Podcasts about harvard

Margaret talks with clinical psychologist Dr. Meredith Elkins, author of the new book PARENTING ANXIETY, about how anxiety really works—and how parents can stop unintentionally reinforcing it in themselves and their kids. Dr. Elkins, a faculty member at Harvard Medical School and director of the McLean Anxiety Mastery Program, shares insights from her new book Parenting Anxiety: Breaking the Cycle of Worry and Raising Resilient Kids. Together, they unpack why anxiety isn't something to eliminate, how avoidance makes fear stronger, and why modern “intensive parenting” may be increasing anxiety for both parents and children. You'll learn the three key markers that distinguish normal anxiety from an anxiety disorder (interference, distress, and duration), why psychological flexibility is one of the most important skills we can teach kids, and how cognitive behavioral therapy—especially exposure—helps people face fear instead of shrinking from it. This conversation offers practical, compassionate tools for parents who want to support anxious kids without over-accommodating, and for anyone who wants to change their relationship with anxiety itself. Here's where you can find Dr. Elkins: https://www.meredithelkinsphd.com/ @drmeredithelkins on IG and FB LinkedIn Buy PARENTING ANXIETY: https://bookshop.org/a/12099/9780593798812 What Fresh Hell is co-hosted by Amy Wilson and Margaret Ables. We love the sponsors that make this show possible! You can always find all the special deals and codes for all our current sponsors on our website: ⁠⁠⁠https://www.whatfreshhellpodcast.com/p/promo-codes/ What Fresh Hell podcast, mom friends, funny moms, parenting advice, parenting experts, parenting tips, mothers, families, parenting skills, parenting strategies, parenting styles, busy moms, self-help for moms, manage kid's behavior, teenager, tween, child development, family activities, family fun, parent child relationship, decluttering, kid-friendly, invisible workload, default parent, parenting anxiety, child anxiety, anxiety in children, anxiety disorders, psychological flexibility, cognitive behavioral therapy, CBT for anxiety, exposure therapy, intensive parenting, mental health for parents, anxiety coping skills, raising resilient kids, parenting mental health, postpartum anxiety, intrusive thoughts, anxiety management, Harvard psychologist, Meredith Elkins, anxiety treatment, family mental health Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

In this episode of The Brave Enough Show, Dr. Sasha Shillcutt and Dr. Zarya Rubin discuss:  The importance of Vitamin "J"  How to downregulate our nervous system  Our stress response and why it is important to understand in building female relationships  "Social media is the Saber-tooth tiger of our generation." -Dr. Rubin    Guest Bio:   Dr. Zarya Rubin is a Harvard-educated functional medicine physician, TEDx speaker, and burnout  expert, specializing in helping smart women heal from chronic stress and burnout that is  impacting their physical and mental health. She studied neurology at McGill University and the  Neurological Institute at Columbia in New York. She trained at the Institute for Integrative  Nutrition, studying with Dr. Andrew Weil, Dr. Mark Hyman, Dr. Deepak Chopra and other  holistic health leaders, and went on to become certified in Advanced Functional Medicine at the  School of Applied Functional Medicine.  Download your FREE burnout toolkit  Listen to the Outsmart Burnout Podcast   The Boundaries Blueprint, my new, short, on-demand course, is designed to be your toolkit for making small changes that add up to a big reset. In just three easy modules, you'll walk away with your personal plan to: Stop the daily drains on your energy, Set boundaries that stick, Protect a pocket of time that is yours (no excuses). This isn't about overhauling your entire life. It's all about the small shifts that bring powerful change. It's simple, practical, and takes less than one hour! Brave Balance is about transforming your professional and personal life in a safe, small group setting. You will grow deep in self-awareness, set clear boundaries, and develop strong time management skills to create the work-life balance you desperately need (and deserve). Change your mindset to let unhealthy behaviors go, and create long-lasting work-life control so you can live well on YOUR terms. Follow Brave Enough:   WEBSITE | INSTAGRAM | FACEBOOK | TWITTER | LINKEDIN Join The Table, Brave Enough's community. The ONLY professional membership group that meets both the professional and personal needs of high-achieving women.

Henry Ergas joins John to explore the erosion of historical understanding, the rise of ideological extremism, and the weakening of social cohesion across Western nations. Ergas argues that a balance of freedom and order are needed to sustain societies or else they will risk succumbing to the enemies of democracy, who possess a vitriolic hatred of the present, yet no unifying vision of the future. The discussion critiques the evolution of multicultural ideology and the rise of antisemitism in Australia, and assesses the slow decay of shared history, identity and hopes that once defined the nation. This conversation is a sober assessment of the challenges confronting liberal democracies and the values required to preserve them.Henry Ergas AO is an economist who spent many years at the OECD in Paris before returning to Australia. He has taught at many universities including Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and the National School of Statistics and Economic Administration in Paris. He is one of Australia's foremost public intellectuals.

There's claims out there that all kinds of things can make us happy in life, from making money to having kids to buying your dream home. But what actually works?? What does it take to have a happy life??  Professor Bob Waldinger is a psychiatrist at Harvard who has spent more than two decades as the director of this amazing study. It has tracked hundreds of people for decades and is the world's longest scientific study into happiness. So we're gonna find out what a lot of us get wrong in searching for the good life. Where we should be putting our time and attention. And we'll get this huge insight into how we can all be happier — and healthier. Find our transcript here: https://bit.ly/ScienceVsHappiness In this episode, we cover: (00:00) What makes us happy? (01:48) The world's longest study into happiness  (07:25) The biggest finding of the study (13:18) How do you build good relationships? (18:26) How did Bob get happier?? (21:53) How childhood adversity changes us (24:12) Does having kids make you happy?  (25:22) Does making money make us happy?  (27:55) The Happiest Person (29:40) Looking back on our lives Don't forget to text a friend you haven't seen in a while! Let us know what they say. Send us a photo if you end up catching up!! You can email us at ScienceVsTeam@gmail.com or tag us in an instagram post — we're at @science_vs. And come say hello to Wendy on tiktok, I'm @wendyzukerman This episode was produced by Wendy Zukerman, with help from Ekedi Fausther-Keeys, Rose Rimler, Meryl Horn, and Michelle Dang. We're edited by Blythe Terrell. Fact checking help by Ekedi Fauster-Keeys. Mix and sound design by Bobby Lord. Music written by Bobby Lord, Bumi Hidaka, So Wiley, Emma Munger and Peter Leonard. An extra thanks to the Zukerman Family and Joseph Lavelle Wilson. Science Vs is a Spotify Studios Original. Listen for free on Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Follow us and tap the bell for episode notifications. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

A former Harvard physics professor claims Einstein's theories and modern cosmology point to exactly where Heaven must be — and his calculations place it 273 billion trillion miles away.READ or SHARE: https://weirddarkness.com/physicist-locates-heaven/WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2026, Weird Darkness.#WeirdDarkness, #WeirdDarkNEWS, #Heaven, #Afterlife, #Science, #Physics, #Bible, #God, #Eternity, #Mystery

It's said, pain is inevitable, suffering is optional. But, is that true? Many of us live our lives in pursuit of certainty, believing that if we could just get things more stable - emotionally, financially, relationally - then we'd finally feel at ease. We wouldn't struggle with anxiety, stress, and fear. we wouldn't suffer so much. Problem is, that approach often deepens our suffering, rather than relieves it. Maybe you've felt this very thing.In this powerful episode on healing and resilience and how to relieve suffering, Jonathan sits down with Dr. Suzan Song, a Harvard- and Stanford-trained psychiatrist and humanitarian researcher. Dr. Song has spent decades working with individuals and communities living through profound instability, revealing a gentler, more honest reframe: healing, lessening suffering, doesn't come from chasing certainty and stability, but from learning how to relate differently to the inevitability of pain, uncertainty, and change.In this conversation, discover:Why pain is inevitable, but suffering often grows from the stories we tell.The hidden role of our nervous system and memory in shaping our experience of hardship.The power of ritual—not as performance, but as a path to emotional grounding and resilience.What purpose really is, and why it's often already present, woven into our lives through mattering.How genuine healing happens in relationship, not in isolation, transforming our approach to mental health.This is an invitation to stop blaming yourself for not feeling satisfied, let go of suffering, and remember that you don't have to navigate life's instabilities alone. Sometimes, relief comes not from doing more, but from allowing yourself to feel everything, then learn how to live with the truth of uncertainty in a world that will never stop changing.You can find Suzan at: Website | Linkedin | Episode TranscriptIf you LOVED this episode, you'll also love the conversations we had with Adam Grant about rethinking beliefs and inner patterns.Check out our offerings & partners: Join My New Writing Project: Awake at the WheelVisit Our Sponsor Page For Great Resources & Discount Codes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Is the era of manufacturing-led growth officially over? For decades, the path to a stable middle class was paved through industrialization, but today, even manufacturing giants like China are losing millions of factory jobs to automation.In this episode, Bethany McLean and Luigi Zingales sit down with Dani Rodrik, Ford Foundation Professor of International Political Economy at Harvard and author of Shared Prosperity in a Fractured World. Rodrik argues that we have "no other choice" but to look toward the service sector to anchor our future economy.But there's a problem: we still treat these essential roles as "bottom rung" jobs in terms of pay and respect. Is it possible to elevate a job's status and pay simply because society needs it to be better? As Rodrik argues, it's a future we must learn to navigate if we want to preserve a stable society. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Secretary of Education Linda McMahon told The Daily Signal a settlement with Harvard University is close, after a protracted battle over the university's diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. Trump said Wednesday that he heard the United States had a deal with Harvard. “I hear we have a deal but who the hell knows with them,” Trump told reporters. When asked about the president's statement by The Daily Signal, McMahon said, “He's right. It's ongoing.” Harvard and the Trump administration have engaged in a legal battle for about nine months after President Donald Trump pulled $2 billion in federal funding and removed Harvard's ability to enroll international students. The president took action over Harvard's alleged failure to curb antisemitism and its DEI practices.Secretary McMohan talked about this, and more, in a sit down interview with Elizabeth Mitchell, Daily Signal White House correspondent, on Tuesday.

FIRST ON THE DAILY SIGNAL—Secretary of Education Linda McMahon told The Daily Signal a settlement with Harvard University is close, after a protracted battle over the university's diversity, equity, and inclusion practices. Trump said Wednesday that he heard the United States had a deal with Harvard. “I hear we have a deal but who the […]

The Culture Show's Jared Bowen on the death of fashion designer Valentino and Boston's Winteractive art installations.Harvard national security expert Juliette Kayyem on President Trump's continued threats against Greenland that are sowing chaos among European allies at Davos.Singer-songwriter Juliana Hatfield performs for Live Music Friday. Her new album is called “Lightning Might Strike.” Presidential historian Doris Kearns Goodwin and her son Joe Kearns Goodwin join for a panel discussion on whether public service, civil or military, could bridge our country's political divide.

In this episode of Mormon Stories Podcast, we talk with Jean Daniel about his journey from a devoted Mormon convert to a Christian pastor. Growing up in Boston, Jean discovered Mormonism as a teenager and found in it a strong sense of structure, identity, and belonging. He served a mission in San Diego, CA and was later married in the Newport beach temple.While studying at Harvard and Yale Divinity Schools, Jean began to see the value in many Christian traditions and ultimately let go of the idea of “one true church.” He shares how this shift led him toward a more open, hopeful approach to Christianity grounded in community. Today, Jean serves as the National Pastor of Canada for the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ).This is a thoughtful conversation about faith after Mormonism and building a meaningful spiritual community with progressive beliefs.Please purchase the book ⁠here⁠.To support this series please donate ⁠here⁠. One half of all donations will go to Dr. Turner for as long as he is participating in the series.___________________YouTubeAt Mormon Stories we explore, celebrate, and challenge Mormon culture through in-depth stories told by members and former members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints as well as scholars, authors, LDS apologists, and other professionals.  Our overall mission is to: 1. Facilitate informed consent amongst LDS Church members, investigators, and non-members regarding Mormon history, doctrine, and theology2. Support Mormons (and members of other high-demand religions) who are experiencing a religious faith crisis3. Promote healing, growth and community for those who choose to leave the LDS Church or other high demand religions

A few years ago, a small, private school in an underprivileged Black community in Louisiana made national headlines for propelling student after student into elite universities like Harvard and Yale. But according to the new book "Miracle Children," the school's success was built on lies and threats. Amna Nawaz spoke with the writers, Katie Benner and Erica Green. PBS News is supported by - https://www.pbs.org/newshour/about/funders. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy

