WEBVTT - Amazing Frauds, Faking Your Own Death, and the Latest on the Election

0:00:15.564 --> 0:00:28.484
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin. Hi, everyone, welcome back to Risky Business, our show

0:00:28.524 --> 0:00:32.324
<v Speaker 1>about making better decisions. I'm Maria Kanikova and I'm Nate Silver.

0:00:32.924 --> 0:00:37.284
<v Speaker 1>So today we have a slightly different and fun show

0:00:37.324 --> 0:00:40.044
<v Speaker 1>for you. We're going to start off talking about some

0:00:40.084 --> 0:00:43.164
<v Speaker 1>of our usual things, so we'll do a quick politics recap.

0:00:43.844 --> 0:00:46.604
<v Speaker 1>So we're taping this on Tuesday, August twenty seventh. That

0:00:46.764 --> 0:00:51.964
<v Speaker 1>DNC has concluded, Kamala Harris has accepted the nomination, and

0:00:52.124 --> 0:00:55.684
<v Speaker 1>a lot of things are going on with Nate's election models,

0:00:55.684 --> 0:00:57.804
<v Speaker 1>so we're going to talk quickly about that, and then

0:00:57.844 --> 0:01:00.284
<v Speaker 1>we're going to be bringing on a very special guest,

0:01:01.044 --> 0:01:05.764
<v Speaker 1>Tim Harford, who hosts another Pushkin podcast, Cautionary Tales, and

0:01:05.804 --> 0:01:09.364
<v Speaker 1>we'll be talking about the intersection of risk and cautionary

0:01:09.404 --> 0:01:17.524
<v Speaker 1>details from history. All right, before we bring Tim on,

0:01:17.804 --> 0:01:21.524
<v Speaker 1>Nate's let's talk a little bit about politics and what

0:01:21.604 --> 0:01:24.524
<v Speaker 1>has happened since the DNC. Last time you and I

0:01:24.564 --> 0:01:27.844
<v Speaker 1>talked the DNC was on day one and we weren't

0:01:27.924 --> 0:01:30.244
<v Speaker 1>quite sure what to expect. We weren't quite sure how

0:01:30.244 --> 0:01:32.284
<v Speaker 1>it was going to go. So now here we are

0:01:32.364 --> 0:01:36.084
<v Speaker 1>a week later. Let's recap and talk about what has

0:01:36.124 --> 0:01:41.084
<v Speaker 1>happened since the convention, and also RFK Junior obviously dropping out,

0:01:41.124 --> 0:01:43.724
<v Speaker 1>So two big things have happened since we last spoke

0:01:44.124 --> 0:01:45.684
<v Speaker 1>to potentially affect the model.

0:01:46.084 --> 0:01:48.564
<v Speaker 2>We still don't know that much, but so far it's

0:01:48.604 --> 0:01:51.644
<v Speaker 2>been kind of a bunch of rand not crap, but

0:01:51.844 --> 0:01:54.764
<v Speaker 2>like kind of by definition, the polls that are done

0:01:54.764 --> 0:01:57.964
<v Speaker 2>in one or two days are either online tracking polls

0:01:57.964 --> 0:02:01.084
<v Speaker 2>which are fine but sometimes don't really capture change some

0:02:01.204 --> 0:02:04.084
<v Speaker 2>voter sentiment. It's gonna be very stable or quick and

0:02:04.124 --> 0:02:06.884
<v Speaker 2>dirty fly by night polls that are also not very good.

0:02:07.844 --> 0:02:10.204
<v Speaker 2>So by Thursday, well, no, so far it seems like

0:02:10.684 --> 0:02:14.364
<v Speaker 2>Harris is poling as well. She has all campaign, But

0:02:14.524 --> 0:02:16.124
<v Speaker 2>is it gonna Is she gonna three points or four

0:02:16.164 --> 0:02:18.524
<v Speaker 2>points or five or six or seven? The model will

0:02:18.564 --> 0:02:20.444
<v Speaker 2>care about that a lot, but like we don't. We

0:02:20.524 --> 0:02:21.884
<v Speaker 2>just don't know quite yet. I mean, I thought it

0:02:21.884 --> 0:02:25.684
<v Speaker 2>was an effective convention, you know, maybe will. I thought

0:02:25.724 --> 0:02:29.164
<v Speaker 2>the gender politics of her speech were interesting. It was

0:02:29.164 --> 0:02:31.444
<v Speaker 2>a very male coded speech talking of like the like

0:02:31.484 --> 0:02:34.164
<v Speaker 2>the most lethal military force. It was a very risk

0:02:34.204 --> 0:02:37.204
<v Speaker 2>taking speech. Actually right, She's like it was we're privileged,

0:02:37.204 --> 0:02:39.364
<v Speaker 2>so we should fucking kick ass America. Like I'm like, oh,

0:02:39.444 --> 0:02:40.244
<v Speaker 2>my gosh, I love this.

0:02:40.964 --> 0:02:42.884
<v Speaker 1>It was a it was a good speech to speak,

0:02:42.924 --> 0:02:43.124
<v Speaker 1>It was.

0:02:43.564 --> 0:02:47.284
<v Speaker 2>Interesting, it was like not a typical speech. And again

0:02:47.404 --> 0:02:51.044
<v Speaker 2>I'm a fan of good strategy, and so anybody who

0:02:51.084 --> 0:02:54.644
<v Speaker 2>shows good strategic instincts I think Harris has repeatedly. Now

0:02:54.684 --> 0:02:57.604
<v Speaker 2>at this point, I just kind of my estimation of

0:02:57.644 --> 0:03:00.604
<v Speaker 2>their intellect and their skills goes up a little bit.

0:03:00.644 --> 0:03:02.804
<v Speaker 2>But but we'll see. I mean, if a speech appeals

0:03:02.844 --> 0:03:06.404
<v Speaker 2>to me is probably somewhat negatively correlated with it's appealing

0:03:06.404 --> 0:03:07.764
<v Speaker 2>to the general population, I'd.

0:03:07.564 --> 0:03:09.564
<v Speaker 1>Say, I don't know. It appealed to me as well.

0:03:09.404 --> 0:03:09.564
<v Speaker 2>Well.

0:03:09.604 --> 0:03:12.084
<v Speaker 1>I think she she walked a fine line in I

0:03:12.124 --> 0:03:15.524
<v Speaker 1>think talking about all of the things that matter, having

0:03:15.524 --> 0:03:18.444
<v Speaker 1>it actually been heavier on policy than I think a

0:03:18.444 --> 0:03:20.164
<v Speaker 1>lot of people thought it was going to be, and

0:03:20.244 --> 0:03:23.524
<v Speaker 1>appealing to a lot of different voters. Right. She didn't.

0:03:24.244 --> 0:03:28.284
<v Speaker 1>She didn't hew to just one audience or kind of

0:03:28.484 --> 0:03:33.164
<v Speaker 1>one one topic, and I think that that was actually

0:03:33.644 --> 0:03:35.644
<v Speaker 1>quite an effective way for her to go.

0:03:35.924 --> 0:03:39.364
<v Speaker 2>No, she avoided some of the presumptuousness, and I think

0:03:39.364 --> 0:03:41.844
<v Speaker 2>we saw with Hillary. I watched her speech in Hillary

0:03:41.884 --> 0:03:46.044
<v Speaker 2>Clinton's intersperse with one another, and she avoided that presumptuousness,

0:03:46.124 --> 0:03:51.004
<v Speaker 2>and she is playing to the center right, kind of unapologized.

0:03:52.084 --> 0:03:55.844
<v Speaker 2>I mean that's the basic gto game, theoreptical strategy. Most

0:03:55.844 --> 0:03:57.764
<v Speaker 2>of the time, you want to you want to appear

0:03:57.804 --> 0:03:58.364
<v Speaker 2>more moderate.

0:03:58.524 --> 0:04:01.604
<v Speaker 1>Yeah. And then, of course after the convention, we had

0:04:01.724 --> 0:04:06.524
<v Speaker 1>news on Friday of last week with RFK Junior dropping

0:04:06.524 --> 0:04:09.684
<v Speaker 1>out of the race and throwing his support.

0:04:09.484 --> 0:04:12.204
<v Speaker 2>What is Cheryl Hines doing? Can we talk about that?

0:04:13.084 --> 0:04:14.444
<v Speaker 1>Okay, yes, I don't know.

0:04:14.484 --> 0:04:15.764
<v Speaker 2>I mean, what is Cheryl Hines doing?

0:04:16.084 --> 0:04:16.564
<v Speaker 1>I don't know.

0:04:16.684 --> 0:04:23.124
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Anyway, when you have polls that test the matchup

0:04:23.564 --> 0:04:27.964
<v Speaker 2>both with him without RFK Junior, then Trump does better

0:04:27.964 --> 0:04:30.244
<v Speaker 2>in polls without him. In other words, RFK is taking

0:04:30.284 --> 0:04:35.564
<v Speaker 2>more votes from Trump than from Harris in our model.

0:04:35.764 --> 0:04:39.484
<v Speaker 2>We adjusted the model on Saturday to make it rfkless.

0:04:41.044 --> 0:04:44.324
<v Speaker 2>It didn't hurt Harris kind of like coincidental reasons, which

0:04:44.364 --> 0:04:46.604
<v Speaker 2>his name was. Like, she is getting like somewhat of

0:04:46.604 --> 0:04:48.604
<v Speaker 2>a convention bounce. I just said, like, oh, it's like

0:04:48.604 --> 0:04:50.764
<v Speaker 2>too early to pay attention to it. But like, but

0:04:50.844 --> 0:04:54.884
<v Speaker 2>she's doing okay, and that was enough to offset this

0:04:55.124 --> 0:04:57.724
<v Speaker 2>RFK maneuver. But yeah, it's a little bit of a

0:04:57.804 --> 0:05:00.844
<v Speaker 2>risk factor. Look I think anything involving RFK is kind

0:05:00.844 --> 0:05:02.084
<v Speaker 2>of over it. He was getting like, you know, three

0:05:02.124 --> 0:05:04.444
<v Speaker 2>and a half four percent in the polls. A lot

0:05:04.484 --> 0:05:06.284
<v Speaker 2>of those books will go to other third party candidates.

0:05:06.324 --> 0:05:08.724
<v Speaker 2>By the way, he'll still be on the ballot technically

0:05:08.724 --> 0:05:12.924
<v Speaker 2>speaking in a number of states. So anyway, I think

0:05:12.924 --> 0:05:15.244
<v Speaker 2>it's like an overrated storyline. But you know, it's one

0:05:15.284 --> 0:05:18.164
<v Speaker 2>of the better things Trump has going for him right now.

0:05:18.204 --> 0:05:21.764
<v Speaker 2>I suppose after a very bad month, you know, whatever,

0:05:21.804 --> 0:05:24.564
<v Speaker 2>he whatever quid pro quo there was, and I'm not

0:05:24.604 --> 0:05:28.804
<v Speaker 2>accusing anybody of anything, but like, look, RFK Junior was

0:05:28.884 --> 0:05:32.324
<v Speaker 2>negotiating with both campaigns for some type of position. What

0:05:32.444 --> 0:05:35.844
<v Speaker 2>ambassadorship do you predict that he'll get. Malta might be one.

0:05:35.884 --> 0:05:38.284
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, No, I think I think getting an ambassadorship to

0:05:38.684 --> 0:05:42.764
<v Speaker 1>a country like Malta might might be a yeah, might

0:05:42.804 --> 0:05:44.644
<v Speaker 1>be a way forward for our FKA. He was very

0:05:44.684 --> 0:05:47.244
<v Speaker 1>mad that. You know, in the past he has been

0:05:47.284 --> 0:05:50.604
<v Speaker 1>promised positions in the Trump administration that never materialized.

0:05:51.484 --> 0:05:56.644
<v Speaker 2>Anyway, future ambassador to Malta RFK Junior and doors Stunnel Trump,

0:05:57.564 --> 0:05:59.644
<v Speaker 2>which should help Trump a little bit, but probably not

0:05:59.684 --> 0:06:00.364
<v Speaker 2>that big a deal.

0:06:01.044 --> 0:06:04.444
<v Speaker 1>And one more question for you. Last time we spoke,

0:06:04.524 --> 0:06:07.004
<v Speaker 1>I kind of I don't know if this was last time,

0:06:07.004 --> 0:06:11.284
<v Speaker 1>but I've definitely asked you whether you thought that Trump

0:06:11.564 --> 0:06:15.724
<v Speaker 1>was actually going to be debating Kamala in September, and

0:06:16.004 --> 0:06:19.524
<v Speaker 1>I express skepticism. Now we see that he might be

0:06:19.564 --> 0:06:22.524
<v Speaker 1>paving the way for not doing that. Have you changed

0:06:22.564 --> 0:06:23.924
<v Speaker 1>your thinking about it at all?

0:06:24.284 --> 0:06:26.724
<v Speaker 2>You know, Marie, you can go to polymarket dot com,

0:06:27.004 --> 0:06:28.684
<v Speaker 2>to which I'm a paid advisor, by the way, and

0:06:28.764 --> 0:06:29.204
<v Speaker 2>bet on this.

0:06:30.924 --> 0:06:33.324
<v Speaker 1>I know I can'tnate because I live in the United States.

0:06:33.404 --> 0:06:36.044
<v Speaker 2>Okay, not if you're an American. I think Donald Trump

0:06:36.044 --> 0:06:39.204
<v Speaker 2>would be incredibly stupid not to debate he needs at

0:06:39.204 --> 0:06:44.284
<v Speaker 2>this point. Currently he's losing, right. The reason why we

0:06:44.364 --> 0:06:46.204
<v Speaker 2>have it closer to fifty to fifty in the model

0:06:46.284 --> 0:06:49.324
<v Speaker 2>is because you know, there are reasons the model expects

0:06:49.324 --> 0:06:51.764
<v Speaker 2>the race to tighten up again, and Trump has electoral

0:06:51.764 --> 0:06:55.004
<v Speaker 2>college advantage if it's really close. But if you have

0:06:55.004 --> 0:06:56.844
<v Speaker 2>the election today, Harris might be a two to one

0:06:56.844 --> 0:07:00.364
<v Speaker 2>favorite or something like that. So Trump wants to introduce

0:07:00.484 --> 0:07:05.084
<v Speaker 2>obstacles for her and variants. So I think it's a bluff.

