Andrew Yang Still Wants To Give You $1,000

Offline is brought to you by Thrive Market.

Simplify your grocery routine with Thrive Market.

Its membership based online grocery platform

eliminates the hassle of traditional shopping

by letting you filter curated products

by your specific dietary needs and wellness goals,

delivering exactly what you need right to your door.

Thrive Market restricts 1,000 plus ingredients,

no stressing over labels or googling every additive.

Every product is curated, organic, and non-GMO brands

vetted before they ever hit the site.

90 plus dietary filters mean the label reading

is already done for you.

High protein, low sugar, GLP1 friendly, gluten-free,

die-free, and more.

The in-app barcode scanner finds a healthier swap

for almost anything in your pantry.

Great for summer party clean outs.

At $5 a month, the membership pays for itself.

Most members make it back in their first two orders.

No pre-order delivery fees, service charges, or tip-math.

One annual cost.

They have some great, they're popcorns good.

It's called lesser evil popcorn.

Love that.

They have simple mills crackers, which are delicious.

They've got primal kitchen sauces.

If you're into that, they also have some fantastic tortilla chips.

If you're ready to build your summer cart,

join Thrive Market with my link,

thrivemarket.com slash offline.

For $20 off your first three orders, plus a free gift.

That's thrivemarket.com slash offline.

If you're running a small business,

the last thing you need is enterprise-size software costs.

That's why Autodesk builds solutions for the way small teams

actually work.

With Autodesk for small business,

it's easier to find the right Autodesk tools

without adding extra complexity.

And now, Autodesk Flex starts at just $99,

giving you access to more than 100 Autodesk products

on a pay-as-you-go basis.

So whether you need design tools for one busy week

or one big project,

you can scale usage without paying for more than you need.

Everything you need, nothing you don't.

Go to Autodesk,

a-u-t-o-d-e-s-k.com slash small business.

SM-A-L-L-B-U-S-I-N-E-S-S today.

And see which Autodesk tools can help you take on more work

without locking into long-term costs.

If the world were like a sleep number mattress,

everything would adapt for your comfort.

Your coffee would never get cold.

Your flight would always be on time.

And your mattress would always respond to you

and your unique sleep needs.

Sleep number mattresses are designed to respond to your body

and shift with your changing life,

helping you fall asleep faster and stay asleep longer.

To experience a whole new world of comfort,

visit a sleep number store or go to sleepnumber.com.

Sleep number to a good life sleep.

We've all been conditioned to market logic.

We're like, look, we all have to be positive contributors

in the market economy.

And if you become obsolete, then you must rescale yourself.

And now everyone's going to become a welder,

electrician or whatever.

And it's bullshit.

You know, it was bullshit.

When we said the coal miners were going to be going to be going to be coaters.

It's bullshit now.

Like, it's bullshit.

When we said the factory workers are going to become nurses.

Like, it's bullshit now.

And when we say college grads are all going to become handymen.

Right.

Especially when 60% of college graduates are women.

And 2.8% of electricians are women.

So it's like, you look at that math and be like,

oh, what's going to happen here?

I'm John Favreau.

And you just heard from today's guest, Andrew Yang.

You might remember Andrew's 2020 presidential campaign,

where he came from nowhere to end up on the Democratic

primary debate stage, mostly based on his universal basic income

proposal to give every American a monthly $1,000 check.

He also spent that campaign warning people that AI was coming to take all of our jobs.

Well, here we are.

Yang was unsuccessful in that campaign, but it turns out he was ahead of his time on AI.

So when I heard he was in LA, I wanted to invite him on to talk about how he sees AI now,

whether he still thinks his old UBI proposal is the right way to deal with the coming job

displacement, and how our political system should deal with it all.

You might also remember that after his 2020 bid, Yang left the Democratic Party to start the

forward party, the goal of which is to elect independent minded candidates and reform the

electoral system. So I wanted to dig into that as well and get his thoughts on the Democratic

Party as it stands today. We also talked about his new book of essays, Hey Yang, where's my

$1,000? And for fun, why he's decided to join the cast of a new television game show, Nation's

Dumbest. It was a fun, freewheeling conversation that I hope you'll find interesting.

We'll get to it in a moment, but before we do, if you're not yet a paying member to Friends of the

Pod, what are you doing? In addition to it being the best way to support your favorite pro-democracy

independent media company, becoming a paying subscriber gets you access to this show Add Free,

as well as Add Free episodes of all your favorite podcasts. Plus, Friends of the Pod get access

to special behind the paywall shows like Podsave America, Only Friends, Dan Fyfer's Polar Coaster,

and our least offline podcast, terminally online. Head on over to Krika.com slash Friends to

subscribe today. Alright, here's Andrew Yang. Andrew Yang, welcome to offline. Hey, thanks for

having me. It's great to be here. Alright, I got to start with The Nation's Dumbest. Yes.

Because I have watched the first episode. What a place to start. So for people who don't know,

you are a contestant on a new reality slash game show called Nation's Dumbest, along with

celebrities like Carmen Electra, JoJo Siwa, Steve O from Jackass. It's currently airing Wednesdays

at 9 p.m. on Fox. Yes. So it's a series of trivia challenges where the winner each week gets

to leave the show. Yup. And then the last contestant standing is The Nation's Dumbest. Yes.

One episode has aired. You did not win the first week. Yes. I know you were close. You were

with one of the final two. Oh, thank you for watching. I know you can't divulge what happens

tonight Wednesday. The people will be hearing this episode on Sunday. How are you feeling about

doing the show now that the first episode has been out in the world? Well, thanks for asking, John.

I did get a bunch of text messages. Being like, hey, I'm seeing you on TV. This show that is

not your usual activity. I feel good about it because I made friends with ICT and Steve O

and Dr. Drew and Matt Liner and a bunch of the other contestants because you're trapped. It's

sort of an intense environment. Hilario Baldwin asked me, how have I been on a reality TV show before?

And then I said, only if you count running for president. And then I've got a laugh out of that.

So it's been a good experience. The best part is that I watched the first episode with my kids

who are 10 and 13. And it was one of the few things we've come together and watched as a family.

And the kids were like, oh, you didn't know that or you didn't know that. And so that was actually a joy.

I know. I watched with my six-year-old and he had a few answers.

Yes.

He knew. So the trivia is interesting. It's maybe like middle school level trivia, but some of it

is harder than you think. But there were questions that I got, but I was like, if I was there

under all the pressure, I could see myself like that. Well, thank you for understanding, John,

because it's true. You're surrounded by these flood lights and there are 20 camera people and they're like,

Yang, like, I'm going to describe this exercise. I don't want to, what is it? I'm just like, oh,

that was a hard one. Thank you for saying so.

Do you feel extra pressure on the show? Because I feel like-

I'm supposed to not be a dumbass.