What if the very differences you've been trying to smooth out are actually your greatest leadership strengths? In this episode, I'm joined by renowned leadership coaches and Fixable hosts Frances Frei and Anne Morriss for a conversation about anxiety, being a neurodivergent leader, and what it really takes to lead well. We talk about how partnership at work and in life has taught them to communicate clearly, embrace conflict, and build teams that thrive because of difference. I ask Frances and Anne some listener questions, from micromanaging bosses to burnout, imposter syndrome, and the fear of being “known for DEI.” Tune in to discover how setting boundaries and rewriting your inner narrative transform the way you lead and feel in life and at work. Check out our sponsors: Northwest Registered Agent - Protect your privacy, build your brand and get your complete business identity in just 10 clicks and 10 minutes! Visit https://www.northwestregisteredagent.com/achieverfree Shopify - Sign up for a $1 per month trial, just go to http://shopify.com/anxiousachiever Cozy Earth - Give your home the luxury it deserves. Head to http://cozyearth.com and use code ACHIEVER for up to 20% off. Express VPN - Secure your online data today. Visit http://expressvpn.com/achiever and find out how you can get up to four extra months. Talkiatry - Head to http://talkiaitry.com/achiever and complete the short assessment to get matched with an in network psychiatrist in just a few minutes. Working Genius - Take the working genius assessment today and get 20% off with code ACHIEVER at working http://genius.com In this Episode, You Will Learn 00:00 Meet Frances Frei & Anne Morriss. 06:00 What partners with different wiring teach each other. 12:45 How conflict actually drives high performance. 16:45 How being neurodivergent has shaped Frances's leadership at Harvard. 20:00 The power of devotion and high standards. 23:45 What are the three elements of trust? 27:45 How listening can change a broken dynamic. 31:30 Why inconsistent boundaries are the same as no boundaries. 39:15 Is it risky to be known for DEI right now? 42:15 How to make inclusion feel expansive, not exclusive. 50:15 Why you're not the best judge of your own excellence. 51:00 Protecting your life force as a leader. Resources + Links Download the Anxious Achiever App HERE Listen to Fixable with Frances Frei & Anne Morriss HERE Learn more about Frances Frei & Anne Morriss HERE Get your copy of Unleashed by Frances Frei & Anne Morriss Get your copy of Move Fast & Fix Things by Frances Frei & Anne Morriss Get a copy of my book - The Anxious Achiever Watch the podcast on YouTube  Find more resources on our website morraam.com Follow Follow me: on LinkedIn @morraaronsmele + Instagram @morraam Follow Frances: on LinkedIn @francesfrei + Instagram @francesxfrei Follow Anne: on LinkedIn @annemorriss + Instagram @annemorriss

Most people think communication is about being right. It's not. It's about controlling the frame. After years of navigating toxic bosses, difficult business partners, and high-stakes negotiations across Wall Street and Main Street, I've cracked the code on why difficult people always seem to win — and how to beat them at their own game without becoming one of them. Today I'm breaking down the nine strategies I use to handle toxic people. You'll learn why the loudest person dominates early but loses later, how Harvard research shows people interpret facts to protect their ego (not accuracy), and why toxic people win because they play with low emotional reactivity and high certainty — even when they're wrong. You'll learn the CLEAN framework, why gaslighting collapses under specificity, and how the Invisible Gorilla study proves we all live in different realities. If you've ever felt drained by difficult people, lost arguments you should've won, or wondered why toxic behavior gets rewarded, this episode will change how you communicate forever. Stop trying to win emotionally. Start winning structurally. Thinking about buying a business but don't know where to start? Main Street Millionaire Live gives you the playbook, mindset, and momentum to become an owner. Stop saying “someday,” and do it this year → https://contrarianthinking.biz/MSML_BDYT26 ___________ 00:00:00 Introduction 00:02:07 The Asymmetry Advantage: How Toxic People Exploit You 00:03:25 Frame Control: The Rule That Wins Every Conversation 00:06:29 The Disrespect Response Ladder: From Absorb to Redirect 00:09:16 The Gaslighting Defense Protocol: Reality Anchor Tactics 00:10:06 Main Street Millionaire Live: Your Path to Business Ownership 00:10:51 The Four Studies That Change How You See Reality 00:13:27 Negotiating Across Two Realities: The Mirror and Redirect Method 00:14:55 The Blue-Throated Mockingbird: Creating Trigger Breakers 00:20:27 The CLEAN Framework: How to Beat Toxic People Structurally 00:22:59 The Power Move: Stop Fighting Emotionally, Win Structurally ___________ MORE FROM BIGDEAL

