WEBVTT - Is There Really A Crisis of Masculinity?

0:00:15.564 --> 0:00:29.284
<v Speaker 1>Pushkin. Welcome back to Risky Business, a show about making

0:00:29.364 --> 0:00:32.004
<v Speaker 1>better decisions. I'm Maria Kannakova.

0:00:31.764 --> 0:00:32.764
<v Speaker 2>And I'm Nate Silker.

0:00:32.964 --> 0:00:35.004
<v Speaker 1>So today on the show, we've got a fun one

0:00:35.044 --> 0:00:38.004
<v Speaker 1>for you. We'll be playing a game that we've played

0:00:38.004 --> 0:00:41.484
<v Speaker 1>on the show before, Good Call, Bad Call, and we're

0:00:41.524 --> 0:00:44.924
<v Speaker 1>going to be starting up by talking about wealthiest man

0:00:44.964 --> 0:00:48.004
<v Speaker 1>in the world, Elon Musk, who's about to become even

0:00:48.244 --> 0:00:52.644
<v Speaker 1>wealthier because Tesla has given him quite the compensation package.

0:00:52.684 --> 0:00:54.684
<v Speaker 1>So we'll discuss whether that's a good call or a

0:00:54.684 --> 0:00:55.124
<v Speaker 1>bad call.

0:00:55.324 --> 0:00:59.644
<v Speaker 2>And we'll be talking about the purported crisis of masculinity.

0:01:00.044 --> 0:01:04.644
<v Speaker 2>I am trying not to add skeptical inflection to my voice.

0:01:04.684 --> 0:01:07.004
<v Speaker 2>In fact, as we'll hear, you know, I don't think

0:01:07.044 --> 0:01:09.404
<v Speaker 2>there's any particularly good reason to be skeptical, but maybe

0:01:09.244 --> 0:01:14.764
<v Speaker 2>maybe Aria disagree. We'll have a fun segment, I predict.

0:01:21.324 --> 0:01:24.924
<v Speaker 1>All right, Nate, le let's get into it. But before

0:01:24.924 --> 0:01:26.884
<v Speaker 1>we do, I want to welcome you back to the

0:01:27.004 --> 0:01:28.084
<v Speaker 1>United States.

0:01:28.684 --> 0:01:30.924
<v Speaker 2>Thank you. No, I mean I if I had learned

0:01:31.404 --> 0:01:34.324
<v Speaker 2>a word of Norwegian or Finnish, I would greet you

0:01:34.364 --> 0:01:36.684
<v Speaker 2>in that language, but they're very fluent in English, and

0:01:36.724 --> 0:01:38.524
<v Speaker 2>so it was not necessary to be honest.

0:01:40.884 --> 0:01:43.044
<v Speaker 1>You and I were both abroad, but I came back

0:01:43.084 --> 0:01:45.884
<v Speaker 1>a week before you from Barcelona, and you were in

0:01:46.164 --> 0:01:49.284
<v Speaker 1>northern Europe. Was summer over in northern Europe.

0:01:49.884 --> 0:01:56.084
<v Speaker 2>It was quite pleasantly temperate. I was in Norway. Saw

0:01:56.164 --> 0:01:58.604
<v Speaker 2>some fjords, pretty good fucking fjords.

0:01:58.684 --> 0:01:58.804
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:01:58.884 --> 0:02:00.844
<v Speaker 2>The first day we kind of drove around. We're like, oh,

0:02:00.884 --> 0:02:03.804
<v Speaker 2>this is nice. Looks like Maine or something, right, And

0:02:03.844 --> 0:02:06.284
<v Speaker 2>then the next day we took a fucking cruise on

0:02:06.364 --> 0:02:10.244
<v Speaker 2>the real fjords. One of the most spectacular natural things

0:02:10.284 --> 0:02:12.844
<v Speaker 2>I've ever seen. Hawaii is up there, but you know,

0:02:12.924 --> 0:02:17.244
<v Speaker 2>top top three in terms of things that will hopefully

0:02:17.404 --> 0:02:20.604
<v Speaker 2>outlast the human race. That sounds pessimistic, but you know

0:02:20.604 --> 0:02:22.404
<v Speaker 2>what I mean, right, Eternal, I do know what.

0:02:22.444 --> 0:02:26.204
<v Speaker 1>You mean, and I do I hope they outlast as well,

0:02:26.284 --> 0:02:28.684
<v Speaker 1>and I hope that they last long enough at least

0:02:28.684 --> 0:02:30.604
<v Speaker 1>for me to see them, because those are one that's

0:02:30.604 --> 0:02:32.404
<v Speaker 1>one of the things that I've never seen that I

0:02:32.404 --> 0:02:34.084
<v Speaker 1>would love to see one of these days.

0:02:34.364 --> 0:02:38.164
<v Speaker 2>Then, since sent some time in Helsinki, Finland, you can

0:02:38.204 --> 0:02:41.404
<v Speaker 2>tell I have some pronouncing it Helsinki, not Helsinki, which

0:02:41.404 --> 0:02:45.724
<v Speaker 2>is how uneducated Americans say, very nice town, great food,

0:02:45.724 --> 0:02:48.244
<v Speaker 2>which I wasn't expecting. And then Amsterdam.

0:02:47.804 --> 0:02:52.484
<v Speaker 1>Briefly, where there's also delicious food. Hmm, you didn't agree.

0:02:52.764 --> 0:02:55.404
<v Speaker 2>No, I think I like Amsterdam and Robbie and I

0:02:55.444 --> 0:02:57.964
<v Speaker 2>have some friends there. I have visited a number of times,

0:02:58.084 --> 0:03:01.884
<v Speaker 2>had a great visit. I think Amsterdam is pound for

0:03:02.204 --> 0:03:03.524
<v Speaker 2>one of the worst food cities.

0:03:04.444 --> 0:03:05.164
<v Speaker 1>Huh.

0:03:05.244 --> 0:03:07.524
<v Speaker 2>And it's good like Nipalese and stuff, there's good. It's

0:03:08.164 --> 0:03:12.764
<v Speaker 2>mixed at Nikolie right uh. And so like you know,

0:03:12.884 --> 0:03:15.924
<v Speaker 2>the international food's good, but the Dutch food, the continental food,

0:03:15.964 --> 0:03:17.044
<v Speaker 2>I know.

0:03:17.284 --> 0:03:18.644
<v Speaker 1>So. So I think this is where you and I

0:03:18.724 --> 0:03:21.764
<v Speaker 1>kind of differ because someone as someone who grew up

0:03:21.804 --> 0:03:26.524
<v Speaker 1>eating hariring, I absolutely love it. And you can get

0:03:26.564 --> 0:03:28.004
<v Speaker 1>really incredible hairing.

0:03:27.844 --> 0:03:31.724
<v Speaker 2>And you get hair. We took the boat, the ferry

0:03:31.804 --> 0:03:36.044
<v Speaker 2>from Helsinki to Tallinn, Estonia for a day too. Pretty

0:03:36.044 --> 0:03:37.324
<v Speaker 2>good fucking haring on that boat.

0:03:37.404 --> 0:03:41.684
<v Speaker 1>Oh absolutely, I'm sure. I'm sure it was delicious. Well,

0:03:41.884 --> 0:03:46.364
<v Speaker 1>welcome back to the United States. You were missed. I

0:03:46.444 --> 0:03:48.764
<v Speaker 1>think New York missed both of us. But but now

0:03:48.764 --> 0:03:49.964
<v Speaker 1>we're now we're all back.

0:03:50.284 --> 0:03:54.164
<v Speaker 2>How did how did Barcelona but the Barcelona? How did

0:03:54.244 --> 0:03:55.604
<v Speaker 2>Barcelona go how the epint go.

0:03:56.724 --> 0:04:00.164
<v Speaker 1>It was fine. You know, it's very funny because I actually,

0:04:00.764 --> 0:04:03.924
<v Speaker 1>you know, I'm normally pretty good at not cashing and

0:04:03.924 --> 0:04:06.684
<v Speaker 1>then like having one big score when it comes to these.

0:04:07.044 --> 0:04:09.564
<v Speaker 1>I actually cashed in I think half of my event

0:04:09.804 --> 0:04:12.364
<v Speaker 1>and had no big scores, so ended down for the trip.

0:04:13.364 --> 0:04:17.484
<v Speaker 1>The deepest I went was well, actually I got fourth

0:04:17.524 --> 0:04:20.804
<v Speaker 1>in one event, but I missed out Nate on a

0:04:20.964 --> 0:04:25.484
<v Speaker 1>thirty seven thousand euro page jump and it was really

0:04:25.564 --> 0:04:29.044
<v Speaker 1>it was really heartbreaking. Had I just made it and

0:04:29.524 --> 0:04:31.244
<v Speaker 1>had I lasted, and had I been in third, I

0:04:31.244 --> 0:04:33.444
<v Speaker 1>would have been way up for the trip. So we

0:04:33.444 --> 0:04:36.724
<v Speaker 1>were very close. And you know, we've talked on the

0:04:36.764 --> 0:04:40.004
<v Speaker 1>show before about butterfly effects and how you know one

0:04:40.004 --> 0:04:44.044
<v Speaker 1>thing affects another. There was a player who was the

0:04:44.044 --> 0:04:46.924
<v Speaker 1>short stack, so people who don't play poker. He had

0:04:47.044 --> 0:04:51.164
<v Speaker 1>the fewest chips, and it seemed pretty likely that I

0:04:51.204 --> 0:04:54.964
<v Speaker 1>would end up outlasting him, and he ended up getting

0:04:55.004 --> 0:04:59.124
<v Speaker 1>it all in with ACE five off suit and getting

0:04:59.124 --> 0:05:01.644
<v Speaker 1>called by Ace King or actually Ace three, not ACE five,

0:05:01.724 --> 0:05:05.844
<v Speaker 1>Ace three getting called by Ace King, and he hit

0:05:05.884 --> 0:05:09.084
<v Speaker 1>his three and ended up doubling, and then he knocked

0:05:09.084 --> 0:05:12.244
<v Speaker 1>me up out a little while later, so you know

0:05:12.324 --> 0:05:13.284
<v Speaker 1>butterfly effects.

0:05:13.324 --> 0:05:15.404
<v Speaker 2>It was it was a good player or bad player.

0:05:16.964 --> 0:05:21.284
<v Speaker 1>Incredibly wealthy player who doesn't really care. He is capable

0:05:21.444 --> 0:05:24.524
<v Speaker 1>of playing well, but at that point he was not

0:05:24.564 --> 0:05:27.364
<v Speaker 1>playing well because he was kind of in and I

0:05:27.404 --> 0:05:30.484
<v Speaker 1>don't give a fuck, but you guys all care about

0:05:30.484 --> 0:05:33.284
<v Speaker 1>the money type of mood. He is a businessman, he's

0:05:33.284 --> 0:05:34.524
<v Speaker 1>not a professional poker player.

0:05:34.684 --> 0:05:39.124
<v Speaker 2>You know, sometimes people with a fucket attitude toward ICM. ICM.

0:05:39.204 --> 0:05:42.844
<v Speaker 2>If you don't play poker, is the strategy the changes

0:05:42.924 --> 0:05:45.964
<v Speaker 2>you make when you're trying to cash a tournament I've had,

0:05:45.964 --> 0:05:47.684
<v Speaker 2>By the way, this is probably cashed a lot and

0:05:47.764 --> 0:05:50.524
<v Speaker 2>nothing too exciting beyond that, right, But like, if you're

0:05:50.564 --> 0:05:52.844
<v Speaker 2>really rich, though, and you just care about winning, then

0:05:52.884 --> 0:05:55.124
<v Speaker 2>you don't have to play with ICM. And it's like

0:05:55.164 --> 0:05:58.004
<v Speaker 2>annoying to all the other knits at the table who are.