0:07:05.244 --> 0:07:07.364
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I think I don't know for sure. Trump's

0:07:07.404 --> 0:07:11.404
<v Speaker 2>been acting pretty irrationally. I think it's a bluff. If

0:07:11.404 --> 0:07:13.404
<v Speaker 2>it's not, I mean, if I were the Harris campaign

0:07:13.404 --> 0:07:15.604
<v Speaker 2>and be like, Okay, don't yo, bro, don't take your

0:07:15.604 --> 0:07:17.404
<v Speaker 2>coverage too far because you could be a good excuse

0:07:17.444 --> 0:07:19.124
<v Speaker 2>not to debate you, then we'll just ride this momentum

0:07:19.164 --> 0:07:22.724
<v Speaker 2>train through to November. And so he has very little leverage.

0:07:22.804 --> 0:07:26.484
<v Speaker 2>If he ducked the debate, he would look very weak. Yeah,

0:07:26.524 --> 0:07:28.764
<v Speaker 2>it has to be emasculating. I mean there are gender

0:07:28.884 --> 0:07:32.204
<v Speaker 2>things here too, right, Like he can't debate Kamala Harris.

0:07:32.204 --> 0:07:34.604
<v Speaker 2>Like he looks so weak that he has like very

0:07:34.604 --> 0:07:36.844
<v Speaker 2>little leverage. And if you stupd enough to do that,

0:07:36.884 --> 0:07:40.004
<v Speaker 2>then you know, probably he doesn't deserve to win. But

0:07:40.284 --> 0:07:44.124
<v Speaker 2>I'm skeptical that this is anything other than like tactical negotiation.

0:07:44.204 --> 0:07:46.884
<v Speaker 1>That makes sense. I'll be very, very curious to see

0:07:46.924 --> 0:07:49.884
<v Speaker 1>how this plays out. And if I could bet on polymarket,

0:07:49.924 --> 0:07:51.804
<v Speaker 1>I would, but but I can't.

0:07:51.844 --> 0:07:53.364
<v Speaker 2>You're going to Barcelona, right.

0:07:53.324 --> 0:07:56.324
<v Speaker 1>I mean I am in Barcelona, Barcelona. Yes, this is

0:07:56.364 --> 0:07:59.004
<v Speaker 1>this is my Barcelona hotel room, nice with my very

0:07:59.044 --> 0:07:59.884
<v Speaker 1>own mini bar.

0:07:59.964 --> 0:08:04.684
<v Speaker 2>I was gonna say it's a lot of booze for yes, yes,

0:08:04.764 --> 0:08:09.284
<v Speaker 2>it is for in the afternoon for me. All right,

0:08:09.324 --> 0:08:11.524
<v Speaker 2>we're we're gonna bring Tim Harford on. Then maybe you

0:08:11.524 --> 0:08:13.444
<v Speaker 2>can have a drink Maria, four pm, Barcelona.

0:08:13.684 --> 0:08:16.204
<v Speaker 1>That sounds great. It is just about cocktail hour here

0:08:16.204 --> 0:08:21.124
<v Speaker 1>in Barcelona. But first, yes, let's welcome Tim onto the show. Tim,

0:08:21.244 --> 0:08:22.164
<v Speaker 1>welcome to the show.

0:08:22.564 --> 0:08:26.204
<v Speaker 3>To be on the show, thank you so for.

0:08:26.004 --> 0:08:29.764
<v Speaker 1>The listeners of Pushkin. You're probably familiar with Tim as

0:08:29.804 --> 0:08:32.964
<v Speaker 1>the host of Cautionary Tales. I've been lucky enough to

0:08:32.964 --> 0:08:35.044
<v Speaker 1>be on the show and to have been a listener

0:08:35.044 --> 0:08:38.244
<v Speaker 1>of the show. I think it's wonderful. My episodes are

0:08:38.244 --> 0:08:41.684
<v Speaker 1>obviously the best, but it's all pretty good. Tim is

0:08:41.724 --> 0:08:45.084
<v Speaker 1>an economist, a journalist. He has a column in the

0:08:45.124 --> 0:08:49.804
<v Speaker 1>Financial Times. He's written multiple amazing books. You know, longtime

0:08:49.844 --> 0:08:52.324
<v Speaker 1>friend of the two of us, Nate, I don't know

0:08:52.324 --> 0:08:54.284
<v Speaker 1>if you want to add anything else, but we're so

0:08:54.404 --> 0:08:56.364
<v Speaker 1>happy to be here and to do kind of an

0:08:56.404 --> 0:09:01.404
<v Speaker 1>episode where Cautionary Tales and Risky Business intersect, where we

0:09:01.444 --> 0:09:05.084
<v Speaker 1>talk about cautionary tales that are about risky business, that

0:09:05.164 --> 0:09:08.964
<v Speaker 1>are about risk, about taking risks, about how risk taking

0:09:09.004 --> 0:09:12.524
<v Speaker 1>can go wrong, and how sometimes you know the lines

0:09:12.564 --> 0:09:16.924
<v Speaker 1>between legitimate risks and cons and deceptions might get blurred

0:09:16.924 --> 0:09:21.084
<v Speaker 1>a little bit and cross over into territory that goes

0:09:21.124 --> 0:09:23.884
<v Speaker 1>from legitimate to illegitimate very quickly.

0:09:24.164 --> 0:09:26.324
<v Speaker 2>Do you mean to say that campling doesn't always work out, Maria?

0:09:26.524 --> 0:09:27.764
<v Speaker 1>It's weird. It's so weird.

0:09:27.844 --> 0:09:29.964
<v Speaker 3>The chance of loss is in fact one hundred percent,

0:09:30.004 --> 0:09:32.844
<v Speaker 3>which I guess we'll get we'll get to that. But yes, that.

0:09:33.284 --> 0:09:36.484
<v Speaker 1>Is absolutely true. So when we were kind of thinking

0:09:36.484 --> 0:09:40.924
<v Speaker 1>about ways to make this episode work, Tim, you thought

0:09:40.924 --> 0:09:43.884
<v Speaker 1>about one particular story where you and I have actually

0:09:43.884 --> 0:09:46.724
<v Speaker 1>intersected on this because we've both thought about this person

0:09:47.444 --> 0:09:50.844
<v Speaker 1>and he's someone who I actually had on my previous podcast,

0:09:50.964 --> 0:09:55.764
<v Speaker 1>The Grift, and he is a well, let's let's have

0:09:55.964 --> 0:09:59.404
<v Speaker 1>you lay him out. Let us meet Sam Israel, the

0:09:59.444 --> 0:10:02.444
<v Speaker 1>first kind of our first subject for today.

0:10:02.364 --> 0:10:06.204
<v Speaker 3>Sam Israel, the third I think is his full name. Third,

0:10:07.004 --> 0:10:12.164
<v Speaker 3>absolutely remarkable gentlemen if gentlemen is the right term, and

0:10:12.244 --> 0:10:17.004
<v Speaker 3>it probably isn't. So we did a Cautionary Tales episode

0:10:17.284 --> 0:10:21.524
<v Speaker 3>live on stage about pyramid schemes and Ponzi schemes and

0:10:21.564 --> 0:10:24.764
<v Speaker 3>white people fall for them, but also white people set

0:10:24.764 --> 0:10:29.804
<v Speaker 3>them up, and this kind of strange snowball of disaster

0:10:29.964 --> 0:10:35.764
<v Speaker 3>where the Ponzi scheme becomes increasingly difficult to cover. And

0:10:36.084 --> 0:10:39.404
<v Speaker 3>the most amazing example I've ever come across is by

0:10:39.444 --> 0:10:43.124
<v Speaker 3>You Capital, which was set up by Sam Israel. I

0:10:43.124 --> 0:10:46.524
<v Speaker 3>saw one writer described Sam Israel and by You Capital.

0:10:46.724 --> 0:10:49.644
<v Speaker 3>It's like somebody took the Bernie made Off story but

0:10:49.804 --> 0:10:52.564
<v Speaker 3>was told to write a Hollywood script and to punch

0:10:52.604 --> 0:10:54.804
<v Speaker 3>it up a bit, you know, make it sing a

0:10:54.804 --> 0:10:59.764
<v Speaker 3>bit more. And everything that made made Off's Ponzi scheme

0:11:00.444 --> 0:11:05.444
<v Speaker 3>notorious applies to Sam Israel. But it just all gets crazier.

0:11:05.764 --> 0:11:09.604
<v Speaker 3>So Sam came from a wealthy family I think of

0:11:09.764 --> 0:11:15.684
<v Speaker 3>commodity traders in Louisiana, but he wanted to show he

0:11:15.684 --> 0:11:19.444
<v Speaker 3>could make it himself. And he got into Wall Street

0:11:19.564 --> 0:11:24.244
<v Speaker 3>at an early age, absorbed that Wall Street culture, you know,

0:11:24.764 --> 0:11:26.764
<v Speaker 3>all that kind of broish culture of Wall Street in

0:11:26.804 --> 0:11:30.764
<v Speaker 3>the nineteen eighties. And so he takes all this in,

0:11:31.124 --> 0:11:36.124
<v Speaker 3>He keeps his mouth shut, He watches various dubious activities,

0:11:36.164 --> 0:11:37.684
<v Speaker 3>and not just the kind of the sex work and

0:11:37.724 --> 0:11:43.564
<v Speaker 3>the excess, but also illegality, financial illegality, observes people kind

0:11:43.604 --> 0:11:46.404
<v Speaker 3>of insider trading, for example, and then he sets up

0:11:46.444 --> 0:11:48.764
<v Speaker 3>his own firm, by You Capital, which is a hedge fund,

0:11:49.644 --> 0:11:54.084
<v Speaker 3>and very quickly By You Capital turns from being a

0:11:54.124 --> 0:11:58.524
<v Speaker 3>hedge fund into being a ponzi scheme. And just to

0:11:58.564 --> 0:12:01.124
<v Speaker 3>remind people what a ponzi scheme is, it's very simple.

0:12:02.124 --> 0:12:04.804
<v Speaker 3>Investors give you money, and then you announce you've made

0:12:04.924 --> 0:12:07.684
<v Speaker 3>massive profits, and then more investors give you money, and

0:12:07.724 --> 0:12:09.724
<v Speaker 3>you announce you made even more massive profit, and then

0:12:09.724 --> 0:12:12.164
<v Speaker 3>more investors give you money, and you keep saying you've

0:12:12.164 --> 0:12:15.164
<v Speaker 3>made massive profits. And if anybody ever says, that's great,

0:12:15.364 --> 0:12:17.924
<v Speaker 3>I'd like my money back, well that's easy. You can

0:12:17.964 --> 0:12:20.804
<v Speaker 3>give them the money back with the profits because more

0:12:20.844 --> 0:12:24.164
<v Speaker 3>people keep giving you, keep giving you their money. And

0:12:24.204 --> 0:12:27.364
<v Speaker 3>the insight that Sam Israel had was with a hedge fund,

0:12:27.404 --> 0:12:30.204
<v Speaker 3>it's kind of open ended. The money keeps growing, and

0:12:30.284 --> 0:12:32.804
<v Speaker 3>why would anybody ever want their money back if you

0:12:32.884 --> 0:12:35.684
<v Speaker 3>keep telling them they made another twenty percent this year,

0:12:35.724 --> 0:12:37.404
<v Speaker 3>they made another twenty five percent this year, Like no

0:12:37.444 --> 0:12:39.444
<v Speaker 3>one ever asks for their money back. They just leave

0:12:39.484 --> 0:12:42.004
<v Speaker 3>the money with you. And so the fraud went on

0:12:42.084 --> 0:12:45.884
<v Speaker 3>for a very long time, and then things started to unravel.

0:12:46.044 --> 0:12:49.324
<v Speaker 3>But Maria, you met Sam So, and you met Sam

0:12:49.324 --> 0:12:52.364
<v Speaker 3>in prison. So a spoiler. So tell us what did

0:12:52.364 --> 0:12:54.604
<v Speaker 3>you make for as a person? How did he get

0:12:54.604 --> 0:12:56.004
<v Speaker 3>into this? Why did he get into this?

0:12:56.204 --> 0:13:01.684
<v Speaker 1>Well, it's funny because my interview with him was from

0:13:02.324 --> 0:13:05.004
<v Speaker 1>a while back, you know, twenty seventeen something like that.

0:13:05.644 --> 0:13:06.764
<v Speaker 1>I honestly don't remember.

0:13:07.284 --> 0:13:10.964
<v Speaker 3>We should say he was arrested, I think in about

0:13:10.964 --> 0:13:12.884
<v Speaker 3>two thousand and seven, two thousand and eight something like that.

0:13:12.964 --> 0:13:16.284
<v Speaker 1>Wasn't yeah, exactly exactly, but so I was trying to

0:13:16.324 --> 0:13:19.964
<v Speaker 1>refresh my memory, and you know, just looked at some

0:13:20.004 --> 0:13:23.884
<v Speaker 1>of the transcripts and then also looked at an interview

0:13:23.924 --> 0:13:27.964
<v Speaker 1>that he did with Andrew Ross Sorkin, and he told

0:13:28.044 --> 0:13:30.124
<v Speaker 1>us the exact same thing at the beginning, which is like,

0:13:30.164 --> 0:13:33.604
<v Speaker 1>don't believe me, I'm a liar. And it's so funny

0:13:33.644 --> 0:13:36.924
<v Speaker 1>because I think that he thinks that that absolves him, right,

0:13:36.964 --> 0:13:40.724
<v Speaker 1>if he puts that disclaimer up top, then he can

0:13:40.884 --> 0:13:45.604
<v Speaker 1>sort of charm his way out and say, but actually,

0:13:45.604 --> 0:13:47.564
<v Speaker 1>I'm a good guy, right, I'm not like that bad

0:13:47.604 --> 0:13:48.364
<v Speaker 1>guy made off.