I feel like they like sought you out to try to, I don't know, because they have,

you know, some people you don't expect to be that smart. You're on there and some of the other

contestants are like, you're the presidential candidate. You better get this, right?

Yeah. I certainly did feel some more pressure and I joke that my crew will be over if I wind up

being the nation's next officially, like losing to everybody. But I realized when so first,

they reach out to me and I have a call of the producers asking them why me for the show.

And they said, we're looking for a politician or journalist that people don't hate, which

was very flattering. And I think you'd be good for this. It's like, are you smarter than a fifth

grader? And I realized that if I turned it down, it was primarily because I would be uncomfortable

with it or daunted by it. I wouldn't be turning it down for the right reasons. You know,

I had some friends saying, don't do it. You're going to look dumb. It's going to be bad for your

image. And I was like, these are not excellent reasons to say no. It feels like I'd be

whistling out. So I said, yes, I definitely had second thoughts during some of the tapings

about that decision and major life decisions that preceded it. But now, watching as a family,

it's actually been really fun and different friends have gone to kick out of it.

Look, my co-host and co-founder, John Love, went on Survivor and only lasted one episode.

And that is the greatest gift of content to me. And to tell me, I would be the gift that keeps

I'm giving you shows. I'm going to over again. I have a serious question about it. I've heard

you say that one reason you thought the show was worth doing is that a primetime network audience

reaches a lot more people than political shows like this or at least a different audience than

those shows. How do you think about getting attention and what kind of attention is valuable,

or is it all valuable? Because as a presidential candidate who came out of nowhere and ended up

where you did, you clearly figured out something about how to capture people's attention at a time

when it's become an incredibly scarce resource. Yes, that's why I have a thriving consultancy on

that very thing. No, I don't. I wrote this and my sub-stack. I say yes to doing podcasts that are

much less cool than this one. I mean, there's like a real one. And I knew that a couple million

people, minimum, we're going to watch this Fox reality TV show. And when I ran for president,

it's funny, John. You know when you're on a needle mover and because people on the street will say

to you like, Hey, I saw you on this or I heard you on that and you're like, Oh, that one actually

reaches normal people. Yeah. And then there are a lot of things you do that just disappear

immediately. Right. And so I thought, well, look, this is going to get in front of millions of

people. And I've been in Iowa and Ohio and Michigan. And a lot of those people are not

tuning into like political news. Right. But that server at the diner could be like, Hey,

saw you on this, saw you on that. And so it felt valuable in that way. Because I think

one of the issues we have is the fragmentation, the media and the siloing and the polarization

everything else. So if you could reach someone just trying to relax at home with their kids,

like after a hard day's work, I thought that was a win. The thing you got attention for during

your 2020 presidential run was your prediction that automation and AI were coming for millions of

jobs. And people treated you like in your words, the magical Asian man from the future. Yes.

Now, you know, Dario Amote says it's Sam Altman, Bernie Sanders. Why do you think your

precedent warning wasn't taken more seriously back then? Well, I don't knock anyone or blame anyone

because back then saying artificial intelligence was going to come seemed kind of like terminator

you know, sci-fi. And now it's very much with us. I drove, drove, I came here in a way,

Mo, I don't know what that says about me. Anyone out here like a Ritter-N-I-Rin. I've

ridden him on, yeah. Yeah, yeah. And I feel like a lot of my stuff in 2019, 2020 aged very well,

a little bit too well. And when they, when I get asked now, it's like, Hey, how are you feeling?

I feel really, really despondent that we are in the place we are. I think this is going to be

terrible for many, many Americans. It's going to suck up tons of value into this super vortex

of AI, capital, data centers, processing power. And millions of Americans are going to look up

being like, what happened to my job? Why is my kid home from college and doesn't have a job that

requires a degree? And it makes me angry and sad on behalf of those families. So, I mean,

I'll be a little more light-hearted for a sec. So I was with Dave Chappelle who introduced me and said,

here's a guy who got everything right in 2020, but no one listened because he's Asian and then

got a laugh. I mean, I made the case that I made the best of my ability. And now the truth is that

I feel more troubled by our institutional inability to respond to the problems of our time.

Then I do anything else. Yeah. And especially true around AI. I mean, there is some debate still

over the scale of the job loss that's coming on this. We're going to debate it even as they

are fighting to disintegrate. Well, that's terrible. I think you said back in February,

you think that millions of white collar workers are going to lose their jobs in the next 12 to 18

months due to AI. The data tells a couple different stories. Yale's Budget Lab has been

tracking this monthly and they show 55,000 explicitly AI-attributed layoffs last year that represents

just under 5% of all layoffs. On the other end of the spectrum, Stanford finds employment for young

workers and AI exposed jobs down 13 to 20%. Even that larger number measures the problem in

tens of thousands. So if you think millions are coming, what are the numbers? What are the current

studies and measurements missing? Sure. The easiest people to fire those you haven't hired yet.

And I run a company, Noble Mobile. We have offline parties and people.

We come back to that. And Noble Mobile has 100% not hired junior engineers and data analysts

and other folks that we would have hired just a few months ago because of AI. And if you extrapolate

that through the economy, Noble Mobile is not a huge company, but there are millions of companies

like us who are each saying, you know what? I don't think I am going to hire that whipper snapper.

Instead, I'm going to have this person use AI tools. And that's happening 100%. I mean,

we're here in Los Angeles and I think there are combination of things that are happening to LA,

but I would argue that AI is one of the forces that's hurting media production and

like studios and folks who used to show up to work and like shooting these studio lots every day.

So I'm very happy to be the guy who's like, look, I think it's millions and then have that

conversation. And if someone comes to me later and is like, yo, Yang, it was really only 700,000.

Ha ha. Then millions weren't until five years from. Yeah, yeah. It's like, oh, you screwed up by 18

months. You know, because there are so many people who have been right there saying we're going to

decimate a bunch of jobs who now have changed their tune and they haven't changed their tune because

they actually think differently. It's because they've been told, yo, stop freaking people out.

Like people are very negative on AI that approval rating. I saw it was 26%. It's like incredibly

unpopular to different people through a mall tub of cocktail and shot at Sam Alman's house.

And so there genuinely was a coming together where there were like, we have to stop freaking people

out about job loss. Everyone then like the CEO of Goldman Sachs writes in New York Times,

not bad being like, everything's going to be fine. Meanwhile, I talked to someone internal

Goldman Sachs was like, oh, yeah, we're going to fire 40% of our own people. So, you know, who do

you want to believe? It aggravates me. So many people are full of it on this because they'll say

one thing in public and then you know the organization's doing something different.

Well, then the other argument you hear is, yes, the transition's going to be rough

and transitions between economic revolutions often are. But what happens is new jobs are created

where old jobs disappear. What's your level of confidence that that also happens this time around

or is this a transition that is different than industrial to post-industrial to information

economy and all that? Yeah, this time is different. It's going to be terrible. And

you know, I'm numbers that I can attach to these things if people are interested. I mean,

I'll throw one number out there. There may be 2.9 million Americans who work in call centers

doing customer service still to this day. And AI is going to do number on that. We can see that

very, very highly. And then imagining that those people are going to get re-skilled to what exactly?