0:05:58.844 --> 0:06:01.364
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, there's a t shirt that some poker players like

0:06:01.444 --> 0:06:06.124
<v Speaker 1>to wear that says ICM is for poor people. That

0:06:06.244 --> 0:06:08.924
<v Speaker 1>means that people who care about the independent hip model.

0:06:08.924 --> 0:06:11.844
<v Speaker 1>You know, the value of your of your chips actually

0:06:12.244 --> 0:06:17.084
<v Speaker 1>changes as these huge payge ump sloom. That means you're poor.

0:06:17.804 --> 0:06:21.164
<v Speaker 1>And if you can say fuck it. Sometimes that's that's

0:06:21.204 --> 0:06:23.324
<v Speaker 1>the way to do it, and you know, there is

0:06:24.004 --> 0:06:27.004
<v Speaker 1>It's a it's an interesting analogy kind of to to

0:06:27.244 --> 0:06:31.164
<v Speaker 1>life because there are definitely moments in life where you

0:06:31.204 --> 0:06:33.644
<v Speaker 1>know it pays to hang around a little bit, but

0:06:33.724 --> 0:06:35.364
<v Speaker 1>sometimes you're like, ah, fuck it, I want to play

0:06:35.404 --> 0:06:36.964
<v Speaker 1>to win, right like I want to I want to

0:06:37.004 --> 0:06:39.444
<v Speaker 1>get I want to take a big swing. I really

0:06:39.524 --> 0:06:42.724
<v Speaker 1>want to go for it. And sometimes that feels really good,

0:06:42.804 --> 0:06:46.204
<v Speaker 1>even if it's not necessarily correct, and you have to

0:06:46.284 --> 0:06:48.724
<v Speaker 1>just try to think, you know what, what risks? Am

0:06:48.764 --> 0:06:51.844
<v Speaker 1>I willing to take? What's the reward here? Is it

0:06:51.884 --> 0:06:54.164
<v Speaker 1>worth it? And am I I think this is actually

0:06:54.164 --> 0:06:57.964
<v Speaker 1>really important? Am I willing to walk away? Right? Like?

0:06:58.604 --> 0:07:00.644
<v Speaker 1>It's kind of like the fuck you money type of

0:07:00.924 --> 0:07:03.884
<v Speaker 1>type of concept, where will I walk away? Like if

0:07:03.924 --> 0:07:07.084
<v Speaker 1>this doesn't go right? And ICM as for poor people,

0:07:07.404 --> 0:07:09.844
<v Speaker 1>that person says, I am willing to walk away, right,

0:07:09.924 --> 0:07:12.964
<v Speaker 1>I am willing to forego you know, forty thousand dollars,

0:07:13.004 --> 0:07:16.044
<v Speaker 1>four hundred thousand dollars. It doesn't matter because I'm not

0:07:16.164 --> 0:07:19.204
<v Speaker 1>poor and I don't care, and you do and.

0:07:19.124 --> 0:07:21.284
<v Speaker 2>Your time is valuable too, you know what I mean?

0:07:21.884 --> 0:07:25.044
<v Speaker 2>I mean obviously, sometimes you're just giving up thousands of

0:07:25.124 --> 0:07:28.684
<v Speaker 2>dollars by not adapting your raine is right, but like, yeah,

0:07:28.724 --> 0:07:31.724
<v Speaker 2>I think it's anything wrong with we're saying opportunity cost

0:07:31.884 --> 0:07:33.724
<v Speaker 2>is high. I mean, it's a very very very very

0:07:33.804 --> 0:07:35.484
<v Speaker 2>very slippery slope, but.

0:07:35.724 --> 0:07:39.804
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, it certainly is. And on that note, Nate, maybe

0:07:39.844 --> 0:07:42.924
<v Speaker 1>we should talk about someone who has the most fuck

0:07:42.964 --> 0:07:49.724
<v Speaker 1>you money in the entire world, Elon Musk. So we

0:07:49.924 --> 0:07:51.844
<v Speaker 1>play a game good call, bad call? You know, is

0:07:51.884 --> 0:07:53.484
<v Speaker 1>this a good call? Is this a bad call? And

0:07:53.604 --> 0:07:56.244
<v Speaker 1>right now we're going to be putting that lens not

0:07:56.404 --> 0:08:00.204
<v Speaker 1>on Musk, but on Tesla's board because earlier this week,

0:08:00.284 --> 0:08:03.604
<v Speaker 1>so we are recording on Monday, September eighth, So I

0:08:03.604 --> 0:08:07.564
<v Speaker 1>guess it was last week that Tesla offered it's CEO,

0:08:07.764 --> 0:08:11.604
<v Speaker 1>Elon Musk, a new compensation package that's going to be

0:08:11.804 --> 0:08:17.044
<v Speaker 1>worth one trillion dollars over the next ten years and

0:08:17.204 --> 0:08:19.924
<v Speaker 1>by the end of it if he actually earns out

0:08:19.964 --> 0:08:22.644
<v Speaker 1>this compensation package, which is an if, right, there are

0:08:23.004 --> 0:08:25.644
<v Speaker 1>a lot of things that have to go right, but

0:08:26.244 --> 0:08:30.004
<v Speaker 1>he would own almost twenty nine twenty eight point eight

0:08:30.204 --> 0:08:34.764
<v Speaker 1>percent of Tesla's stock because that's how his compensation would

0:08:34.804 --> 0:08:37.404
<v Speaker 1>be paid out, which is huge, right, and that's a

0:08:37.444 --> 0:08:43.004
<v Speaker 1>lot more than most CEOs ever get to earn of

0:08:43.044 --> 0:08:45.364
<v Speaker 1>their of their company's stock, which would put him in

0:08:45.404 --> 0:08:48.844
<v Speaker 1>a really interesting position. So basically, you know, the board

0:08:48.884 --> 0:08:51.844
<v Speaker 1>has thrown money at him to try to get him

0:08:51.884 --> 0:08:54.844
<v Speaker 1>to stick around. Nate, do you want to talk about

0:08:54.884 --> 0:08:56.844
<v Speaker 1>some of the things that he has to do or

0:08:56.844 --> 0:08:58.244
<v Speaker 1>should I just go through that quickly?

0:08:58.324 --> 0:09:00.644
<v Speaker 2>Why don't you go You know, I'm still on finish

0:09:01.164 --> 0:09:04.124
<v Speaker 2>time here, so why don't you go through it? Maria?

0:09:04.364 --> 0:09:09.204
<v Speaker 1>All right? So, basically he needs to meet some milestones,

0:09:09.524 --> 0:09:14.604
<v Speaker 1>which include everything from profits that have to increase over

0:09:14.844 --> 0:09:20.364
<v Speaker 1>twenty four times to one million autonomous taxis that are

0:09:20.404 --> 0:09:26.124
<v Speaker 1>going to be deployed, one million humanoid robots, and car

0:09:26.164 --> 0:09:29.964
<v Speaker 1>sales obviously, so there are a lot of things that

0:09:30.164 --> 0:09:34.164
<v Speaker 1>have to happen. So Tesla has to reach four hundred

0:09:34.204 --> 0:09:40.164
<v Speaker 1>billion in adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization annually,

0:09:40.604 --> 0:09:44.204
<v Speaker 1>and right now it is earning less than seventeen billion

0:09:44.244 --> 0:09:47.404
<v Speaker 1>dollars a year, so that's quite a high number. He

0:09:47.524 --> 0:09:50.604
<v Speaker 1>needs to have an eight point five trillion dollar market cap.

0:09:51.004 --> 0:09:55.124
<v Speaker 1>Current market cap is about one trillion. The robotaxis is

0:09:55.164 --> 0:09:57.724
<v Speaker 1>a huge ask, right because right now they're way behind

0:09:57.724 --> 0:10:03.364
<v Speaker 1>schedule on that. So they have to deliver twenty million teslas,

0:10:03.404 --> 0:10:07.124
<v Speaker 1>which is actually probably the most attainable, but I don't

0:10:07.164 --> 0:10:08.204
<v Speaker 1>know we can talk about that.

0:10:09.724 --> 0:10:15.564
<v Speaker 2>I could deliver fourteen million teslas, and.

0:10:15.164 --> 0:10:20.404
<v Speaker 1>And they're humanoid robots. Optimus is another one where they've

0:10:20.444 --> 0:10:24.044
<v Speaker 1>had a lot of issues, including in their demos. The

0:10:24.124 --> 0:10:28.124
<v Speaker 1>Optimus robots have not hit their benchmarks over time. I

0:10:28.164 --> 0:10:31.564
<v Speaker 1>think Elon has been over optimistic with all of these,

0:10:31.564 --> 0:10:34.204
<v Speaker 1>including the robots. But these are the things that have

0:10:34.284 --> 0:10:37.644
<v Speaker 1>to happen for him to get his compensation. Except and

0:10:37.724 --> 0:10:40.364
<v Speaker 1>this is one big except. So I was reading all

0:10:40.404 --> 0:10:42.284
<v Speaker 1>of this and I was like, huh, interesting thing that

0:10:42.324 --> 0:10:47.524
<v Speaker 1>they put in there. If there are factors quote outside

0:10:47.764 --> 0:10:52.764
<v Speaker 1>Tesla's control end quote that hurts Tesla's ability to reach

0:10:53.004 --> 0:10:57.004
<v Speaker 1>these milestones and reach these delivery targets, then Musk will

0:10:57.044 --> 0:11:00.124
<v Speaker 1>still get compensated. And it seems to me that that's

0:11:00.164 --> 0:11:03.004
<v Speaker 1>a pretty big out right that must can say, oh, well,

0:11:03.044 --> 0:11:04.044
<v Speaker 1>you know this was up might.

0:11:04.004 --> 0:11:07.124
<v Speaker 2>Have the best lawyer billing cycles in history. If there's

0:11:07.124 --> 0:11:09.164
<v Speaker 2>a dispute over this, I would think.

0:11:09.484 --> 0:11:12.604
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I think so. So that's kind of the that's

0:11:12.644 --> 0:11:16.404
<v Speaker 1>the one caveat This will come to a vote on

0:11:16.604 --> 0:11:21.724
<v Speaker 1>November six. Listeners might remember as well that Musk already

0:11:21.764 --> 0:11:25.284
<v Speaker 1>has a prior compensation package that is in courts right

0:11:25.324 --> 0:11:29.444
<v Speaker 1>now because it was challenged. So yeah, so that's where

0:11:29.444 --> 0:11:33.364
<v Speaker 1>we are. And the question is right, like good call

0:11:33.564 --> 0:11:36.364
<v Speaker 1>or bad call on the part of the board of Tesla.

0:11:37.044 --> 0:11:40.444
<v Speaker 1>Everything is going down. Profits are going down, Tesla's market

0:11:40.484 --> 0:11:42.844
<v Speaker 1>share is going down. Is it a good call to

0:11:42.924 --> 0:11:46.004
<v Speaker 1>just throw money at Elon and try to kind of

0:11:46.044 --> 0:11:47.964
<v Speaker 1>get him to hit all of these targets to get

0:11:47.964 --> 0:11:50.124
<v Speaker 1>his attention back? Do we think this is a good

0:11:50.204 --> 0:11:53.404
<v Speaker 1>use of capital? Do we think Elon will be motivated

0:11:53.444 --> 0:11:55.684
<v Speaker 1>by it? He's already the world's richest man. Do we

0:11:55.724 --> 0:11:57.484
<v Speaker 1>think he's going to perform? Like? What do we think

0:11:57.524 --> 0:11:59.844
<v Speaker 1>about all of this? I think it's actually a really

0:11:59.964 --> 0:12:05.284
<v Speaker 1>kind of interesting psychological question about someone who's already insanely wealthy.