The Wealth Formula Podcast is one of the longest-running personal finance podcasts still standing. For more than a decade, I've shown up every single week to talk about investing, markets, and the forces shaping the economy. What's interesting is how much my own thinking has evolved over that time. Early on, I was more rigid. I was—and still am—a real estate guy. But back then, I didn't give much thought to ideas outside that lane. I was dogmatic, and I didn't always challenge my own beliefs. Time has a way of doing that for you. I've now lived through multiple market cycles. I've watched the stock market melt up to valuations that felt absurd—and then keep going. I've seen gold go from flat for a decade to parabolic over a year. I've seen interest rates sit near zero for a decade and then snap higher at the fastest pace in modern history. And I've learned, sometimes the hard way, that diversification is about survival and that every asset class has its day. One lesson I learned that I am thinking a lot about these days is: ignore major technological shifts at your own peril. Back in 2014, I first started hearing people talk seriously about Bitcoin. At the time, I dismissed it. I listened to the critics, was convinced it was a scam, and didn't take the time to truly understand it. That was a mistake—not because everyone should have bought Bitcoin, but because I ignored a structural change happening right in front of me. Bitcoin went from a cypherpunk expression of freedom to the largest ETF owned by BlackRock. Today, the dominant story is artificial intelligence. And whether you love stocks, hate stocks, prefer real estate, or focus exclusively on cash flow, you cannot afford to ignore AI. This isn't a fad. It's a general-purpose technology—on the scale of electricity, the internet, or the industrial revolution itself. That doesn't mean it's easy to invest in. It's hard to look at headline names trading at massive valuations and feel good about buying them today. But investing in AI isn't about chasing a single company. It's about understanding second- and third-order effects: energy demand, data centers, productivity gains, labor displacement, capital flows, and how blockchain and decentralized systems intersect with all of it. What experience has taught me is this: you don't need to be first to invest—but you do need to be early in understanding. If you wait until something feels obvious, most of the opportunity is already gone. This week's episode of the Wealth Formula Podcast is focused squarely on AI and blockchain—what's real, what's noise, and where the long-term implications may lie. Listen to this episode. You'll come away smarter. And years from now, you may look back and realize this was one of those moments where paying attention really mattered. Transcript Disclaimer: This transcript was generated by AI and may not be 100% accurate. If you notice any errors or corrections, please email us at phil@wealthformula.com.  Welcome everybody. This is Buck Joffrey with the Wealth Formula Podcast. Coming to you from Montecito, California. Today we wanna start with a reminder. We are in a new year and we are already doing deals, uh, through the Wealth Formula Accredit Investor Club. You can go and sign up for that for free. Uh, wealth formula.com just hit investor club and you just get on there and, and you’ll get onboarded. And from there, all you gotta do is wait for deal flow and webinars coming to your inbox. And, um, you know, if nothing else, you learn something. So go check it out. Uh, go to. Wealth formula.com and sign up for Investor Club now onto today’s show. Uh, the, it is interesting. I don’t know if you are aware it’s a listener, but we are, wealth Formula is, uh, probably I would say one of the, certainly in the one of the top longest running personal finance podcasts still. Standing. Uh, I’ve been around, well, I think the first episode was on like 2014, so it was a long time, but in earnest, you know, at least for over a decade. And, you know, during that time, I’ve shown up every week, every single week. Don’t Ms. Weeks, but none, none. Isn’t that incredible? I’ve shown up, uh, talked about investing and talked about very way markets are working, forces, shaping the economy, all that kind of stuff. But you know, as you can imagine, as a. As a younger individual versus, um, my crusty self. Now, you know, a lot of my own thinking has evolved over that time, you know, back then. And I, you know, I think this appealed to some people, but, um, you know, I was really dogmatic. I’m a real estate guy, right? And I still am a real estate guy, but back then I wouldn’t give anything else the time of day to even think about, you know, and, and, uh, I, I, you know. I was dogmatic and didn’t always challenge my own belief systems. Um, I’m different now, right? I’ve softened And time is a way of, of changing all of that dogmatic stuff for you. You know, I’ve lived through multiple market cycles. I’ve watched, well, I’ve watched the stock market, which I, which I always maligned, you know, melt up to valuations. Uh, that felt absurd. And then keep going higher. I’ve seen gold, which was kind of ridiculous for the longest time. I watched it for like a decade, just pretty much flat, and then it goes parabolic. Over the last year, I’ve seen interest rates sit near zero for a decade and then snap higher. Uh, not even as time, just launch higher at the fastest space in modern history. And I’ve learned sometimes I guess, the hard way that diversification is about survival and that every class, every asset class has its day. Just like every dog has its day. And um, you know, one other lesson that I learned that I’m thinking a lot about these days is ignore major technological shifts at your own peril. So what am I talking about? Well. It’s kind of a, it is a technological shift, whether you think it about not, but Bitcoin. Okay. Back in 2014, I first started hearing people talk seriously about Bitcoin, and at that time I dismissed it. I was, uh, I was listening to critics beater Schiff that constantly called it a scam, said it was going to zero and so on. I didn’t, I didn’t take the time to truly understand it, to try to understand it the way I understand it now, that makes me a believer in Bitcoin. That, of course was a big mistake, not because, you know, everyone should have bought Bitcoin and, uh, back then, well, they, you know, would’ve been nice if they did, but because fundamentally I ignored something that was a structural change happening right in front of me. And since then, Bitcoin went from a cipher punk expression of freedom to the large CTF owned by BlackRock today. The dominant story is actually artificial intelligence. Now, whether you love stocks, hate stocks, prefer real estate focused exclusively on cab, whatever, you cannot afford to ignore ai. It’s not a fad. It’s a general purpose technology and a technology shift, and the scale of electricity. The internet bigger than the internet, bigger than the industrial revolution. Now, that doesn’t mean it’s easy to invest in. I mean, I’m gonna go invest in AI and make a bunch of money because I mean, what does that even mean? It’s hard to look at headline names, trading at massive valuations like Nvidia and all that right now, and saying, oh, I’m gonna go buy that. Who knows? That’s gonna work out. When I talk about investing in AI isn’t really just investing in stocks or any individual company or data centers or whatever. It’s about understanding. The second and third order effects, energy demand. You know, as I mentioned, data centers, productivity gains, labor displacement, capital flows, and how blockchain and decentralized systems intersect with all of that. It is very, very complicated. Um, but it’s really important to start to try to understand, you know, an experience that stop me is this. You don’t need to be the first to invest, but you do need to be early in understanding. If you wait until something feels obvious, usually the opportunity’s gone by then. And you know, the thing about AI is even if you think it’s obvious now. The reality is that most people haven’t really caught on. Maybe they played with chat GPT, but I don’t think they’re understanding what this whole, you know, this thing is gonna do to our world. Um, anyway, so that is what this week’s episode of Wealth Formula Podcast, uh, is about. It’s about AI and also, um, a little bit about, you know, bitcoin and blockchain and that kind of thing. Um, we’re gonna talk about what’s noise, uh, you know, where the long, what the long-term, uh, implications are all of this stuff. This is a show that, uh, I really enjoy doing really, really good stuff. Um, so make sure you listen in. We’ll have that interview for you right after these messages. Wealth Formula banking is an ingenious concept powered by whole life insurance, but instead of acting just as a safety net. The strategy supercharges your investments. First, you create a personal financial reservoir that grows at a compounding interest rate much higher than any bank savings account. As your money accumulates, you borrow from your own bank to invest in other cash flowing investments. Here’s the key. Even though you borrowed money at a simple interest rate, your insurance company keeps paying you compound interest. On that money, even though you’ve borrowed it, that result, you make money in two places at the same time. That’s why your investments get supercharged. This isn’t a new technique. It’s a refined strategy used by some of the wealthiest families in history, and it uses century old rock solid insurance companies as its backbone. Turbocharge your investments. Visit Wealth formula banking.com. Again, that’s wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show, everyone. Today. My guest on Wealth Formula podcast is Jim Thorne, chief Market strategist at Wellington. L is private wealth with more than 25 years of experience in capital markets. He’s previously served as chief capital market strategist, senior portfolio manager, chief economist, and CIO. Uh, equities at major investment firms and has also taught economics and finance at the university level. Uh, Jim is known for translating complex economic, political, and market dynamics into clear actionable insights to help investors and advisors navigate long-term capital decisions. Uh, Jim, welcome with the program. Thanks for having me Buck. Well, um, Tim, I, I, I, uh, had been following a little bit of, uh, what you discuss on, uh, on X and, um, one of the things that caught my eye is, you know, your, your narrative on, on ai, a lot of people are tend to be still sort of skeptical of AI and what’s going on, uh, with the markets. Um, uh, but at the same time, uh, there’s this. Sense. I think that ignoring AI altogether as an investor is, is, is downright potentially dangerous. So, uh, at the highest level, why is AI something people simply can’t dismiss? Well, we live in an, uh, uh, you know, many other people have coined this term, but we live, we’re living in an exponential age of, of technological innovation. And, you know, AI and I’ll just add into their, uh, blockchain is just the normal evolutionary process that, you know, for me started when I left graduate school and came into the business in the nineties where everybody had this high degree of skepticism of the computer and the, the, the phone, the, the. And the internet. And so, you know, what we do is we go through these cycles and there are periods of time where the stars align. And we have a period of time where we have what I would call an intense period of innovation where I would suggest to you that. People are skeptical. Skeptical, and yet at the same point in time, they very early on in the, in the, in the trade, call it a bubble when it’s not. And so I think it comes from the position of ignorance. One, I think two, fear, and then three. If you think about if you are an active manager, I in a 40 ACT fund, um, you know, and you’re sitting there with, uh, you know, mi. Uh, Nvidia at, you know, eight or 9% of your index. And that’s a big chunk that you’ve gotta put into your fund, uh, just to be market neutral. So there’s a lot of people that hate this rally. There’s a lot of people that are can, going to continue to hate this rally. But the thing I anchor my hat on are a couple of things. Look at if this is no different than the railroad. Canals, any major technological innovation, will it become a bubble? Yes. Just not now. So, so let’s follow up on that, because a lot of people think, or are talking about the, do you know the.com bubble, uh, comparisons, and you’ve argued that that sort of misses the real story. So, so where are we getting it wrong right now? Are those people getting it wrong? In the nineties buck, you’d walk into a bar and there wouldn’t be ESPN on there’d be CNBC on people were getting their jobs to become day traders. Folks didn’t go to the go to university because they were basically getting their white papers financed. You had companies that were trading off of clicks. So I lived that. Anybody who is of a younger generation has no idea what a bubble is, and it’s specious and pedantic for them to use that term when they have no clue about what they’re talking about. But you did mention that it could become a bubble. How do we know when it does become a bubble? Oh, it’ll become a bubble. Well, when, when, when you know, the, what, what I am looking for is, you know, when we, when the good investment opportunities start to dry up, when liquidity starts to dry up. So what I, it’s not about valuation, to me it’s about liquidity. So in 2000, what, and I’m roughly speaking, what went down was you had all these companies that were trading at Strat catastrophic valuation, this stupid valuations, and you walked in one day and they didn’t get financing. And if you read the prospectus or you followed the company, you knew that they were not going to be free cash flow positive for another two or three rounds of financing. All of a sudden you walked in and everybody goes, oh my God, this thing, you know, trading at 250 times sales. And everybody went, yeah, of course. And so what it was is, was when does liquidity dry up? So I’ll give you a date, um, you know, with Trump’s big beautiful bill act. 100% tax deductibility of CapEx and that goes until Jan 1, 20 31. So to me, that’s a very motivating factor for people to, um, invest. The last thing I would say to you in more of a game theoretic context book is, look, if you are a big tech company and you don’t invest in ai. You are ensuring your death. Yahoo, Hela Packard. I can go through the list of companies that cease to invest, so they’re looking. If it was you and I when we were running this company, I would say, dude, we gotta invest because if we don’t have a poll position in this next platform, whatever it is, we’re done. We’re toast. And I think that’s why you’re seeing all these hyperscalers spending as much money as they are. ’cause they get this, they saw it. So, you know, you framed ai not necessarily as a a tech trade, but as a capital expenditure cycle. Can you explain that to people? Well, what we need to do is we need to build out the infrastructure of ai. Then, and that’s the phase that we’re in right now. So it’s more like we’re building out all of the railroads, the railway tracks and the railway stations across the United States back in the 18 hundreds. And then we’re gonna go through that building phase. And then as that building phase goes, some companies, some towns, are going to basically realize and recognize what’s happening and start to basically take ai. Bring it into their business model, into enhanced margins. Right. So right now we’re building it out. I mean, you know, we all focus on the hyperscalers, but the majority of companies, pardon me, governments. Individuals, they haven’t used AI and, and what is interesting about this is back in the nineties, they were talking about how the internet had to evolve to be much more. You know, uh, have critical thinking in, in, in it. And it was more explained when you went to these conferences, as you know, you know, think about this. You’re hearing this in 99, okay? Not today. You go in and you ask Google or dog pile at the same time, or excite, okay? You would say, I wanna go to Florida in the third week of March and I wanna stay here and I wanna spend this amount of money and I wanna rent a car. Plan it for me. And they would come back and they would tell you that it would come back and it would, it would, everything would be there. And you would have your over here and all you would have to do is drop your money and you had your thing planned. So none of this is as, it’s aspirational, but we’ve heard it before. And in technology, what happens is it’s not like it’s new. We’ve been talking to, I did machine learning in in graduate school. Ai, you know, I did neural networks and I’m a terrible Ian. This isn’t, you know, Claude Shannon wrote about this in 1937, right? But it’s about when does it hit, and so it was chat GBT. Can we argue, was that right? As an investor, it’s stop arguing, start investing. Then what you’ve gotta figure out, which is the question you ask, is when does the music stop? I think it goes until the end of the decade. You know, one of the things that, uh, is interesting about this, uh, AI investment, uh, it’s, it’s unfolding in a higher interest rate environment. Why is that detail so important? Understanding its significance? Well, it’s the cost of capital, right? And so this phase that we have right now. It’s funny you say that, right? ’cause our reference point is zero interest rates, right? Yeah, yeah. Right. That’s right. So, you know, you know, so, so think about this, what it happens right now. Now we’re in the phase where you’ve got these hyperscalers that instead of taking all their free cash flow and buying bonds and buying back stock, are increasing CapEx because there’s a great tax deduction on it. So you get a lot of, so we’re in this phase where, for where, where a lot of the money is, you know, was. Was, let me, let me be clear, was a hundred free cashflow. Now we’re getting these guys, these companies like Oracle and what have you, you know, starting to issue debt and look at debt isn’t bad as long as the rate of return on debt is higher than the interest rates. And so, you know, you know, I, I would say historically speaking, for a lot of these high quality names, the interest rates are not, uh, at levels that will stop them from investing. Right. Right. You know, you’ve written that, um, productivity is ultimately the real story behind ai. So why does productivity matter more than the technology headlines themselves? Well, let me just put it this way, right? So we’ve grown, I grew up, I, I joined, I’m up here in Toronto, right? So I’m gonna give it to you in Canadian dollars, right? So I joined, I joined here. You know, I grew up here, went to the states, came back home. Growing this company I joined when we’re about three and a half billion. We’re getting close to 50 billion, and we’re the fastest growing independent platform in the country. I’m a one man band, right? I use three ai. In the old days, I’d have four research assistants. Where’s the margin in that? And so I, that’s how I see it. And let me be clear, it’s, you know, this isn’t we’re, it’s not perfect. But if I wanted to say, instead of you, but hey, write me a 2000 word essay on the counterfactual of what happened with railroads up until 1894 when the, when the bubble popped, give me a f, you know, a a thousand word essay and, and just a general overview. I can get that in less than five minutes. Michael Sailor is writing product on ai, which, which, which you would take, which you would take. He’s in his presentation, say it would take a hundred lawyers. So it’s gonna be more about those. And it’s, it’s no different than Internet of things or, you know, it was, uh, Kasparov that talked about this. Gary Kasparov talking about the melding of, of technology in humans. He would ran, run this chess tournament called freestyle. You could use a computer, you could use, you know, grand Masters. You could use whatever you wanted to compete. And who won? Well, who won it Was that those teams that were generalists that had a little bit of that, the knowledge of the computer and the knowledge of the test. Uh, o of chess, right? That’s what’s gonna happen. So this isn’t we’re, as far as I’m concerned, we’re not, yes, there’s going to be some d some jobs that are going to be replaced, but that is always the case in technology. I’m not a Luddite, okay? I am not Luddite. But the same point in time. I, I would suggest to you that it, it is just a really, for me, it’s a, helps me. Do research no different than when I was an undergrad and they went from cue cards in the, the library at the university to actually having a dummy terminal and I could ask questions in queue. You know, it stalked me from having to go to the basement of the library and going to microfiche. Right. Have helping that way. Now can it, can, will it do other things? I’m sure it is, and I’ll lead that to Elon Musk and the crew. You know, that’s above my pay grade. But for me, I see it as a very helpful way of, you know, allowing me to process and delineate. Much more information a a and not have me waste so much time trying to figure out what got went on in the past or, you know, QMF. Right. You know, summarize me the talk five, you know, academic papers in this area, what are they saying? And then they gimme the papers. Right. It just speeds the process up. Yeah. You know, um, one of the things that I’ve been sort of talking about and thinking about. Is that it’s hard to not see AI as a very, very strong deflationary force. Um, how do you think about that? Yeah. Technology is deflationary, right? Doubt about it. And so I look at it this way, Ray. Um, so I work at the financial services industry, okay. You know, Mr. Diamond of JP Morgan is talking about how they are starting to embrace blockchain and ai. They are going to cut out the back end of that in the, the margins in that, in that company by the end of the cycle are going to be fantastic. People just do not get in. You know, the financial services industry is built on a platform. Of the 1960s, dude. I mean, they’re still running Fortran, cobalt. So you know what I, how I look at this is much more as a margin type story, and there’s going to be a lot of displacement. But at the same point in time, I look at Tesla and automation and ai. And you know, people look at Tesla as a car company. I look at Tesla as an advanced manufacturing company. Elon Musk could basically go into any industry and disrupt it if it wanted to. Right. So that’s how I look at it. And so, you know, the hard part is going to be, you know. Nothing. If we get back to where we were, it’s not going to be perfect, right? Because here’s, here’s where the counter is, here’s where the counter is. Right? If you, if, if you think about, and we’re, I’m gonna take Trump outta the equation and ent outta the equation right now, but if we just went back to the way things were before COVID, we would have strong deflationary forces. Okay. Just with demographics, just with excessive levels of debt. Just with, you know, pushing on a string in terms of, in terms we couldn’t get the growth up, you know, and, you know, and the overregulation of financial institutions. Trump and descent are basically applying what’s called supply side economics, and they’re deregulating. It’s says law, which is John Batiste, that says basically supply creates his own demand and it’s non-inflationary. But really what they’re going to try to do is they’re going to try to run the economy hot and they’re gonna try to pull this way out of the debt. And if you do that and you deregulate the banks. And allow the banks to get back to where they were before the financial crisis. Okay. You know, and, and the Fed takes its interest rates down to neutral, expands the balance sheet. Then I don’t think we’re gonna go back to the zero bound in deflation. I think this thing’s gonna run hot for a long time. And I think it, the real question is, is, is is 2 75 in the United States the neutral rate? I think it is. Uh, but as, as, as Scott be says, and, and, and, and, and let’s be clear, buck, the guy’s a superstar. Okay. Guy is a legend. Just you sit there, just shut up and listen to him. Okay. They keep up, right? Well, so they’re gonna run it hot, but where we are is, in his words, mine, not mine. We’re still in this detox period, you know what I mean? We still got the Biden era. We still got, you know, a over a decade of excessive ca of Central Bank intermediation. That needs to get, you know, go away. So what I say, and what I’ve been writing about is 26 is going to be the year that the baton is passed back to the private sector. Let’s get rates down to 2 75. That’s, I mean, I’m going off the New York Fed model. That says real fed funds, the real, the real neutral rate is 75 to 78 basis points. I think inflation’s at two. That that gets you 2 75. Get the rates there and then get the balance sheet of the Fed to the level so that overnight lending isn’t loose or tight. It’s just normal. And then step back, go away and let Wall Street and the private sector create credit. Create economic growth and let’s get back to the business cycle. And if we do that, we’re gonna have non-inflationary growth. It’s gonna be strong, but we’re not going back to the zero bound and we’re gonna grow our way out of this. And so that’s where I get really excited about. This is a very unique time in history. A very, very, very unique time in history where, and I don’t know how long it’s going to last because of the compression that we have now because of the, you know, we live in such a digital world, but let’s