0:13:49.164 --> 0:13:52.004
<v Speaker 3>So I should say there's one amazing scene. Gee Lawson

0:13:52.004 --> 0:13:54.644
<v Speaker 3>wrote this book The Octopus, which is like the quintessential

0:13:55.284 --> 0:13:58.284
<v Speaker 3>account of Sammue's wail. But there's a scene in that

0:13:58.364 --> 0:14:02.484
<v Speaker 3>book where his wife walks in and catches him bent

0:14:02.564 --> 0:14:06.124
<v Speaker 3>over his desk snorting cocaine through a fifty dollar bill

0:14:06.844 --> 0:14:09.244
<v Speaker 3>and says, why are you taking cocaine? And he goes,

0:14:09.524 --> 0:14:13.084
<v Speaker 3>how dare you accuse me of taking drugs? So yeah, sorry,

0:14:13.284 --> 0:14:14.404
<v Speaker 3>I interrupted.

0:14:15.124 --> 0:14:17.924
<v Speaker 1>He it is the kind of guy he is, and

0:14:18.044 --> 0:14:22.084
<v Speaker 1>you know, he was incredibly charismatic, and he said, I

0:14:22.164 --> 0:14:24.764
<v Speaker 1>was doing really really well on Wall Street. Right, he

0:14:25.524 --> 0:14:27.564
<v Speaker 1>kind of got in. He didn't want to compete with

0:14:27.604 --> 0:14:30.164
<v Speaker 1>his siblings, so he wanted to do it on his own,

0:14:30.484 --> 0:14:33.044
<v Speaker 1>so he didn't want to go into the family business. Instead,

0:14:33.084 --> 0:14:36.444
<v Speaker 1>he had this opportunity to go into Wall Street, worked

0:14:36.444 --> 0:14:40.324
<v Speaker 1>at a very successful hedge fund and was actually making money.

0:14:40.324 --> 0:14:42.804
<v Speaker 1>By the way, this is all according to Sam Israel, Right,

0:14:42.844 --> 0:14:44.964
<v Speaker 1>I haven't actually looked at his returns. I did not

0:14:45.044 --> 0:14:47.244
<v Speaker 1>look at his balance sheets. I don't know how he

0:14:47.244 --> 0:14:49.604
<v Speaker 1>did as a trader. He assures me that he was

0:14:49.644 --> 0:14:54.564
<v Speaker 1>making you know, millions for people and for himself in

0:14:54.604 --> 0:14:57.044
<v Speaker 1>his prior Wall Street days. So let's just we'll take

0:14:57.084 --> 0:14:59.324
<v Speaker 1>that on faith. But what I've learned working with con

0:14:59.404 --> 0:15:02.084
<v Speaker 1>artists is you can't take anything on faith. So asterisk

0:15:02.244 --> 0:15:04.644
<v Speaker 1>but he was very successful on Wall Street, and I

0:15:04.684 --> 0:15:07.084
<v Speaker 1>assume he must have been to a certain degree because

0:15:07.324 --> 0:15:10.244
<v Speaker 1>he started his own hedge fund right and he was

0:15:10.284 --> 0:15:13.004
<v Speaker 1>able to raise I think about three hundred million to

0:15:13.044 --> 0:15:15.364
<v Speaker 1>begin with of outside money, which back then, this was

0:15:15.404 --> 0:15:18.364
<v Speaker 1>nineteen ninety six, I want to say something around somewhere

0:15:18.404 --> 0:15:20.444
<v Speaker 1>around there in ninety so that was a lot of money.

0:15:21.204 --> 0:15:23.244
<v Speaker 1>And he went in with a partner who was a

0:15:23.244 --> 0:15:26.604
<v Speaker 1>close friend of his, who was a disgraced fund manager

0:15:27.084 --> 0:15:30.244
<v Speaker 1>whose fund had just gone under. But Sam believed in

0:15:30.324 --> 0:15:33.164
<v Speaker 1>him and thought that, you know, that he was a

0:15:33.164 --> 0:15:35.364
<v Speaker 1>good guy and that this would work. So the way

0:15:35.444 --> 0:15:39.524
<v Speaker 1>Sam told it to me was that when they started

0:15:39.524 --> 0:15:44.004
<v Speaker 1>by you in nineteen ninety six, he kind of relied

0:15:44.044 --> 0:15:46.044
<v Speaker 1>on this guy, you know, to be an equal partner,

0:15:46.284 --> 0:15:49.444
<v Speaker 1>and that this guy was started losing a lot of money,

0:15:49.764 --> 0:15:52.084
<v Speaker 1>and Sam said, well, I'm a good trader, I'm good

0:15:52.084 --> 0:15:54.284
<v Speaker 1>at this. I'll be able to kind of work my

0:15:54.404 --> 0:15:57.244
<v Speaker 1>way out of the hole. But he couldn't, and the

0:15:57.284 --> 0:16:00.844
<v Speaker 1>hole kept getting bigger, and so at some point he realized,

0:16:01.124 --> 0:16:03.724
<v Speaker 1>you know, shit, we've lost twelve percent in our first year.

0:16:04.204 --> 0:16:06.284
<v Speaker 1>You know, it's even worse in our second year. This

0:16:06.564 --> 0:16:09.364
<v Speaker 1>is looking bad, and our ability to raise money is

0:16:09.484 --> 0:16:12.684
<v Speaker 1>going down because our returns are shit. They're absolutely horrible.

0:16:13.444 --> 0:16:16.524
<v Speaker 1>And so that's when it became a Ponzi scheme.

0:16:16.564 --> 0:16:20.204
<v Speaker 3>And his his his accountant, who was a guy called

0:16:20.244 --> 0:16:24.724
<v Speaker 3>Dan Marino. He there is footnote foroobody. Well, if anybody

0:16:24.804 --> 0:16:27.044
<v Speaker 3>so think about it, this is nineteen ninety six. If

0:16:27.044 --> 0:16:30.604
<v Speaker 3>anybody googles as pre google, right, if anybody who tries

0:16:30.684 --> 0:16:34.204
<v Speaker 3>to search on the internet for Dan Marino, they get

0:16:34.244 --> 0:16:37.284
<v Speaker 3>the football player. So he's working with this accountant who

0:16:37.324 --> 0:16:41.484
<v Speaker 3>is completely invisible to internet searches. And the accountants are smart.

0:16:41.644 --> 0:16:42.444
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's really smart.

0:16:42.444 --> 0:16:43.044
<v Speaker 1>It's very smart.

0:16:43.084 --> 0:16:46.404
<v Speaker 3>The accountant's completely crooked and basically sets up his own

0:16:46.804 --> 0:16:49.524
<v Speaker 3>fake Uh.

0:16:49.244 --> 0:16:51.724
<v Speaker 2>Sounds like a cricket I had a stereotype based on

0:16:52.164 --> 0:16:55.844
<v Speaker 2>last but sounds like a cricket account accountant or a quarterback.

0:16:56.604 --> 0:16:59.884
<v Speaker 3>So he sets up his own fake auditing firm. So

0:16:59.924 --> 0:17:02.684
<v Speaker 3>he's basically auditing his own accounts. And if anybody sort

0:17:02.684 --> 0:17:04.524
<v Speaker 3>of were to really go and check the go the

0:17:04.524 --> 0:17:07.684
<v Speaker 3>guy who says that Dan Marino's accounts are genuine is

0:17:07.724 --> 0:17:10.764
<v Speaker 3>an orditor called Dan Marino, and they're the same guy.

0:17:10.844 --> 0:17:13.524
<v Speaker 3>So that was kind of an important part of this fraud.

0:17:13.764 --> 0:17:19.684
<v Speaker 3>But yeah, Dan Marinos told the author Gee Lawson that

0:17:20.364 --> 0:17:23.124
<v Speaker 3>one of the problems was, there's this idea, Oh, we're

0:17:23.164 --> 0:17:25.404
<v Speaker 3>going to have a really good year. We're going to

0:17:25.484 --> 0:17:27.324
<v Speaker 3>make a lot of money for real. And when we

0:17:27.364 --> 0:17:29.684
<v Speaker 3>make a lot of money for real, then it will

0:17:29.724 --> 0:17:31.764
<v Speaker 3>no longer be a Ponzi scheme. You know, we'll have

0:17:32.004 --> 0:17:34.484
<v Speaker 3>you know, it's all genuine, It'll all come out good

0:17:34.524 --> 0:17:38.204
<v Speaker 3>in the end. Dan Marino said. The problem is sometimes

0:17:38.204 --> 0:17:40.204
<v Speaker 3>they did have good years, but whenever they had a

0:17:40.204 --> 0:17:42.844
<v Speaker 3>good year, they would claim it was an even better year,

0:17:43.484 --> 0:17:45.284
<v Speaker 3>and whenever they had a bad year, they would never

0:17:45.324 --> 0:17:47.644
<v Speaker 3>admit that they had a bad year. So there was

0:17:47.644 --> 0:17:50.924
<v Speaker 3>a you know, whatever it was, vanity, fear of the consequences,

0:17:50.964 --> 0:17:54.204
<v Speaker 3>whatever it was, he just made it completely impossible for

0:17:54.284 --> 0:17:56.484
<v Speaker 3>him ever to catch up with his own life.

0:17:57.444 --> 0:18:00.124
<v Speaker 1>And I think that that's very typical of con artists,

0:18:00.164 --> 0:18:02.724
<v Speaker 1>right where they say I'll fix it, I'll make it better,

0:18:02.804 --> 0:18:05.644
<v Speaker 1>this isn't this is just temporary, but it never is.

0:18:06.044 --> 0:18:10.884
<v Speaker 1>But the most incredible thing about I'm Israel is that

0:18:11.284 --> 0:18:15.044
<v Speaker 1>once the scheme kind of comes undone, right, which happens

0:18:15.044 --> 0:18:17.844
<v Speaker 1>at some point, just like with SBF night. Right, at

0:18:18.484 --> 0:18:20.204
<v Speaker 1>some point people are going to ask for their money

0:18:21.004 --> 0:18:22.924
<v Speaker 1>and people are going to get spooked, and when they

0:18:22.924 --> 0:18:25.324
<v Speaker 1>get spooked, like there's going to be a day of reckoning.

0:18:25.844 --> 0:18:28.764
<v Speaker 1>And he had a moment where he said, oh shit,

0:18:28.884 --> 0:18:32.564
<v Speaker 1>you know I'm going to jail. And he thought he

0:18:32.564 --> 0:18:35.724
<v Speaker 1>would get seven or eight years, which was pretty typical

0:18:35.804 --> 0:18:40.164
<v Speaker 1>for white collar criminals. And then they switched judges and

0:18:40.444 --> 0:18:44.764
<v Speaker 1>the judge gave him two hundred and forty months, so

0:18:45.204 --> 0:18:50.724
<v Speaker 1>twenty years right instead, And he was like, oh shit,

0:18:51.204 --> 0:18:53.524
<v Speaker 1>you know I can't do twenty years. I'm going to

0:18:53.524 --> 0:18:56.004
<v Speaker 1>be an old man. This is this is not cool.

0:18:56.084 --> 0:18:58.964
<v Speaker 1>I was ready for seven I can't do twenty. And

0:18:59.084 --> 0:19:02.004
<v Speaker 1>so instead of you know, figuring out how do I

0:19:02.044 --> 0:19:04.524
<v Speaker 1>deal with this, he decides to fake his own death.

0:19:04.564 --> 0:19:06.964
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, which he's obviously going to work out really well.

0:19:07.524 --> 0:19:10.644
<v Speaker 1>Oh it's going to work out great, we'll be back

0:19:10.684 --> 0:19:23.564
<v Speaker 1>in a minute. He only has a few months to plan, right,

0:19:23.924 --> 0:19:25.844
<v Speaker 1>It's not like he has been thinking, oh, I'm going

0:19:25.924 --> 0:19:28.044
<v Speaker 1>to fake my own death. This is my exit strategy.

0:19:28.244 --> 0:19:30.044
<v Speaker 1>Because a lot of CONN artists they don't think that

0:19:30.124 --> 0:19:32.844
<v Speaker 1>far ahead, right, they don't think of the exit strategy.

0:19:32.884 --> 0:19:35.004
<v Speaker 1>They think it's always going to work out. So he says,

0:19:35.004 --> 0:19:36.724
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to I'm going to fake my own death.

0:19:37.764 --> 0:19:40.044
<v Speaker 1>I've watched this really cool movie it's called r V,

0:19:40.644 --> 0:19:43.604
<v Speaker 1>and I'm going to buy an RV and I'm going to,

0:19:43.844 --> 0:19:46.684
<v Speaker 1>you know, just go around the country and maybe make

0:19:46.724 --> 0:19:47.964
<v Speaker 1>my way to go oh, by the way. One of

0:19:48.004 --> 0:19:52.524
<v Speaker 1>the things he told me was that as after his sentencing,

0:19:52.564 --> 0:19:55.324
<v Speaker 1>as he was walking out, an FBI agent, one of

0:19:55.324 --> 0:19:57.444
<v Speaker 1>the ones he'd gotten friendly with, looked at him and said,

0:19:57.444 --> 0:20:01.204
<v Speaker 1>I have two words for you, Costa Rica. I find

0:20:01.204 --> 0:20:04.124
<v Speaker 1>it very difficult to believe that that actually has.