0:12:05.324 --> 0:12:07.564
<v Speaker 1>You know, how do we motivate someone like that? And

0:12:07.844 --> 0:12:10.444
<v Speaker 1>is this, you know, is this the way to do it?

0:12:11.084 --> 0:12:14.564
<v Speaker 2>Yeah? I think it's a smart package. Actually, so you

0:12:14.604 --> 0:12:17.084
<v Speaker 2>can burn me at the stake for being such a capitalist.

0:12:17.084 --> 0:12:19.204
<v Speaker 2>But no, the reason why it's smart is because it

0:12:19.244 --> 0:12:22.884
<v Speaker 2>would seemed to me like these targets are a not

0:12:23.804 --> 0:12:27.124
<v Speaker 2>terribly easy to hit, notwithstanding the ambiguity of some of

0:12:27.164 --> 0:12:29.964
<v Speaker 2>these you know, acts of God clauses, right and b.

0:12:31.004 --> 0:12:33.444
<v Speaker 2>If the company is doing that well, then there's a

0:12:33.484 --> 0:12:36.284
<v Speaker 2>lot of wealth to go around, right. We're talking about

0:12:36.724 --> 0:12:41.764
<v Speaker 2>much higher than market growth. The fact that Tesla you know,

0:12:41.924 --> 0:12:46.244
<v Speaker 2>is facing more competition from Chinese automakers. It's products you're

0:12:46.244 --> 0:12:48.604
<v Speaker 2>not seen as innovative. They are all these things they

0:12:48.924 --> 0:12:50.964
<v Speaker 2>are trying to do, robo taxis and stuff like that,

0:12:50.964 --> 0:12:53.604
<v Speaker 2>but they're kind of like not as market leading right now.

0:12:53.684 --> 0:12:56.564
<v Speaker 2>But like, but if he turns it around, then I

0:12:56.564 --> 0:12:59.764
<v Speaker 2>think it strikes me as like fairly rational if it's

0:12:59.804 --> 0:13:02.324
<v Speaker 2>unlikely to be hit these benchmarks. Although Elon has bet

0:13:02.364 --> 0:13:05.044
<v Speaker 2>on himself before and been right, it's part of why

0:13:05.044 --> 0:13:07.764
<v Speaker 2>he is already the world's richest man, I'm all for it.

0:13:08.444 --> 0:13:13.564
<v Speaker 1>Well, so theoretically, I don't mind, you know, great compensation

0:13:13.724 --> 0:13:18.844
<v Speaker 1>packages if there's a good end result. I'm wondering, though,

0:13:20.044 --> 0:13:22.564
<v Speaker 1>if you want to get you know, the world's richest

0:13:22.564 --> 0:13:26.004
<v Speaker 1>man right to focus on Tesla, even though his attention

0:13:26.124 --> 0:13:28.884
<v Speaker 1>has been elsewhere, his ambitions have been elsewhere. You know,

0:13:28.964 --> 0:13:32.324
<v Speaker 1>he's interested in X and SpaceX and all these other things.

0:13:33.404 --> 0:13:37.524
<v Speaker 1>Is just like throwing dollar signs at it. Is that

0:13:37.804 --> 0:13:40.924
<v Speaker 1>really going to be the best motivator? And the reason

0:13:40.964 --> 0:13:43.604
<v Speaker 1>I asked that, and maybe the answer is yes, but

0:13:43.644 --> 0:13:46.804
<v Speaker 1>the answer could also be no, because there is a

0:13:46.884 --> 0:13:51.844
<v Speaker 1>lot of really great psychological research about intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation,

0:13:52.364 --> 0:13:54.724
<v Speaker 1>and a lot of times the reason that games players

0:13:54.804 --> 0:13:57.964
<v Speaker 1>want to play, you know, are four flow states and

0:13:58.044 --> 0:14:01.244
<v Speaker 1>kind of things that are intrinsic to the game, right,

0:14:01.284 --> 0:14:03.084
<v Speaker 1>Like they want to do better, they want to level up,

0:14:03.124 --> 0:14:04.564
<v Speaker 1>they want to do this, they want to get that,

0:14:05.244 --> 0:14:07.924
<v Speaker 1>like things that make them a good player within the game, right,

0:14:07.964 --> 0:14:10.564
<v Speaker 1>that convey some sort of prestige on them.

0:14:10.684 --> 0:14:11.964
<v Speaker 2>And it fits.

0:14:12.244 --> 0:14:14.084
<v Speaker 1>And I'm not talking about people for whom like this

0:14:14.124 --> 0:14:16.404
<v Speaker 1>is their profession and like they just need to get paid.

0:14:17.324 --> 0:14:22.884
<v Speaker 1>But when you start replacing intrinsic motivation with extrinsic motivation,

0:14:23.004 --> 0:14:26.804
<v Speaker 1>right when you start putting dollar values on everything, sometimes

0:14:26.844 --> 0:14:31.004
<v Speaker 1>motivation actually lacks. So there can be this you know,

0:14:31.044 --> 0:14:34.964
<v Speaker 1>ironic effect where where when you actually get money, like

0:14:35.004 --> 0:14:37.284
<v Speaker 1>all of a sudden, it's not fun anymore. And that's

0:14:37.324 --> 0:14:39.124
<v Speaker 1>why a lot of people. You know, you sometimes hear

0:14:39.164 --> 0:14:42.644
<v Speaker 1>the advice like keep your hobbies, your hobbies right, don't

0:14:42.684 --> 0:14:45.124
<v Speaker 1>try to make everything into a side hustle, because you

0:14:45.164 --> 0:14:47.124
<v Speaker 1>might find that you no longer enjoy the types of

0:14:47.164 --> 0:14:49.884
<v Speaker 1>things that you used to really enjoy when you feel.

0:14:49.644 --> 0:14:54.044
<v Speaker 2>Like you have to experience. Yeah, I'm curious, Nate.

0:14:54.084 --> 0:14:56.324
<v Speaker 1>Why don't you actually say a little bit more about that,

0:14:56.364 --> 0:14:58.084
<v Speaker 1>because I think that that is part of the question

0:14:58.204 --> 0:15:01.284
<v Speaker 1>here right about whether this is the best motivator.

0:15:01.924 --> 0:15:03.804
<v Speaker 2>Well, look, I'll talk about the two big things that

0:15:03.844 --> 0:15:07.324
<v Speaker 2>I find very motivating, and maybe they're not so different

0:15:07.364 --> 0:15:09.124
<v Speaker 2>than the way Elon thinks about the world.

0:15:09.204 --> 0:15:10.244
<v Speaker 1>Right. You know.

0:15:10.404 --> 0:15:14.924
<v Speaker 2>One is just to build a product that you think

0:15:15.044 --> 0:15:17.124
<v Speaker 2>is really great. Right, to do something that nobody else

0:15:17.164 --> 0:15:21.804
<v Speaker 2>has done, to differentiate, to add intellectual value, artistic value,

0:15:21.844 --> 0:15:24.924
<v Speaker 2>aesthetic value, whatever it might be. Right, But it's like, Okay,

0:15:25.604 --> 0:15:28.924
<v Speaker 2>here's the world. Nobody is building a good election model

0:15:28.964 --> 0:15:30.844
<v Speaker 2>or writing a book like the book I wrote, or

0:15:30.844 --> 0:15:32.604
<v Speaker 2>whatever else, right, and so I am going to do

0:15:32.724 --> 0:15:36.004
<v Speaker 2>that really well. Right, And I think Elon is or

0:15:36.044 --> 0:15:40.004
<v Speaker 2>maybe was motivated by that type of thing, right, he

0:15:40.124 --> 0:15:45.364
<v Speaker 2>definitely has vision. I think you have to be pretty biased,

0:15:45.404 --> 0:15:46.684
<v Speaker 2>not to give him credit for that, right, And the

0:15:46.804 --> 0:15:49.804
<v Speaker 2>other big motivator is like the desire to prove people

0:15:50.124 --> 0:15:54.404
<v Speaker 2>wrong and the fact that you'll have people like us say, oh,

0:15:54.604 --> 0:15:58.764
<v Speaker 2>these targets seem very hard to achieve. They're kind of crazy.

0:15:58.844 --> 0:16:01.484
<v Speaker 2>It can't be done. How can he do all these

0:16:01.484 --> 0:16:03.604
<v Speaker 2>things where they're not even like leading the robotaxi market

0:16:03.644 --> 0:16:05.964
<v Speaker 2>for example, Like, like that could be very motivating too,

0:16:05.964 --> 0:16:09.124
<v Speaker 2>I think I think more so than the money, really, right,

0:16:09.124 --> 0:16:11.644
<v Speaker 2>It's like they're not like that. You have very many

0:16:11.884 --> 0:16:14.204
<v Speaker 2>anyone in Silicon Valley, be the founders or vcs or

0:16:14.204 --> 0:16:16.684
<v Speaker 2>whatever else. They don't like just go and say, Okay,

0:16:16.844 --> 0:16:18.004
<v Speaker 2>well I made a lot of money. I'm going to

0:16:18.044 --> 0:16:20.644
<v Speaker 2>go right in the sunset and hang out at my

0:16:20.764 --> 0:16:24.404
<v Speaker 2>private villa in Tuscany and show up and go to

0:16:24.444 --> 0:16:27.404
<v Speaker 2>really nice three star Michelin restaurants. Right, They usually are

0:16:27.444 --> 0:16:31.124
<v Speaker 2>still motivated to prove their doubters wrong, which makes them

0:16:31.164 --> 0:16:34.804
<v Speaker 2>assholes sometimes. And I don't think anybody would would shy

0:16:34.844 --> 0:16:40.204
<v Speaker 2>away from accusing Elon of that either, right, But yeah.

0:16:39.204 --> 0:16:41.404
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, no, I think that that is a very powerful

0:16:41.444 --> 0:16:44.284
<v Speaker 1>motivator for people like Elon, Right, like, prove the hater's wrong.

0:16:44.364 --> 0:16:46.804
<v Speaker 1>Prove that I can do it, prove that I'm better

0:16:46.844 --> 0:16:49.524
<v Speaker 1>than they think I am because I know better now.

0:16:49.684 --> 0:16:53.884
<v Speaker 1>He has shown a pension for overconfidence. Right. He has

0:16:54.324 --> 0:16:57.924
<v Speaker 1>failed to hit very ambitious targets in the past, but

0:16:58.564 --> 0:17:01.644
<v Speaker 1>they're actually you know, you know, I mean this is

0:17:01.884 --> 0:17:05.044
<v Speaker 1>and listeners of the show no, no fan of Elon,

0:17:05.364 --> 0:17:11.284
<v Speaker 1>but this is something that is actually pretty not smart,

0:17:11.324 --> 0:17:14.964
<v Speaker 1>but like it is something that can work when you

0:17:15.004 --> 0:17:19.524
<v Speaker 1>do set these ambitious targets, right, even if you don't

0:17:19.684 --> 0:17:24.124
<v Speaker 1>actually hit them, you might hit a much higher target

0:17:24.164 --> 0:17:26.764
<v Speaker 1>than you otherwise would have done in trying to hit

0:17:26.804 --> 0:17:29.924
<v Speaker 1>this crazy target. Right. So it's kind of the opposite

0:17:30.004 --> 0:17:35.564
<v Speaker 1>of customer service business or consulting when you say under promise,

0:17:35.644 --> 0:17:37.964
<v Speaker 1>over deliver, right, Like, that's how you get people to

0:17:38.004 --> 0:17:40.924
<v Speaker 1>be really happy. Like you tell them a little bit

0:17:41.004 --> 0:17:43.084
<v Speaker 1>less than you think you're capable of doing, and then

0:17:43.164 --> 0:17:45.284
<v Speaker 1>once you hit what you're actually capable of doing, they'll

0:17:45.324 --> 0:17:47.364
<v Speaker 1>be like, holy shit, this is even better than I thought.