say it’s five years demographic says it’s to 33, 32 to 33. That’s, you know, that’s how long this run is. And, and to me, uh, AI is a massive play. I, I, to me, blockchain is a massive play and to me it’s to those countries and companies that get it is, whereas investors, we wanna think, start thinking about investing. Yeah. You mentioned, um, non non-inflationary growth. Can you drill down on that a little bit just so people understand a little bit where. Usually you think of an economy running super hot, you, you think automatically there’s an, you know, an inflationary growth. So I want you to think in your mind into your list as think in your mind. Go back to economics 1 0 1 with the demand curve. In the supply curve, okay? And there are an equilibrium. And at that equilibrium we have a price at an equilibrium, and we have an output as an equilibrium. Okay? Now what I want you to do is I want you to keep the demand curves stagnant or, or, or anchored. Then I want you to shift the supply curve out. Prices go down, output goes out. We can talk all this esoteric stuff, you know, you know Ronald Reagan and, and Robert Mandel and supply side economics. But it’s really your shift in the supply curve out, and that’s what, and that’s what BeIN’s doing. I mean, this is a w would just sit down and be quiet. He’s talking about, you know, what is deregulation? He’s pushing the supply provider. Oh, hold on. My phone. My, my thing. And what did, since the two thousands, what did, what was the policy? It was kingian, it was all focused on the demand curve. Everything was focused on demand. And so all we’re doing is we’re, we’re getting the keynesians out. I use 2000 ’cause that’s when Ben Bernanke really came in and was very influential. Let me just say he’s a very smart, I learned so much from reading. Smart, smart, smart, smart guy. But his whole thing was Kasan. He came from MIT, his thesis supervisor was Stanley Fisher, right? We’re going back to, you know, Mario Dragons thesis supervisors, Stanley Fisher, all these guys came from MIT, Larry, M-I-T-M-I-T, Yale, and Princeton. Whereas previously it was the University of Chicago. It was Milton Friedman. It was, it was supply side economics. We’re going back, they’re going back to supply side economics and right now we need it. We need balance. But my god, what did we end off with? We ended off with four years of mono modern monetary theory. Deficits matter. That’s insanity. You had mentioned a little bit, uh, you, you’ve talked about blockchain a few times here. Talk about the significance. I mean, it’s sort of, you know, blockchain was a thing that everybody was, everybody was talking about it, you know, three, four years ago, but now it’s all about ai. But you know, now you’ve got, um, but in, but in the background, blockchain has grown, uh, adoption has grown. Uh, tell us what’s going on there, and if you could tie it into the significance of, of where we’re at today. Yeah. Um, uh, Jeff Bezos gave a wonderful speech, I think in two thou, early two thousands, where he basically talked about the fact that, you know, once this innovation is led out of the genie’s, led out of the bottle, whether or not, you know, buck and Jim, like it as an investment, the innovation continues. And so after the internet bubble pop, right? Really smart guys like Jeff Bezos, uh, Zuckerberg, you, you, the whole cast of characters, right? Basically built it out. Okay. And it wasn’t perfect and everybody knew it wasn’t perfect. I mean, that was the whole thing that was so bizarre. But they knew it wasn’t perfect and they knew that they needed to solve some problems. Right. And you know, it was a double spend problem. I mean, the internet that we were dealing with right now was developed in the 1950s and so on and so forth. And so, you know, that always stuck with me. Right. A couple of things stuck with me because I’ve lived through a couple of these cycles. The first one is Buck. When the, when Wall Street coalesces around something just shut up and buy it, right? I mean, I, I spent too much of my life arguing about whether dog pile and Ask Gees was better than Google. Wall Street said Google was the best. Shut up. Invest, right? And so, so look, blockchain solved the double spend problem. Blockchain solved all the problems that the original iteration of the internet could solve, and everybody knew it was coming along okay. So it’s a decentral, it’s decentralized, right? Uh, does, does not need to be reconciled. So no. Not only do you have another iteration of the internet. You have basically introduced into society the biggest innovation in accounting or recordkeeping since double entry. Bookkeeping accounting was introduced in Florence, Italy centuries ago by the Medicis and, and buck. All this is out there like, so this is a profound, right? So think about you’re in an accounting department and you don’t have to reconcile, right? So look. The first use cakes was Bitcoin. And what was the, what was the beautiful thing about it? Well, first off, it grew up by itself. And secondly, it’s got perfect scarcity, right? And so let’s just full stop. And I mean, yes, gold and silver had the run that they should have had decades. So I had been waiting and listening to people, gold bugs, talking about this type of run since the nineties. Okay. Um, but look, you know, and the problem with fi money, right? I mean, this is, this goes back decades. It’s an old argument. The way you solve it is, is Bitcoin. That’s the solution. I mean, forget about it. I mean, if they’re gonna whip it around and do all this stuff, fine. But the other thing that people miss and Sailor hasn’t, and Sailor is brilliant, is look. Bitcoin is pristine collateral in 2008, in September. What caused the, the system to stop was the counter. We could not identify counterparty risk for near cash. It was a settlement problem. Anybody you talk to Buck that says it was, you know, the subprime this and it, yeah, that was crap. I get that. But when the system shut down is you had a $750 million near cash instrument with X, Y, Z, wall Street firm, and you did this for three extra beeps and it was no longer cash. Guess. And guess what? Your institutional money market fund broke the buck. That’s when the system blew sky high. When the money market broke the buck and it was a settlement problem, blockchain and Bitcoin solved that. Sailor knows that, look where Wall Street’s gonna go. They understand now that. Bitcoin is pristine, collateral and capital that is 100% transparent. Let’s lend against it, and that’s what Sadler’s doing. That’s why Wall Street hates the guy so much, right? Think about that. Think of where is he going after he’s going after all the stranded capital on Wall Street. And, and the whole point is he’s sitting there going, I’m too busy for this. And you’ve got all these other people that are gonna live off of other people’s ignorance. Meanwhile, Jing Diamond knows exactly what he’s talking about. We can identify, if I hear one more person on me in, in the meeting say, I don’t know. You know, you know, uh, micro strategies balance sheet is so complicated. Really. Compared to JP Morgans, I mean, you know what his capital is. It says Bitcoin, like, what are you guys talking about? But hey, fucking in this business, people make generational wealth on ignorance of people who think they know what they don’t know. So, you know, just going back to Jamie Diamond, you know, he spent, I don’t know how long. Throwing every insult, uh, he could towards Bitcoin. And now they’ve really kind of, they haven’t backtracked. I think he’s, he’s, you know, his, his, um, I think the way he phrases is the blockchain’s a real thing. He never seems to really say the word Bitcoin, uh, in this regard. Um, banks in general, where do you think they’re headed with this stuff? I mean, I, you know, right now, again, you can kind of see even. Um, I think, you know, some of the big advisory firms suddenly recommending one to, you know, one to 4% of people’s portfolios in Bitcoin. I mean, this is all, I mean, gosh, I, I’ve, you know, been talking about Bitcoin since 2017. This is in unbelievable transformation in less than a decade. Where do you see this going in the next five to 10 years? It’s called the, it’s called, what is it? It’s called, I’m gonna call it the Evolution of Jim. Me, you know, in my business and, and, and, and you know, the thing I have book is I’ve survived and I’ve gone through a lot of cycles. I’ve done a lot, you know, and you ask yourself, you scratch your head a lot and you’re, and you, but you’re continually doing objective research and you’re this, if you, this is why I love this game so much. Right? So let’s just go stop for a second. Let’s get some context. Right. My first summer job, one of my first summer jobs, I worked in the basement of a bank in the in, in downtown Toronto, right up the street from the Toronto Stock Exchange. And my job was to let guys in with beak, briefcases into the cage, into the big vault, to basically bring in certificates. Okay. And, and what? Stock certificates. And so remember, you know, and I remember my grandfather when we, when he died, look at, we couldn’t sell the house because he didn’t believe in the banks. And we were finding certificates all over the house in the walls. Okay? Right. So in the 1960s it was bare based. The whole industry was bare based. And there was the volume in Wall Street started to pick up to the point where they couldn’t handle the volume. There was a paper crisis where almost a third of the companies went down bankrupt because of the cage. The cage. Okay. So basically what happened was, to make a long story short, they came out with, they came, Hey, why don’t we get two computers At one point in time, they said, okay, crisis. Let’s solve it. Well, why don’t we get these two computers and we can solve, or we can sell trades among, amongst each other. Okay. And then we don’t need to have guys riding around Wall Street with bicycles and big briefcases. Okay. And then what we did was, what we did was we sat there and said, well, why don’t we have a centralized clearing, and we’re gonna call it DTC or CDS, depending on what country you’re in. And what we’re gonna do is we’re gonna offer paper, we’re gonna, we’re gonna issue paper rights to the underlying stock that was developed in the early 1970s. That’s the system that we’re on right now. There are a lot of faults with that. Let me give you, when you’ve talked about the GameStop a MC situation, when you have a company that’s basically have more shares outstanding short, sorry, more shares short than outstanding, that shows you that the old system doesn’t work. It’s called ation. The paper writes to the underlying assets, it, it doesn’t match up. There have been guys that make a career outta this and write books about this, right? Dole Pineapple. They had a corporate, a corporate event, right? Hostile takeover. 64,000 for 64 million shares, voted, I think, and there was only 3,200 on. We all know this, so this has to be solved. The way you solve it is you tokenize assets, and this was talked about a decade ago, and they know about it and true tofor, they, and if you’re thinking about it, it’s totally logical, right? But if we allow this innovation to go full stream ahead, we’re wiped out, right? So what did they do? They delayed. They delayed. And as you know, you could talk about, it’s called Operation choke 0.2 0.0. Right. You know, the Fed overreached their bounds, they de banked people. I mean, this is why, why Best it’s going after them. They, yet they stepped over their constitutional mandate. Right. The federal, the Fed Act is not, uh, does not supersede the US Constitution. Elizabeth warned the whole thing. They did it. Okay, so let’s not complain about it. So now Atkins is gonna, we’re gonna have the Clarity Act come out and they’re gonna basically deregulate New York Stock Exchange already there. They’re gonna put everything on the blockchain and when you put everything on the blockchain, trade a settlement. There’s no hypo. Immediate settlement. Immediate, which is a benefit if you can get your act together because it, you know, for Wall Street firms you need less capital, right? So it’s a natural evolutionary process. And then you sit there and go back in history, if you and I were writing it, we’d sit there and go, well, should we be surprised that the incumbents right, the status quo pushed back on innovation? No, there was a guy, there was a prophet, um. At, at Harvard, his name was Clay Christensen, and he wrote this wonderful book called The Innovator’s Dilemma. You know, why does, why don’t companies evolve, or why do they go bankrupt? It’s because they cease to evolve and the status quo doesn’t allow the evolution of the companies to take place. Right? Well, that’s what happened in RA. We’re gonna complain about it. No, it, it is what it is. It’s water under the bridge. And so what I think is happening is, you know, Mr. Diamond is basically saying. He’s pragmatic, he’s a realist. And now he’s saying, we gotta evolve. And hey, by the way, now I’ve gotten to the point where I think I can make a tunnel. Think about that. Yeah. Think about his own stable coins, right? So his own stable coins. And, uh, well think about this. If you trade like internal meetings, right? And I’m hyped this hypothetical, right? I go, fuck, don’t screw this up this time. And you’re gonna go, Jim, what are you talking about? I go. We want a nice bread between bid and ask in these financial price. We don’t wanna go down to pennies. Okay? Can we go back to the old days when we were, you know, trading in quarters and sixteenths and so we can make some skin in the game? I think you’ve got the deregulation of the banking industry where the banks are gonna, they’re fit. It’s gonna be baby steps. But what’s gonna happen is they’re gonna basically say, stop taking all that capital that’s sitting at the Fed, making four or fed funds rate overnights wherever it’s four half, 3 75 right now. And you can now trade it. Go back to prop trading, which is what they did. And they’re gonna start off, they will start off with, its only treasuries. Eventually they’ll be able to expand throughout our lifetime. So the old way you gotta look at it is, you know. We’re bringing the ba, you know, we’re putting the band back together, man. Right. And the banks are gonna deregulate, they’re gonna deregulate the banks, they’re going to innovate, they’re gonna be able to use the capital, their earnings profile going out into the end of the decade. It’s, it’s gonna be monstrous, it’s gonna be, you know, it, it’s, it’s, and, and that’s how I get, you know, when people say, where do you think the s and p goes? You know, I say, you know, 14,000, you know, double from here by the end of the decade. And he goes, well, what about ai? I go, well, they’re gonna, that’s important, but it’s the banks. I think the banks are gonna have a renaissance. Yeah. Yeah. Um, one thing just to get your thoughts on, so when you look at the banks, you talked about sort of the inevitability of tokenization. Um, the stock exchange, uh, we talked about stable coins. I mean, another great way for banks to make money. Uh, essentially where does that, how, how does that help or hurt Bitcoin adoption? Because Bitcoin is a sort of a separate, separate, you’re not, you’re not building on Bitcoin as much as you are, say, Ethereum, Mar Solana or, you know, some of the, some of the blockchain things. So, so is it just that. Is it just a, an adoption issue? Because you live in a, in a different world. You live in a world of blockchain and Bitcoin is, its currency. It’s weird, right? Because I, I’m writing this feed like, so Buck, where are you right now? Where, where, where are you located? I’m in Santa Barbara. You’re in California. So, yeah, so I’m in Toronto, right? Uh, you know, I lived in, worked in the States for, you know, a decade, a couple of decades, and I’m back home and it’s like, man, they don’t get it. Right, and, and, and, and what am I talking about? Well, well, this, this is the, the thing that you’ve gotta understand is this, right. Ethereum was invented by Vladi Butrin in this town, Joe Alozo, who’s the head of one of the largest Ethereum groups. Father is a dentist at Bathurst and Spadina. We’re up here and people are saying, oh, you know, president Trump don’t talk about being a 51st state. We act like a colony, duke. We are a, you know, we forget about calling us one. We are. So, look, it, look, there is no doubt in my mind that Ethereum is going to have a place and, and we’re going to use it. Seems like we’re going to use Ethereum and that’s the smart contract, you know? Um. And that’s fine. Um, you know, but going back in time. But, but remember, there’s not per, there’s not perfect scarcity there. So I like Ethereum, don’t get me wrong, but I look at Bitcoin and I look at the, I look at the scarcity, and I also look at the fact of, you know, what sa, what Sailor, if you sailor did a presentation in the middle of next year and all hell broke loose. What he did, and it’s, you know, and of course I’m hypothesizing. He basically went to New York and said, I am going to create fixed income products and I am going to give yields. On those products, and I’m coming after the stranded capital that sits on Wall Street that you guys have been ripping on for years. In the middle of last year, staler went public and declared war. Okay. Are we surprised that Jim Shane Oaks came out and everybody came out basically guns a blazing. Are we surprised? But what he, what Sailor did and put and slammed on the table is it’s pristine capital, it’s transparent capital. And what are you willing to pay for that? And now you GARP banks trading at. We have no idea what their capital structure really is. Honestly, we have an idea, but it’s very opaque, right? You know, the high quality names are trading at two, two to, you know, two times tangible book. You’ve got fintech’s companies trading at four to five times, right book, and you know, what’s Sailor doing right now? Diluting his stock so he can buy as much Bitcoin as he wants because he sees the next game. He says the hell with what you guys think the next game is going to be. Wall Street’s going to realize that Bitcoin is pristine capital and there’s only 21 million of it. What do you and, and what just happened today? What did Morgan Stanley just file a treasury company. So everything you and I are talking about, they know they’re smart guys, right? They’re real, they’re not. That’s, this is the whole point. They’re really, really, really smart. Okay. They see they’ve gone through the history. They know. Okay, so you’re sitting there, you get around the room, you say, so wait a minute. Wait. Whoa, sailor’s over here. And he’s basically saying he’s gonna give you a a pref that’s basically backed by Bitcoin charging 10%. And he’s going after our corporate clients. I mean, and what’s the pitch Buck? You’ve got a hundred million dollars. Okay, you got a hundred million dollars in the kitty. Okay, buck. What happens is you need $10 million a year for working capital, which is in cash, which means you’ve got $90 million sitting there idle. Hey, buck, I can give you 10% on that. You go to Jamie, he’s giving you two. What are you gonna do? Yeah. I think one of the issues right now is I the, the perceived risk profile of that. Right. Uh, you know. I tend to agree with you about the, uh, pristine nature of Bitcoin s collateral, but just in general, the perception. I don’t know that, that that’s. That’s the case. Well, you gotta go back to the fact that, do you think Bitcoin’s going to zero or not? No, of course not. Yeah. ‘ cause the Bitcoin doesn’t go to zero. There’s no, then, then that are, there’s Bitcoin could go to zero. There’s no, I mean, I don’t think, I mean, non-zero probability, of course, right? I don’t think it is. And if that has been, if it has been selected and now you have Wall Street coalescing it, I haven’t even mentioned the president of the United States or his family. Right. Uh, or the Commerce Secretary and his family, right? Or if you go to New York, wall Street, right, they’re all talking about it, right? So, I, I, you know, to me, I, I, the question about micro strategy, to me it’s not. That it’s a treasury company and it’s got a pile of Bitcoin. What does he do with it? Does he become a bank? Like why does it, this is me. I’m pitching him. Right. Hey, Mike, why don’t you just become a FinTech, say you’re like a FinTech company and you’ll get, and you, you’re gonna instantaneously trade it five to six times book. Why don’t you, why are you, you’re talking like you’re attacking them, but you’re still, you’re still a software company with a, with a big whack of Bitcoin that you are writing pres. Right? So, and, and so that’s, that’s how I look at it. I think the wave is too big. We are going to digitize. And the other thing that we didn’t really touch on with respect to AI and blockchain, and I’m gonna paraphrase the president. Right. Um, Mr. Trump is, look, um, it’s a matter of national security, duke, and when I hear that, I go back to the nineties in the eighties when I was in late eighties when I was an undergrad. Right. And it wasn’t China, it was Japan. And, and you know, what happened was, you know, it, it’s funny, Al Gore did deregulate so that. The internet could become for-profit. We all stood around and said, you know what the hell could, how do we make money on this? That’s, you know, what do we do? And then what did we do? We, we, we threw a ton of money at it and the United States controlled it. And what did we get out of it? We got out, we got, you know, all those companies. Right. The last thing I would say to you, and this is much more of a personal story, is I, when I was younger, I was in New York and it was 2000 and I was at the Grand Hyatt, and it was a tech, it was a tech conference and, uh, Larry Ellison Oracle was there and he gave a, he gave a, he gave a a, a fireside chat. Then, um, we go to a breakout room and, you know, in a break, I don’t know about if you’ve been to one, but you go to a breakout room, it’s a smaller room at the hotel, and you know, sometimes you got 25 people, sometimes you got 50 people, right. And, you know, I went to the, I went to the breakout with Mr. Allison ’cause of Oracle and I went in there and it was absolutely jammed and I was sweating and he just looked at us and he just ripped us. He AP Soly, just, I still have the scars today. I’m talking to you about it. Okay. He called it a bubble. He called it a bubble. He, he was early in calling it a bubble. I never forgot that. And then you sit there and see what he’s doing right now. Where he’s levering up the balance sheet. Now, to me, having survived in this game for such a long period of time, and I call it a game, it’s a game of strategy, whatever, you know, how does that not, you know, I would say to you, we were, your office was next to mine. Fuck. I remember New York, he’s loading the goose loaded in. He go in, he’s borrowing money from his grandmother. He’s, you know, what is going on. And he’s really stinking smart. You know, he’s, he, Larry Allenson just doesn’t do, and people, oh, he’s in, you know, he’s, no, he’s not, he’s, he’s like the mentor of all of these guys. You know what I mean? So there’s a, to me, there’s a discontinuity that these need to believe that we’re still early on because you know, what, if Larry’s, what do we take when Larry or Mr. Ellison is leveraging up to me, it’s profound because I’m anchoring off of my bias to the New York, the New York high at, at the Tech Co. I think it was, I think it was at Bear Stearn. I couldn’t remember Bear Stearns or Lehman. But you know, one of those I carry that experience on with the rest of my life. I do. It’s like, what is Larry thinking? Right? So he’s leveraging up buck. That’s all I know. He’s a priest or guy. Well, that’s probably a good place for us to stop, Jim, uh, chief, uh, market strategist at Wellington Elta Private Wealth. Thank you so much for joining me. Thanks so much and be safe. You make a lot of money but are still worried about retirement. Maybe you didn’t start earning until your thirties. Now you’re trying to catch up. Meanwhile, you’ve got a mortgage, a private school to pay for, and you feel like you’re getting further and further behind. Now, good news, if you need to catch up on retirement, check out a program put out by some of the oldest and most prestigious life insurance companies in the world. It’s called Wealth Accelerator, and it can help you amplify your returns quickly, protect your money from creditors, and provide financial protection to your family if something happens. The concepts here are used by some of the wealthiest families in the world, and there’s no reason why they can’t be used by you. Check it out for yourself by going to wealth formula banking.com. Welcome back to the show everyone. Hope you enjoyed it. Uh, and, uh, as I said before, do not ignore ai. This is something that you need to start using. Have your kids start using it. Uh, make sure that they, you know. They use it every day because this whole world is turning AI and it’s gonna happen. You know, it’s gonna happen in, in a blink of an, uh, blink of an eye. And the world is gonna change and there are gonna be real winners out there. And the winners are gonna be people who knew where there was, was going and kind of used it in their mind’s eye as they looked on navigating how. You know how to allocate their money. Anyway, that is it for me. This week on Wealth Formula Podcast. This is Buck JJoffrey signing off. If you wanna learn more, you can now get free access to our in-depth personal finance course featuring industry leaders like Tom Wheel Wright and Ken McElroy. Visit wealth formula roadmap.com.