0:20:04.084 --> 0:20:11.404
<v Speaker 2>Yes out Mano Dan Marino. Would you Costa Rica? I

0:20:11.484 --> 0:20:11.884
<v Speaker 2>don't know what.

0:20:14.204 --> 0:20:15.444
<v Speaker 1>I think You've got a career.

0:20:15.284 --> 0:20:19.004
<v Speaker 3>This so but I'm curious. So, Maria, you said that

0:20:19.044 --> 0:20:21.164
<v Speaker 3>this is very this is short term thinking.

0:20:21.164 --> 0:20:21.484
<v Speaker 2>He didn't.

0:20:21.524 --> 0:20:24.804
<v Speaker 3>He wasn't really think to the consequences of his actions,

0:20:24.804 --> 0:20:31.324
<v Speaker 3>and that that's true. Any Ponzi scheme inevitably becomes completely unsustainable.

0:20:31.364 --> 0:20:34.484
<v Speaker 3>You cannot possibly keep it going. It will come to

0:20:34.524 --> 0:20:37.044
<v Speaker 3>an end. So what is the way out? And then

0:20:37.044 --> 0:20:39.164
<v Speaker 3>the faking the suicide again like of course he's going

0:20:39.244 --> 0:20:40.804
<v Speaker 3>to get caught. Of course, that's not going to work.

0:20:41.404 --> 0:20:44.164
<v Speaker 1>So he decided he was going to jump off a bridge.

0:20:44.364 --> 0:20:46.204
<v Speaker 3>Well, not just he was decided he was going to

0:20:46.244 --> 0:20:48.444
<v Speaker 3>pretend that he had jumped off a bridge, right, he

0:20:48.444 --> 0:20:52.884
<v Speaker 3>actually jumped off a bridge because he because he then

0:20:52.924 --> 0:20:55.484
<v Speaker 3>he did actually actually claimed.

0:20:55.284 --> 0:20:58.604
<v Speaker 1>Actually he actually jumped off a bridge. He did. So

0:20:58.684 --> 0:21:01.124
<v Speaker 1>this is the research he was doing. When you're trying

0:21:01.124 --> 0:21:03.884
<v Speaker 1>to fake your own death, and I interviewed this woman,

0:21:03.924 --> 0:21:07.284
<v Speaker 1>Elizabeth Greenwood, who wrote about faking your own death, you

0:21:07.364 --> 0:21:09.284
<v Speaker 1>have to think very far ahead. You have to figure

0:21:09.284 --> 0:21:11.284
<v Speaker 1>out money. You know, how am I going to be

0:21:11.404 --> 0:21:13.164
<v Speaker 1>off the grid right these days? Like how am I

0:21:13.164 --> 0:21:15.164
<v Speaker 1>going to survive? How am I going to get out

0:21:15.204 --> 0:21:18.124
<v Speaker 1>of the country, and you know where, where's my cash

0:21:18.164 --> 0:21:20.964
<v Speaker 1>going to come from? All of these things. Instead, what

0:21:21.084 --> 0:21:23.804
<v Speaker 1>he spends his time thinking is researching all of the

0:21:23.804 --> 0:21:26.364
<v Speaker 1>bridges in New York to try to figure out which

0:21:26.404 --> 0:21:29.524
<v Speaker 1>one he could conceivably jump off of and not die.

0:21:30.644 --> 0:21:34.484
<v Speaker 1>So he finds a bridge that's under construction, so there

0:21:34.484 --> 0:21:37.564
<v Speaker 1>are nets underneath, and he's like, oh, perfect, Like I'm

0:21:37.604 --> 0:21:40.684
<v Speaker 1>gonna jump and I'm going to land in the net

0:21:41.004 --> 0:21:43.844
<v Speaker 1>and then I'll use the net to scramble up and

0:21:44.164 --> 0:21:50.084
<v Speaker 1>get out. So he does this not realizing that those

0:21:50.244 --> 0:21:54.724
<v Speaker 1>nets are pretty damn hard to climb out of. So

0:21:54.764 --> 0:21:56.524
<v Speaker 1>he manages to make the net. By the way, thinking

0:21:56.524 --> 0:22:00.044
<v Speaker 1>about risk right, risk reward. If you miss the net,

0:22:00.244 --> 0:22:04.484
<v Speaker 1>the you know, the risk reward equation there is not great.

0:22:04.604 --> 0:22:06.964
<v Speaker 3>So the net deigning to catch people or just like

0:22:07.884 --> 0:22:09.844
<v Speaker 3>a spat of that somebody drops, I mean that's the.

0:22:10.164 --> 0:22:15.004
<v Speaker 1>Right, No, it's I think it was. I think it

0:22:15.084 --> 0:22:17.244
<v Speaker 1>was designed to catch bricks and you know, falling debris

0:22:17.284 --> 0:22:19.764
<v Speaker 1>from construction. So when a person goes into it, it

0:22:19.884 --> 0:22:22.084
<v Speaker 1>just like you know, it goes all the way down.

0:22:22.324 --> 0:22:23.844
<v Speaker 1>So then he's stuck in it. And at this point

0:22:23.924 --> 0:22:25.684
<v Speaker 1>he's like, I think I'm going to die anyway, except

0:22:25.724 --> 0:22:27.724
<v Speaker 1>it's going to be much worse because I'm gonna have

0:22:27.804 --> 0:22:30.204
<v Speaker 1>spent my last minutes trying to scramble up this net.

0:22:30.644 --> 0:22:34.044
<v Speaker 1>But he actually does manage to get out, and he

0:22:34.124 --> 0:22:36.684
<v Speaker 1>has a driver waiting for him to take him to

0:22:36.684 --> 0:22:41.244
<v Speaker 1>his RV and he thinks he's going to drive off

0:22:41.244 --> 0:22:44.364
<v Speaker 1>into the sunset. Oh, by the way, another really really

0:22:44.404 --> 0:22:47.484
<v Speaker 1>important thing if you're trying to fake your own death,

0:22:47.524 --> 0:22:51.204
<v Speaker 1>do not tell your mother, your girlfriend, your son, and

0:22:51.244 --> 0:22:54.844
<v Speaker 1>the driver that you're going to be faking your own death.

0:22:54.924 --> 0:22:59.884
<v Speaker 1>Don't worry, momb I'm not actually dead, calling uber.

0:23:01.324 --> 0:23:02.124
<v Speaker 2>Do it in style.

0:23:03.724 --> 0:23:06.484
<v Speaker 1>But that's this is what happened. So you know, he

0:23:06.724 --> 0:23:11.364
<v Speaker 1>he's fucked from the beginning because he has not thought

0:23:11.404 --> 0:23:13.924
<v Speaker 1>any of this through. But he does manage to make

0:23:13.964 --> 0:23:16.284
<v Speaker 1>it out of the net. He's met by a driver,

0:23:16.644 --> 0:23:19.124
<v Speaker 1>makes it to his RV, and for the first few

0:23:19.164 --> 0:23:21.644
<v Speaker 1>weeks it actually seems like everything is kind of okay

0:23:22.004 --> 0:23:24.964
<v Speaker 1>because even though he's living in an RV, living in

0:23:25.084 --> 0:23:27.604
<v Speaker 1>RV parks, you know, he's kind of getting away with it.

0:23:28.004 --> 0:23:32.284
<v Speaker 1>And then he walks into a bar one day and

0:23:32.324 --> 0:23:36.324
<v Speaker 1>he sees himself on TV on America's Most Wanted, and

0:23:37.204 --> 0:23:40.444
<v Speaker 1>he goes and reads about himself on the internet, which

0:23:40.484 --> 0:23:42.084
<v Speaker 1>is a big, big no no if you're faking your

0:23:42.084 --> 0:23:45.244
<v Speaker 1>own death to start googling yourself, but he does that,

0:23:45.644 --> 0:23:48.084
<v Speaker 1>and he sees that his girlfriend has been arrested as

0:23:48.084 --> 0:23:50.924
<v Speaker 1>an accomplice and that they're looking to arrest his mother.

0:23:51.484 --> 0:23:53.444
<v Speaker 1>He doesn't realize that this is a trap, that the

0:23:53.484 --> 0:23:55.564
<v Speaker 1>police do this kind of thing to try to get

0:23:55.724 --> 0:23:59.484
<v Speaker 1>people kind of out of hiding. He thinks this is real,

0:23:59.604 --> 0:24:02.604
<v Speaker 1>and so he gets on a motorcycle, goes to the

0:24:02.604 --> 0:24:06.284
<v Speaker 1>police department to turn himself in, walks in. He says,

0:24:06.324 --> 0:24:08.604
<v Speaker 1>you know, hey, I'm here to turn myself in, and

0:24:08.604 --> 0:24:10.964
<v Speaker 1>the police officer like what you know? In for what?

0:24:11.044 --> 0:24:13.684
<v Speaker 1>You need to use the bathroom? Like it's over there anyway,

0:24:13.684 --> 0:24:16.244
<v Speaker 1>there's all of this miscommunication. He says, no, you know,

0:24:16.404 --> 0:24:22.244
<v Speaker 1>I turning myself in. I'm wanted and I just don't

0:24:22.244 --> 0:24:24.484
<v Speaker 1>want any press here. And at this point the police

0:24:24.524 --> 0:24:28.164
<v Speaker 1>officer actually looks at him, realizes who he is, and

0:24:28.364 --> 0:24:31.724
<v Speaker 1>that is when he gets caught and gets an additional

0:24:31.724 --> 0:24:34.484
<v Speaker 1>two years added on to his sentence for faking his

0:24:34.524 --> 0:24:35.564
<v Speaker 1>own death and running away.

0:24:35.964 --> 0:24:39.164
<v Speaker 3>It's astonishing. I'm not one thing you said, Maria. You

0:24:39.244 --> 0:24:42.524
<v Speaker 3>said that the craziest thing about him, or the most

0:24:42.524 --> 0:24:44.484
<v Speaker 3>amazing thing about him. I'm not even sure that is

0:24:44.524 --> 0:24:46.564
<v Speaker 3>the craziest thing about him. But you know, we haven't

0:24:46.564 --> 0:24:49.724
<v Speaker 3>got all day, so there are other stories you could

0:24:49.724 --> 0:24:54.724
<v Speaker 3>tell about Sam. But I wanted to ask Nate. Given that, Nate,

0:24:54.764 --> 0:24:58.684
<v Speaker 3>you've been thinking about the habits of risk taking individuals,

0:24:58.724 --> 0:25:05.044
<v Speaker 3>these people you call Riverians. Is short termism part of

0:25:05.084 --> 0:25:08.084
<v Speaker 3>the or kind of a side effect or a glitch

0:25:08.164 --> 0:25:11.964
<v Speaker 3>in the Riveria and thinking system. So on the one hand,

0:25:12.004 --> 0:25:14.924
<v Speaker 3>you need that ability to think probabilistically, you need that

0:25:14.964 --> 0:25:19.764
<v Speaker 3>ability to take calculated risks. But I mean Samme's meel

0:25:19.844 --> 0:25:21.524
<v Speaker 3>just seems to have never been able to see past

0:25:21.564 --> 0:25:25.244
<v Speaker 3>the It had no problem taking risks, but just couldn't

0:25:25.284 --> 0:25:26.364
<v Speaker 3>see past the end of his nose.

0:25:27.004 --> 0:25:30.644
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. No, look, I think the better investors in gamblers

0:25:30.644 --> 0:25:32.604
<v Speaker 2>have a longer time horizon. That's kind of one of

0:25:33.364 --> 0:25:36.164
<v Speaker 2>one of Silicon Valley's secrets, despite their many flaws, that

0:25:36.204 --> 0:25:38.884
<v Speaker 2>they do kind of think ten years ahead. But yeah,

0:25:38.924 --> 0:25:41.964
<v Speaker 2>some of this sounds very familiar, Marie, I know if

0:25:41.964 --> 0:25:45.164
<v Speaker 2>I'm talking to you, the notion of like a good

0:25:45.204 --> 0:25:48.444
<v Speaker 2>business gone bad. I mean, even FTX was a pretty

0:25:48.444 --> 0:25:50.244
<v Speaker 2>good business, right, it was like the leading brand for

0:25:50.284 --> 0:25:55.124
<v Speaker 2>crypto trading. They made legitimate profits, et cetera. But like

0:25:55.244 --> 0:25:57.724
<v Speaker 2>you know, it turns sour or I think you know,

0:25:58.124 --> 0:26:01.964
<v Speaker 2>Sam bacon Free couldn't resist the temptation to take all

0:26:01.964 --> 0:26:03.884
<v Speaker 2>this money sitting on the sideline. He couldn't like resist

0:26:03.924 --> 0:26:07.004
<v Speaker 2>the temptation to go and gamble with it. But yeah,

0:26:07.044 --> 0:26:10.444
<v Speaker 2>the lack of advanced planning coupled with kind of miscalculating

0:26:10.484 --> 0:26:14.724
<v Speaker 2>consequences you know, if you're very charming, which I think

0:26:14.764 --> 0:26:17.724
<v Speaker 2>Sam Israel is more so than SBF, it's a different story.

0:26:19.124 --> 0:26:21.164
<v Speaker 2>You can kind of easle your way out of things, right.

0:26:21.204 --> 0:26:22.764
<v Speaker 2>You can think you can like dance your way out

0:26:22.764 --> 0:26:26.684
<v Speaker 2>of anything, and you can up the con a level

0:26:26.764 --> 0:26:29.604
<v Speaker 2>or two or three, and then you may on some level, no,

0:26:29.684 --> 0:26:31.284
<v Speaker 2>it's not going to work. But I don't know. I mean,

0:26:31.364 --> 0:26:35.444
<v Speaker 2>at some point there's a point of no return, right, there.