0:17:47.724 --> 0:17:50.644
<v Speaker 1>And he is kind of doing the opposite, right. Historically,

0:17:50.644 --> 0:17:54.204
<v Speaker 1>what he's done is over promise and underdeliver. That's not

0:17:54.244 --> 0:17:57.124
<v Speaker 1>necessarily great for Tesla's stock in the short term, but

0:17:57.404 --> 0:18:01.724
<v Speaker 1>it might not be necessarily a horrible strategy for motivating

0:18:01.804 --> 0:18:06.124
<v Speaker 1>people within the company to actually strive to hit kind

0:18:06.164 --> 0:18:09.364
<v Speaker 1>of these other milestones. And one of the reasons why

0:18:09.404 --> 0:18:11.924
<v Speaker 1>I think that probably the board wants him there and

0:18:12.044 --> 0:18:14.124
<v Speaker 1>is willing to kind of do any throw anything at

0:18:14.124 --> 0:18:18.804
<v Speaker 1>the problem to get him there is that anecdotally, Musk

0:18:18.924 --> 0:18:23.164
<v Speaker 1>does have a very strong motivating influence on workers when

0:18:23.204 --> 0:18:26.964
<v Speaker 1>he's present, right, and when he's not, motivation tends to sag. Like.

0:18:27.044 --> 0:18:29.564
<v Speaker 1>It is a very kind of cultive personality type of

0:18:29.604 --> 0:18:32.204
<v Speaker 1>business from what we've heard and from what we've seen,

0:18:32.684 --> 0:18:34.884
<v Speaker 1>and so maybe they're just trying to do everything they

0:18:34.964 --> 0:18:37.924
<v Speaker 1>can to try to get him physically there and really

0:18:38.004 --> 0:18:41.844
<v Speaker 1>trying to motivate people directly. I'm torn, right, Like, I

0:18:41.884 --> 0:18:44.444
<v Speaker 1>don't know. Obviously, I don't think they should be throwing

0:18:44.564 --> 0:18:47.004
<v Speaker 1>this amount of money at anyone, but like, let's just

0:18:47.044 --> 0:18:50.284
<v Speaker 1>put that aside and just think about.

0:18:50.084 --> 0:18:54.684
<v Speaker 2>Type of socialists are you running your rand moom Donnie's campaign?

0:18:55.524 --> 0:18:58.964
<v Speaker 1>I know, I know, right, but so let's let's just

0:18:59.004 --> 0:19:00.484
<v Speaker 1>put those considerations aside.

0:19:00.604 --> 0:19:06.244
<v Speaker 2>And you believe billionaires shouldn't exist? Are billionaires Okay.

0:19:06.284 --> 0:19:11.684
<v Speaker 1>I'm fine with billionaires existing, but but yeah, so so

0:19:11.764 --> 0:19:14.764
<v Speaker 1>the I think the question here is is an interesting

0:19:14.844 --> 0:19:17.204
<v Speaker 1>one in terms of how do we, you know, how

0:19:17.244 --> 0:19:20.684
<v Speaker 1>do we get people like that to perform at peak? They,

0:19:20.804 --> 0:19:24.484
<v Speaker 1>I think, are trying to throw everything into the equation,

0:19:25.004 --> 0:19:27.564
<v Speaker 1>you know, all these targets, money, all all of these

0:19:27.564 --> 0:19:30.084
<v Speaker 1>different things. The one thing that does worry me is

0:19:30.124 --> 0:19:33.764
<v Speaker 1>that out clause that I read to you, right, because like,

0:19:34.604 --> 0:19:37.124
<v Speaker 1>if he can just get the money without doing anything,

0:19:38.364 --> 0:19:40.404
<v Speaker 1>I think that there's a good chance that he is

0:19:40.484 --> 0:19:45.044
<v Speaker 1>going to potentially go there. So I might be worried

0:19:45.044 --> 0:19:48.364
<v Speaker 1>about language, but that's my biggest that's one of my

0:19:48.404 --> 0:19:48.964
<v Speaker 1>biggest Oh.

0:19:48.964 --> 0:19:52.644
<v Speaker 2>Look, I assume that, I mean, Tesla's stock was up

0:19:52.684 --> 0:19:56.924
<v Speaker 2>on this, right. I assume that, like the lawyers have

0:19:56.964 --> 0:19:59.724
<v Speaker 2>thought about how that clause might be interpreted in their

0:19:59.764 --> 0:20:02.444
<v Speaker 2>outclauses and in clauses. And I'm making that term up right.

0:20:03.524 --> 0:20:06.564
<v Speaker 2>I assume that, like it's not just you know, writing

0:20:06.564 --> 0:20:08.364
<v Speaker 2>things up on a white board, that they thought this

0:20:08.404 --> 0:20:09.724
<v Speaker 2>through a little bit. But yeah, look, to me, the

0:20:09.804 --> 0:20:15.844
<v Speaker 2>question is also, you know, does elon add that much

0:20:16.004 --> 0:20:20.524
<v Speaker 2>marginal value over another CEO? That kind of thing is

0:20:20.604 --> 0:20:22.364
<v Speaker 2>very hard to test, right if you go and I

0:20:22.404 --> 0:20:27.724
<v Speaker 2>asked my handy assistant Claude the AI. But I asked Claude,

0:20:28.324 --> 0:20:31.564
<v Speaker 2>what's the empirical literature say on whether CEO pay packages

0:20:31.604 --> 0:20:32.164
<v Speaker 2>are worth it?

0:20:32.284 --> 0:20:32.564
<v Speaker 1>Right?

0:20:32.684 --> 0:20:35.404
<v Speaker 2>And Claude wasn't sure. There does not seem to be

0:20:35.444 --> 0:20:39.244
<v Speaker 2>a clear consensus on this question in general and specifically.

0:20:39.404 --> 0:20:43.564
<v Speaker 2>I mean, you know, Elon got very distracted by politics

0:20:43.564 --> 0:20:46.004
<v Speaker 2>for some period of time. Well, that's stracts the right word.

0:20:46.004 --> 0:20:47.964
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I think most people would say that XAI

0:20:48.244 --> 0:20:50.964
<v Speaker 2>is doing interesting things behind kind of the big three

0:20:51.004 --> 0:20:56.564
<v Speaker 2>AI labs, but is a serious player, right, there's SpaceX

0:20:56.604 --> 0:21:00.084
<v Speaker 2>There's a lot of things, so yeah, you know. Meanwhile,

0:21:00.244 --> 0:21:03.884
<v Speaker 2>Elon has also been accused of recreational drug use in

0:21:03.964 --> 0:21:06.924
<v Speaker 2>well sourced stores in the Wall Street Journal. He is

0:21:07.004 --> 0:21:10.684
<v Speaker 2>a polarizing figure. I don't believe that his approval writing.

0:21:10.684 --> 0:21:12.964
<v Speaker 2>We've been tracking favorability of branks for Elon. They haven't

0:21:13.004 --> 0:21:14.724
<v Speaker 2>really improved very much. And see let the White House.

0:21:14.724 --> 0:21:17.404
<v Speaker 2>In fact, if anything, Republicans are more mad at him

0:21:17.404 --> 0:21:20.084
<v Speaker 2>now than they once were. Democrats haven't really you know,

0:21:20.564 --> 0:21:24.084
<v Speaker 2>returned to admiration for him yet. So there are a

0:21:24.124 --> 0:21:27.204
<v Speaker 2>lot of disadvantages too. But you know, I mean, look,

0:21:28.444 --> 0:21:30.684
<v Speaker 2>one of the other options he owns somewhere in the

0:21:30.764 --> 0:21:34.364
<v Speaker 2>range of fifteen percent of Tesla stock, right, so who's

0:21:34.364 --> 0:21:37.404
<v Speaker 2>the largest shareholder. If you wanted to oust him, you

0:21:37.444 --> 0:21:40.084
<v Speaker 2>would have to have the majority of other shareholders wanting

0:21:40.124 --> 0:21:42.324
<v Speaker 2>him out, which is very difficult for lots and lots

0:21:42.324 --> 0:21:44.724
<v Speaker 2>of reasons. So, you know, maybe it's not a choice

0:21:44.724 --> 0:21:50.444
<v Speaker 2>between Elon and generic CEO so much as motivated Elon

0:21:50.564 --> 0:21:51.844
<v Speaker 2>versus unmotivated Elon.

0:21:52.804 --> 0:21:54.844
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so at the end of the day, night, good

0:21:54.884 --> 0:21:56.964
<v Speaker 1>call or bad call. I think you know where you

0:21:57.004 --> 0:22:01.484
<v Speaker 1>come down, all right, and I am it's hard going.

0:22:01.644 --> 0:22:03.604
<v Speaker 1>I'm gonna waffle on this one. I'm going to say,

0:22:03.724 --> 0:22:05.884
<v Speaker 1>I really I'm not sure I can see it going

0:22:05.924 --> 0:22:09.884
<v Speaker 1>either way. And this is a very waffly answer, But

0:22:10.284 --> 0:22:12.324
<v Speaker 1>that's at the end of the day where I'm coming

0:22:12.324 --> 0:22:17.124
<v Speaker 1>out and yeah, I'm hedging, Nate, I'm hedging. So yeah,

0:22:17.164 --> 0:22:21.404
<v Speaker 1>so that's where we are. Let's take a quick break now,

0:22:21.724 --> 0:22:23.524
<v Speaker 1>and then when we come back, we're going to talk

0:22:23.564 --> 0:22:27.644
<v Speaker 1>about the Battle of the sexes or you know, is

0:22:27.684 --> 0:22:31.244
<v Speaker 1>there actually a crisis of masculinity. We'll find out after

0:22:31.284 --> 0:22:47.604
<v Speaker 1>the break. Nate. Normally, when I think of the Battle

0:22:47.644 --> 0:22:50.444
<v Speaker 1>of the Sexes, I'm thinking game theory. Right, there's actually

0:22:50.484 --> 0:22:53.124
<v Speaker 1>a game that's called Battle of the Sexes. But in

0:22:53.364 --> 0:22:57.644
<v Speaker 1>today's segment, that is not what we're talking about, well

0:22:57.884 --> 0:23:00.804
<v Speaker 1>sort of, but not really. We're talking about kind of

0:23:01.004 --> 0:23:04.004
<v Speaker 1>the headlines that have been in the news over the

0:23:04.084 --> 0:23:08.044
<v Speaker 1>last few years about kind of a crisis of modern

0:23:08.444 --> 0:23:12.404
<v Speaker 1>masculinity that men are not doing as well as they

0:23:12.444 --> 0:23:17.284
<v Speaker 1>once were. Basically, you know, suicide as up, education levels

0:23:17.324 --> 0:23:20.684
<v Speaker 1>are down, loneliness is up. You know, we're seeing a

0:23:20.724 --> 0:23:24.404
<v Speaker 1>loneliness epidemic. And that's actually true of both sexes, but

0:23:24.444 --> 0:23:28.164
<v Speaker 1>more for men than for women's suicide actually is also

0:23:28.244 --> 0:23:30.084
<v Speaker 1>true that it's going up for both men and women,

0:23:30.164 --> 0:23:34.004
<v Speaker 1>but more for men, and on and on. So the

0:23:34.124 --> 0:23:37.684
<v Speaker 1>question here is is this actually a crisis of masculinity

0:23:38.044 --> 0:23:42.484
<v Speaker 1>or are these overblown headlines that basically are just like

0:23:43.444 --> 0:23:46.524
<v Speaker 1>little data blifts that really do not tell the whole

0:23:46.564 --> 0:23:51.964
<v Speaker 1>story where there's actually, you know, just as much male

0:23:52.044 --> 0:23:55.004
<v Speaker 1>dominance as there ever was, and maybe on the margins

0:23:55.124 --> 0:23:59.084
<v Speaker 1>certain things are changing a little bit, but it's still

0:23:59.844 --> 0:24:03.884
<v Speaker 1>basically same old story. So that is that is the

0:24:03.924 --> 0:24:08.044
<v Speaker 1>topic for this Battle of the Sexes. And obviously I'm female,

0:24:08.244 --> 0:24:10.764
<v Speaker 1>you're male, but I'm gonna let you kick this one

0:24:10.844 --> 0:24:14.524
<v Speaker 1>OFFN eight. So what is your kind of initial reaction

0:24:14.644 --> 0:24:16.244
<v Speaker 1>and then we can get into some data.

