.719
<v Speaker 4>Just like clean air, good soil, clean water. You need

0:36:21.760 --> 0:36:24.960
<v Speaker 4>two point one well educated, healthy children. And you have

0:36:25.040 --> 0:36:27.120
<v Speaker 4>got to end up with a system that gives you

0:36:27.160 --> 0:36:28.040
<v Speaker 4>all those four.

0:36:28.160 --> 0:36:31.640
<v Speaker 1>It feel badine point one short, it feel guilty.

0:36:32.800 --> 0:36:36.480
<v Speaker 4>Yes, we're point nine long, so okay.

0:36:36.200 --> 0:36:38.080
<v Speaker 2>I'll get fine, thank you.

0:36:38.880 --> 0:36:41.839
<v Speaker 1>So we're not already coming up with a solution here

0:36:42.000 --> 0:36:46.919
<v Speaker 1>already practical actions beyond changing the way we all live.

0:36:48.160 --> 0:36:51.840
<v Speaker 4>The solution starts always is better than ninety nine percent

0:36:51.880 --> 0:36:56.799
<v Speaker 4>of the people with communications slash propaganda. You have got

0:36:56.800 --> 0:36:59.359
<v Speaker 4>to have people understand what the problem is before they

0:36:59.360 --> 0:37:02.000
<v Speaker 4>can solve it. And they do not understand it, they're

0:37:02.000 --> 0:37:04.600
<v Speaker 4>not even prepared to listen to it, and yet the

0:37:04.640 --> 0:37:08.040
<v Speaker 4>clock is ticket. We've got to persuade these people. This

0:37:08.080 --> 0:37:11.120
<v Speaker 4>is a problem. It is solvable. You have just got

0:37:11.160 --> 0:37:15.560
<v Speaker 4>to find a way of changing your incentives. Now you

0:37:15.560 --> 0:37:18.000
<v Speaker 4>can bully them as I'm sure they will pretty quickly

0:37:18.040 --> 0:37:21.120
<v Speaker 4>in China, so you can't get a house unless you're married, etc.

0:37:21.680 --> 0:37:23.920
<v Speaker 4>And then you can give them carrots and you can

0:37:23.960 --> 0:37:27.799
<v Speaker 4>say every child, you get not a silly little six

0:37:27.840 --> 0:37:31.719
<v Speaker 4>thousand dollars, but you get eighty thousand dollars, and you

0:37:31.760 --> 0:37:37.440
<v Speaker 4>get subsidized childcare. We look after your education of the children,

0:37:37.880 --> 0:37:41.440
<v Speaker 4>and we look after their health because everyone's benefit. You

0:37:41.480 --> 0:37:43.480
<v Speaker 4>can decide to have no children, but you're not going

0:37:43.560 --> 0:37:46.400
<v Speaker 4>to prosper if the world is cracking up around you

0:37:46.480 --> 0:37:49.640
<v Speaker 4>for lack of people, the infrastructure is collapsing around you.

0:37:49.920 --> 0:37:53.160
<v Speaker 4>I think you need a couple of dozen of these

0:37:53.239 --> 0:37:58.040
<v Speaker 4>cultural shifts that really make people feel that. They say

0:37:58.160 --> 0:38:01.000
<v Speaker 4>it takes a village, it takes the society to bring

0:38:01.080 --> 0:38:05.880
<v Speaker 4>up enough good, healthy children, And you've just got them

0:38:05.920 --> 0:38:11.760
<v Speaker 4>to change the general tone that people appreciate people having children,

0:38:12.080 --> 0:38:14.520
<v Speaker 4>recognize them as producing a good that they need.

0:38:15.480 --> 0:38:19.440
<v Speaker 1>Jeremy, do you have any feelings on gold because that

0:38:19.520 --> 0:38:22.520
<v Speaker 1>looks to us like it might be the other bullmarket

0:38:22.560 --> 0:38:24.799
<v Speaker 1>of the coming ten years done it.

0:38:25.400 --> 0:38:30.240
<v Speaker 4>Yes, I've always felt uncomfortable about gold because it doesn't

0:38:30.239 --> 0:38:33.279
<v Speaker 4>have a dividend, It doesn't produce anything in the end

0:38:33.840 --> 0:38:37.120
<v Speaker 4>other than it's a wonderful, handsome metal. And it does

0:38:37.200 --> 0:38:41.720
<v Speaker 4>have a tiny amount of industrial use, but for ninety

0:38:41.760 --> 0:38:45.320
<v Speaker 4>percent of it, one has to admit it's a speculative medium.

0:38:45.360 --> 0:38:50.880
<v Speaker 4>Now it has ten thousand years head start over bitcoin,

0:38:51.719 --> 0:38:56.000
<v Speaker 4>and it's absolutely indestructible. It is there, it's always going

0:38:56.040 --> 0:38:57.759
<v Speaker 4>to be handsome, it's always going to.

0:38:57.680 --> 0:38:59.080
<v Speaker 3>Be slightly useful.

0:38:59.280 --> 0:39:02.480
<v Speaker 4>So I'm comfortable with gold, but it is far better

0:39:02.960 --> 0:39:06.640
<v Speaker 4>to stack in your mattress than bitcoin.

0:39:07.360 --> 0:39:08.840
<v Speaker 1>I think I have to agree with you on that

0:39:08.920 --> 0:39:11.319
<v Speaker 1>as well. There's too much agreement in this conversation. It

0:39:11.600 --> 0:39:14.799
<v Speaker 1>should be making us uncomfortable. Can I ask you one

0:39:14.880 --> 0:39:16.719
<v Speaker 1>last question? Is there a book you're reading at the

0:39:16.760 --> 0:39:19.440
<v Speaker 1>moment that you might recommend to our listeners?