Like no one really knows. And you know, you then look at the 2 to 3 million Uber drivers. Maybe

it's like a partial income, but still, I mean, I might be keeping their family afloat. Those are

the obvious ones. There are a bunch of in-obvious ones ripping through various orgs. And I,

I think the entire comparison industrial revolution is very, very limited in dumb, honestly.

I mean, but I hear it all the time. You're kind of straw-manning it too.

Because we've all been conditioned to market logic. We're like, look, we all have to be positive

contributors in the market economy. And like, if you become obsolete, then you must re-skill yourself.

And like, now everyone's going to become a welder, electrician or whatever. And it's bullshit.

You know, it was bullshit. When we said the coal miners were going to be going to code us. It's

bullshit now. Like, it's bullshit. When we said the factory workers are going to become nurses.

Like, it's bullshit now. And then we say college grads are all going to become handymen.

Right. Especially when 60% of college graduates are women. And 2.8% of electricians are women.

So it's like, you look at that math and be like, oh, what's going to happen here? It's like,

is everyone just going to change who they are so that you know? Yeah. You know, you can sense where I am

on this particular topic. Offline is brought to by Quince. Summer days are always a little more

relaxed. So when I open my closet, I find myself reaching for the same comfortable go anywhere

pieces again and again. That's why I keep coming back to Quince. They focus on well-made essentials

that naturally become those everyday staples you live in all season long. Quince is 100% European

linen pants and shirts are breathable easy to throw on in the summer upgrade your rotation needs.

Starting at just $34. Their teas are so soft, you'll never want to take them off and the

lightweight cotton sweaters are exactly what you want when summer nights cool down. In fact,

I just got a couple of their t-shirts and one of their lightweight cotton sweaters. I'm going to

vacation in Maine where it gets cold at night, but then it's warmed during the day. So I had the

sweater. The teas, both of them are like super soft, very affordable, really love Quince.

Everything at Quince is priced 50 to 80% less than similar brands. They work directly with

ethical factories and cut out the middlemen. So you're paying for exceptional quality, not brand

markup. Make your summer wardrobe easier. Go to Quince.com slash offline for free shipping on your

order and 365 day returns now available in Canada too. That's q-u-i-n-c-e.com slash offline for

free shipping and 365 day returns. Quince.com slash offline. Offline is brought to you by bookshop.org.

Local bookstores are the heart of our communities. Since 2020, Bookshop.org has funneled over

$40 million back into independent shops. They're a best for the world cup, Beacorp, and the unapologetic

anti-Amazon alternative, built to ensure your favorite local bookstore stays open forever.

Would you be surprised to learn that we're living in a resurgence of independent bookstores?

More than 1,000 new stores have opened in the last five years. Independent bookstores do more

than sell books they take care of and pour back into their communities creating safe spaces that

foster culture, curiosity, and a love of reading. When you purchase from Bookshop.org,

you're supporting more than 3,000 local independent bookstores so they can continue their essential

work. Now you can support local independent bookstores even when you read digitally with bookshop.org's

ebook app. Download the app for iPhone or Android. Every purchase financially supports local

independent bookstores. My favorite local independent bookstore, Shavalli is in Larchmont. Go there

all the time. Take the kids there. They like to look at some of the books there and then we buy

them with some bugs. I get to look at the books. It's like a really important store in the community

in our neighborhood where we live and we just love it. So I'm such a fan of independent bookstores

and bookshop.org really makes it easy to find one and support them. Use code offline tent to get 10%

off your next order at bookshop.org. That's 10% off at bookshop.org with code offline tent.

So the question is what to do about it. You've talked about how it's time to stop taxing labor

and start taxing AI. What does a taxing AI look like to you? Token tax, payroll tax,

equivalent, there's a bunch of different proposals out there. Yeah, I like a token tax. I think it's

very direct and measurable. I like a value added tax and where the only major economy that doesn't

have one. It's very hard to game your way out of a fewer major company. It would include AI

in the data centers and more and more value is going to flow towards these global tech companies

and we're not going to see meaningful tax revenue. So that's really the problem to solve. If you solve

that, then you can get more of the value into people's hands. I mean, the economy might be 31 trillion

dollars. Now AI is going to grow the top line. It's just the issue is that most people are not going

to feel those benefits in a meaningful way. So there are two mechanisms. One is how do you get the

tax revenue and number two, how does that family feel like it's going to benefit them? And do you think

so obviously your big proposal is universal basic income. Yes. $1,000 a month. Yeah, freedom

dividend might have to ratchet that up a little bit. That was going to say. So that was my next

question. What is UBI still the answer? Is it the only answer? If you're taxing these AI

companies now, then what do we do with it? We should distribute it quickly and broadly to the American

people. And I'll tell a story, which I don't think it's in my book, which I appreciate you listening to.

Of course. And have you written a book, John? I have. I thought so. I have. So did you get a note

from your publisher saying, Hey, AI wants to absorb your book into the board and they want to pay

you $2,500 for the privilege. Have you got? Did you get that yet? Unless someone got it that I didn't.

It might have been right before. Yeah. Not yet. So the point is that our data right now is getting

sold and resold for about $300 billion a year. And no American seeing a dime of that. AI models

are now the foundation of these multiple trillion dollar companies that are IPO-ing. And most Americans

are not going to see a dime of that unless they somehow get access to the IPO, etc. etc.

Yeah. And so having that value get returned to the American people, if you think about it in those

terms, actually very, very sensible. And it becomes increasingly necessary as all of this accelerates

would be my argument. I'm just trying to think of like how this actually works because right now,

a revenue of all of the AI companies combined is, you know, it's like what, few hundred billion

dollars globally that's right now. Yeah. And so the worry is that the value from the companies comes

after the jobs are gone, right? Totally. And again, that like, you know, so UBI that's your

old proposal that's 1,000 a month. That's like a what, $3 trillion proposal year.

Yes. It comes to a lot less than that because of existing benefits and a bunch of other things.

Right. But let's say order of magnitude like that, that's what we're talking about.

I think that's the kind of move that we should make. Right now, US GDP might be 84,000 ahead.

So if you think about something for each American to get, if you were to say 12,000 or 15,000,

that might sound like a lot of money. If you compare it to other things that we currently have

coming out of the government, but if you compare it to $84,000 in GDP per person with an up arrow

attached to it because of AI, you know, it's going to get to 90,000. It's going to get to 100,000.

So at what point do you go to Americans and say, okay, you know, 100,000 ahead, everyone's getting 15.

And that's going to help us manage the greatest economic and technological transformation

in the history of our species. Yeah. You know, like that is what we're looking at right now.