0:24:16.804 --> 0:24:21.524
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, look, maybe I'm playing into the stereotype a little

0:24:21.564 --> 0:24:23.764
<v Speaker 2>bit here. I think there's something real. I mean, one

0:24:23.804 --> 0:24:25.364
<v Speaker 2>reason why I say that is because you can see

0:24:25.404 --> 0:24:28.804
<v Speaker 2>it reflected in voting patterns too, which is something that

0:24:28.844 --> 0:24:32.684
<v Speaker 2>I study quite a bit, where among young voters in

0:24:32.724 --> 0:24:36.764
<v Speaker 2>the US and elsewhere, there are bigger gender splits than

0:24:36.764 --> 0:24:41.364
<v Speaker 2>there ever have been before. Historically, gender is only mildly

0:24:41.364 --> 0:24:44.404
<v Speaker 2>predictive of voting share. Usually women are a bit more

0:24:44.684 --> 0:24:47.724
<v Speaker 2>liberal than men, but that's been more profound, for example,

0:24:47.804 --> 0:24:50.364
<v Speaker 2>for Kamala Harris, for Donald Trump. And I think it

0:24:50.404 --> 0:24:55.564
<v Speaker 2>reflects the fact that, like some men feel a little

0:24:55.604 --> 0:24:59.324
<v Speaker 2>bit left out of the direction that society is headed, right,

0:24:59.324 --> 0:25:03.044
<v Speaker 2>They feel society as too risk averse, They feel emasculated,

0:25:03.164 --> 0:25:07.444
<v Speaker 2>They feel that, you know, institutions may be led. Well,

0:25:07.484 --> 0:25:11.564
<v Speaker 2>I don't know certainly what I call the village in

0:25:11.604 --> 0:25:14.244
<v Speaker 2>my book, right, the village is kind of academia and

0:25:14.284 --> 0:25:17.044
<v Speaker 2>media and so forth. Certainly in that field you see

0:25:17.044 --> 0:25:21.484
<v Speaker 2>more and more women leaders. Right in like democratic politics,

0:25:21.484 --> 0:25:23.004
<v Speaker 2>a lot of people who work on campaigns you know,

0:25:23.044 --> 0:25:25.044
<v Speaker 2>the women who ran Joe Biden's campaign was a woman.

0:25:26.324 --> 0:25:29.004
<v Speaker 2>So yeah, I think there's I think there's something there. Maria.

0:25:29.164 --> 0:25:32.604
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, well, having there be something there and having it

0:25:32.644 --> 0:25:36.404
<v Speaker 1>be like a full blown crisis are two different things.

0:25:36.644 --> 0:25:40.444
<v Speaker 1>So I do think that there's definitely I agree that

0:25:40.524 --> 0:25:42.844
<v Speaker 1>there is dissatisfaction. I mean, I think a lot of

0:25:42.844 --> 0:25:45.764
<v Speaker 1>what you're talking about is probably what got us you know,

0:25:45.844 --> 0:25:48.604
<v Speaker 1>Trump two point zero, right, what got us to that,

0:25:49.284 --> 0:25:51.844
<v Speaker 1>to that moment in time where a lot of people

0:25:51.884 --> 0:25:54.724
<v Speaker 1>felt really disaffected. And by the way, you're seeing this

0:25:54.844 --> 0:25:58.284
<v Speaker 1>in women too, where it's kind of a dovetailing that

0:25:58.324 --> 0:26:02.404
<v Speaker 1>where you're seeing the tradwife movement right where women are saying, yeah,

0:26:02.484 --> 0:26:06.684
<v Speaker 1>you know, we want to be at home and be

0:26:06.844 --> 0:26:10.884
<v Speaker 1>wives and full time homemakers and cook elaborate meals and

0:26:10.924 --> 0:26:13.084
<v Speaker 1>take care of our children and have lots of children.

0:26:13.124 --> 0:26:14.764
<v Speaker 1>We've talked on the show a little bit about this

0:26:14.844 --> 0:26:16.844
<v Speaker 1>movement in the past, but I think that these two

0:26:16.924 --> 0:26:19.324
<v Speaker 1>things are kind of going hand in hand, right. So

0:26:19.364 --> 0:26:22.484
<v Speaker 1>it's not just men who feel disaffected. There is a

0:26:22.524 --> 0:26:25.364
<v Speaker 1>subset of women who think, oh, you know, it's good

0:26:25.404 --> 0:26:27.884
<v Speaker 1>that women are staying at home. They shouldn't be in

0:26:27.924 --> 0:26:30.644
<v Speaker 1>the workforce in the same numbers as men. Men should

0:26:30.644 --> 0:26:33.884
<v Speaker 1>be the breadwinners. You know, we like traditional gender roles,

0:26:34.124 --> 0:26:38.884
<v Speaker 1>So you definitely have this current, this subcurrent in society.

0:26:39.484 --> 0:26:42.364
<v Speaker 1>That said, I think that some of the data that

0:26:42.564 --> 0:26:47.364
<v Speaker 1>has been cited that shows that basically men are not

0:26:47.484 --> 0:26:50.804
<v Speaker 1>doing as well as women. I think that a lot

0:26:50.844 --> 0:26:54.044
<v Speaker 1>of those data points, if you dig a little bit deeper,

0:26:54.804 --> 0:26:59.084
<v Speaker 1>don't hold a lot of water. So, for instance, when

0:26:59.084 --> 0:27:02.164
<v Speaker 1>it comes to the workforce, we still do have quite

0:27:02.204 --> 0:27:07.004
<v Speaker 1>a significant gender pay gap. So women on average make

0:27:07.084 --> 0:27:10.604
<v Speaker 1>eighty three cents to eighty five on the dollar.

0:27:11.084 --> 0:27:12.724
<v Speaker 2>Of what I'm going to I'm going to note for

0:27:12.764 --> 0:27:15.484
<v Speaker 2>the record that I think people would be the.

0:27:15.324 --> 0:27:19.724
<v Speaker 1>Causes of that, the causes of that. Yeah, that's that's

0:27:19.764 --> 0:27:21.924
<v Speaker 1>totally fine. I'm just saying that this that this still

0:27:21.964 --> 0:27:25.044
<v Speaker 1>exists right when, because if we're posing the question of

0:27:25.084 --> 0:27:27.244
<v Speaker 1>men are not doing as well as women, I'm just

0:27:27.404 --> 0:27:29.324
<v Speaker 1>kind of saying that there is a still a gender

0:27:29.324 --> 0:27:33.564
<v Speaker 1>pay gap that is in favor of men, and it

0:27:33.724 --> 0:27:39.404
<v Speaker 1>holds true over all education levels. So basically, men who

0:27:39.684 --> 0:27:41.844
<v Speaker 1>have no education are able to get better jobs and

0:27:41.884 --> 0:27:44.964
<v Speaker 1>women who have no education. Women with PhDs are paid

0:27:45.004 --> 0:27:48.884
<v Speaker 1>more than women with PhDs, and we still don't see

0:27:48.924 --> 0:27:53.444
<v Speaker 1>women progressing into positions of power at nearly the same

0:27:53.524 --> 0:27:56.124
<v Speaker 1>rates as we see men. So we do. We do

0:27:56.244 --> 0:27:59.444
<v Speaker 1>have that sort of thing and the fact that, oh

0:27:59.524 --> 0:28:02.924
<v Speaker 1>that there's a crisis in higher education, or that women

0:28:03.924 --> 0:28:07.044
<v Speaker 1>graduate from college more often than men. This has been

0:28:07.084 --> 0:28:10.604
<v Speaker 1>the case for kind of a long time, Like women

0:28:10.684 --> 0:28:14.084
<v Speaker 1>tend to do better academically and have for a very

0:28:14.124 --> 0:28:17.044
<v Speaker 1>long time. So this is not something new. It's not

0:28:17.124 --> 0:28:19.164
<v Speaker 1>like all of a sudden we have different education.

0:28:19.284 --> 0:28:21.284
<v Speaker 2>I've got to push back. I mean, it has gotten

0:28:21.284 --> 0:28:23.644
<v Speaker 2>I believe significantly big. I mean in terms of like

0:28:23.684 --> 0:28:26.204
<v Speaker 2>college graduation rates is going to like three to two

0:28:26.284 --> 0:28:29.404
<v Speaker 2>women or might go to two to one, and eventually,

0:28:29.484 --> 0:28:31.284
<v Speaker 2>I mean this kind of leads to interesting things like

0:28:31.324 --> 0:28:35.124
<v Speaker 2>should there be affirmative action for men on campus? It

0:28:35.124 --> 0:28:38.284
<v Speaker 2>also affects things like the campus dating scene potentially.

0:28:38.444 --> 0:28:42.164
<v Speaker 1>That's actually so nate, that's actually the kind of a

0:28:42.444 --> 0:28:45.804
<v Speaker 1>data point in the opposite direction. If this is If

0:28:45.804 --> 0:28:48.804
<v Speaker 1>it's true that it has gotten worse and there is

0:28:48.884 --> 0:28:51.044
<v Speaker 1>still a huge gender pay gap and that men are

0:28:51.124 --> 0:28:53.764
<v Speaker 1>still getting paid more than women, even though women are

0:28:53.764 --> 0:28:56.564
<v Speaker 1>pushing to get educated and are more educated than men.

0:28:56.644 --> 0:28:58.844
<v Speaker 1>That that actually shows that men are getting even more

0:28:58.844 --> 0:29:01.044
<v Speaker 1>privileged when it comes to how much they're being paid

0:29:01.044 --> 0:29:03.524
<v Speaker 1>than women. Right, Because if.

0:29:03.324 --> 0:29:07.124
<v Speaker 2>You're no, I don't think necessary, I mean, are there

0:29:07.124 --> 0:29:08.084
<v Speaker 2>are a few things here right.

0:29:09.484 --> 0:29:11.084
<v Speaker 1>This is, by the way, By the way, the reason

0:29:11.124 --> 0:29:13.444
<v Speaker 1>we're going back and forth on this is even economists

0:29:13.524 --> 0:29:15.364
<v Speaker 1>go back and forth on this, like the data is,

0:29:15.804 --> 0:29:18.684
<v Speaker 1>the data is really complicated, and this is a very

0:29:18.764 --> 0:29:22.604
<v Speaker 1>muddy subject with tons of confounds, and it's really really

0:29:22.644 --> 0:29:25.884
<v Speaker 1>hard to control for all of the variables. So I'm

0:29:26.124 --> 0:29:28.604
<v Speaker 1>I'm just doing a little bit of a caveat on that.