0:39:19.800 --> 0:39:20.040
<v Speaker 3>Yeah?

0:39:20.160 --> 0:39:25.760
<v Speaker 4>Actually, James Galbraith, a son of Kenneth Galbraith, the famous

0:39:26.160 --> 0:39:30.320
<v Speaker 4>economist of the fifties sixty seventies. He has a book

0:39:30.960 --> 0:39:36.360
<v Speaker 4>that looks at economics more compatibly with the laws of physics,

0:39:36.600 --> 0:39:40.680
<v Speaker 4>the laws of nature, and entropy. I think it's called

0:39:41.120 --> 0:39:43.320
<v Speaker 4>entropy economics, or words to that effect.

0:39:44.280 --> 0:39:45.279
<v Speaker 3>And it's brand.

0:39:45.040 --> 0:39:48.799
<v Speaker 4>New, and it's only half a few weeks, and it

0:39:48.960 --> 0:39:55.640
<v Speaker 4>covers disturbingly large chunks of what I'm working on, some

0:39:55.680 --> 0:39:58.680
<v Speaker 4>of which I thought was come blindingly original until I

0:39:58.840 --> 0:39:59.200
<v Speaker 4>read it.

0:39:59.239 --> 0:40:00.400
<v Speaker 3>And it's done.

0:40:01.040 --> 0:40:02.920
<v Speaker 2>You can now you can just plagiarize that. It'll make

0:40:02.960 --> 0:40:03.840
<v Speaker 2>it a whole lot easier.

0:40:04.360 --> 0:40:08.839
<v Speaker 4>Yeah, but it makes the point that economics has been

0:40:08.920 --> 0:40:12.840
<v Speaker 4>spectacularly incapable of dealing with the real world.

0:40:12.920 --> 0:40:13.560
<v Speaker 3>It doesn't.

0:40:13.960 --> 0:40:16.880
<v Speaker 4>It thinks you can do it with capital and labor

0:40:16.920 --> 0:40:21.239
<v Speaker 4>and productivity. And my ancient joke was, try making a

0:40:21.280 --> 0:40:25.320
<v Speaker 4>loaf of bread with just a baker and an oven.

0:40:26.080 --> 0:40:29.880
<v Speaker 4>You need wheat, and you need heat, you need energy,

0:40:30.120 --> 0:40:34.200
<v Speaker 4>and you need materials, and economics doesn't cover them. It

0:40:34.239 --> 0:40:39.920
<v Speaker 4>doesn't cover the fact that every material of the past

0:40:40.360 --> 0:40:43.759
<v Speaker 4>is finite. We mine it, we run out. No, no,

0:40:43.800 --> 0:40:45.320
<v Speaker 4>we don't. It's just a question of price.

0:40:45.360 --> 0:40:45.680
<v Speaker 3>They say.

0:40:45.719 --> 0:40:49.040
<v Speaker 4>It is a totally inadequate system for dealing with a

0:40:49.120 --> 0:40:52.520
<v Speaker 4>finite world. And you can't have compound growth on a

0:40:52.560 --> 0:40:55.560
<v Speaker 4>finite planet. Everybody knows that that's the laws of physics.

0:40:55.719 --> 0:40:59.000
<v Speaker 4>It doesn't work, and they have nothing to do with that.

0:41:00.120 --> 0:41:03.560
<v Speaker 4>So what we get there is lots of assumptions to

0:41:03.719 --> 0:41:06.319
<v Speaker 4>deal with the world that is simply not the real world.

0:41:06.400 --> 0:41:08.719
<v Speaker 4>And I'm very attached to the real world and i

0:41:08.760 --> 0:41:12.520
<v Speaker 4>don't want to see it get destroyed unnecessarily because of

0:41:12.560 --> 0:41:16.800
<v Speaker 4>the wrong assumptions by fifty years of economists. And James

0:41:17.040 --> 0:41:19.560
<v Speaker 4>Galbraith shares that view excellent.

0:41:19.680 --> 0:41:21.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to order that and read it, and it

0:41:21.160 --> 0:41:23.640
<v Speaker 1>sounds like everyone else should as well. Jeremy, thank you

0:41:23.719 --> 0:41:25.920
<v Speaker 1>so much for being with us today. I really appreciate it.

0:41:25.920 --> 0:41:27.879
<v Speaker 3>It was a real pleasure. Thanks for having me.

0:41:32.280 --> 0:41:34.319
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for listening to this week's Marin Talks Money.

0:41:34.360 --> 0:41:36.680
<v Speaker 1>If you like our show, rates, review, and subscribe wherever

0:41:36.719 --> 0:41:39.239
<v Speaker 1>you listen to podcasts, I keep sending your questions or

0:41:39.239 --> 0:41:40.520
<v Speaker 1>your comments to Merin.

0:41:40.239 --> 0:41:41.640
<v Speaker 2>Money at Bloomberg dot net.

0:41:41.800 --> 0:41:43.960
<v Speaker 1>You can also follow me in John on Twitter or

0:41:44.160 --> 0:41:47.600
<v Speaker 1>x I'm at Marinus w and John is John Underscore Steppe.

0:41:47.880 --> 0:41:50.360
<v Speaker 1>This episode was hosted by me Maren zumsep Web. The

0:41:50.400 --> 0:41:54.040
<v Speaker 1>show is designed by Samasadi and Moses and sound designed

0:41:54.040 --> 0:41:56.680
<v Speaker 1>by Blake Maples. As special thanks to Jeremy Grantham,