I understand the political argument for a universal program like this.

When we're talking a transformation of this scale and a problem this large,

do you worry that handing out, you know, $1,000 a month or a couple of thousand whatever it

scales up to, to people who are pretty wealthy is taking away resources that could be targeted to

helping people through this transition in other ways than just giving them cash or maybe it's

even giving people who need it more cash or maybe it's not even the level of the amount of money.

Maybe it's targeting it towards a specific group of people who are going to be more likely to be

displaced by AI than other people. Yes. All right. Check it out. Okay. If you look at our history,

the major other time where we saw this displacement was the trade adjustment assistance

TAA, which was meant to help the displaced manufacturing workers when we started

kicking their jobs to Asia, let's say. Yeah. And we were bad at actually targeting and delivering

that at that time when you could actually point to the town. In Ohio and say, okay, we're

gutting this factory. Let's try and help people. With AI, it would be very, very difficult to target

in any intelligible way because you know, you have a little company here, you have a big company there,

you have folks, you know, never being hired. And so when you start looking at the difficulty of

targeting and that any intelligent system is drawing in money from the big winners anyway,

whether it's through a value out of tax or an AI tax, then you don't care and using the most

extreme example. It's like if Jeff Bezos gets an extra 2000 a month, but we're bringing in,

you know, tens of millions of dollars or more from either his company's activities or him personally,

then you don't care about sending the dude $2,000, especially if it eases the administration problem

and it makes it seem fair, politically pletable, appealing to folks. We're just shitting at targeting

the gains. And if you start trying to target, you end up in a TAA-type problem, I'd urge anyone

who thinks that we can do this to go look at the history of what happened with the TAA program

because it did not go well. And that was easier to identify them when we're looking at now.

Yeah, you lose efficiency and it's just harder to target. It's really sad when you actually see

what happened with that program, the Displaced Manufacturing Workers in Ohio and Michigan,

where you had a giant waiting list of people to sign up and they never end up getting benefits.

Then even if they did get through the program, the impact wasn't what people hoped for.

Why tax and a check rather than ownership, giving everyone ownership of the AI companies in the upside?

I'm open to anything. I know that's some of the proposals too.

Everyone gets a little piece of the upside and I don't know what you thought about that.

Yeah, no, no. I'm open to it. I think that one of the fears I have, I will say, and one reason I love

starting a conversation with something like Universal Basic Income, is that let's say that people

via the government now become shareholders of some of these companies. And then we can all be like,

yay, we got shares. And then the stewards of that are like, okay, we're going to chill and see and

wait. And then I get rid of your jobs, but then I'm still not feeling any benefits even though

technically, like my government, because you understand it. We have two problems in this current

environment. One is where is the value flowing in and then how is it coming back out?

Then the other option that's sometimes seen as an alternative to UBI is redistributing work,

right? And not just money. So there's job guarantees, short of work week, work sharing,

like they're done in Germany, wage insurance. What do you think about all this?

Again, I'm very, very open-minded. And I love a shorter work week. Love that. The one I dislike the

most is something like a job guarantee, because I think you wind up with bullshit, make work,

job, and people justifying. Yeah, it's like, oh, so my joke with Bernie, we were talking about in 2020,

and you know, used for jobs guaranteeing us for universal based gain coming. My joke was,

why not distribute gray overalls while you're at it? And like a pickaxe is like, that's where this

lands. But I understand the spirit of it. And I do have an Asian joke here, which is like, I'm Asian,

so I love work. I love people working. I just won't think people ideally are creating work for

themselves, starting initiatives, organizations, nonprofits, working in their faith community,

like doing things that they want to do and that they're passionate about. The big challenge of

this era, John, is trying to define an economy around human flourishing at a time when our

labor will not be meaningful in terms of economic output. And that's a very hard thing to actually

accept. Well, then it is. But then I think that the problem is so big that, I mean, unless we are

giving people a 70, 80,000 year salary through UBI, which is incredibly expensive. Do you see a

future where no one's working? Where 90% of the labor is automated and AI is doing it? How

how severe do you think it gets? Yes. So I'm 51. And what I say to people is that I'm at an age where

if I don't get dumber in a given month, it was a good month. Meanwhile, AI might get twice as smart

during that month. So saying that, oh, if I take this course or do this, I'm going to be able to

compete as stupid. It's like the goalposts are just sprinting away from me by the time I even get

to the starting block. Like it's crazy. Right. So then after you accept that, then it becomes a

question of, okay, like how do we make it so that people have a place to go for structure,

purpose, fulfillment, community values, training, you know, when I wake up in the morning, what am I

going to do? Right. And to me, the only satisfactory vision is that we make it so that I have a place

to go based upon things that AI want to do and be that we need more of and that three things that

most of us can agree on in this dimension would be health and wellness, education, nurturing and care

taking, and arts and creativity. Okay. These are three things that most people can look at and be like,

okay, like I won't completely eliminate the need for those. Well, here's the thing is that AI

could, for example, do the art much better than I could. But that is not necessarily the point.

Like, like we're going to redefine the economy of personal fulfillment. Yes. Like these are things

that we have decided we value as a society. Because right now, we're in this most dangerous of times,

which is what we actually value as a society is just getting shit done, capital efficiency,

and we've all brainwashed ourselves into, you know, like, hustle mode and like, like, like, grindy,

like, you know, I'm going to ask, you know, all the stuff. And then if someone falls by the

wayside, we have mock sympathy for them for like a split second, be like, oh, it sucks for them

and then be like, oh, well, you know, they're turned away. Meanwhile, in this case, AI is going to get

many, many more of us and it has nothing to do with my intellect or education or work ethic or

character. It doesn't matter, you know, it's like it's better than me. And so what we have to do is

we have to say, okay, AI is going to do a lot of where Enroboz is going to do a lot of work

very powerfully and effectively. So what do we care about? What do we want more of what do we

want to spend our time doing? So one of the illustrations, I suppose, is that at this point,

we should all be getting paid to go to the gym. You know, it's like, it's sort of us paying, like,

we should be getting paid. And then the personal trainer who's there, all energetic,

whipposent to shape and whatnot should also be getting paid. Yeah. And they could be paid in

wellness box. And then they could take those wellness books and then, you know, use it on a

salad or use it to go to the game or use it and they could get like recognized for the wellness

box and like, we could get wellness books showing up. And who's paying us the wellness box? So what

we need to do, in my opinion, is build a multi-variant human-centered economy around multiple pursuits.

And then if you have this wellness box as an example, the wellness box would be monetized by

the federal government. If I was in charge, I could be like, look, there's an exchange rate,

a whole thing. You can take wellness books and like, turn them into stuff. You can go to Chipotle,

like, you can live great on the wellness box. Yeah. You can live well on the education and

nurturing books. And the example I used on the trails that we have an autistic son. My wife is at

spent years at home with him. The market economy values that at zero. We all know that's perverse

and that's immensely valuable. And so she could be getting like these nurturing

books. I mean, we'd never better name. They'd all be called Yang Bucks, honestly. Not now.