0:29:29.844 --> 0:29:31.884
<v Speaker 2>Let me go through a couple of arguments that I

0:29:31.924 --> 0:29:35.004
<v Speaker 2>think the kind of economists on the other side of

0:29:35.004 --> 0:29:38.204
<v Speaker 2>this issue we'd go through, and some of them are

0:29:38.484 --> 0:29:41.444
<v Speaker 2>are explanations liberals would like more, some conservatives would like more. Right,

0:29:42.404 --> 0:29:48.564
<v Speaker 2>you know, one belief is that women often take more

0:29:48.604 --> 0:29:53.164
<v Speaker 2>time out of their careers to care for children, to

0:29:53.324 --> 0:29:56.164
<v Speaker 2>care sometimes for other like ailing family members, for things

0:29:56.204 --> 0:29:59.044
<v Speaker 2>like that, and that you know, if you count for that,

0:29:59.124 --> 0:30:02.004
<v Speaker 2>then there's questions about how much of the gender wage

0:30:02.124 --> 0:30:05.684
<v Speaker 2>gap remains. You know. The more plocularly incorrect thing too,

0:30:05.724 --> 0:30:07.724
<v Speaker 2>This is kind of what got Larry Summer's in a

0:30:07.764 --> 0:30:11.524
<v Speaker 2>lot of trouble at Harvard University. Right, you know, there

0:30:11.524 --> 0:30:15.524
<v Speaker 2>are some evidence that men have higher variance, that they

0:30:16.564 --> 0:30:19.964
<v Speaker 2>end up in really bad circumstances, commit substantially more violence

0:30:20.324 --> 0:30:24.404
<v Speaker 2>and more crime. Right, can crash out in different ways.

0:30:25.084 --> 0:30:29.404
<v Speaker 2>But if there's more genetic variation in a population, then

0:30:29.444 --> 0:30:31.764
<v Speaker 2>maybe the very top earners Elon Musk of the world

0:30:31.804 --> 0:30:34.604
<v Speaker 2>to bring him up again might tend to be men more, right,

0:30:34.644 --> 0:30:37.364
<v Speaker 2>I mean, those are those are theories that compete with this,

0:30:37.644 --> 0:30:42.524
<v Speaker 2>I guess, right, you know, I think one could ask

0:30:43.164 --> 0:30:49.484
<v Speaker 2>how predictive is college completion of success in career anyway?

0:30:49.724 --> 0:30:54.284
<v Speaker 1>Right, yep, that's a very valid question, especially now when

0:30:54.324 --> 0:30:56.124
<v Speaker 1>you have you know, also the Pewter teals of the

0:30:56.124 --> 0:30:58.804
<v Speaker 1>world paying people not to go to college. You know. There,

0:30:58.844 --> 0:31:02.244
<v Speaker 1>I think we are seeing a very very different society

0:31:02.284 --> 0:31:04.284
<v Speaker 1>than even ten years ago, and I think that that

0:31:04.364 --> 0:31:07.444
<v Speaker 1>shift is going to all the all the evidence shows

0:31:07.444 --> 0:31:11.404
<v Speaker 1>that that shift is not a prairiy blip that people

0:31:11.524 --> 0:31:15.364
<v Speaker 1>are putting less value on. Okay, where did you go

0:31:15.404 --> 0:31:16.764
<v Speaker 1>to school? Et cetera, et cetera.

0:31:17.324 --> 0:31:19.764
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and tech, as you said, is like the field

0:31:19.764 --> 0:31:23.644
<v Speaker 2>where this is most pronounced. Right, there's now a you know,

0:31:23.764 --> 0:31:29.004
<v Speaker 2>anti higher education quadrant in tech I would see, right,

0:31:29.044 --> 0:31:31.684
<v Speaker 2>But it hasn't spread to like finances much, which is

0:31:31.724 --> 0:31:34.204
<v Speaker 2>still a bit more hierarchical. But like all this is

0:31:34.244 --> 0:31:41.164
<v Speaker 2>tied together, right, the backlash against elite higher education and

0:31:41.564 --> 0:31:44.804
<v Speaker 2>the backlash against women's roles in society. These things are

0:31:45.004 --> 0:31:49.004
<v Speaker 2>tied together, I think to like a greater and greater extent, right,

0:31:49.724 --> 0:31:51.884
<v Speaker 2>you know, and again you know, Look, my premise is

0:31:51.884 --> 0:31:55.044
<v Speaker 2>always at like, it doesn't do anybody any good to

0:31:55.044 --> 0:31:59.284
<v Speaker 2>pretend that, on average, that gender differences don't exist.

0:31:59.444 --> 0:31:59.644
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:32:00.044 --> 0:32:03.644
<v Speaker 2>If you look at measures of self reported well being,

0:32:03.724 --> 0:32:07.724
<v Speaker 2>if you ask people are you happy or not? Basically? Right,

0:32:08.404 --> 0:32:12.484
<v Speaker 2>First of all, there are enormous generational divides where a

0:32:12.484 --> 0:32:16.004
<v Speaker 2>lot of gen Z reports very poor mental health, But

0:32:16.084 --> 0:32:20.084
<v Speaker 2>there is a gender gap too. Men tend to report

0:32:21.004 --> 0:32:26.124
<v Speaker 2>higher happiness, lower levels of anxiety and depression. If you

0:32:26.164 --> 0:32:30.324
<v Speaker 2>look at like what circumstances, what life circumstances affect people's

0:32:30.364 --> 0:32:33.164
<v Speaker 2>sense of well being? Right? For some types of things,

0:32:33.244 --> 0:32:37.444
<v Speaker 2>men are more resilient, but not for work related stuff.

0:32:37.484 --> 0:32:37.564
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:32:37.604 --> 0:32:39.524
<v Speaker 2>If you ask kind of questions about like what would

0:32:39.564 --> 0:32:41.964
<v Speaker 2>happen if you got demoted at work or you weren't

0:32:41.964 --> 0:32:46.844
<v Speaker 2>performing expectations that you know, men have a bigger psychological

0:32:46.844 --> 0:32:49.284
<v Speaker 2>effect from that than women do on average, all these

0:32:49.524 --> 0:32:50.164
<v Speaker 2>our averages.

0:32:50.484 --> 0:32:54.884
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, absolutely, I will just add to that to kind

0:32:54.884 --> 0:32:59.924
<v Speaker 1>of give a broader picture that usually the gender differences

0:33:00.444 --> 0:33:04.244
<v Speaker 1>within genders are much much larger than the gender differences

0:33:04.284 --> 0:33:07.764
<v Speaker 1>between genders on almost any data point you can find. Right.

0:33:07.764 --> 0:33:10.004
<v Speaker 1>That means men differ more from men, and women differ

0:33:10.044 --> 0:33:12.764
<v Speaker 1>more from women than men on average, and women on

0:33:12.804 --> 0:33:15.884
<v Speaker 1>average differ from each other. That is something that is

0:33:15.964 --> 0:33:18.924
<v Speaker 1>just basically true of almost anything you can find in

0:33:18.964 --> 0:33:21.964
<v Speaker 1>the psychology literature. So I just want people to keep

0:33:21.964 --> 0:33:23.284
<v Speaker 1>that in the back of their minds.

0:33:23.724 --> 0:33:26.204
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Look, you know, I just came from the self

0:33:27.044 --> 0:33:30.324
<v Speaker 2>professed happiest country in the world, Finland. I was trying

0:33:30.364 --> 0:33:31.204
<v Speaker 2>to do it. Oh my god.

0:33:31.244 --> 0:33:33.684
<v Speaker 1>That that always just I get such a kick out

0:33:33.684 --> 0:33:34.084
<v Speaker 1>of that.

0:33:35.284 --> 0:33:38.404
<v Speaker 2>They seem pretty happy. They drink a lot, you get offered,

0:33:38.724 --> 0:33:40.204
<v Speaker 2>Oh that's probably why.

0:33:40.324 --> 0:33:45.404
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, they haven't bought into the alcohol is bad for

0:33:45.444 --> 0:33:48.604
<v Speaker 1>you yet, so yes, their life satisfaction is probably higher.

0:33:48.684 --> 0:33:51.084
<v Speaker 2>This could be, this could be a whole different episode.

0:33:51.084 --> 0:33:52.684
<v Speaker 2>Not that we could do the boost thing, right, but

0:33:52.764 --> 0:33:55.404
<v Speaker 2>like national happiness rankings, what do they really tell you, right,

0:33:56.604 --> 0:34:03.004
<v Speaker 2>I think they're probably somewhat real. One thing you actually notice,

0:34:03.044 --> 0:34:05.164
<v Speaker 2>I haven't published this work. Maybe I'll get around to

0:34:05.164 --> 0:34:09.004
<v Speaker 2>it eventually. If you look at fertility rates by country,

0:34:09.844 --> 0:34:14.644
<v Speaker 2>then happiness is somewhat predictive of that when you control

0:34:14.764 --> 0:34:17.124
<v Speaker 2>for GDP. I mean, basically, you know, the big thing

0:34:17.124 --> 0:34:18.484
<v Speaker 2>that no one wants to talk about is that, like

0:34:19.204 --> 0:34:22.764
<v Speaker 2>both men and women have seen to discover around the

0:34:22.764 --> 0:34:25.764
<v Speaker 2>world that like, when you get wealthier than maybe there

0:34:25.764 --> 0:34:27.924
<v Speaker 2>are better things to do with your life and to

0:34:27.964 --> 0:34:31.524
<v Speaker 2>have children, right, and this is causing potential decline in

0:34:31.564 --> 0:34:33.964
<v Speaker 2>the global population. Right. That's a big difference between not

0:34:33.964 --> 0:34:36.844
<v Speaker 2>really between men and women, but it's also a generational difference.

0:34:36.924 --> 0:34:37.124
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:34:37.924 --> 0:34:43.084
<v Speaker 2>But people actually have, controlling for other factors, more kids

0:34:43.124 --> 0:34:45.404
<v Speaker 2>in happier countries, which suggests to me that there is

0:34:45.484 --> 0:34:49.684
<v Speaker 2>like some tangible difference here potentially. I mean, you could

0:34:49.724 --> 0:34:52.964
<v Speaker 2>look at things like suicide rates. I haven't looked at that. Actually,

0:34:53.604 --> 0:34:56.164
<v Speaker 2>you know, men commit suicide much more offer than women,

0:34:56.244 --> 0:35:01.804
<v Speaker 2>even though even though they report higher self reported mental health,

0:35:01.804 --> 0:35:03.884
<v Speaker 2>which is interesting. Maybe it's another case of like having

0:35:03.964 --> 0:35:07.844
<v Speaker 2>more variation potentially, but I think these things are at

0:35:07.924 --> 0:35:10.644
<v Speaker 2>least partly real, and some of us that it's more

0:35:10.684 --> 0:35:14.324
<v Speaker 2>you know, the notion about like men not feeling like

0:35:14.364 --> 0:35:16.644
<v Speaker 2>they have a lot of close friends, right.

0:35:16.884 --> 0:35:19.444
<v Speaker 1>That's actually a huge thing. I think that there's a

0:35:19.484 --> 0:35:22.844
<v Speaker 1>lot to that, and I think that there you know,

0:35:22.924 --> 0:35:30.084
<v Speaker 1>women historically socially have had to kind of be more socialized, right.

0:35:30.124 --> 0:35:32.644
<v Speaker 1>It's it's one of those things where women, I think,

0:35:33.644 --> 0:35:37.444
<v Speaker 1>just in general in society have kind of had to

0:35:37.644 --> 0:35:40.244
<v Speaker 1>get support groups, right, and be nice and be the

0:35:40.284 --> 0:35:43.404
<v Speaker 1>people in the family who take care of calendars and

0:35:43.444 --> 0:35:47.044
<v Speaker 1>appointments and keep up with other parents and like and

0:35:47.084 --> 0:35:50.004
<v Speaker 1>do all of the social stuff. And for men, that

0:35:50.564 --> 0:35:54.724
<v Speaker 1>once again historically hasn't always been their dominant social role.