0:26:35.284 --> 0:26:37.084
<v Speaker 1>Is a point of no return. Yeah, I think I

0:26:37.084 --> 0:26:40.404
<v Speaker 1>think that's absolutely right, Nate. I think one of the

0:26:40.924 --> 0:26:44.844
<v Speaker 1>this is a characteristic that you have both uh, both

0:26:44.844 --> 0:26:48.404
<v Speaker 1>with raverians and non reveriance and Tim. I'm sure you've

0:26:48.524 --> 0:26:51.204
<v Speaker 1>come across this in other cautionary tales, but I think

0:26:51.204 --> 0:26:54.524
<v Speaker 1>a lot of it is this over confidence in hubris, right,

0:26:54.564 --> 0:26:58.044
<v Speaker 1>that comes with a certain level of success and people.

0:26:58.404 --> 0:27:00.924
<v Speaker 1>And I think to be an entrepreneur and to be

0:27:00.964 --> 0:27:04.164
<v Speaker 1>a risk taker, you need to be over confident to

0:27:04.204 --> 0:27:07.564
<v Speaker 1>a certain extent. You know, as as we all know,

0:27:07.684 --> 0:27:10.484
<v Speaker 1>if you actually know your odds of access, you're not

0:27:10.564 --> 0:27:12.804
<v Speaker 1>gonna you're not gonna start the damn company. You're not

0:27:12.884 --> 0:27:15.684
<v Speaker 1>gonna you're not gonna try it, because it's the risk

0:27:15.724 --> 0:27:18.764
<v Speaker 1>of failure, and the chances of failure are so high,

0:27:18.844 --> 0:27:22.564
<v Speaker 1>so it's a it's this fine balance and I think

0:27:22.604 --> 0:27:26.364
<v Speaker 1>overconfidence so turns into delusion and turns into this thinking

0:27:26.444 --> 0:27:31.124
<v Speaker 1>that actually, you know, I can keep doing this forever.

0:27:31.684 --> 0:27:34.764
<v Speaker 1>And because you've gotten away with it for so long,

0:27:35.244 --> 0:27:40.404
<v Speaker 1>it seems like probabilistically speaking, you know, your base rates change,

0:27:40.444 --> 0:27:43.644
<v Speaker 1>I've gotten you know, okay, you know one year, two years,

0:27:43.684 --> 0:27:46.444
<v Speaker 1>three years, four years, everything's good. This is this is

0:27:46.484 --> 0:27:47.244
<v Speaker 1>all going good.

0:27:47.604 --> 0:27:51.084
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, if the coin comes up heads five times in

0:27:51.124 --> 0:27:53.044
<v Speaker 2>a row, I mean you see it in poker all

0:27:53.044 --> 0:27:56.324
<v Speaker 2>the time, right, Yeah. You know, winner's tilt is something

0:27:56.324 --> 0:27:59.604
<v Speaker 2>which is maybe under discussed loser tilt we all have experienced.

0:28:00.004 --> 0:28:03.884
<v Speaker 2>Uh maybe not a Maria, uh, but winter's tilt where

0:28:03.884 --> 0:28:05.724
<v Speaker 2>you're on a hot streak and you're like, ah, maybe

0:28:05.724 --> 0:28:07.924
<v Speaker 2>I have some gift from God to play poker really

0:28:07.924 --> 0:28:10.884
<v Speaker 2>well or something is also a big deal.

0:28:12.204 --> 0:28:15.804
<v Speaker 1>It absolutely is. One of my favorite psych studies is

0:28:16.164 --> 0:28:18.164
<v Speaker 1>from Ellen Langer, and I think the name of the

0:28:18.164 --> 0:28:22.524
<v Speaker 1>paper is something like heads, I win tails, It's chance

0:28:22.684 --> 0:28:29.964
<v Speaker 1>something like that. Yeah, And she had people be not

0:28:30.084 --> 0:28:33.444
<v Speaker 1>bet but guess the results of a coin toss and

0:28:33.524 --> 0:28:35.564
<v Speaker 1>it was actually not a fair coin. It was rigged,

0:28:35.764 --> 0:28:38.764
<v Speaker 1>and there were different Basically, it came up heads and

0:28:38.804 --> 0:28:42.244
<v Speaker 1>tails the exact same number of times in all of

0:28:42.284 --> 0:28:45.124
<v Speaker 1>the different conditions, but in some of them it was

0:28:45.164 --> 0:28:49.324
<v Speaker 1>pretty random. In others it was clustered near the end,

0:28:49.444 --> 0:28:53.564
<v Speaker 1>and in the most important condition, the correct guesses were

0:28:53.604 --> 0:28:56.524
<v Speaker 1>clustered near the beginning, right, So basically you would say,

0:28:56.564 --> 0:28:59.364
<v Speaker 1>you know, heads, you'd guess, and then they'd make sure

0:28:59.364 --> 0:29:01.364
<v Speaker 1>it landed on heads. It was a rigged toss, so

0:29:01.364 --> 0:29:04.084
<v Speaker 1>that you were right it was yeah, And the people

0:29:04.124 --> 0:29:07.364
<v Speaker 1>who were correct clustered at the beginning would then and

0:29:07.404 --> 0:29:10.684
<v Speaker 1>these were Harvard students, by the way. Then they got

0:29:10.724 --> 0:29:15.764
<v Speaker 1>all sorts of questions like I'm good at predicting the

0:29:15.844 --> 0:29:19.644
<v Speaker 1>outcomes of coin tosses, and they would rate themselves as

0:29:19.684 --> 0:29:21.844
<v Speaker 1>actually quite good at it. They would say, if I

0:29:21.884 --> 0:29:24.364
<v Speaker 1>had more time to practice and to guess, I'd get

0:29:24.364 --> 0:29:27.284
<v Speaker 1>even better. So things that made it very clear that

0:29:27.324 --> 0:29:29.964
<v Speaker 1>they thought that this was a skill and not actually

0:29:30.004 --> 0:29:33.164
<v Speaker 1>completely random. And it was so easy to get people

0:29:33.204 --> 0:29:36.524
<v Speaker 1>to believe that they were skilled at something where it

0:29:36.564 --> 0:29:40.644
<v Speaker 1>was just complete randomness when they had those those things

0:29:40.724 --> 0:29:42.524
<v Speaker 1>happen at the beginning, so Tim, I think this goes

0:29:42.564 --> 0:29:44.844
<v Speaker 1>back to the beginning of your question. This is how

0:29:44.884 --> 0:29:47.844
<v Speaker 1>you get into Ponzi schemes. Think about Bernie Madeoff, right,

0:29:47.884 --> 0:29:50.324
<v Speaker 1>He was successful for far longer than Sam Israel, and

0:29:50.324 --> 0:29:52.284
<v Speaker 1>Sam Israel, by the way, was the single biggest Ponzi

0:29:52.324 --> 0:29:53.844
<v Speaker 1>scheme before Bernie made Off.

0:29:54.284 --> 0:29:58.484
<v Speaker 3>Now I'm curious, we've been talking about people who were

0:29:59.404 --> 0:30:02.244
<v Speaker 3>have an appetite for risk and who it all came

0:30:02.284 --> 0:30:05.724
<v Speaker 3>apart for Maria, I know you've been doing a little

0:30:05.724 --> 0:30:10.244
<v Speaker 3>bit of research into one of the most important gamblers

0:30:10.364 --> 0:30:12.684
<v Speaker 3>in economic history.

0:30:13.284 --> 0:30:17.844
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, John Law. He was. He was someone who I

0:30:17.844 --> 0:30:20.364
<v Speaker 1>wrote about for The Confidence Game and I've come back

0:30:20.364 --> 0:30:23.884
<v Speaker 1>to so my my next book is about cheating, So

0:30:24.084 --> 0:30:27.164
<v Speaker 1>I've I've kind of been thinking about him. But one

0:30:27.164 --> 0:30:30.404
<v Speaker 1>of the reasons I am interested in John Law. So

0:30:30.644 --> 0:30:32.684
<v Speaker 1>when we're talking about someone like Sam Israel, right, it's

0:30:32.684 --> 0:30:35.964
<v Speaker 1>pretty clear con artist, right, Ponzi's game. When you're talking

0:30:36.004 --> 0:30:40.004
<v Speaker 1>about someone like John Law, it becomes much less clear

0:30:40.644 --> 0:30:44.804
<v Speaker 1>because he's someone who was a huge gambler, and we

0:30:44.924 --> 0:30:47.644
<v Speaker 1>know that sometimes he was successful, but he also ran

0:30:47.764 --> 0:30:51.364
<v Speaker 1>his father's business into the ground if I remember correctly,

0:30:51.484 --> 0:30:54.524
<v Speaker 1>through gambling. But I guess he got better with time

0:30:55.564 --> 0:31:00.844
<v Speaker 1>and killed a man literal gambling or like literal gambling.

0:31:01.124 --> 0:31:04.284
<v Speaker 1>So yeah, so he was someone who came from money.

0:31:04.764 --> 0:31:08.564
<v Speaker 1>Who's you know who whose parents had a financial business.

0:31:08.684 --> 0:31:10.924
<v Speaker 3>We should say this is it was seventeen hundreds, just

0:31:11.444 --> 0:31:14.524
<v Speaker 3>to situate, right, Yes, for those small number of listeners

0:31:14.524 --> 0:31:16.884
<v Speaker 3>who don't know who John Lauri is or that everybody should.

0:31:17.084 --> 0:31:19.404
<v Speaker 1>We're in the seventeen hundreds and he's going to be

0:31:19.404 --> 0:31:22.764
<v Speaker 1>making friends with the Duke of Orleans or the Duke

0:31:22.804 --> 0:31:26.764
<v Speaker 1>of Orleans who was then Regent of France, and he's

0:31:26.804 --> 0:31:29.604
<v Speaker 1>going to be basically setting up France's banking system. So

0:31:29.684 --> 0:31:33.484
<v Speaker 1>the reason why I was fascinated by him is that

0:31:34.284 --> 0:31:37.484
<v Speaker 1>it's actually unclear if he was a con artist or not,

0:31:37.804 --> 0:31:40.804
<v Speaker 1>Like did he believe that? Because it was the kind

0:31:40.804 --> 0:31:44.924
<v Speaker 1>of the end of his time at the height of

0:31:44.964 --> 0:31:47.924
<v Speaker 1>finance was with the establishment of this thing called the

0:31:47.964 --> 0:31:55.164
<v Speaker 1>Mississippi Company, which was a huge bubble and basically bankrupted

0:31:55.284 --> 0:31:58.284
<v Speaker 1>a ton of people. And the question is, you know,

0:31:59.084 --> 0:32:01.964
<v Speaker 1>did he know what he was doing and get unlucky

0:32:02.124 --> 0:32:04.204
<v Speaker 1>or did he like basically, did he do this as

0:32:04.244 --> 0:32:06.404
<v Speaker 1>a kind of Ponzi scheme, as a kind of con

0:32:06.604 --> 0:32:06.844
<v Speaker 1>or not.

0:32:07.284 --> 0:32:10.124
<v Speaker 3>And the fact that we still don't really agree on that,

0:32:10.204 --> 0:32:12.124
<v Speaker 3>I think is fascinating. I mean, we should say so.

0:32:13.404 --> 0:32:18.684
<v Speaker 3>He was originally Scott, a Scott. He killed a guy

0:32:18.684 --> 0:32:21.484
<v Speaker 3>and a duel, was sentenced to death for murder, escaped

0:32:21.524 --> 0:32:26.604
<v Speaker 3>from prison, traveled Europe, wound up in Paris, made a

0:32:26.604 --> 0:32:29.764
<v Speaker 3>few friends with some influential nobles, made a huge amount

0:32:29.804 --> 0:32:33.044
<v Speaker 3>of money gambling because he would set himself up as

0:32:33.084 --> 0:32:37.364
<v Speaker 3>the house and he understood the probability enough that he

0:32:37.924 --> 0:32:40.124
<v Speaker 3>knew he had an edge. So he's gambling with all

0:32:40.124 --> 0:32:42.804
<v Speaker 3>these nobles. He's making a huge amount of money. And

0:32:42.844 --> 0:32:48.804
<v Speaker 3>then he sets up his own bank and he starts

0:32:49.204 --> 0:32:52.484
<v Speaker 3>issuing paper money. This is not the first paper money

0:32:52.884 --> 0:32:56.004
<v Speaker 3>in the history of the world, it's not even the

0:32:56.004 --> 0:32:58.284
<v Speaker 3>first paper money in the history of France, but it is.

0:32:58.484 --> 0:33:01.364
<v Speaker 3>It's pretty new and people are still trying to figure

0:33:01.364 --> 0:33:03.884
<v Speaker 3>out kind of how it works. And of course this

0:33:04.044 --> 0:33:07.124
<v Speaker 3>is revolutionary. He's ahead of his time, like paper money

0:33:07.164 --> 0:33:09.084
<v Speaker 3>is how we do things right. It's kind of amazing.

0:33:09.444 --> 0:33:11.524
<v Speaker 3>And then the whole thing just gets wrapped up with

0:33:11.564 --> 0:33:13.804
<v Speaker 3>French government debt and gets wrapped up with the Mississippi

0:33:13.804 --> 0:33:16.924
<v Speaker 3>bubble and the Mississippi Bubble was it was a stock

0:33:17.004 --> 0:33:20.324
<v Speaker 3>market bubble. One stock was involved, the stock of the

0:33:20.364 --> 0:33:24.284
<v Speaker 3>Mississippi Company, and John Law controlled the Misissippi Company. But

0:33:24.324 --> 0:33:27.284
<v Speaker 3>it was clear that nobody really understood what was going

0:33:27.324 --> 0:33:30.244
<v Speaker 3>on except that number go up. And if number go up,

0:33:30.284 --> 0:33:32.044
<v Speaker 3>everyone everyone gets very excited.

0:33:32.164 --> 0:33:35.644
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's very intoxicating when the number goes up. Right.