Go to www.LearningLeader.com for more This is brought to you by Insight Global. If you need to hire one person, hire a team of people, or transform your business through Talent or Technical Services, Insight Global's team of 30,000 people around the world has the hustle and grit to deliver. www.InsightGlobal.com/LearningLeader Jimmy Wales is the founder of Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit. After his daughter Kira's birth faced medical challenges and he couldn't find reliable information online, Jimmy launched Wikipedia in January 2001. In this conversation, Jimmy shares why extending trust before it's earned creates better outcomes, how to deal with bad actors, and the seven rules for building things that last. Notes: Key Learnings (in Jimmy's words) Wikipedia launched 20 days after my daughter was born. When Kira was born, I realized that when you go on the internet, and you've got a question like, "what is this condition my daughter has?"  It just wasn't there. There were either random blogs or academic journal articles that were way above my head. Kira was born on December 26th, and I opened Wikipedia on January 15th.  Nupedia failed because of the seven-stage review process. Before Wikipedia, we worked on Nupedia. We recruited academics to write articles. You had to send in your CV showing you were qualified before you could write anything. We had very slow progress. I was on the verge of giving up. This top-down approach with a seven-stage review process before you publish anything that's no fun, and nobody's doing it. We let anyone edit and figured we'd add structure later. We thought we'd have to figure out who the editor-in-chief of the chemistry section is. You're gonna have to have some kind of authority and hierarchy. But I thought, let's just not have too much structure for as long as possible.  "It's fun. You could be the first person to create a page." There was a point in time when you could write, "Paris is the capital of France". That's amazing. It's not much of an encyclopedia article, but it was fun. It's like, oh, we can just start documenting whatever we know. People started just doing all kinds of stuff. The magic is when you come back and see others improving your work. You could just write a few facts down and hit save, and it's not very good yet. But you'd go back a few days later and see somebody dug in, and they added more information. That element has always been really important. Is it fun? Do you enjoy the activity? Do you meet interesting people? You spend one afternoon, you add a few facts, and then you think, you know what? The world's just ever so slightly better. Trust is conditional, not naive. Out of every thousand people, probably a small handful are gonna be really annoying. But it's really rare to have somebody who's actually malicious. The idea of assuming good faith, as we call it in Wikipedia, is extending trust first before it's been earned. It's conditional. You extend that friendly hand of trust. And if the person proves themselves to be super problematic, then you have to deal with it. To get trust, give trust.  Most people are decent. It also creates an environment where trustworthy behavior is rewarded. As a boss, wouldn't it be fantastic if you said, I'm going to go off and do this other thing, but I just trust my people are so good, they're gonna crack on with the work? Sometimes they'll make a call I would've made differently. That's okay. They're smart. Sometimes they're going to get it better than I did. "You haven't earned my trust." When somebody looks you dead in the eye and says, "You haven't earned my trust," that's destruction. It's the opposite of building a culture where people can thrive.  Extending trust works in parenting, too. When teenagers say, "Well, it doesn't matter what I do, they're going to think the worst anyway, so I might as well do the bad thing." That's really unfortunate. As opposed to saying to your teenager, "Yeah, you want to go out and stay a little later than before. I want you to do that. I trust you, but you gotta do it the right way." You give that trust and believe me, they come home right on time because this is my chance to actually nail this. Give your children an opportunity to live up to building trust.  When trust is broken, you can rebuild it faster than you think. Frances Fry is a Harvard professor who had a huge job at Uber when they had an enormous crisis of trust. People say once you've broken trust, that's it, you can never get it back. But is it really true? No, it's actually not true. She thinks companies can rebuild trust faster than you think. A teenager who's broken a rule can rebuild trust pretty quickly. And our job is to let them rebuild that trust.  The eighth rule is walk the walk. The rules of trust aren't just a lot of good words. You actually have to walk the walk. If you say "I screwed up" and you own that, but then you go back to being the same as you were before, you're not going to rebuild trust. But if you walk the walk, people will see that.  Airbnb rebuilt trust by walking the walk. Really early in Airbnb's history, someone rented out their apartment and came home and it was absolutely trashed. Airbnb handled it very badly. They were stonewalling. In this era, that's often the wrong advice. Not saying anything just means it goes viral. So they ripped off the band-aid. They said, Look, we screwed this up. They started requiring ID's for people renting apartments out, ID's from customers, and substantial insurance for owners. They walked the walk. Transparency doesn't mean sharing everything; it means sharing the process. If people can see your workings, they can see what you're doing and how it works, it gives them assurance in the process. It's about judgment calls. What would be helpful for us to share so people can trust the whole process?  If you think people are fundamentally rotten, you can't work with them. It's very easy when we look at the state of the world to be downtrodden, cynical, and don't trust anybody. If you think people on the other side of you politically or people at your workplace are fundamentally just rotten people, then you're going to have a hard time listening to them. You're going to have a hard time understanding where they're coming from. You're not going to do the right things that make sense to people. Which hurts all of society.  When you've been beaten up by life, change the channel. If you work somewhere where your boss doesn't trust you and your coworkers are all backstabbing freaks, it's time to change the channel. Every night, you should be trying to find a better position. Your number one criteria in looking for that next position is finding somebody who you think is a proper person to be your manager. Think of it as you're interviewing the company just as much as they're interviewing you. When you give trust, you attract trustworthy people. When you become known as a person who gives trust before it's earned, you magically attract trustworthy people. It's kind of cool how it works. Will you get burned every once in a while? Maybe. But you attract the type of people that you wanna be around. Curiosity is the ultimate love language. Get out there in the world and be curious. Asking people questions and being genuinely curious about their stories and learning about them and asking follow-up questions is a great way to show love and to connect with people. When you find yourself in a curiosity conversation where everyone's asking and learning, and they're head nodding and into it, there's nothing better. That's human nature connecting. We are born to connect and collaborate with others. It's quite easy and natural for people to fit into whatever culture is around them. We naturally like to work together to build something good. We're social, and we like to be social. We collaborate to build experiences together. A party with only yourself is not a party. Do what you love, even if it takes time to get there. One of the things that I think is really important is do what you love, do something that you really care about. Oftentimes for young people, there's this struggle between here's the thing that I really want to be doing, and here's the thing that's going to make me some money. Work really hard to find a way to put those together.  Reflection Questions Jimmy says extending trust before it's earned creates better outcomes, but it requires not being naive when someone proves untrustworthy. Think of a situation where you're withholding trust. Is it because of actual evidence that this person is untrustworthy, or are you bringing baggage from past experiences with different people? What would it look like to extend conditional trust in this situation? If you're in a leadership position, honestly assess: are there team members who feel you don't trust? What specific actions could you take this week to demonstrate trust before they've "earned" it in the traditional sense? More Learning #605 - Seth Godin: The Power of Remarkable Ideas #598 - Sam Parr: Bold, Fast, Fun (Founder of The Hustle) #645 - Ryan Petersen: Take Action - From Crisis to Solution Audio Pod Timestamps 02:07 Jimmy Wales' Early Fascination with Encyclopedias 04:28 The Birth of Wikipedia 07:35 The Trust Factor in Wikipedia 12:04 Managing Bad Actors on Wikipedia 15:28 Personal Reflections on Trust 27:05 Setting Reasonable Boundaries for Teens 28:18 Rebuilding Trust After It's Broken 32:37 The Importance of Transparency in Leadership 36:50 The Power of Positive Purpose 39:06 Practical Advice for the Trust-Broken 43:01 Connecting and Collaborating with Others 45:17 Career Advice for Young Professionals 49:41 EOPC