And then arts and creativity of someone paints mural or goes and performs live, which I love,

like the, you know, the cafe or whatnot. Instead of counting on the charity of strangers,

which like, you know, it's right. I always, by the way, give money to any musician I pass

because I have a reputation uphold. And I'm like, that's the best of it.

Could be a camera. But the government would say, look, this new currency is real. Everyone would

doubt it at first. They'd be like, oh, like, it's bullshit. But then after you have a bunch of

people taking action on it and then realizing that they can carry a balance and do these things and

even like trade it with each other and do it, you could stimulate billions and billions of

dollars worth of activity in each of these dimensions that could occupy millions of Americans

very happily and do it at a fraction of what it would cost if you were, you know, paying people

in USD. Okay. This is like a sort of utopia that's sort of on the other side of the transition,

right? Like, say we could get this. Well, by the way, we have to get there as soon as

fucking possible. Well, that's what I'm saying. But because this chasm in the middle is going to

consist of us all freaking out our kids coming home, getting depressed and dysfunctional,

feeling they don't have a place in the world and eventually we start killing each other. Well,

that's not already there. No, that's what I was getting at is that like the transition, regardless

of what's on the other side of the transition, is the most precarious part here because of politics,

right? Yeah. And, you know, 80% of Americans want more regulation. You've got politicians from

Bernie Sanders to run DeSantis attacking data centers. I was thinking about something,

my old boss, Barack Obama said to the New Yorker a couple of months ago, he said he's like working on

a, he's been working on helping like lawmakers come up with like AI agenda that's not simply a

knee jerk, screw the billionaires in tech thing because the genius out of the bottle and he said he

worries that without a proactive agenda, some of the populist impulses could go in bad directions

that don't actually help people or reinforce some of the anti-democratic trends we've seen.

As usual with him, he's sort of understating the issue here, but it does seem like this could

supercharge all of the political trends we have seen over the last decade in ways they're

quite destructive. And I wonder how you think about sort of navigating that challenge?

Yeah, the path of least resistance is disintegration, conflict, strife, hatred, like the whole nine.

And I am Asian and so one of the things I joke about with my community is like look,

guys we all know that when the wheel of hate turns it will, like, you know,

and us like relatively early on the list. And so we have to try and keep the country strong and

whole and together and keep us from turning on each other. I think it's a noble ambition that

Brock is laying out. But right now let's take wealth inequality as something I think we can all

agree is driving nastiness and polarization and anger and frustration. AI is going to supercharge

at all. I mean, anyone saying you can see that. And so what you'd have in the best of worlds would be

government acting as a counterweight, bringing the folks to the table and saying, look guys,

pitchforks are going to come. Let's try and figure this out. We don't all want to be using

Chinese AI and other even AI joke I'm going to share. It's fun. How far behind the US is China

and AI? How far? 12 hours because they wake up and see whatever we did.

All right, so it's good. All right, so we need to have a grand bargain type approach. And even the

folks I know at the AI companies, the argument is like, look guys, this is just enlightens self-interest

because even though you're sitting on stacks of money, bulletproof cars and private security and

like the bunker and the rest of it, it sucks. It's terrible. So how about you give some back and

stay above ground? Really the argument. And some of them are like, yeah, yeah, down with that. Others

have just said, no, it's all going to shit. I'm just going to monetize. But you have to try and

take advantage of the first group as quickly as you can. We'll talk about politics. You were a

Democrat for most of your adult life. You ran for president as one. You left the party in October

of 2021. What in your view is so wrong or broken with the Democratic Party that you didn't think it

was worth changing it from the inside? It was the math. Daniel, that looked at it was like, hey,

you know, you have maybe 30 of the 50 states where the Democratic brand is quite underwater,

negative. And by the way, it's got a lot worse since 21. And so if you want some kind of genuinely

dynamic solutions oriented environment, you need someone like Dan Osborne to become Senator,

Adam Nebraska. By the way, Union guy, you know, like military veteran pro choice, like, you know,

very reasonable. I think would be like a fine US Senator, you know, and got 47% in Nebraska as an

independent force. The Republicans to spend $10 million in a deep red state. So I'm sure they enjoyed

it. I'm sure they enjoyed yeah, popping up debt Fisher. So I looked at the math and the map.

And I said, the two party system is going to get worse, not better. It's going to become more

polarized and dysfunctional and not somehow right itself. And so the only way out would be to try

to have a positive independent political movement that can compete in ways that, you know,

a traditional partisan couldn't. And I experienced versions of this, John. So I'm walking around

Iowa and say, hey, I'm running for president. And the waitress at the diner says very, very intrigued,

like, oh, really? Like what party? And I said, Democrat. And then she recoiled and was like, oh, it's

like I just spread it horns. And I was like, wait a minute. Like, aren't I like, aren't I for you? I

at least that's a way I was brought up. So Dan Osborne's running again.

Yo Seth Bonnar running in Montana, who was advised by John Tester, the last Democratic Senator

from Montana, who's like, hey, that he, I think his direct quote was the Democratic brand is poison

in Montana. So run as an independent. And now Seth is raised seven figures and like,

poised to be potentially competitive. So it's up to them that Democrat is still in the race.

Yeah. So we're in the whole thing out. Right, right. Well, and that is one of the points here is that

like a lot of folks listening to this podcast think Democrat and then any third parties of spoiler,

but then if you look at a place like Montana, it really could be the reverse where you Seth Bonnar,

one on one with the Republican, who by the way, in this case is like not exactly a strong Republican,

just like some weird last minute replacement job. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Like you can compete there.

But if you throw a D next to the candidate's name, you probably can't compete because, you know,

and you can feel how you want to feel about that. But it's just math. It's practical.

And so the question is, how can you make more of these environments genuinely dynamic and

competitive? And I saw that in 2021 when I was just doing the research and I'd urge anyone to

take a look at some of the numbers, the electoral map, cherrymandering, number of competitive

districts, Senate races, et cetera. And it's very hard for me to imagine a world where the

Democratic Party, as it currently stands, gets a durable governing majority, solves all the problem,

turns all the red states blue. It's actually trending the other direction because a lot of

the biggest blue states are losing population. And so congressional seats are then drifting the

other direction. More and more rural areas are, I mean, I can stop there. People kind of get it.

You're right about the brand and the math. The challenge I see is like, I love that, you know,

Dan Osborne can run in Nebraska instead of the Democrat. And then a bunch of people will think,

oh, because there's not the D attached to his name that maybe I'll give him a shot even though most

of his, all of his positions, he could fit comfortably within the Democratic Party. Yeah, a whole

lot of most of them, right? Yeah. And even all of them, he would still be, he wouldn't be kicked out,

right? Well, by the way, his big break from the party in terms of like the voters of Nebraska,

is he was like, look, I'm a pipe fitter. I'm a mechanic. I have tattoos on my arms. I don't

even own a business suit. And like, I think that politicians should wear a NASCAR jacket with the

names of all their corporate sponsors on them, right? Because that's what's going on in Washington.