0:33:37.004 --> 0:33:40.284
<v Speaker 2>I did wonder too, there is some survivorship bias in

0:33:40.324 --> 0:33:44.964
<v Speaker 2>which kind of scams and schemes we discover. You know,

0:33:45.164 --> 0:33:47.484
<v Speaker 2>the best frauds in history, probably nobody knows about it.

0:33:47.644 --> 0:33:48.524
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, a good point.

0:33:48.764 --> 0:33:52.284
<v Speaker 2>SPF was convinced that he could somehow navigate his way

0:33:52.324 --> 0:33:55.564
<v Speaker 2>through bankruptcy, or not through bankruptcy, now his way through

0:33:55.604 --> 0:33:58.364
<v Speaker 2>this downfall and bitcoin and come out on either side

0:33:58.364 --> 0:34:00.284
<v Speaker 2>of it. And maybe people wouldn't really notice, right, Maybe

0:34:00.324 --> 0:34:03.164
<v Speaker 2>it's like a page a sixteen story and not inn

0:34:03.164 --> 0:34:06.124
<v Speaker 2>a one story. If he like, if there's a spontaneous

0:34:06.364 --> 0:34:08.924
<v Speaker 2>rise in bitcoin prices and they recover these losses that

0:34:08.964 --> 0:34:11.324
<v Speaker 2>they have, they were ten million and ten billion in

0:34:11.364 --> 0:34:12.884
<v Speaker 2>a hole, which is pretty hard to overcome.

0:34:13.644 --> 0:34:16.644
<v Speaker 1>It's funny, Nate. I think that's a really important point

0:34:16.684 --> 0:34:20.244
<v Speaker 1>that the best con artists are never caught. When people

0:34:20.484 --> 0:34:22.324
<v Speaker 1>when we talk about conn artists and people ask me,

0:34:22.324 --> 0:34:24.764
<v Speaker 1>you know, why aren't there as many female con artists,

0:34:25.684 --> 0:34:29.164
<v Speaker 1>I say a few things, but one of them is

0:34:29.444 --> 0:34:32.204
<v Speaker 1>kind of a joke but kind of not, which is

0:34:32.644 --> 0:34:34.884
<v Speaker 1>that they're just better at it. So we don't know

0:34:34.924 --> 0:34:36.844
<v Speaker 1>them because they haven't been caught. They don't have as

0:34:36.924 --> 0:34:39.604
<v Speaker 1>much ego, and they know when to disappear and how

0:34:39.604 --> 0:34:44.604
<v Speaker 1>to disappear much better than the sam Is reels of

0:34:44.604 --> 0:34:45.004
<v Speaker 1>the world.

0:34:45.284 --> 0:34:47.444
<v Speaker 2>Or like cheating in poker, a lot of these famous

0:34:48.004 --> 0:34:51.564
<v Speaker 2>cheating scandals, like online cheating scandals, people are are very

0:34:51.604 --> 0:34:54.884
<v Speaker 2>greedy where they win at like, you know, thirteen centered

0:34:54.884 --> 0:34:58.204
<v Speaker 2>deviations above some random rate, whereas if you won at

0:34:58.204 --> 0:35:00.764
<v Speaker 2>two center deviations above random, it would be almost possible

0:35:00.764 --> 0:35:03.604
<v Speaker 2>to detect and you'd have a great life. Although we

0:35:03.644 --> 0:35:05.324
<v Speaker 2>don't find those people though, right, we don't find the

0:35:05.364 --> 0:35:07.524
<v Speaker 2>people that are that are actually good at cheating a

0:35:07.524 --> 0:35:07.964
<v Speaker 2>lot of time.

0:35:09.124 --> 0:35:12.404
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, but so as we you know, wrap up the

0:35:12.524 --> 0:35:15.964
<v Speaker 1>story of John law I do think that it's interesting that,

0:35:16.204 --> 0:35:20.444
<v Speaker 1>I mean, economists don't agree, historians don't agree whether whether

0:35:20.564 --> 0:35:23.964
<v Speaker 1>or not he was you know, greedy, he was obviously greedy.

0:35:24.004 --> 0:35:26.604
<v Speaker 1>I think everyone agrees on that, but whether he thought

0:35:26.644 --> 0:35:29.444
<v Speaker 1>that this could actually all worked out. I found a

0:35:29.564 --> 0:35:32.284
<v Speaker 1>rhyme that I would love to share if you guys

0:35:32.284 --> 0:35:37.004
<v Speaker 1>are in poetry mode, that come from the time about

0:35:37.324 --> 0:35:40.124
<v Speaker 1>what happened with the Mississippi bubble. And it goes like this.

0:35:40.884 --> 0:35:44.084
<v Speaker 1>My shares, which on Monday I bought, were worth millions.

0:35:44.084 --> 0:35:47.324
<v Speaker 1>On Tuesday, I thought so. On Wednesday, I chose my

0:35:47.364 --> 0:35:51.364
<v Speaker 1>abode in my carriage. On Thursday, I rode to the ballroom.

0:35:51.444 --> 0:35:54.964
<v Speaker 1>On Friday I went to the workhouse. Next day I was.

0:35:54.964 --> 0:35:59.084
<v Speaker 2>Sent first poetry reading on the Risky Business podcast.

0:35:59.124 --> 0:36:01.844
<v Speaker 1>I believe it is it is think that should style tradition.

0:36:02.084 --> 0:36:02.764
<v Speaker 3>That's very good.

0:36:05.524 --> 0:36:08.044
<v Speaker 1>And one nobleman of the time said, thus sends the

0:36:08.084 --> 0:36:10.924
<v Speaker 1>system of paper money, which which has enriched a thousand

0:36:10.964 --> 0:36:14.644
<v Speaker 1>beggars and impoverished one hundred thousand men. And obviously that's

0:36:14.684 --> 0:36:17.044
<v Speaker 1>not true, which is why we you know, that was

0:36:17.124 --> 0:36:19.284
<v Speaker 1>not the end of the system of paper money. It

0:36:19.364 --> 0:36:22.084
<v Speaker 1>was just it just happened to be the end of

0:36:22.164 --> 0:36:24.684
<v Speaker 1>John Law. He had to escape France, by the way,

0:36:24.724 --> 0:36:27.284
<v Speaker 1>because he was convicted and was going to be sent

0:36:27.324 --> 0:36:29.324
<v Speaker 1>to prison there. So he dressed up as a beggar

0:36:29.844 --> 0:36:33.684
<v Speaker 1>ran away to Italy and died in Venice, totally impoverished.

0:36:34.444 --> 0:36:37.684
<v Speaker 1>And I guess the cautionary talesary.

0:36:37.724 --> 0:36:41.684
<v Speaker 3>It is a cautionary tale. And I guess the lesson,

0:36:41.764 --> 0:36:44.364
<v Speaker 3>or maybe the lesson is that the economics lesson is,

0:36:44.364 --> 0:36:45.764
<v Speaker 3>if you're going to have paper money, if you're going

0:36:45.804 --> 0:36:49.044
<v Speaker 3>to have somebody who has the right to just create

0:36:49.124 --> 0:36:52.044
<v Speaker 3>money with a printing press, you've got to make sure

0:36:52.044 --> 0:36:54.244
<v Speaker 3>you have the right controls over that person or over

0:36:54.284 --> 0:36:56.884
<v Speaker 3>that institution. It can't just be some guy who killed

0:36:56.924 --> 0:36:59.524
<v Speaker 3>a guy in a duel and came over what a

0:36:59.524 --> 0:37:01.844
<v Speaker 3>lot of money in gambling, and then he's the guy

0:37:01.844 --> 0:37:05.884
<v Speaker 3>who can do it. You need this institutional scaffolding, which

0:37:06.484 --> 0:37:08.564
<v Speaker 3>you know, when we have it, it seems to work just fine.

0:37:10.284 --> 0:37:26.724
<v Speaker 2>We'll be back right after this. I mean, are there

0:37:26.764 --> 0:37:31.564
<v Speaker 2>like two or three or one big takeaways, like common

0:37:31.644 --> 0:37:34.884
<v Speaker 2>patterns and when you know something is becoming a cautionary

0:37:34.924 --> 0:37:35.804
<v Speaker 2>tale or a can.

0:37:38.244 --> 0:37:42.884
<v Speaker 3>At the risk of quoting that classic opening line of

0:37:43.284 --> 0:37:47.564
<v Speaker 3>Ana Karenina that all happy families are alike, and every

0:37:47.684 --> 0:37:51.644
<v Speaker 3>unhappy family is unhappy in its own way. I think

0:37:51.724 --> 0:37:55.044
<v Speaker 3>one of the striking things about cautionary tales is that

0:37:55.684 --> 0:37:57.764
<v Speaker 3>there are a lot of different ways for things to

0:37:57.804 --> 0:38:05.684
<v Speaker 3>go wrong. There's there are organizational problems, informational problems, engineering problems,

0:38:06.684 --> 0:38:12.044
<v Speaker 3>hubrisk and arrogance, as short sightedness, lots and lots of

0:38:12.124 --> 0:38:16.444
<v Speaker 3>self delusion, lots of wishful thinking. I mean, it's a

0:38:16.484 --> 0:38:20.204
<v Speaker 3>miracle that human civilization survives, actually, given how many different

0:38:20.204 --> 0:38:23.244
<v Speaker 3>ways there are to go wrong. I mean that is

0:38:23.284 --> 0:38:27.684
<v Speaker 3>part of the slightly perverse joy of researching and writing

0:38:27.804 --> 0:38:32.604
<v Speaker 3>these cautionary tales. There is always a new disaster, and

0:38:32.764 --> 0:38:34.804
<v Speaker 3>always a new way for disaster to happen.

0:38:35.964 --> 0:38:37.924
<v Speaker 1>You make that sound almost gleeful.

0:38:38.244 --> 0:38:40.684
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I mean sometimes I have to remind myself that, like,

0:38:41.044 --> 0:38:42.884
<v Speaker 3>I'm not supposed to be enjoying this, because some of

0:38:42.884 --> 0:38:46.484
<v Speaker 3>them are very very sad. Some of them are straightforwardly

0:38:46.564 --> 0:38:50.084
<v Speaker 3>hilarious and no great harm is done, but a lot

0:38:50.084 --> 0:38:52.124
<v Speaker 3>of them are pretty painful.

0:38:53.124 --> 0:38:56.044
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Maria, I remember you telling me that, like, cons

0:38:56.124 --> 0:38:59.484
<v Speaker 2>are most likely to occur when you're in an upcycle

0:38:59.564 --> 0:39:01.364
<v Speaker 2>or a down cycle, right, not in the steady state,

0:39:01.404 --> 0:39:04.124
<v Speaker 2>but when there's something new and novel and people are panicking.

0:39:04.484 --> 0:39:09.124
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, moments of transition. So whether those are societal transitions

0:39:10.004 --> 0:39:13.844
<v Speaker 1>or whether their personal transitions is when you're most vulnerable

0:39:13.884 --> 0:39:16.244
<v Speaker 1>to get cons So it's not a personality trade. It's

0:39:16.284 --> 0:39:19.844
<v Speaker 1>not intelligence, it's not it's not anything like that. It

0:39:20.004 --> 0:39:23.084
<v Speaker 1>is this kind of moment of either up or down

0:39:23.124 --> 0:39:30.044
<v Speaker 1>euphoria or you know, despondency. But when things are uncertain

0:39:30.124 --> 0:39:35.404
<v Speaker 1>and your worldview gets challenged, gets shattered, gets displaced, you

0:39:35.444 --> 0:39:39.644
<v Speaker 1>look for certainty, and that's when con artists swoop in

0:39:39.924 --> 0:39:41.484
<v Speaker 1>and give that certainty to you.

0:39:41.644 --> 0:39:44.124
<v Speaker 3>As long as nothing ever changes, we will say from

0:39:44.164 --> 0:39:45.484
<v Speaker 3>cons we're good.

0:39:46.044 --> 0:39:50.804
<v Speaker 2>You know, my great grandfather faked his death and got a.

0:39:50.804 --> 0:39:53.844
<v Speaker 1>Wait what okay, Nate, can we just can we we

0:39:53.884 --> 0:39:57.924
<v Speaker 1>need this story. Sorry, we're pausing everything, Nate, please.

0:39:58.124 --> 0:40:00.644
<v Speaker 2>I mean his name was Ferdinand Thrunn, which is a

0:40:00.684 --> 0:40:01.204
<v Speaker 2>great name.

0:40:01.804 --> 0:40:02.644
<v Speaker 1>It's an amazing name.

0:40:02.684 --> 0:40:04.364
<v Speaker 2>He was written up in the Chicago Tribune and the

0:40:04.404 --> 0:40:06.164
<v Speaker 2>New York Times and places like that. Yeah, he was

0:40:06.204 --> 0:40:09.764
<v Speaker 2>like a insurance fraudster. We should do this as separate

0:40:09.964 --> 0:40:14.404
<v Speaker 2>segments sometime, yeah, But basically his technique was to commit

0:40:14.444 --> 0:40:17.244
<v Speaker 2>crimes so devious that there is no law to charge

0:40:17.244 --> 0:40:19.444
<v Speaker 2>them with because I haven't figured out like this particular

0:40:19.524 --> 0:40:21.764
<v Speaker 2>type of fry. But we should do proper research and

0:40:21.804 --> 0:40:22.924
<v Speaker 2>do an episode on this. Maria.

0:40:23.524 --> 0:40:25.964
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, absolutely so, Maria, Nate.

0:40:26.044 --> 0:40:30.284
<v Speaker 3>I now we've discussed Sam as well, we discussed John Law.

0:40:30.484 --> 0:40:33.284
<v Speaker 3>I actually had a couple of questions, given that you

0:40:33.364 --> 0:40:36.524
<v Speaker 3>guys are absolutely experts on this sort of thing, I

0:40:36.564 --> 0:40:38.404
<v Speaker 3>had a couple of questions for you that I hope

0:40:38.444 --> 0:40:42.404
<v Speaker 3>you won't mind me asking, and that The first one is,

0:40:42.604 --> 0:40:47.804
<v Speaker 3>I have your two most recent books in front of me.