We're taught that good leaders decide fast. But that belief may be holding you back. Harvard instructor and author of Manage Yourself to Lead Others, Margaret Andrews, explains why effective decisions often take longer and how rushing creates more work later.Together, she and Jason explore the mystic around leadership and decisions. Plus, one easy way to know if your meetings are effective. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tal Ben-Shahar is an academic, author, speaker, teacher and co-founder of the Happiness Studies Academy. His classes on Positive Psychology and Leadership were among the largest courses in Harvard's history, and he teaches, speaks, and consults around the world, to the general public, governments, Fortune 500 companies, and educational institutions. Tal's personal mission statement is “to make the world a better place through wholebeing education” and his internationally best-selling books have been translated into more than 25 languages. Tal has been featured on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, NBC, FOX, CNN, and 60 Minutes among others. Tal earned both his BA and PHD from Harvard. In this episode we discuss the following: Tal flips a common assumption on it's head: happiness doesn't start with feeling good; it starts with giving ourselves permission to feel bad. Painful emotions aren't a bug in the system. They're proof that we're alive. The mistake we make is treating emotions as moral verdicts rather than facts of nature, and then trying to suppress what we feel. The key is to accept what we're feeling and then chose to act in line with our values. The real work isn't learning these ideas. It's applying them, and for that reason Tal wears a bracelet to help him bridge the knowing / doing gap. In summary, to be happy, remember to let yourself feel bad. And then ACT.