And I was like, yeah, so, so like that's, you know, and that happens to be genuine in dance case.

But I agree with you on his policy positions. But the challenge is at some point,

Republicans are going to get smart to this and figure out that if someone's not running with the

D next to their name, but they have a lot of the D positions that they're just a Democrat trying

to fool you by shedding the party's brand. And like, it's, do you see the forward party as a party

that people join and support because they see their political beliefs reflected in the party

or like some third parties? Is it just a home for people who hate the other two parties, the two

major parties? We are political infrastructure for positive, principled independence. But what is

that? What positions do what what what beliefs? Because everyone has like, and you know this,

right? Like it's a a Seth Bodner and a Dan Osborne has a different platform than a Bloomberg.

Right? There's like the socially liberal, fiscally conservative independent. There's the culturally

conservative, economically populous independent. Are they both have a home in the forward party? Is

it just everyone who's not completely ideological? Will we left and ideologically right?

Well, we have principles around being data driven solutions oriented rule of law.

Listen to vote totals, like you know, hear the constitutions and the basics. But it's also

collaborate with people from either party or any party. Like don't demonize, like don't villainize.

And I think those three figures you named, you know, obviously Dan Osborne and Seth Bodner are sure.

But we'd be perfectly happy with Mike Bloomberg as well, even though he might differ very

significantly from Dan Osborne and various economic issues. The point we would make is that right now

our current system is not going to deliver what the majority of Americans want. And so how do we

get ourselves to a place where it will? And in my view, that starts with having, you know, like

dynamic US Senate that in this case might have two or three principled independence from South

Dakota, Montana and Nebraska. Instead of it being, like run by in this case, the Republican party.

And I think that's more achievable than most Americans realize that if you had one or two of these

independent Senate candidates break through, it would be a very, very big deal for our national

politics. By the way, to your point, I just want to say, you know what, the Republican spent that

10 million on in Nebraska saying Dan Osborne's a Democrat. So to your point, that's like the attack

line. It's like he says he's an independent. He's lying to you. He's just a Democrat. And then,

you know, anyway, but it also, it works in Nebraska because the different, like the Democrats were

bound out or it's bound out this right, like we're not going to have this. We're not going to

have a situation we had in Montana, right? The situation in Montana is because Republicans are all

you know, enthralled to Trump. And it's a Trump party and ever and they're all cohesive. And so

they're at least for now, they're one party. And in Montana, the Republicans are going to win

because the Democrat won't drop out and sets in the race. And so then they split the vote,

the Republican wins. And it's like, whose fault is that? Is it the independent candidate,

the Democratic candidate? Both. Everyone for not being able to figure it out. Like I'm just wondering

if both the Democratic Party and the forward party are put into disadvantage because the Republican

party has unity and can take that partisan Republican voters, but other voters who might be sick

of the Democratic Party brand interested in being more independent will split the vote and then

it will end up to the benefit of Republicans. So Dan Osborne being one on one with Deb Fisher is

not a one time thing. In 2022, just two years before, Evan McMullen got a one-on-one with Mike Lee

right because the Democratic candidate in Utah was like, hey, look, I'm going to give it to

Evan. I got her shot. Right. And that Democrat like, you know, I think new Evan like it was kind

of co-alitional. It was like a good energy and a good vibe. In South Dakota, Brian Banks, who ran

for US Senate as a Democrat in the last cycle and that was running as an independent said, hey,

I will agree with the Democratic candidate that whichever one of us is polling weaker gets out

and supports the other. And you know, like, right. So the other thing I'm going to just say

from the starting gate is like, no one thinks Montana is going to be competitive in the absence of

like an independent candidate. Same with South Dakota. I mean, these are just red blotches on the

map to the vast majority of folks. But if you get to those states, you realize that it's not like

everyone loves the Republicans there. And it's not like everyone loves their electeds in DC. I mean,

a lot of them hate that. So it's like, like if you decide you just want to play the current game

then you're just giving the Republicans uncontested wins in various places. And so at least if Seth

runs and they can make like you can work it out with the them. Yeah, but these you have a chance

like we're introducing possibilities where there would be none otherwise.

Offline is brought to you by three day blinds. There's nothing I'd rather be talking about right now

than blinds blinds blinds blinds. There's a better way to buy blinds shades shutters and drapery

and it's called three day blinds. They are the leading manufacturer of high quality custom window

treatments in the US. We can shop for almost anything at home. Why not blinds three day blinds

has local professionally trained design consultants who have an average of 10 plus years of experience

that provide expert guidance on the right blinds for you and the comfort of your home. Just set up

an appointment and you'll get a free no obligation quote the same day DIY projects can be fun. But

measuring and installing blinds can be a big challenge. The expert team of three day blinds handles

all the heavy lifting. They design, measure and install so you can sit back, relax and leave it

to the pros. Also three day blinds by the way even before their response or my first move to L.A.

Got three day blinds and because I don't know how to install blinds or really pick them out.

Someone came, they helped me out, walked me through the whole process step by step and it was fantastic.

Three day blinds has been in business for over 45 years and they've helped over two million

people get the window treatments of their dreams so they are a brand you can trust. Right now get

quality window treatments that fit your budget with three day blinds head to three day blinds.com

slash offline for their buy one get one 50% off deal on custom blinds shades and drapery for a free

no charge no obligation consultation just head to three day blinds.com slash offline one last time

that's buy one get one 50% off when you head to the number three D.A.Y. blinds dot if you're running

a small business the last thing you need is enterprise size software costs. That's why auto desk

build solutions for the way small teams actually work with auto desk for small business. It's easier

to find the right auto desk tools without adding extra complexity and now auto desk flex starts

at just $99 giving you access to more than 100 auto desk products on a pay as you go basis.

So whether you need design tools for one busy week or one big project you can scale usage without

paying for more than you need everything you need nothing you don't go to auto desk a uto dbsk.com slash

small business smal l l b u s i n e s s today and see which auto desk tools can help you take on more

work without locking into long term costs. Hey it's james bagg from the psychology of your 20s in a

very special episode brought to you by aligning university. I ask Dr. Sandra Espinosa what does therapy

actually do from the science behind therapeutic change to how clinicians approach the work to why

therapy can feel so difficult to access or even stigmatized in some families and communities. We

pull back the curtain on the therapeutic process and explore what meaningful growth actually looks

like. I didn't go to therapy until my mid late 20s I think it was almost and it was a career that

I was pursuing and I was still nervous. I am a much better wife, daughter, friend, mom because I'm

a therapist. What makes a therapist? We want to hear your story. I tell my my clients you are the

expert in your story and I am going to be a witness to that. You can listen to this full episode

of the psychology of your 20s on the iHot radio app or wherever you get your podcasts.