0:40:47.964 --> 0:40:50.884
<v Speaker 3>I have Nate's On the Edge, I have Maria's The

0:40:50.924 --> 0:40:55.324
<v Speaker 3>Biggest Bluff, Stone Cold Classic Amazing. I looked in the index.

0:40:57.044 --> 0:41:00.684
<v Speaker 3>The word experiments does not appear in the index of

0:41:00.724 --> 0:41:04.364
<v Speaker 3>either of your books. Expected value, of course does appear,

0:41:04.404 --> 0:41:08.684
<v Speaker 3>but experiments does not. And I just wondered whether you

0:41:08.724 --> 0:41:13.924
<v Speaker 3>two a brilliant risk takers, analysts poker players. But I

0:41:13.924 --> 0:41:17.684
<v Speaker 3>thought a poker player can't really experiment, like if you

0:41:17.724 --> 0:41:20.484
<v Speaker 3>want to, if you want to find out, you need

0:41:20.524 --> 0:41:22.244
<v Speaker 3>to you need to make the bet. You know, you

0:41:22.284 --> 0:41:24.404
<v Speaker 3>need to put down the money. There's no cheap way

0:41:24.844 --> 0:41:29.604
<v Speaker 3>to find out what the other person's cards are. And

0:41:29.684 --> 0:41:34.164
<v Speaker 3>maybe that is a blind spot in poker playing relative

0:41:34.244 --> 0:41:36.844
<v Speaker 3>to decision making advice in everyday life. Because what I've

0:41:37.004 --> 0:41:39.924
<v Speaker 3>what I've always been saying to people, is okay, if

0:41:39.964 --> 0:41:42.604
<v Speaker 3>you're facing an uncertain situation, you know, you don't know

0:41:42.604 --> 0:41:45.204
<v Speaker 3>what the right thing to do is. Maybe there's an experiment,

0:41:45.284 --> 0:41:47.204
<v Speaker 3>maybe that you can run a little pilot, Maybe you

0:41:47.204 --> 0:41:49.484
<v Speaker 3>can run a little you know, ab test. Maybe there's

0:41:49.524 --> 0:41:53.284
<v Speaker 3>a cheap way to find out without betting all your

0:41:53.404 --> 0:41:56.724
<v Speaker 3>chips metaphorically speaking. So I just wanted to ask why

0:41:56.884 --> 0:41:59.124
<v Speaker 3>why did neither of you talk about experiments? And is

0:41:59.564 --> 0:42:02.884
<v Speaker 3>this in fact a blind spot in the poker player's

0:42:02.964 --> 0:42:03.644
<v Speaker 3>view of the world.

0:42:04.804 --> 0:42:08.364
<v Speaker 2>It's a great point, Tim. I have a home game

0:42:08.404 --> 0:42:10.924
<v Speaker 2>I play maybe every third week. That's a one dollar

0:42:11.004 --> 0:42:13.724
<v Speaker 2>two dollars game, which for me is you know, on

0:42:13.764 --> 0:42:15.484
<v Speaker 2>the lower side of the stakes. I play, and I

0:42:15.484 --> 0:42:20.324
<v Speaker 2>probably am doing some experimenting in that game, right. You know,

0:42:20.404 --> 0:42:22.524
<v Speaker 2>last night I made I had a nut flush straw,

0:42:22.564 --> 0:42:24.044
<v Speaker 2>which some of our artists will know what that means.

0:42:24.044 --> 0:42:26.404
<v Speaker 2>I had the ace I flush straw on a board

0:42:26.404 --> 0:42:29.884
<v Speaker 2>that was King Queen x X and we made like

0:42:29.884 --> 0:42:33.684
<v Speaker 2>a three x overbet shove on the turn. I'm just

0:42:33.724 --> 0:42:36.164
<v Speaker 2>going to experiment, I bet. Probably there's some frequency which

0:42:36.164 --> 0:42:37.564
<v Speaker 2>you're supposed to do. This is in game theory, but

0:42:37.684 --> 0:42:40.324
<v Speaker 2>like but if I lose this pot, then you know,

0:42:40.364 --> 0:42:42.684
<v Speaker 2>I'll win sometimes to catch my flush and like it'll

0:42:42.684 --> 0:42:45.444
<v Speaker 2>be a fun hand to show down and whatever. But

0:42:45.484 --> 0:42:48.364
<v Speaker 2>I did feel I think we do probably experiment a

0:42:48.444 --> 0:42:50.284
<v Speaker 2>little bit, and that kind of like naughty feeling you

0:42:50.364 --> 0:42:53.124
<v Speaker 2>have of like having an experiment and getting away with it,

0:42:53.364 --> 0:42:55.164
<v Speaker 2>like you're kind of taking the piss to use. Is

0:42:55.204 --> 0:42:57.484
<v Speaker 2>that the British term. Yeah, you're taking the piss. You

0:42:57.564 --> 0:42:59.284
<v Speaker 2>kind of get away with it like It's a very

0:42:59.284 --> 0:43:02.644
<v Speaker 2>satisfying feeling, and I think encourages kurrent artistries sometimes.

0:43:02.724 --> 0:43:03.364
<v Speaker 3>Yeah.

0:43:03.484 --> 0:43:07.004
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think that there are so two things. One, yes,

0:43:07.084 --> 0:43:09.604
<v Speaker 1>I think that you can experiment this way, and to me,

0:43:09.924 --> 0:43:12.044
<v Speaker 1>I do it when I move down in stakes as well,

0:43:12.244 --> 0:43:17.004
<v Speaker 1>right when the money is not not as meaningful and

0:43:17.044 --> 0:43:19.684
<v Speaker 1>you get to test certain theories out right, So if

0:43:19.684 --> 0:43:24.364
<v Speaker 1>I'm studying and I'm kind of figuring out different possibilities

0:43:24.404 --> 0:43:27.244
<v Speaker 1>for playing similar spots, I might test those out and

0:43:27.284 --> 0:43:29.844
<v Speaker 1>feel comfortable testing them out when I don't care as

0:43:29.924 --> 0:43:32.804
<v Speaker 1>much about the stakes, when it's not kind of as important.

0:43:33.044 --> 0:43:37.004
<v Speaker 1>Now that said, we can't experiment as in the traditional

0:43:37.124 --> 0:43:39.764
<v Speaker 1>so I'm you know, I'm a trained psychologist, right, so

0:43:39.884 --> 0:43:42.564
<v Speaker 1>when I was doing studies for my PhD. You have

0:43:42.644 --> 0:43:45.364
<v Speaker 1>to have a very strict experimental design where you have

0:43:45.484 --> 0:43:47.644
<v Speaker 1>your control group, and you have your test groups, and

0:43:47.924 --> 0:43:51.404
<v Speaker 1>you know, you have all of these things where you're

0:43:52.084 --> 0:43:55.924
<v Speaker 1>trying to subtly change the conditions and see if the

0:43:55.964 --> 0:43:59.684
<v Speaker 1>outcome changes. That obviously you can't do because in some ways,

0:43:59.764 --> 0:44:02.204
<v Speaker 1>you know, my whole book was an experiment. So experiments

0:44:02.244 --> 0:44:04.204
<v Speaker 1>not in the index, but the biggest bluff, all of

0:44:04.204 --> 0:44:07.364
<v Speaker 1>it was was experiment. And I saw poker as kind

0:44:07.364 --> 0:44:10.404
<v Speaker 1>of a psychology laboratory of out a lot of the

0:44:10.404 --> 0:44:14.804
<v Speaker 1>psychological theories that I had kind of known in theory

0:44:14.924 --> 0:44:16.964
<v Speaker 1>and putting them into practice at the table and being

0:44:17.044 --> 0:44:18.844
<v Speaker 1>able to see, oh, you know, this is how this

0:44:18.924 --> 0:44:21.924
<v Speaker 1>plays out, this is how that plays out. And I

0:44:22.004 --> 0:44:24.044
<v Speaker 1>do think that poker is great for that. But of

0:44:24.084 --> 0:44:27.964
<v Speaker 1>course you can't when you're playing in a tournament, when

0:44:27.964 --> 0:44:31.724
<v Speaker 1>you're playing in a game, you can't have the exact

0:44:31.764 --> 0:44:36.404
<v Speaker 1>same conditions where you say, Okay, on this exact same board,

0:44:36.404 --> 0:44:38.884
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to do this. Let's see what happens. All right,

0:44:38.924 --> 0:44:41.444
<v Speaker 1>Pretend I didn't do that. Let's go back. Now I'm

0:44:41.444 --> 0:44:43.804
<v Speaker 1>going to do something else, and we'll see what happens there.

0:44:44.004 --> 0:44:47.644
<v Speaker 1>Because even if Nate and I were thinking, oh, okay,

0:44:47.724 --> 0:44:49.844
<v Speaker 1>let's see what it feels like to over bet three

0:44:49.884 --> 0:44:53.364
<v Speaker 1>times the pot in this particular spot, and Nate says, okay,

0:44:53.364 --> 0:44:55.524
<v Speaker 1>I'm going to do this, and then Maria, you do

0:44:55.884 --> 0:45:00.964
<v Speaker 1>why people that's not in poker, that experiment is actually

0:45:00.964 --> 0:45:04.604
<v Speaker 1>not a valid control group because Nate and I are

0:45:04.644 --> 0:45:07.284
<v Speaker 1>so different. People respond to us differently, and all of

0:45:07.284 --> 0:45:10.244
<v Speaker 1>a sudden, you can't control the environment because it's different environment.

0:45:10.284 --> 0:45:12.404
<v Speaker 1>The moment you switch out the players, right, all of

0:45:12.444 --> 0:45:15.684
<v Speaker 1>a sudden, the experimental conditions change, even if you've changed

0:45:15.724 --> 0:45:19.804
<v Speaker 1>literally nothing except who's sitting in that chair. And I

0:45:19.804 --> 0:45:23.644
<v Speaker 1>think that's actually fascinating and a Really that's how life works.

0:45:23.644 --> 0:45:27.324
<v Speaker 1>That's why sometimes psych studies from the laboratory don't generalize

0:45:27.324 --> 0:45:30.124
<v Speaker 1>well to the real world because the real world does

0:45:30.164 --> 0:45:33.484
<v Speaker 1>get messier and it's much more difficult to control. No. Look,

0:45:33.524 --> 0:45:35.684
<v Speaker 1>I think all of your variables.

0:45:35.364 --> 0:45:39.324
<v Speaker 2>As someone who's self reflectively kind of seen his social

0:45:39.364 --> 0:45:44.324
<v Speaker 2>status rise and fall different times. If you're charming and

0:45:44.444 --> 0:45:46.844
<v Speaker 2>privileged and are seen as being on a winning streak,

0:45:46.964 --> 0:45:49.924
<v Speaker 2>you can get away with a lot. Yeah, people really

0:45:49.964 --> 0:45:51.924
<v Speaker 2>are afraid to call you on your bullshit.

0:45:52.484 --> 0:45:56.644
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, okay, yes, second quick question. Second quick question, because

0:45:56.364 --> 0:46:01.524
<v Speaker 3>I have to take advantage of the opportunity to tap

0:46:01.564 --> 0:46:04.924
<v Speaker 3>into your wisdom. Okay, So you I think I think

0:46:04.924 --> 0:46:06.884
<v Speaker 3>it's fair to say that both of you would advocate

0:46:08.244 --> 0:46:10.444
<v Speaker 3>putting a probability on on something. If you're going to

0:46:10.444 --> 0:46:12.404
<v Speaker 3>make a risky decision, you have to have an idea.

0:46:12.644 --> 0:46:14.844
<v Speaker 3>Is this like a five to one? Is it a

0:46:14.884 --> 0:46:17.244
<v Speaker 3>three to one? Is there twenty percent chances is going

0:46:17.284 --> 0:46:19.284
<v Speaker 3>to happen? Is there are seventy percent chances is going

0:46:19.364 --> 0:46:22.764
<v Speaker 3>to happen? And you know, and there's a difference between

0:46:22.804 --> 0:46:25.084
<v Speaker 3>say a fifty three percent chance and a forty eight

0:46:25.124 --> 0:46:28.044
<v Speaker 3>percent chance, even though they're both close to fifty to fifty.

0:46:28.604 --> 0:46:31.684
<v Speaker 3>So it's important to quantify as much as you can,

0:46:31.764 --> 0:46:35.324
<v Speaker 3>even though you don't always have the data. Okay, So

0:46:36.364 --> 0:46:38.764
<v Speaker 3>two very little stories to get you to reflect on

0:46:40.404 --> 0:46:45.244
<v Speaker 3>the case in favor of quantification. Apparently, when the US

0:46:45.364 --> 0:46:49.484
<v Speaker 3>government was pondering the Bay of Pigs invasion, the Joint

0:46:49.524 --> 0:46:52.484
<v Speaker 3>chiefs of Staff thought that the chance of success was

0:46:52.524 --> 0:46:56.324
<v Speaker 3>thirty percent, and a report was prepared for President Kennedy

0:46:56.924 --> 0:46:59.844
<v Speaker 3>and Kennedy and thirty percent was Presumably they thought, oh,

0:46:59.884 --> 0:47:02.804
<v Speaker 3>the president wanting to understand percentages, so he was told

0:47:03.004 --> 0:47:06.444
<v Speaker 3>there is a fair chance of success, and by fair

0:47:06.564 --> 0:47:11.044
<v Speaker 3>chance of success, they meant well, thirty percent. Now we

0:47:11.044 --> 0:47:13.844
<v Speaker 3>don't know what Kennedy understood by a fair chance of success,

0:47:13.844 --> 0:47:15.604
<v Speaker 3>but he seems to have thought it was a good

0:47:15.724 --> 0:47:20.164
<v Speaker 3>chance of success, and he approved this total fiasco. So

0:47:21.084 --> 0:47:25.404
<v Speaker 3>it might seem more user friendly to express things as well,

0:47:25.444 --> 0:47:29.364
<v Speaker 3>this is common or uncommon, or likely or unlikely. But

0:47:29.444 --> 0:47:32.604
<v Speaker 3>actually none of those words really mean the same thing

0:47:32.684 --> 0:47:35.324
<v Speaker 3>to the person who's uttering the word as to the

0:47:35.324 --> 0:47:38.444
<v Speaker 3>person who's receiving it. So you should always put probabilities

0:47:38.484 --> 0:47:42.964
<v Speaker 3>on things. Here's the counter example, counterexample. Think back to

0:47:42.964 --> 0:47:45.604
<v Speaker 3>the financial crisis two thousand and seven, two thousand and eight.