0:35:54.804 --> 0:35:57.124
<v Speaker 1>So we actually do see that that men tend to

0:35:57.124 --> 0:36:00.724
<v Speaker 1>have smaller circles, and that those circles often shrink with

0:36:00.884 --> 0:36:05.164
<v Speaker 1>age unless they do something specifically to counteract it. Something

0:36:05.164 --> 0:36:07.964
<v Speaker 1>else that we mentioned briefly but have not gone into

0:36:08.004 --> 0:36:10.804
<v Speaker 1>in detail, But I think it's important here, including in

0:36:10.884 --> 0:36:14.524
<v Speaker 1>social circles who you interact with, and I think that

0:36:14.644 --> 0:36:19.484
<v Speaker 1>this is affecting both genders, is that you know, teens

0:36:19.644 --> 0:36:24.244
<v Speaker 1>right now. Tweens are coming up in an era where

0:36:24.604 --> 0:36:28.084
<v Speaker 1>so much activity is online, right, and there's this atomization

0:36:28.244 --> 0:36:30.724
<v Speaker 1>of society that we didn't experience you and I and

0:36:30.724 --> 0:36:33.164
<v Speaker 1>A when we were when we were growing up. And

0:36:33.204 --> 0:36:36.684
<v Speaker 1>I think that there are generational differences that we have

0:36:36.764 --> 0:36:38.964
<v Speaker 1>no idea yet how that's going to play out, but

0:36:39.444 --> 0:36:41.444
<v Speaker 1>as of now, I think that those do not have

0:36:41.484 --> 0:36:44.484
<v Speaker 1>a great effect on mental health. Right if you socialize

0:36:44.484 --> 0:36:47.164
<v Speaker 1>online versus in person, there is a difference. We do

0:36:47.244 --> 0:36:49.404
<v Speaker 1>have data on that, and so I do think that

0:36:49.444 --> 0:36:52.724
<v Speaker 1>we're going to be seeing kind of some spillover effects

0:36:52.764 --> 0:36:55.564
<v Speaker 1>from that in the future. And it's too early to

0:36:55.604 --> 0:36:58.244
<v Speaker 1>say whether you know what the gender differences will be,

0:36:59.044 --> 0:37:01.644
<v Speaker 1>what kind of what the fall from that will be,

0:37:01.724 --> 0:37:04.604
<v Speaker 1>But there is an important kind of generational shift going

0:37:04.644 --> 0:37:07.004
<v Speaker 1>on right now that we should be paying attention to.

0:37:10.684 --> 0:37:12.564
<v Speaker 2>And we'll be right back after this break.

0:37:25.964 --> 0:37:26.164
<v Speaker 1>Yeah.

0:37:26.324 --> 0:37:28.924
<v Speaker 2>Look, I think some stereotypes are true on an average,

0:37:28.964 --> 0:37:32.484
<v Speaker 2>right If you let's say I get dinner with a

0:37:32.604 --> 0:37:36.084
<v Speaker 2>male friend playtonic right the next day, do I get

0:37:36.124 --> 0:37:39.884
<v Speaker 2>like a follow up thank you We'll stening out again

0:37:39.924 --> 0:37:43.684
<v Speaker 2>soon text? Probably not? Right with a female friend over

0:37:43.724 --> 0:37:46.244
<v Speaker 2>fifty to fifty I would say, right, just an observation

0:37:46.324 --> 0:37:47.684
<v Speaker 2>I think will hold true for a lot of people.

0:37:48.604 --> 0:37:52.644
<v Speaker 2>You know, men stereotypically like to hang up by doing

0:37:52.684 --> 0:37:55.644
<v Speaker 2>things together. Right, you're watching a football game, you're watching

0:37:55.684 --> 0:37:59.324
<v Speaker 2>a movie, you're playing a video game. Right, maybe playing poker,

0:37:59.804 --> 0:38:03.444
<v Speaker 2>women tend to you know, involve more talking on average,

0:38:03.604 --> 0:38:07.124
<v Speaker 2>don't shoot the messenger, right, There is data on this, right,

0:38:07.164 --> 0:38:09.244
<v Speaker 2>and like and that might be more threatened by a

0:38:09.524 --> 0:38:12.204
<v Speaker 2>like a model where now you're hanging out in person

0:38:12.444 --> 0:38:14.884
<v Speaker 2>or you're or you're not hanging out in person as much. Right,

0:38:14.924 --> 0:38:17.484
<v Speaker 2>you know, I think poker is interesting and there is

0:38:17.564 --> 0:38:22.124
<v Speaker 2>certainly outright sexism in poker, for sure, and yes, but

0:38:22.764 --> 0:38:25.564
<v Speaker 2>you know, I also think it's a male bonding experience

0:38:25.804 --> 0:38:28.644
<v Speaker 2>and an outlet for some men who feel like they

0:38:28.644 --> 0:38:32.164
<v Speaker 2>don't have another way to like to make friends. Right,

0:38:32.324 --> 0:38:34.644
<v Speaker 2>you go to the poker room, and believe me, there

0:38:34.644 --> 0:38:36.844
<v Speaker 2>are some poker players who are very sociable and eloquent

0:38:36.884 --> 0:38:39.684
<v Speaker 2>and everything else, but like you want, Yeah, some guys

0:38:39.764 --> 0:38:42.724
<v Speaker 2>just want to play poker and talk about crypto and

0:38:42.804 --> 0:38:44.644
<v Speaker 2>sports and women.

0:38:45.004 --> 0:38:45.204
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:38:45.924 --> 0:38:48.804
<v Speaker 2>You know, that's one of the reasons why poker is

0:38:48.804 --> 0:38:51.844
<v Speaker 2>a popular hobby with with with men right, and might

0:38:51.924 --> 0:38:54.324
<v Speaker 2>encourage men who are like, Okay, this is my this

0:38:54.404 --> 0:38:56.524
<v Speaker 2>is my safe space a little bit when you do

0:38:56.524 --> 0:38:59.444
<v Speaker 2>see some of the more sexist behaviors, Oh for sure.

0:38:59.484 --> 0:39:03.004
<v Speaker 1>I mean I've said that often that you know, especially

0:39:03.044 --> 0:39:05.204
<v Speaker 1>at lower stakes, when you go to your local casino,

0:39:05.244 --> 0:39:08.804
<v Speaker 1>that's where I've experienced some of the greatest misogyny because

0:39:09.124 --> 0:39:11.484
<v Speaker 1>I think that people there are playing for different reasons

0:39:11.484 --> 0:39:13.164
<v Speaker 1>than when you get to like high stakes pros for

0:39:13.204 --> 0:39:15.084
<v Speaker 1>whom like this is a career, they're taking it like

0:39:15.124 --> 0:39:18.124
<v Speaker 1>it's their profession. And at those lower stakes you often

0:39:18.164 --> 0:39:21.044
<v Speaker 1>get people for whom like this is their socializing, right,

0:39:21.124 --> 0:39:23.364
<v Speaker 1>like this is there, like I just want to be

0:39:23.444 --> 0:39:25.284
<v Speaker 1>with the guys and like I don't want to watch

0:39:25.284 --> 0:39:27.724
<v Speaker 1>my fucking mouth. Like you're the one who chose to

0:39:27.764 --> 0:39:30.244
<v Speaker 1>sit at this table. If I want to, you know,

0:39:30.484 --> 0:39:34.044
<v Speaker 1>hit on the dealer and like talk about her boobs

0:39:34.084 --> 0:39:36.444
<v Speaker 1>and like mention your ass, that's fine, And if you're

0:39:36.444 --> 0:39:38.764
<v Speaker 1>not comfortable, you leave, right, I'm not going to change

0:39:38.764 --> 0:39:41.124
<v Speaker 1>my behavior. I'm here with the boys. I want to drink,

0:39:41.164 --> 0:39:43.524
<v Speaker 1>I want to have fun. So I think that there's

0:39:43.564 --> 0:39:47.844
<v Speaker 1>definitely something to that. And yeah, so I do think

0:39:47.844 --> 0:39:51.204
<v Speaker 1>that all of these factors matter when we're thinking about, like,

0:39:51.724 --> 0:39:54.484
<v Speaker 1>is there actually a crisis here? Right, So at the

0:39:54.564 --> 0:39:56.604
<v Speaker 1>end of the day and night, how would you weigh

0:39:56.724 --> 0:39:59.364
<v Speaker 1>all of this to say, you know, is there a

0:39:59.444 --> 0:40:02.204
<v Speaker 1>crisis or are these just kind of some issues where

0:40:02.204 --> 0:40:05.084
<v Speaker 1>men are winning some where they're losing. And it's true

0:40:05.084 --> 0:40:07.884
<v Speaker 1>of women as well, and we're just in a moment

0:40:07.884 --> 0:40:11.124
<v Speaker 1>of social change that's not necess necessarily gender related, which

0:40:11.164 --> 0:40:14.044
<v Speaker 1>is how I would kind of think about it, as

0:40:14.084 --> 0:40:16.724
<v Speaker 1>opposed to saying, yes, it's a crisis of masculinity, that

0:40:16.724 --> 0:40:18.404
<v Speaker 1>would be my answer. How would you answer it?

0:40:19.884 --> 0:40:22.804
<v Speaker 2>Well, look, I think most people are will tend to

0:40:22.804 --> 0:40:25.004
<v Speaker 2>treat everything as a crisis, whether or not it's actually

0:40:25.484 --> 0:40:30.924
<v Speaker 2>incret nor. The mental health numbers for young people are

0:40:31.044 --> 0:40:34.164
<v Speaker 2>very bad, and I think it has to constitute a crisis. Now,

0:40:34.164 --> 0:40:39.524
<v Speaker 2>they're worse for women than men. But look, okay, let

0:40:39.564 --> 0:40:41.204
<v Speaker 2>me be a little spicier here, right, I think there

0:40:41.284 --> 0:40:48.204
<v Speaker 2>is often implicit bias against men in how the village, right,

0:40:48.404 --> 0:40:50.564
<v Speaker 2>the kind of progressive communities talk about some of these

0:40:51.124 --> 0:40:53.844
<v Speaker 2>things potentially, Right, if you kind of get at the

0:40:53.924 --> 0:40:58.604
<v Speaker 2>question of, like to go back to self diagnosed mental health, right,

0:40:58.724 --> 0:41:02.044
<v Speaker 2>some people will say, Okay, women are higher and liberals

0:41:02.084 --> 0:41:03.884
<v Speaker 2>are higher. This isn't even bigger different talking way, Liberals

0:41:03.884 --> 0:41:06.484
<v Speaker 2>are higher than conservatives by a wide margin.

0:41:06.764 --> 0:41:06.924
<v Speaker 1>Right.