So this is all sub presidential level. What do you think about sort of 28 and the field that

the democrats might have in 28? What's your scouting report on the bench? Oh so fun. Are you a

sports guy? I have too much politics in my head. So I don't know.

Space for all the sports stuff that I used to. I do like sports but I get asked a lot about the

candidates and I know most of them I'd say in the democratic field. I think it's going to be

governor who's not part of the Biden administration is my feeling and so that gives you

Gavin Newsom, Josh Shapiro, Wes Moore, JB Pritzker, Gretchen Whitmer if she decides to run. I think

there might was there news on her. I don't know. I mean I thought what she's doing. She kind of

rules it out and then sort of walked it back but it seems like she's not going to.

Yeah so I think Americans are eager to move on from the Biden years.

Oh I shouldn't laugh. By the way like I want everyone to rewind the tape a little bit and I think

you were in on this which I appreciate about you because you have something called a brain.

So if people keep up with me, I've not been a Trump fan from the get. I decided to run for

president because Trump won in 2016. I was like oh my god, things are going to get more fucked up.

It's time for me to get off my catch and do something about this. Fast forward to 2024

Joe Biden's running and I was like this is a catastrophe and so I get behind my guy Dean Phillips,

go up to New Hampshire being like hey it's primary time. Let's go Dean. The new Dean scream.

And watching the knives come out for Dean like really really saddens me to this day

where this dude tried to save the party from itself really. It's like come on. Watching all the

Democrats a fall over themselves to get out of Joe's way and be.

Shiv Dean in the way they did. It was just such a calamity and missed opportunity for the country.

I mean a lot of these governors I just listed would have been great candidates in 2024. If they

like you got a primary and I think that's where the Democratic Party failed all of us.

I'm angry about it every day to this day. And Dean lost his seat in Minnesota and this is a guy

who like you know three-term member of Congress from a competitive district. Lost his

you know like like I mean I was I'm going to say like lost his reputation. I'm not sure that's

true because his reputation kind of got vindicated but there was like a parade of hit pieces and

his colleagues being like oh like this guy terrible. I'm like what are you talking about? Like this guy

did what we wish everyone did which is like put his career on the line for the country.

Well I will say so I was very much on the like I don't know about this. This is not a great idea

for Biden to run and I was way more vocal. We had Dean on and gave Dean a hard time but not

because it wasn't like other people in the party was like how dare you run against him because my

frame to Dean was like yeah this is pretty this is pretty scary that we're doing this and it's like

nice that someone's actually challenging him but like what are you off like what's the what's the

choice what's you and I feel like it's indicative of a larger issue we have which is we're we're all

very good at talking about what's bad or what we don't like but you can't beat something with nothing

so me done how are we talking about it? I think that in the Democrat I say this for the whole party

right? Yeah I know and I worry as much as like I think that and I know you have thoughts on

Kamala Harris as well but like you know she only had 104 days and all that but it was very um

okay what do I have to like I want to win I want to help the party there's so much pressure on me

which like I totally get but it was like okay what do I need to say? And and I although the

governor's you talked about too I sort of blame all of them too because they could have run they

could have run before the debate they could have not endorsed her and forced a primary afterwards

there was no time so they didn't I understand why but like it was really a collective

problem here where at the end of the day you need to if you're going to run for president and you

need to and we need someone who runs for president who's like going to be for something and you

understand immediately why they're running for president. I'm with you and I do remember you being

one of the more lucid voices on like the yo guy is like well I like it is is this really the best

approach uh you know um so what about you you're gonna run uh I am I know you're you see so you

sound like you're leaning towards it when I when I've heard you know oh that's good I guess I mean

she leaning forward Andrew Yang now I'm I'm I did not run in 2024 because I did not think I would

be constructive or helpful or generative what I did do in 24 is go to New Hampshire and South

Carolina and try and help Dean Phillips force a democratic primary I thought that was my highest use

and uh it made me sad when uh you did it something above I ever just by having de-naught I mean

you know so yeah we were like oh you must not come on because you've done something horrible yeah

no I mean he he was like uh you know freaking again third-term member congress vice chair of the

Democratic Law and he's real dude yeah um so uh so I thought that was my highest use and the the

question now for me is like what is my highest use uh you know I um try and ask myself that's like

I you know like I have two missions like you know how can I do the most good and two how do I stay

married and those like the two main things at that uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh uh

what if I had any give a day just through my head um yeah um make sure my kids still like me yes um

so really the the major question for me is I'm not always seeing things playing out and like how can

I be helpful if you did run would you run as a democrat you know um I have a lot of respect for a

lot of the candidates who are currently in the field but like you know like I can't say to you what I

said earlier and then spend like you know the last number of years trying to build a political

alternative and saying you know I think the answer is actually it's the Democratic Party again

well I guess you're I mean the thing that would worry me is I think I mean you know the history

you know the history of third-party candidates on a presidential level like the system just makes

it impossible for them to win Ross Perogat what 18% of the vote 90% of vote so get zero electoral votes

the only one who's ever gotten the electoral votes is George Wallace because it was he was a

factional candidate in one geographic area so though if you do rewind the tape I think Abraham Lincoln

technically was a third-party candidate yeah like that that um yeah that that um is also part of our

history but um what you're asking right now John is the sort of thing that someone like me weighs

it's like you know because I like I consider myself a do-goodter like I want to do positive things

and so you have to figure out hey is this going to have a positive impact right one of the reasons

I ran for president in 2020 is that I thought I'd have a positive impact when I lose it's like look

I'm gonna let people know about the fourth industrial illusion an AI mainstream universal basic

income as something we need hopefully accelerate the end of poverty in our time because poverty

we can alleviate it if we just decide to do so I mean it's fricking madness that we haven't

um we are the richest most advanced society in the history of the world and AI is going to give us

an unprecedented in human history chance to flip from scarcity to abundance that's like the only

big opportunity in this time like is it gonna make us crazy is gonna decimate our jobs like yes

but but it could also flip us to abundance and so that is the project of this time and I

thought I could help us in 2020 moving that direction winner lose and when I was on programs like

this if someone was like come on yeah like do you really think you're gonna win then I have to be

like of course because you know if you say no then you're a joke and like people blah blah blah blah yeah

so I what I said to and I don't know this you specifically but what I'd say to people is like

there are multiple versions of victory um if I thought that there were multiple versions of victory

I'd be much more enthused about running um because the reality is I'm unlikely to actually be president

and I'm also not someone who's terribly motivated by that though um in part because you know