0:47:46.524 --> 0:47:50.964
<v Speaker 3>You had quants putting probabilities on things. This is the

0:47:50.964 --> 0:47:54.004
<v Speaker 3>probability that such and such a thing will default based

0:47:54.044 --> 0:47:55.964
<v Speaker 3>on what we know about history, based on what we

0:47:56.044 --> 0:47:59.764
<v Speaker 3>know about other things that are correlated with it. But

0:47:59.804 --> 0:48:05.044
<v Speaker 3>actually all of those probabilities were spuriously precise. People had

0:48:05.084 --> 0:48:08.364
<v Speaker 3>too much confidence in the probabilities, and it's fine to say, oh,

0:48:08.364 --> 0:48:10.684
<v Speaker 3>we think there's like antin five percent chance that this

0:48:10.724 --> 0:48:13.364
<v Speaker 3>will default. That's fine. But then the problem is you

0:48:13.444 --> 0:48:15.484
<v Speaker 3>feed the zero point five percent into a model, which

0:48:15.524 --> 0:48:18.564
<v Speaker 3>gets fed into another model, which gets fed into another model,

0:48:18.844 --> 0:48:20.444
<v Speaker 3>and in the end you'd be like, oh, well, we've

0:48:20.524 --> 0:48:22.844
<v Speaker 3>repackaged this thing, and now there's like only a one

0:48:22.844 --> 0:48:25.124
<v Speaker 3>in a trillion chance that this will default. And it

0:48:25.164 --> 0:48:27.844
<v Speaker 3>turns out that that's all dependent on the quality of

0:48:27.844 --> 0:48:31.844
<v Speaker 3>your original assumption and you shouldn't be betting the existence

0:48:31.844 --> 0:48:35.924
<v Speaker 3>of Western civilization on that calculation. And people got it wrong.

0:48:36.324 --> 0:48:39.764
<v Speaker 3>So the case against quantification is once you have a number,

0:48:40.244 --> 0:48:42.844
<v Speaker 3>then you are tempted to rely on that number too

0:48:42.924 --> 0:48:46.164
<v Speaker 3>much and to analyze or to manipulate or to remodel

0:48:46.764 --> 0:48:50.204
<v Speaker 3>or to reanalyze that number too much, and to forget

0:48:50.324 --> 0:48:55.084
<v Speaker 3>that actually the number was always basically just an educated guess.

0:48:56.524 --> 0:49:00.004
<v Speaker 1>Well. I think that when you're talking about quantification and

0:49:00.044 --> 0:49:04.924
<v Speaker 1>when you're talking about probabilities, it's the exact same logic

0:49:05.004 --> 0:49:08.084
<v Speaker 1>that you have to apply to algorithms and to kind

0:49:08.124 --> 0:49:10.164
<v Speaker 1>of building algorithms. Which is something that Nate and I

0:49:10.244 --> 0:49:12.844
<v Speaker 1>have talked about on the pod with AI, which is

0:49:13.124 --> 0:49:17.604
<v Speaker 1>garbage in garbage out right. If your assumptions are garbage,

0:49:17.644 --> 0:49:21.124
<v Speaker 1>then your probabilistic assessment is going to be garbage. So

0:49:21.324 --> 0:49:24.564
<v Speaker 1>I actually think that both of these things, they're not

0:49:24.684 --> 0:49:28.764
<v Speaker 1>counter examples. The thirty percent chance of the Bay of pigs.

0:49:29.164 --> 0:49:32.964
<v Speaker 1>I just think that these were people who had a

0:49:33.044 --> 0:49:36.124
<v Speaker 1>lot of qualifications, had done the research, had done regulous,

0:49:36.284 --> 0:49:39.884
<v Speaker 1>rigorous analysis, and that was not garbage in right there.

0:49:40.084 --> 0:49:42.364
<v Speaker 1>They had assumptions that were there for a good reason.

0:49:42.604 --> 0:49:45.724
<v Speaker 1>They had good historical data. I have no idea how

0:49:45.764 --> 0:49:48.644
<v Speaker 1>they came upon the thirty percent. I'm just see making

0:49:48.644 --> 0:49:54.564
<v Speaker 1>your SUPs. Yeah, hindsight bias exactly, and so you get

0:49:54.564 --> 0:49:57.524
<v Speaker 1>thirty percent. And by the way, you should absolutely have

0:49:57.604 --> 0:50:01.004
<v Speaker 1>told Kennedy thirty percent and not fair chance. There are

0:50:01.164 --> 0:50:04.404
<v Speaker 1>so many psych studies about this that trying to put

0:50:04.484 --> 0:50:09.684
<v Speaker 1>words with percentages backfires because people do not understand. And

0:50:10.164 --> 0:50:12.404
<v Speaker 1>it's like if you have a weather man and says

0:50:12.444 --> 0:50:15.084
<v Speaker 1>a fair chance of rain, right, let's talk about not

0:50:15.164 --> 0:50:17.084
<v Speaker 1>a fair chance that the Bay of pigs is a

0:50:17.084 --> 0:50:21.084
<v Speaker 1>success fair chance of rain? Do you bring an umbrella?

0:50:21.244 --> 0:50:23.484
<v Speaker 1>You want to know what the percentage chances. You want

0:50:23.524 --> 0:50:26.924
<v Speaker 1>to know that actual number, because otherwise a quantification gets

0:50:27.124 --> 0:50:30.324
<v Speaker 1>all out of whack. Financial crisis when you have those

0:50:30.404 --> 0:50:34.724
<v Speaker 1>numbers in the models. Those were people whose incentives were

0:50:34.724 --> 0:50:39.924
<v Speaker 1>not aligned with giving you a correct probabilistic assessment. Their

0:50:39.964 --> 0:50:43.044
<v Speaker 1>incentives were to make money. That's also a question that

0:50:43.084 --> 0:50:45.444
<v Speaker 1>you have to make. You always have to ask, and

0:50:45.484 --> 0:50:49.204
<v Speaker 1>this is something that Nate and I talk about as well.

0:50:50.004 --> 0:50:53.604
<v Speaker 1>When you're making these assumptions, do the incentives align, Where

0:50:53.684 --> 0:50:57.884
<v Speaker 1>are the assumptions coming from, and do you have an

0:50:57.884 --> 0:51:02.284
<v Speaker 1>incentive to be correct? Right? And in this particular case,

0:51:02.324 --> 0:51:05.844
<v Speaker 1>their incentive was to make money for them today and

0:51:05.884 --> 0:51:07.964
<v Speaker 1>to make their company think that this was going to

0:51:07.964 --> 0:51:10.804
<v Speaker 1>be a great bet that it was going to work out.

0:51:11.484 --> 0:51:15.324
<v Speaker 1>And so those percentages are not something that you want

0:51:15.364 --> 0:51:18.004
<v Speaker 1>to rely on. Now, if my incentive is if my

0:51:18.044 --> 0:51:21.404
<v Speaker 1>percentage is wrong, I'm getting fired. Right. If my percentage

0:51:21.564 --> 0:51:25.684
<v Speaker 1>is wrong, then I'm making zero dollars. Then all of

0:51:25.724 --> 0:51:29.204
<v Speaker 1>a sudden, I come up with different percentages, I use

0:51:29.244 --> 0:51:32.684
<v Speaker 1>different inputs. My model looks very, very different. But Wall

0:51:32.724 --> 0:51:35.404
<v Speaker 1>Street didn't work that way, still doesn't work that way.

0:51:35.604 --> 0:51:37.364
<v Speaker 1>That's not how you're incentivized.

0:51:37.524 --> 0:51:42.284
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, look, I think there's a risk of laundering subjective

0:51:42.324 --> 0:51:45.364
<v Speaker 2>opinions through probabilities and forgetting their subjective right. If I'm

0:51:45.404 --> 0:51:48.724
<v Speaker 2>running nak the airport, there's traffic on the Vanwick or whatever. Right,

0:51:49.084 --> 0:51:50.684
<v Speaker 2>I might say myself, Oh, it's a five percent chance

0:51:50.804 --> 0:51:52.524
<v Speaker 2>going to miss my flight. Right, It's not coming out

0:51:52.524 --> 0:51:56.844
<v Speaker 2>of any regression analysis or anything. You know. I've probably

0:51:56.884 --> 0:52:00.524
<v Speaker 2>used the phrase in the show, like quoting Vice President Harris.

0:52:01.164 --> 0:52:02.844
<v Speaker 2>A model does not fall out of a coconut tree.

0:52:02.844 --> 0:52:05.284
<v Speaker 2>It exists in the context of that which became before it,

0:52:05.324 --> 0:52:08.364
<v Speaker 2>or whatever else you're trying to get at the truth

0:52:08.884 --> 0:52:11.764
<v Speaker 2>with the model. And I think mediocre modelers in particular

0:52:12.804 --> 0:52:16.724
<v Speaker 2>will publish a number and then forget how many assumptions

0:52:16.924 --> 0:52:20.084
<v Speaker 2>are driven into that. Right. I still think it's worth

0:52:20.524 --> 0:52:22.524
<v Speaker 2>quantifying things. I mean, at the end of the day,

0:52:23.004 --> 0:52:27.324
<v Speaker 2>probability is defined as a number between point zero and one,

0:52:27.764 --> 0:52:31.124
<v Speaker 2>and you have to make decisions even in conditions of uncertainty.

0:52:32.004 --> 0:52:33.604
<v Speaker 2>But to Tim's point, yeah, I think there are cases

0:52:33.644 --> 0:52:38.724
<v Speaker 2>where people don't forget how provisional a guess is when

0:52:38.764 --> 0:52:39.604
<v Speaker 2>you put a number on it.

0:52:40.644 --> 0:52:43.524
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, And I think it is always important to not

0:52:43.604 --> 0:52:46.324
<v Speaker 1>have a false sense of certainty. And there's also a

0:52:46.364 --> 0:52:50.684
<v Speaker 1>lot of data that shows that when you have numbers,

0:52:50.724 --> 0:52:52.324
<v Speaker 1>and when you have a lot of these things, it

0:52:52.324 --> 0:52:55.084
<v Speaker 1>does give you a false sense of certainty, right that

0:52:55.124 --> 0:52:57.364
<v Speaker 1>you often do become a little bit over confident when

0:52:57.364 --> 0:52:59.004
<v Speaker 1>you're like, well, I have this model, in this model,

0:52:59.084 --> 0:53:02.324
<v Speaker 1>so this it must be. And there you have the

0:53:02.324 --> 0:53:04.684
<v Speaker 1>bias that we've talked about a lot, where it goes

0:53:04.684 --> 0:53:07.764
<v Speaker 1>from being probabilistic to seeming much more certain like this

0:53:07.804 --> 0:53:12.604
<v Speaker 1>will not default, this will not happen because you forget

0:53:13.164 --> 0:53:15.484
<v Speaker 1>that it ain't zero.

0:53:16.764 --> 0:53:19.044
<v Speaker 3>Thank you so much, guys, fantastic Tim.

0:53:19.124 --> 0:53:21.044
<v Speaker 1>Thank you so much for coming on the pod today.

0:53:21.044 --> 0:53:22.804
<v Speaker 1>It's been such a pleasure, havn't you.

0:53:23.444 --> 0:53:27.124
<v Speaker 3>It's been really really fun. Thank you for sharing your wisdom.

0:53:27.164 --> 0:53:29.284
<v Speaker 3>And if people want to hear more about Sam Israel

0:53:29.444 --> 0:53:32.644
<v Speaker 3>or any other stories of things going disastrously wrong and

0:53:32.964 --> 0:53:35.604
<v Speaker 3>me trying to investigate the social science behind why they

0:53:35.644 --> 0:53:39.524
<v Speaker 3>went wrong. Caution ne Tales with Tim Harford is one

0:53:39.524 --> 0:53:42.684
<v Speaker 3>of Risky Business's sister podcasts on Pushkin.

0:53:43.404 --> 0:53:46.164
<v Speaker 1>It is and there are lots of tales of risk

0:53:46.244 --> 0:53:49.204
<v Speaker 1>taking assessments that do not turn out quite the way

0:53:49.204 --> 0:54:08.724
<v Speaker 1>the risk taker thought they would. Risky Business is hosted

0:54:08.764 --> 0:54:11.684
<v Speaker 1>by Me kind of Cova and me Mate Silver. The

0:54:11.724 --> 0:54:15.244
<v Speaker 1>show is a co production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia.

0:54:15.924 --> 0:54:19.804
<v Speaker 1>This episode was produced by Isabel Carter. Our associate producer

0:54:19.884 --> 0:54:23.404
<v Speaker 1>is Gabriel Hunter Chang. Our executive producer is Jacob Eldstein.

0:54:23.964 --> 0:54:26.364
<v Speaker 2>And if you want to listen to an AD free version,

0:54:26.404 --> 0:54:29.044
<v Speaker 2>sign up for Pushkin Plus. For six seventy nine a month,

0:54:29.244 --> 0:54:32.364
<v Speaker 2>you get access to ad free listening. Thanks for tuning in.