0:41:08.324 --> 0:41:11.604
<v Speaker 2>You know, they will say, well, that's because there is

0:41:11.644 --> 0:41:17.964
<v Speaker 2>a stigma against declaring mental health conditions, and that women

0:41:18.684 --> 0:41:21.724
<v Speaker 2>and concern or women and liberals don't suffer from the stigma,

0:41:22.084 --> 0:41:29.484
<v Speaker 2>whereas conservatives and men do, right, to which I would say, okay,

0:41:30.284 --> 0:41:36.084
<v Speaker 2>maybe there is something to stoicism basically, right, and you

0:41:36.084 --> 0:41:39.324
<v Speaker 2>know they're popular still assists books and podcasts and websites

0:41:39.324 --> 0:41:41.564
<v Speaker 2>and things like that where it's like, okay, you know,

0:41:41.644 --> 0:41:44.924
<v Speaker 2>maybe there's something to be said for like toughing it

0:41:44.964 --> 0:41:50.044
<v Speaker 2>out under pressure. Maybe this is actually an evolutionarily smart strategy, right,

0:41:50.084 --> 0:41:54.084
<v Speaker 2>Maybe it's okay to like compartmentalize things a little bit, right,

0:41:54.164 --> 0:41:55.564
<v Speaker 2>or you know, to kind of the example of what

0:41:55.644 --> 0:41:57.684
<v Speaker 2>was kind of half joking about before. We're like men

0:41:57.804 --> 0:41:59.764
<v Speaker 2>like to do stuff, women like to talk with one another,

0:42:00.124 --> 0:42:03.564
<v Speaker 2>you know. Now and then I'll see like some op

0:42:03.724 --> 0:42:06.324
<v Speaker 2>ed in the Atlantic or whatever. Right you Usually when

0:42:06.364 --> 0:42:08.444
<v Speaker 2>by women they're like, well, men don't know how to

0:42:09.484 --> 0:42:11.164
<v Speaker 2>good friendships. It's like fuck you if I want to

0:42:11.204 --> 0:42:14.244
<v Speaker 2>go out and watch a baseball game with my friend, Like,

0:42:14.284 --> 0:42:16.284
<v Speaker 2>don't tell me it's like any less valid than like

0:42:16.644 --> 0:42:18.644
<v Speaker 2>chatting chatting chatting pressure. Yeah.

0:42:18.724 --> 0:42:21.564
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, no. And by the way, I actually think there's

0:42:21.564 --> 0:42:24.044
<v Speaker 1>good data for both men and women that you bond

0:42:24.044 --> 0:42:26.684
<v Speaker 1>more through experiences that like that kind of stuff and

0:42:26.724 --> 0:42:28.844
<v Speaker 1>doing things together is just good for friendship period.

0:42:29.244 --> 0:42:31.844
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, people talk so much, you know, what's what's they

0:42:31.924 --> 0:42:34.124
<v Speaker 2>to talk about? Go do something?

0:42:35.084 --> 0:42:38.044
<v Speaker 1>But yeah, I mean, but it sounds like it sounds

0:42:38.084 --> 0:42:40.924
<v Speaker 1>like you're you're kind of on the same page as

0:42:40.964 --> 0:42:44.084
<v Speaker 1>I am when it comes to like, yeah, there are

0:42:44.084 --> 0:42:48.244
<v Speaker 1>obviously some issues happening, but it's less clear how much

0:42:48.284 --> 0:42:51.684
<v Speaker 1>of it is. Gender is kind of a crisis of

0:42:51.804 --> 0:42:55.564
<v Speaker 1>masculinity as such, right, because the mental health stuff that's

0:42:55.764 --> 0:42:59.204
<v Speaker 1>that's a very different crisis like that is not The data,

0:42:59.284 --> 0:43:02.404
<v Speaker 1>as you said, are not great for women either. So

0:43:02.444 --> 0:43:04.604
<v Speaker 1>I think there are lots of things going on. I

0:43:04.684 --> 0:43:06.444
<v Speaker 1>do think we need to there are lots of trends

0:43:06.484 --> 0:43:08.524
<v Speaker 1>that we should be paying attention to. But I think

0:43:08.564 --> 0:43:11.244
<v Speaker 1>the data inconclusive. When it comes to, oh, you know,

0:43:11.364 --> 0:43:14.404
<v Speaker 1>is there is there a crisis for one gender or another?

0:43:14.444 --> 0:43:17.324
<v Speaker 1>I think the answer there is no, there's not enough

0:43:17.684 --> 0:43:21.004
<v Speaker 1>evidence for that, but there are some undercurrents that we

0:43:21.004 --> 0:43:24.964
<v Speaker 1>should be paying attention to and monitoring, especially with the

0:43:25.004 --> 0:43:26.324
<v Speaker 1>next generation coming up.

0:43:27.364 --> 0:43:28.924
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, look, I mean I don't know. If you look

0:43:28.964 --> 0:43:33.964
<v Speaker 2>at like the male versus female employment population ratio, right,

0:43:34.004 --> 0:43:38.124
<v Speaker 2>it's dropped actually for everybody, in part because you have

0:43:38.204 --> 0:43:40.964
<v Speaker 2>like the population aging outside of prime working years, but

0:43:41.604 --> 0:43:44.444
<v Speaker 2>it's dropped quite a bit more for men. Right in

0:43:44.524 --> 0:43:47.524
<v Speaker 2>two thousand and five according to the Bureau of Labor

0:43:47.564 --> 0:43:52.524
<v Speaker 2>Cystix before before the site gets compromised by Trump. So

0:43:52.804 --> 0:43:57.524
<v Speaker 2>in two thousand and five, seventy three percent of men

0:43:57.604 --> 0:44:02.564
<v Speaker 2>aged twenty and older were employed. Now it's sixty seven percent. Right,

0:44:02.604 --> 0:44:04.764
<v Speaker 2>there's a drop off for women, but it's been less

0:44:04.804 --> 0:44:08.124
<v Speaker 2>from fifty eight to fifty six. It looks like here, right, So,

0:44:08.204 --> 0:44:11.644
<v Speaker 2>like I think, I think there's plenty of evidence for this, right,

0:44:12.004 --> 0:44:14.844
<v Speaker 2>quantitative and qualitative and everything and everything else.

0:44:15.524 --> 0:44:18.084
<v Speaker 1>But there's also evidence against it that we've talked about.

0:44:18.124 --> 0:44:20.204
<v Speaker 1>I don't think we need to rehash it once again.

0:44:20.204 --> 0:44:22.124
<v Speaker 1>But it sounds like you're coming out more on the

0:44:22.204 --> 0:44:24.684
<v Speaker 1>side of crisis. I'm coming out less on the side

0:44:24.684 --> 0:44:27.764
<v Speaker 1>of crisis. And I don't just don't like the crisis language.

0:44:27.804 --> 0:44:30.964
<v Speaker 1>I think that is I think that's way too alarmist,

0:44:31.164 --> 0:44:34.004
<v Speaker 1>and that is not how we should be approaching this.

0:44:34.164 --> 0:44:37.164
<v Speaker 1>I'm much more in the camp of stoicism, you know,

0:44:37.204 --> 0:44:41.244
<v Speaker 1>that's one of the underlying philosophies of my writing. So

0:44:41.804 --> 0:44:44.244
<v Speaker 1>I'm all for that. This has been fun, though, and

0:44:44.284 --> 0:44:47.124
<v Speaker 1>I think that it is interesting to look through these data.

0:44:47.404 --> 0:44:50.484
<v Speaker 1>It's a really tough topic one that I'm sure some

0:44:50.564 --> 0:44:52.884
<v Speaker 1>of these things will will be revisiting. But it also

0:44:53.004 --> 0:44:55.404
<v Speaker 1>it goes to show that, you know, assessing these sources

0:44:55.404 --> 0:44:59.884
<v Speaker 1>of risks, it's tough, right, and it's a really difficult

0:44:59.964 --> 0:45:03.444
<v Speaker 1>job for economists try to parse the numbers, and there's

0:45:03.444 --> 0:45:06.284
<v Speaker 1>so much going on that it's just not going to

0:45:06.324 --> 0:45:08.604
<v Speaker 1>be a clear story ever, which is why people can

0:45:09.484 --> 0:45:12.764
<v Speaker 1>right authoritative op eds on opposite sides of this insight

0:45:12.884 --> 0:45:17.084
<v Speaker 1>data that seems to support their point of view. So yeah,

0:45:17.084 --> 0:45:20.004
<v Speaker 1>this has been a fun show, Nate. I you know,

0:45:20.244 --> 0:45:22.964
<v Speaker 1>one of the other things about northern Europe where you

0:45:23.044 --> 0:45:25.724
<v Speaker 1>came from, is that there also is a lot more

0:45:25.724 --> 0:45:28.684
<v Speaker 1>gender equality there than there is in other parts of

0:45:28.724 --> 0:45:31.364
<v Speaker 1>the world. So curious if that has something to do

0:45:31.404 --> 0:45:33.444
<v Speaker 1>with the happiness levels as well. But maybe we can.

0:45:34.084 --> 0:45:36.284
<v Speaker 1>Maybe we can leave that for another show.

0:45:37.204 --> 0:45:38.724
<v Speaker 2>Look, I think if you look at the happiest countries

0:45:38.724 --> 0:45:41.164
<v Speaker 2>in the world, they're also smaller countries, right, I think

0:45:41.204 --> 0:45:42.004
<v Speaker 2>that absolutely.

0:45:42.044 --> 0:45:45.364
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, so many confounding factors. Yeah, lots and lots of

0:45:45.404 --> 0:45:48.924
<v Speaker 1>confounding factors there. And on that note, Nate, I hope

0:45:48.924 --> 0:45:51.444
<v Speaker 1>you have a lovely week, and let me invite you

0:45:52.124 --> 0:45:55.444
<v Speaker 1>to dinner so that we can talk, because I'm female

0:45:55.564 --> 0:45:57.364
<v Speaker 1>and you know I like to I like to bond

0:45:57.404 --> 0:46:00.204
<v Speaker 1>over talking and good food. So let's get a dinner

0:46:00.204 --> 0:46:01.084
<v Speaker 1>from the calendar.

0:46:01.284 --> 0:46:03.404
<v Speaker 2>You know, maybe go to a Yankees game, Maria, you

0:46:03.404 --> 0:46:04.204
<v Speaker 2>can get dinner there.

0:46:04.324 --> 0:46:07.204
<v Speaker 1>Okay, all right, I will. I will go to a

0:46:07.284 --> 0:46:16.924
<v Speaker 1>Yankees game, Nate, because I am a good friend. Let

0:46:17.044 --> 0:46:18.964
<v Speaker 1>us know what you think of the show. Reach out

0:46:19.004 --> 0:46:23.124
<v Speaker 1>to us at Risky Business at pushkin dot fm. And

0:46:23.244 --> 0:46:25.364
<v Speaker 1>by the way, if you're a Pushkin Plus subscriber, we

0:46:25.404 --> 0:46:28.124
<v Speaker 1>have some bonus content for you that's coming up right

0:46:28.164 --> 0:46:29.124
<v Speaker 1>after the credits.

0:46:29.324 --> 0:46:32.564
<v Speaker 2>And if you're not subscribing yet, consider signing up for

0:46:32.764 --> 0:46:34.924
<v Speaker 2>just six ninety nine a month. What a nice price.

0:46:35.284 --> 0:46:37.924
<v Speaker 2>You get access to all that premium content and ad

0:46:38.084 --> 0:46:40.884
<v Speaker 2>for listening across Pushkin's entire network of shows.

0:46:41.564 --> 0:46:44.644
<v Speaker 1>Risky Business is hosted by me Maria Kanikova.

0:46:44.324 --> 0:46:46.684
<v Speaker 2>And by me Nate Silver. The show is a co

0:46:46.764 --> 0:46:50.644
<v Speaker 2>production of Pushkin Industries and iHeartMedia. This episode was produced

0:46:50.644 --> 0:46:54.404
<v Speaker 2>by Isabelle Carter. Our associate producer is Sonia Gerwit. Sally

0:46:54.444 --> 0:46:57.484
<v Speaker 2>Helm is our editor, and our executive producer is Jacob Goldstein.

0:46:57.964 --> 0:46:59.164
<v Speaker 2>Mixing by Sarah Bruger.

0:46:59.564 --> 0:47:00.764
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much for tuning in.