I'm like the Asian like son of immigrant so like I'm gonna be president someday that's not a

thing that was happening in the Yang household it's it's it's more you know it's like I love this

country uh can I help it um are there any democrats and the potential candidates now that you think

come close to getting the AI story and the crisis and solutions like is anyone talking about it

in ways that you find compelling I think a lot of them get it the the question is what are we going

to do about it in what time frame and and that's something no I'm more dubious of truly because what

one of the great diseases of this time john is that uh the political incentives and what happens

to most people are now like more unrelated than they've been in our lifetime you know what I mean

yeah and and so um my concern is that someone's going to win and then have various pressures coming in

and then do some of the things maybe and it is all assuming by the way that we are fair elections

institutions hold up and like a lot a lot of you know like things you have to um hope hold um but

I'm someone who thinks that we should be distributing money to human beings right now like I

I was sincere in 2020 it's like look at a minimum we should be uh adopting a negative income tax

and a revved up child tax credit so that more money is flowing to the needy among us and the

the number show it pays for itself yeah um and I'm not sure that's going to happen

with even some of my favorite people in this field um winning yeah uh I do like some of them though

yeah I want to end on one question that's just because it's the most offline topic of all uh you

now run a phone company noble mobile uh whose entire pitch is that it pays you to use your phone

less it is very offline like explain the model and the idea behind it and you you even have offline

parties which uh you referenced earlier yes offline parties where we uh put your phone in a bag

and then you have to make eye contact with people we actually had someone get someone's phone number

on a napkin they like walked out with like a napkin it's like a 90s man you and I remember that's

I know college parties that's why that's this generation is going to solve it because we're we've

seen but we've experienced now yeah like you're you're a gen X or like me then um uh I'm

millennial oh you're another millennial I'm 1981 so like my my wife is born in 81 okay yeah so

yeah yeah yeah all right so check it out check it out um I'm the magical Asian man who's trying

to give everyone money uh and then uh and Americans are more frustrated than ever about um our finances

so I um saw when Mark Cuban did with Cosplus drugs have you had Mark on uh actually yes we did

uh I'm sure he talks well yeah yeah yeah yeah good good good um so Mark starts Cosplus drugs which

gets Americans a better deal on generic drugs and I was like Mark that's freaking genius

uh and and so I thought can we get Americans a better deal on something else that we all pay for

um so I listed the expense structure of the average American family and household and it goes

you know you know this uh housing healthcare education food fuel transportation media and then

wireless um we spend eighty three dollars a month on our wireless service I was spending

hundred forty hundred fifty dollars a month on Verizon just for myself I'm a chump I'm gonna put

you on the spot I don't know if this has ever come up in the history of offline which provider do you

sit out how much do you spend you know Verizon and it's definitely up to like one between I

want to say between one fifteen one eighty me too you and I same saying it's a lot all right all

right cuz I get that cuz I have the automatic pain I get the like the thing from the text message

from Verizon it's like you've paid the bill this month and I'm always like yeah so we want

yeah I got there's like one fifty four seventy four was the number they kept texting me all right

um the average American spending eighty three a month on their wireless the average European

is spending thirty five dollars a month on their wireless yeah same stuff that forty eight dollars

a month delta comes to an extra hundred billion dollars a year that Americans are spending on data

that's really a commodity at this point and it's and the one of the secrets in this industry is that

you and I chose Verizon because it was the best network and we are a very especially important

people so I don't know if the best it was more expensive yeah over the intervening twenty some

odd years or so all of the three major carriers have now built very robust networks so that there's

almost no difference between them so you and I are spending a hundred fifty a month on Verizon

for like a brand that you know might have been true at some point now less true um so I went to

the carriers and was like guys who's gonna get give me Andrew Yang and Scott Halloween some other

people like the best value possible to distribute to the American people like you know the Robinhoods

of uh mobile yeah and team mobile said we will so team mobile is our backbone um we sit on their

time we don't sit on their time but we use their towers yeah and uh the average noble mobile user

is spending forty two dollars a month um as opposed to eighty three dollars a month on unlimited

wireless I'm on it right now it's from Verizon and here's the kicker that any data you don't use

we give you half the money back at the end of the month so that's the so you're using your phone

less that's the gimmick of if you use your phone less we will pay you and the average noble mobile

user is using seventeen percent less screen time than they did previously which I'm going to say

is probably realistic for a lot of people because I like you and my heavy phone user um but

fifteen percent less it's like yeah I can do that and by the way the entire thing is psychological

because when you're doom scrolling and looking at stuff that's probably making you sad

like John Faber now you're like wait a minute I'm actually costing myself money doing this

and you're like oh let me start making me miserable and for yes so those are the two things we

try and solve for with noble is save more money and uh we pay five and a half percent interest at

any of the savings you get and like Yang thinks that psychologically if you have a growing balance

like it'll make you happier yeah and then also dooms grow less look up more touch grass more

and that will make you happier um so noble mobile uh you know millions in revenue like that is a

very very happy customers uh and anyone listening to this if you go to noble mobile.com slash Yang

you get three months for free which will save you 250 bucks on average um so I'm still the magical

Asian man from the future trying to give everyone money and I don't even need to be president to do

it look at that yes so um you know and and this brand tie in with offline is I got to say perfect

we'll probably know I can't believe I didn't know about this before but we we love any kind of

gimmick any kind of strategy to get people off their phones or at least use their phones less so

I'm glad we could uh and the conversation with that thanks for coming by thanks for having me John

I really appreciate it of course

you

you started your business with a great idea and a ton of hustle let got print.com help you look the

part grow your business by getting professional marketing that works need business cards before

a networking event high impact postcards for a promotion or sleek fines for your storefront

we offer a huge selection reliable quality and low pricing right now get 20% off your first order

with the code podcast so don't worry about printing worry about growing your business start today

at gotprint.com and print with confidence hey it's gemis bagged from the psychology of your 20s in a

very special episode brought to you by a lion university I asked dr. Sandra Espinosa what does

therapy actually do from the science behind therapeutic change to how clinicians approach the

work to why therapy can feel so difficult to access or even stigmatized in some families and

communities we pull back the curtain on the therapeutic process and explore what meaningful

growth actually looks like I didn't go to therapy until my mid 20 late 20s I think it was almost

and it was a career that I was pursuing and I was still nervous I am a much better wife, daughter,

friend, mom because I'm a therapist what makes you a therapist we want to hear your story I tell

my my clients you are the expert in your story and I am going to be a witness to that you can

listen to this full episode of the psychology of your 20s on the iHot radio app or wherever you

get your podcasts shop vans and Albertsons for great deals on family favorites this week at vans

and Albertsons fresh split chicken breasts bonin value packs are 169 per pound with membership

and 18 count Lucerne large eggs are a dollar 99 each limit three with digital coupon plus

tillamook shredded chunk sliced or snack cheese 6.5 to 8 ounces are 199 each with digital coupon

limit three total hurry in these deals won't last visit vans or Albertsons dot com for more deals

and ways to save