Can AI make you sound more human? Can you use technology to connect authentically—without turning into a robot? In this episode, I share lessons from Allison Shapira's new book and our conversation about striking the right balance between efficiency and genuine connection. Are you using AI to amplify your authentic voice, or are you leaving the human touch behind? What are the boundaries we need to draw so our communications—whether wedding vows or emails—stay personal and impactful in the age of AI?Listen to this new episode for practical ways to make AI work for you without losing authenticity, and hints on how small businesses can use tech to build stronger, more empathetic client relationships.Allison Shapira is an executive advisor, Harvard lecturer, keynote speaker, and bestselling author who helps senior leaders communicate with confidence, clarity, and authenticity in high-stakes moments. Since 2003, she has advised leaders from prime ministers to Fortune 50 executives, designing communication programs that build trust and drive results. An adjunct lecturer at the Harvard Kennedy School, her work has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, The New York Times, and Harvard Business Review. She is the author of Speak with Impact and AI for the Authentic Leader.Contact Allison Shapira, Keynote SpeakerWebsite: www.allisonshapira.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/allisonshapira/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/AllisonShapiraInstagram: @AllisonShapiraX: @AllisonShapiraIf you have any questions about anything in this, or any of my podcasts, or have a suggestion for a topic or guest, please reach out directly to me at Alan@WeddingBusinessSolutions.com or visit my website Podcast.AlanBerg.com Please be sure to subscribe to this podcast and leave a review (thanks, it really does make a difference). If you want to get notifications of new episodes and upcoming workshops and webinars, you can sign up at Have you ever wondered... "What would Alan say or do about this?" - well, now you can ask my AI Alter-Ego "Ask Alan Anything" the things you'd ask the real Alan, any time of the day or night. And as a listener of this podcast, you'll save 50%, so starting at only $10 per month you can "Ask Alan Anything"!Go to www.WhatWouldAlanSay.com and use the 50% off coupon code - podcast - to start asking Alan anything today. I'm Alan Berg. Thanks for listening. If you have any questions about this or if you'd like to suggest other topics for "The Wedding Business Solutions Podcast" please let me know. My email is Alan@WeddingBusinessSolutions.com. Look forward to seeing you on the next episode. Thanks. Listen to this and all episodes on Apple Podcast, YouTube or your favorite app/site: Apple Podcast: http://bit.ly/weddingbusinesssolutions YouTube: www.WeddingBusinessSolutionsPodcast.tv Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3sGsuB8 Stitcher: http://bit.ly/wbsstitcher Google Podcast: http://bit.ly/wbsgoogle iHeart Radio: https://ihr.fm/31C9Mic Pandora: http://bit.ly/wbspandora ©2025 Wedding Business Solutions LLC & AlanBerg.com

Do you think we love ourselves too much or not enough? Is it easier for you to give or receive? Tune in to my conversation with Anil Gupta and learn:How to understand self-love.Why forgiveness is essential for personal freedom.Why it's easier to give and sometimes so hard to receive.How to become a better receiver.How to overcome your limiting beliefs.How to recognize your worth and grow emotionally. How helping others can alleviate your own pain.How the decisions you make today shape your future.Anil Gupta, internationally known as The Love Doctor, helps successful individuals create extraordinary relationships—whether in love, business, or personal fulfillment. He spoke in 18 countries as well as Tedx, Sky TV, NBC, Fox news, BBC iHeartRadio, Harvard and crowds of over 10,000 people. He has helped thousands of people overcome life struggles through a powerful practical and proven methodology. Connect with Anil: www.meetanil.comLinkedIn- https://www.linkedin.com/in/anilgupta-lovedoctor/Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/anilgupta_lovedoctor/FB - https://www.facebook.com/AnilLoveDoc/

IWhat is our children's future? What skills should they be developing? How should schools be adapting? What will the fully functioning citizens and workers of the future look like? A look into the landscape of the next 15 years, the future of work with human and AI interactions, the transformation of education, the safety and privacy landscapes, and a parental playbook. Navigation: Intro The Landscape: 2026–2040 The Future of Work: Human + AI The Transformation of Education The Ethics, Safety, and Privacy Landscape The Parental Playbook: Actionable Strategies Conclusion Our co-hosts: Bertrand Schmitt, Entrepreneur in Residence at Red River West, co-founder of App Annie / Data.ai, business angel, advisor to startups and VC funds, @bschmitt Nuno Goncalves Pedro, Investor, Managing Partner, Founder at Chamaeleon, @ngpedro Our show: Tech DECIPHERED brings you the Entrepreneur and Investor views on Big Tech, VC and Start-up news, opinion pieces and research. We decipher their meaning, and add inside knowledge and context. Being nerds, we also discuss the latest gadgets and pop culture news Subscribe To Our Podcast Bertrand SchmittIntroduction Welcome to Episode 72 of Tech Deciphered, about our children’s future. What is our children’s future? What skills should they be developing? How should school be adapting to AI? What would be the functioning citizens and workers of the future look like, especially in the context of the AI revolution? Nuno, what’s your take? Maybe we start with the landscape. Nuno Goncalves PedroThe Landscape: 2026–2040 Let’s first frame it. What do people think is going to happen? Firstly, that there’s going to be a dramatic increase in productivity, and because of that dramatic increase in productivity, there are a lot of numbers that show that there’s going to be… AI will enable some labour productivity growth of 0.1 to 0.6% through 2040, which would be a figure that would be potentially rising even more depending on use of other technologies beyond generative AI, as much as 0.5 to 3.4% points annually, which would be ridiculous in terms of productivity enhancement. To be clear, we haven’t seen it yet. But if there are those dramatic increases in productivity expected by the market, then there will be job displacement. There will be people losing their jobs. There will be people that will need to be reskilled, and there will be a big shift that is similar to what happens when there’s a significant industrial revolution, like the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th century into the 20th century. Other numbers quoted would say that 30% of US jobs could be automated by 2030, which is a silly number, 30%, and that another 60% would see tremendously being altered. A lot of their tasks would be altered for those jobs. There’s also views that this is obviously fundamentally a global phenomenon, that as much as 9% of jobs could be lost to AI by 2030. I think question mark if this is a net number or a gross number, so it might be 9% our loss, but then maybe there’re other jobs that will emerge. It’s very clear that the landscape we have ahead of us is if there are any significant increases in productivity, there will be job displacement. There will be job shifting. There will be the need for reskilling. Therefore, I think on the downside, you would say there’s going to be job losses. We’ll have to reevaluate whether people should still work in general 5 days a week or not. Will we actually work in 10, 20, 30 years? I think that’s the doomsday scenario and what happens on that side of the fence. I think on the positive side, there’s also a discussion around there’ll be new jobs that emerge. There’ll be new jobs that maybe we don’t understand today, new job descriptions that actually don’t even exist yet that will emerge out this brave new world of AI. Bertrand SchmittYeah. I mean, let’s not forget how we get to a growing economy. I mean, there’s a measurement of a growing economy is GDP growth. Typically, you can simplify in two elements. One is the growth of the labour force, two, the rise of the productivity of that labour force, and that’s about it. Either you grow the economy by increasing the number of people, which in most of the Western world is not really happening, or you increase productivity. I think that we should not forget that growth of productivity is a backbone of growth for our economies, and that has been what has enabled the rise in prosperity across countries. I always take that as a win, personally. That growth in productivity has happened over the past decades through all the technological revolutions, from more efficient factories to oil and gas to computers, to network computers, to internet, to mobile and all the improvement in science, usually on the back of technological improvement. Personally, I welcome any rise in improvement we can get in productivity because there is at this stage simply no other choice for a growing world in terms of growing prosperity. In terms of change, we can already have a look at the past. There are so many jobs today you could not imagine they would exist 30 years ago. Take the rise of the influencer, for instance, who could have imagined that 30 years ago. Take the rise of the small mom-and-pop e-commerce owner, who could have imagined that. Of course, all the rise of IT as a profession. I mean, how few of us were there 30 years ago compared to today. I mean, this is what it was 30 years ago. I think there is a lot of change that already happened. I think as a society, we need to welcome that. If we go back even longer, 100 years ago, 150 years ago, let’s not forget, if I take a city like Paris, we used to have tens of thousands of people transporting water manually. Before we have running water in every home, we used to have boats going to the North Pole or to the northern region to bring back ice and basically pushing ice all the way to the Western world because we didn’t have fridges at the time. I think that when we look back in time about all the jobs that got displaced, I would say, Thank you. Thank you because these were not such easy jobs. Change is coming, but change is part of the human equation, at least. Industrial revolution, the past 250 years, it’s thanks to that that we have some improvement in living conditions everywhere. AI is changing stuff, but change is a constant, and we need to adapt and adjust. At least on my side, I’m glad that AI will be able to displace some jobs that were not so interesting to do in the first place in many situations. Maybe not dangerous like in the past because we are talking about replacing white job collars, but at least repetitive jobs are definitely going to be on the chopping block. Nuno Goncalves PedroWhat happens in terms of shift? We were talking about some numbers earlier. The World Economic Forum also has some numbers that predicts that there is a gross job creation rate of 14% from 2025 to 2030 and a displacement rate of 8%, so I guess they’re being optimistic, so a net growth in employment. I think that optimism relates to this thesis that, for example, efficiency, in particular in production and industrial environments, et cetera, might reduce labour there while increasing the demand for labour elsewhere because there is a natural lower cost base. If there’s more automation in production, therefore there’s more disposable income for people to do other things and to focus more on their side activities. Maybe, as I said before, not work 5 days a week, but maybe work four or three or whatever it is. What are the jobs of the future? What are the jobs that we see increasing in the future? Obviously, there’re a lot of jobs that relate to the technology side, that relate obviously to AI, that’s a little bit self-serving, and everything that relates to information technology, computer science, computer technology, computer engineering, et cetera. More broadly in electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, that might actually be more needed. Because there is a broadening of all of these elements of contact with digital, with AI over time also with robots and robotics, that those jobs will increase. There’s a thesis that actually other jobs that are a little bit more related to agriculture, education, et cetera, might not see a dramatic impact, that will still need for, I guess, teachers and the need for people working in farms, et cetera. I think this assumes that probably the AI revolution will come much before the fundamental evolution that will come from robotics afterwards. Then there’s obviously this discussion around declining roles. Anything that’s fundamentally routine, like data entry, clinical roles, paralegals, for example, routine manufacturing, anything that’s very repetitive in nature will be taken away. I have the personal thesis that there are jobs that are actually very blue-collar jobs, like HVAC installation, maintenance, et cetera, plumbing, that will be still done by humans for a very long time because there are actually, they appear to be repetitive, but they’re actually complex, and they require manual labour that cannot be easily, I think, right now done by robots and replacements of humans. Actually, I think there’re blue-collar roles that will be on the increase rather than on decrease that will demand a premium, because obviously, they are apprenticeship roles, certification roles, and that will demand a premium. Maybe we’re at the two ends. There’s an end that is very technologically driven of jobs that will need to necessarily increase, and there’s at the other end, jobs that are very menial but necessarily need to be done by humans, and therefore will also command a premium on the other end. Bertrand SchmittI think what you say make a lot of sense. If you think about AI as a stack, my guess is that for the foreseeable future, on the whole stack, and when I say stack, I mean from basic energy production because we need a lot of energy for AI, maybe to going up to all the computing infrastructure, to AI models, to AI training, to robotics. All this stack, we see an increase in expertise in workers and everything. Even if a lot of this work will benefit from AI improvement, the boom is so large that it will bring a lot of demand for anyone working on any part of the stack. Some of it is definitely blue-collar. When you have to build a data centre or energy power station, this requires a lot of blue-collar work. I would say, personally, I’m absolutely not a believer of the 3 or 4 days a week work week. I don’t believe a single second in that socialist paradise. If you want to call it that way. I think that’s not going to change. I would say today we can already see that breaking. I mean, if you take Europe, most European countries have a big issue with pension. The question is more to increase how long you are going to work because financially speaking, the equation is not there. Personally, I don’t think AI would change any of that. I agree with you in terms of some jobs from electricians to gas piping and stuff. There will still be demand and robots are not going to help soon on this job. There will be a big divergence between and all those that can be automated, done by AI and robots and becoming cheaper and cheaper and stuff that requires a lot of human work, manual work. I don’t know if it will become more expensive, but definitely, proportionally, in comparison, we look so expensive that you will have second thoughts about doing that investment to add this, to add that. I can see that when you have your own home, so many costs, some cost our product. You buy this new product, you add it to your home. It can be a water heater or something, built in a factory, relatively cheap. You see the installation cost, the maintenance cost. It’s many times the cost of the product itself. Nuno Goncalves PedroMaybe it’s a good time to put a caveat into our conversation. I mean, there’s a… Roy Amara was a futurist who came up with the Amara’s Law. We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and overestimate the effect in the long run. I prefer my own law, which is, we tend to overestimate the speed at which we get to a technological revolution and underestimate its impact. I think it’s a little bit like that. I think everyone now is like, “Oh, my God, we’re going to be having the AI overlords taking over us, and AGI is going to happen pretty quickly,” and all of that. I mean, AGI will probably happen at some point. We’re not really sure when. I don’t think anyone can tell you. I mean, there’re obviously a lot of ranges going on. Back to your point, for example, on the shift of the work week and how we work. I mean, just to be very clear, we didn’t use to have 5 days a week and 2 days a weekend. If we go back to religions, there was definitely Sabbath back in the day, and there was one day off, the day of the Lord and the day of God. Then we went to 2 days of weekend. I remember going to Korea back in 2005, and I think Korea shifted officially to 5 days a week, working week and 2 days weekend for some of the larger business, et cetera, in 2004. Actually, it took another whatever years for it to be pervasive in society. This is South Korea, so this is a developed market. We might be at some point moving to 4 days a week. Maybe France was ahead of the game. I know Bertrand doesn’t like this, the 35-hour week. Maybe we will have another shift in what defines the working week versus not. What defines what people need to do in terms of efficiency and how they work and all of that. I think it’s probably just going to take longer than we think. I think there’re some countries already doing it. I was reading maybe Finland was already thinking about moving to 4 days a week. There’re a couple of countries already working on it. Certainly, there’re companies already doing it as well. Bertrand SchmittYeah, I don’t know. I’m just looking at the financial equation of most countries. The disaster is so big in Western Europe, in the US. So much debt is out that needs to get paid that I don’t think any country today, unless there is a complete reversal of the finance, will be able to make a big change. You could argue maybe if we are in such a situation, it might be because we went too far in benefits, in vacation, in work days versus weekends. I’m not saying we should roll back, but I feel that at this stage, the proof is in the pudding. The finance of most developed countries are broken, so I don’t see a change coming up. Potentially, the other way around, people leaving to work more, unfortunately. We will see. My point is that AI will have to be so transformational for the productivity for countries, and countries will have to go back to finding their ways in terms of financial discipline to reach a level where we can truly profit from that. I think from my perspective, we have time to think about it in 10, 20 years. Right now, it’s BS at this stage of this discussion. Nuno Goncalves PedroYeah, there’s a dependency, Bertrand, which is there needs to be dramatic increases in productivity that need to happen that create an expansion of economy. Once that expansion is captured by, let’s say, government or let’s say by the state, it needs to be willingly fed back into society, which is not a given. There’re some governments who are going to be like, “No, you need to work for a living.” Tough luck. There’re no handouts, there’s nothing. There’s going to be other governments that will be pressured as well. I mean, even in a more socialist Europe, so to speak. There’re now a lot of pressures from very far-right, even extreme positions on what people need to do for a living and how much should the state actually intervene in terms of minimum salaries, et cetera, and social security. To your point, the economies are not doing well in and of themselves. Anyway, there would need to be tremendous expansion of economy and willingness by the state to give back to its citizens, which is also not a given. Bertrand SchmittAnd good financial discipline as well. Before we reach all these three. Reaping the benefits in a tremendous way, way above trend line, good financial discipline, and then some willingness to send back. I mean, we can talk about a dream. I think that some of this discussion was, in some ways, to have a discussion so early about this. It’s like, let’s start to talk about the benefits of the aeroplane industries in 1915 or 1910, a few years after the Wright brothers flight, and let’s make a decision based on what the world will be in 30 years from now when we reap this benefit. This is just not reasonable. This is not reasonable thinking. I remember seeing companies from OpenAI and others trying to push this narrative. It was just political agenda. It was nothing else. It was, “Let’s try to make look like AI so nice and great in the future, so you don’t complain on the short term about what’s happening.” I don’t think this is a good discussion to have for now. Let’s be realistic. Nuno Goncalves PedroJust for the sake of sharing it with our listeners, apparently there’re a couple of countries that have moved towards something a bit lower than 5 days a week. Belgium, I think, has legislated the ability for you to compress your work week into 4 days, where you could do 10 hours for 4 days, so 40 hours. UAE has some policy for government workers, 4.5 days. Iceland has some stuff around 35 to 36 hours, which is France has had that 35 hour thing. Lithuania for parents. Then just trials, it’s all over the shop. United Kingdom, my own Portugal, of course, Germany, Brazil, and South Africa, and a bunch of other countries, so interesting. There’s stuff going on. Bertrand SchmittFor sure. I mean, France managed to bankrupt itself playing the 75 hours work week since what, 2000 or something. I mean, yeah, it’s a choice of financial suicide, I would say. Nuno Goncalves PedroWonderful. The Future of Work: Human + AI Maybe moving a little bit towards the future of work and the coexistence of work of human and AI, I think the thesis that exists a little bit in the market is that the more positive thesis that leads to net employment growth and net employment creation, as we were saying, there’s shifting of professions, they’re rescaling, and there’s the new professions that will emerge, is the notion that human will need to continue working alongside with machine. I’m talking about robots, I’m also talking about software. Basically software can’t just always run on its own, and therefore, software serves as a layer of augmentation, that humans become augmented by AI, and therefore, they can be a lot more productive, and we can be a lot more productive. All of that would actually lead to a world where the efficiencies and the economic creation are incredible. We’ll have an unparalleled industrial evolution in our hands through AI. That’s one way of looking at it. We certainly at Chameleon, that’s how we think through AI and the AI layers that we’re creating with Mantis, which is our in-house platform at Chameleon, is that it’s augmenting us. Obviously, the human is still running the show at the end, making the toughest decisions, the more significant impact with entrepreneurs that we back, et cetera. AI augments us, but we run the show. Bertrand SchmittI totally agree with that perspective that first AI will bring a new approach, a human plus AI. Here in that situation, you really have two situations. Are you a knowledgeable user? Do you know your field well? Are you an expert? Are you an IT expert? Are you a medical doctor? Do you find your best way to optimise your work with AI? Are you knowledgeable enough to understand and challenge AI when you see weird output? You have to be knowledgeable in your field, but also knowledgeable in how to handle AI, because even experts might say, “Whatever AI says.” My guess is that will be the users that will benefit most from AI. Novice, I think, are in a bit tougher situation because if you use AI without truly understanding it, it’s like laying foundations on sand. Your stuff might crumble down the way, and you will have no clue what’s happening. Hopefully, you don’t put anyone in physical danger, but that’s more worrisome to me. I think some people will talk about the rise of vibe coding, for instance. I’ve seen AI so useful to improve coding in so many ways, but personally, I don’t think vibe coding is helpful. I mean, beyond doing a quick prototype or some stuff, but to put some serious foundation, I think it’s near useless if you have a pure vibe coding approach, obviously to each their own. I think the other piece of the puzzle, it’s not just to look at human plus AI. I think definitely there will be the other side as well, which is pure AI. Pure AI replacement. I think we start to see that with autonomous cars. We are close to be there. Here we’ll be in situation of maybe there is some remote control by some humans, maybe there is local control. We are talking about a huge scale replacement of some human activities. I think in some situation, let’s talk about work farms, for instance. That’s quite a special term, but basically is to describe work that is very repetitive in nature, requires a lot of humans. Today, if you do a loan approval, if you do an insurance claim analysis, you have hundreds, thousands, millions of people who are doing this job in Europe, in the US, or remotely outsourced to other countries like India. I think some of these jobs are fully at risk to be replaced. Would it be 100% replacement? Probably not. But a 9:1, 10:1 replacement? I think it’s definitely possible because these jobs have been designed, by the way, to be repetitive, to follow some very clear set of rules, to improve the rules, to remove any doubt if you are not sure. I think some of these jobs will be transformed significantly. I think we see two sides. People will become more efficient controlling an AI, being able to do the job of two people at once. On the other side, we see people who have much less control about their life, basically, and whose job will simply disappear. Nuno Goncalves PedroTwo points I would like to make. The first point is we’re talking about a state of AI that we got here, and we mentioned this in previous episodes of Tech Deciphered, through brute force, dramatically increased data availability, a lot of compute, lower network latencies, and all of that that has led us to where we are today. But it’s brute force. The key thing here is brute force. Therefore, when AI acts really well, it acts well through brute force, through seeing a bunch of things that have happened before. For example, in the case of coding, it might still outperform many humans in coding in many different scenarios, but it might miss hedge cases. It might actually not be as perfect and as great as one of these developers that has been doing it for decades who has this intuition and is a 10X developer. In some ways, I think what got us here is not maybe what’s going to get us to the next level of productivity as well, which is the unsupervised learning piece, the actually no learning piece, where you go into the world and figure stuff out. That world is emerging now, but it’s still not there in terms of AI algorithms and what’s happening. Again, a lot of what we’re seeing today is the outcome of the brute force movement that we’ve had over the last decade, decade and a half. The second point I’d like to make is to your point, Bertrand, you were going really well through, okay, if you’re a super experienced subject-matter expert, the way you can use AI is like, wow! Right? I mean, you are much more efficient, right? I was asked to do a presentation recently. When I do things in public, I don’t like to do it. If it’s a keynote, because I like to use my package stuff, there’s like six, seven presentations that I have prepackaged, and I can adapt around that. But if it’s a totally new thing, I don’t like to do it as a keynote because it requires a lot of preparation. Therefore, I’m like, I prefer to do a fire set chat or a panel or whatever. I got asked to do something, a little bit what is taking us to this topic today around what’s happening to our children and all of that is like, “God! I need to develop this from scratch.” The honest truth is if you have domain expertise around many areas, you can do it very quickly with the aid of different tools in AI. Anything from Gemini, even with Nana Banana, to ChatGPT and other tools that are out there for you and framing, how would you do that? But the problem then exists with people that are just at the beginning of their careers, people that have very little expertise and experience, and people that are maybe coming out of college where their knowledge is mostly theoretical. What happens to those people? Even in computer engineering, even in computer science, even in software development, how do those people get to the next level? I think that’s one of the interesting conversations to be had. What happens to the recent graduate or the recent undergrad? How do those people get the expertise they need to go to the next level? Can they just be replaced by AI agents today? What’s their role in terms of the workforce, and how do they fit into that workforce? Bertrand SchmittNo, I mean, that’s definitely the biggest question. I think that a lot of positions, if you are really knowledgeable, good at your job, if you are that 10X developer, I don’t think your job is at risk. Overall, you always have some exceptions, some companies going through tough times, but I don’t think it’s an issue. On the other end, that’s for sure, the recent new graduates will face some more trouble to learn on their own, start their career, and go to that 10X productivity level. But at the same time, let’s also not kid ourselves. If we take software development, this is a profession that increase in number of graduates tremendously over the past 30 years. I don’t think everyone basically has the talent to really make it. Now that you have AI, for sure, the bar to justify why you should be there, why you should join this company is getting higher and higher. Being just okay won’t be enough to get you a career in IT. You will need to show that you are great or potential to be great. That might make things tough for some jobs. At the same time, I certainly believe there will be new opportunities that were not there before. People will have to definitely adjust to that new reality, learn and understand what’s going on, what are the options, and also try to be very early on, very confident at using AI as much as they can because for sure, companies are going to only hire workers that have shown their capacity to work well with AI. Nuno Goncalves PedroMy belief is that it generates new opportunities for recent undergrads, et cetera, of building their own microbusinesses or nano businesses. To your point, maybe getting jobs because they’ll be forced to move faster within their jobs and do less menial and repetitive activities and be more focused on actual dramatic intellectual activities immediately from the get go, which is not a bad thing. Their acceleration into knowledge will be even faster. I don’t know. It feels to me maybe there’s a positivity to it. Obviously, if you’ve stayed in a big school, et cetera, that there will be some positivity coming out of that. The Transformation of Education Maybe this is a good segue to education. How does education change to adapt to a new world where AI is a given? It’s not like I can check if you’re faking it on your homework or if you’re doing a remote examination or whatever, if you’re using or not tools, it’s like you’re going to use these tools. What happens in that case, and how does education need to shift in this brave new world of AI augmentation and AI enhancements to students? Bertrand SchmittYes, I agree with you. There will be new opportunities. I think people need to be adaptable. What used to be an absolute perfect career choice might not be anymore. You need to learn what changes are happening in the industry, and you need to adjust to that, especially if you’re a new graduate. Nuno Goncalves PedroMaybe we’ll talk a little bit about education, Bertrand, and how education would fundamentally shift. I think one of the things that’s been really discussed is what are the core skills that need to be developed? What are the core skills that will be important in the future? I think critical thinking is probably most important than ever. The ability to actually assimilate information and discern which information is correct or incorrect and which information can lead you to a conclusion or not, for example, I think is more important than ever. The ability to assimilate a bunch of pieces of information, make a decision or have an insight or foresight out of that information is very, very critical. The ability to be analytical around how you look at information and to really distinguish what’s fact from what’s opinion, I think is probably quite important. Maybe moving away more and more from memorisation from just cramming information into your brain like we used to do it in college, you have to know every single algorithm for whatever. It’s like, “Who gives a shit? I can just go and search it.” There’s these shifts that are not simple because I think education, in particular in the last century, has maybe been too focused on knowing more and more knowledge, on learning this knowledge. Now it’s more about learning how to process the knowledge rather than learning how to apprehend it. Because the apprehension doesn’t matter as much because you can have this information at any point in time. The information is available to you at the touch of a finger or voice or whatever. But the ability to then use the information to do something with it is not. That’s maybe where you start distinguishing the different level degrees of education and how things are taught. Bertrand SchmittHonestly, what you just say or describe could apply of the changes we went through the past 30 years. Just using internet search has for sure tremendously changed how you can do any knowledge worker job. Suddenly you have the internet at your fingertips. You can search about any topics. You have direct access to a Wikipedia or something equivalent in any field. I think some of this, we already went through it, and I hope we learned the consequence of these changes. I would say what is new is the way AI itself is working, because when you use AI, you realise that it can utter to you complete bullshit in a very self-assured way of explaining something. It’s a bit more scary than it used to be, because in the past, that algorithm trying to present you the most relevant stuff based on some algorithm was not trying to present you the truth. It’s a list of links. Maybe it was more the number one link versus number 100. But ultimately, it’s for you to make your own opinion. Now you have some chatbot that’s going to tell you that for sure this is the way you should do it. Then you check more, and you realise, no, it’s totally wrong. It’s definitely a slight change in how you have to apprehend this brave new world. Also, this AI tool, the big change, especially with generative AI, is the ability for them to give you the impression they can do the job at hand by themselves when usually they cannot. Nuno Goncalves PedroIndeed. There’s definitely a lot of things happening right now that need to fundamentally shift. Honestly, I think in the education system the problem is the education system is barely adapted to the digital world. Even today, if you studied at a top school like Stanford, et cetera, there’s stuff you can do online, there’s more and more tools online. But the teaching process has been very centred on syllabus, the teachers, later on the professors, and everything that’s around it. In class presence, there’s been minor adaptations. People sometimes allow to use their laptops in the classroom, et cetera, or their mobile phones. But it’s been done the other way around. It’s like the tools came later, and they got fed into the process. Now I think there needs to be readjustments. If we did this ground up from a digital first or a mobile first perspective and an AI first perspective, how would we do it? That changes how teachers and professors should interact with the classrooms, with the role of the classroom, the role of the class itself, the role of homework. A lot of people have been debating that. What do you want out of homework? It’s just that people cram information and whatever, or do you want people to show critical thinking in a specific different manner, or some people even go one step further. It’s like, there should be no homework. People should just show up in class and homework should move to the class in some ways. Then what happens outside of the class? What are people doing at home? Are they learning tools? Are they learning something else? Are they learning to be productive in responding to teachers? But obviously, AI augmented in doing so. I mean, still very unclear what this looks like. We’re still halfway through the revolution, as we said earlier. The revolution is still in motion. It’s not realised yet. Bertrand SchmittI would quite separate higher education, university and beyond, versus lower education, teenager, kids. Because I think the core up to the point you are a teenager or so, I think the school system should still be there to guide you, discovering and learning and being with your peers. I think what is new is that, again, at some point, AI could potentially do your job, do your homework. We faced similar situation in the past with the rise of Wikipedia, online encyclopedias and the stuff. But this is quite dramatically different. Then someone could write your essays, could answer your maths work. I can see some changes where you talk about homework, it’s going to be classwork instead. No work at home because no one can trust that you did it yourself anymore going forward, but you will have to do it in the classroom, maybe spend more time at school so that we can verify that you really did your job. I think there is real value to make sure that you can still think by yourself. The same way with the rise of calculators 40 years ago, I think it was the right thing to do to say, “You know what? You still need to learn the basics of doing calculations by hand.” Yes, I remember myself a kid thinking, “What the hell? I have a calculator. It’s working very well.” But it was still very useful because you can think in your head, you can solve complex problems in your head, you can check some output that it’s right or wrong if it’s coming from a calculator. There was a real value to still learn the basics. At the same point, it was also right to say, “You know what? Once you know the basics, yes, for sure, the calculator will take over because we’re at the point.” I think that was the right balance that was put in place with the rise of calculators. We need something similar with AI. You need to be able to write by yourself, to do stuff by yourself. At some point, you have to say, “Yeah, you know what? That long essays that we asked you to do for the sake of doing long essays? What’s the point?” At some point, yeah, that would be a true question. For higher education, I think personally, it’s totally ripe for full disruption. You talk about the traditional system trying to adapt. I think we start to be at the stage where “It should be the other way around.” It should be we should be restarted from the ground up because we simply have different tools, different ways. I think at this stage, many companies if you take, [inaudible 00:33:01] for instance, started to recruit people after high school. They say, “You know what? Don’t waste your time in universities. Don’t spend crazy shitload of money to pay for an education that’s more or less worthless.” Because it used to be a way to filter people. You go to good school, you have a stamp that say, “This guy is good enough, knows how to think.” But is it so true anymore? I mean, now that universities have increased the enrolment so many times over, and your university degree doesn’t prove much in terms of your intelligence or your capacity to work hard, quite frankly. If the universities are losing the value of their stamp and keep costing more and more and more, I think it’s a fair question to say, “Okay, maybe this is not needed anymore.” Maybe now companies can directly find the best talents out there, train them themselves, make sure that ultimately it’s a win-win situation. If kids don’t have to have big loans anymore, companies don’t have to pay them as much, and everyone is winning. I think we have reached a point of no return in terms of value of university degrees, quite frankly. Of course, there are some exceptions. Some universities have incredible programs, incredible degrees. But as a whole, I think we are reaching a point of no return. Too expensive, not enough value in the degree, not a filter anymore. Ultimately, I think there is a case to be made for companies to go back directly to the source and to high school. Nuno Goncalves PedroI’m still not ready to eliminate and just say higher education doesn’t have a role. I agree with the notion that it’s continuous education role that needs to be filled in a very different way. Going back to K-12, I think the learning of things is pretty vital that you learn, for example, how to write, that you learn cursive and all these things is important. I think the role of the teacher, and maybe actually even later on of the professors in higher education, is to teach people the critical information they need to know for the area they’re in. Basic math, advanced math, the big thinkers in philosophy, whatever is that you’re studying, and then actually teach the students how to use the tools that they need, in particular, K-12, so that they more rapidly apprehend knowledge, that they more rapidly can do exercises, that they more rapidly do things. I think we’ve had a static view on what you need to learn for a while. That’s, for example, in the US, where you have AP classes, like advanced placement classes, where you could be doing math and you could be doing AP math. You’re like, dude. In some ways, I think the role of the teacher and the interaction with the students needs to go beyond just the apprehension of knowledge. It also has to have apprehension of knowledge, but it needs to go to the apprehension of tools. Then the application of, as we discussed before, critical thinking, analytical thinking, creative thinking. We haven’t talked about creativity for all, but obviously the creativity that you need to have around certain problems and the induction of that into the process is critical. It’s particular in young kids and how they’re developing their learning skills and then actually accelerate learning. In that way, what I’m saying, I’m not sure I’m willing to say higher education is dead. I do think this mass production of higher education that we have, in particular in the US. That’s incredibly costly. A lot of people in Europe probably don’t see how costly higher education is because we’re educated in Europe, they paid some fee. A lot of the higher education in Europe is still, to a certain extent, subsidised or done by the state. There is high degree of subsidisation in it, so it’s not really as expensive as you’d see in the US. But someone spending 200-300K to go to a top school in the US to study for four years for an undergrad, that doesn’t make sense. For tuition alone, we’re talking about tuition alone. How does that work? Why is it so expensive? Even if I’m a Stanford or a Harvard or a University of Pennsylvania or whatever, whatever, Ivy League school, if I’m any of those, to command that premium, I don’t think makes much sense. To your point, maybe it is about thinking through higher education in a different way. Technical schools also make sense. Your ability to learn and learn and continue to education also makes sense. You can be certified. There are certifications all around that also makes sense. I do think there’s still a case for higher education, but it needs to be done in a different mould, and obviously the cost needs to be reassessed. Because it doesn’t make sense for you to be in debt that dramatically as you are today in the US. Bertrand SchmittI mean, for me, that’s where I’m starting when I’m saying it’s broken. You cannot justify this amount of money except in a very rare and stratified job opportunities. That means for a lot of people, the value of this equation will be negative. It’s like some new, indented class of people who owe a lot of money and have no way to get rid of this loan. Sorry. There are some ways, like join the government Task Force, work for the government, that at some point you will be forgiven your loans. Some people are going to just go after government jobs just for that reason, which is quite sad, frankly. I think we need a different approach. Education can be done, has to be done cheaper, should be done differently. Maybe it’s just regular on the job training, maybe it is on the side, long by night type of approach. I think there are different ways to think about. Also, it can be very practical. I don’t know you, but there are a lot of classes that are not really practical or not very tailored to the path you have chosen. Don’t get me wrong, there is always value to see all the stuff, to get a sense of the world around you. But this has a cost. If it was for free, different story. But nothing is free. I mean, your parents might think it’s free, but at the end of the day, it’s their taxes paying for all of this. The reality is that it’s not free. It’s costing a lot of money at the end of the day. I think we absolutely need to do a better job here. I think internet and now AI makes this a possibility. I don’t know you, but personally, I’ve learned so much through online classes, YouTube videos, and the like, that it never cease to amaze me how much you can learn, thanks to the internet, and keep up to date in so many ways on some topics. Quite frankly, there are some topics that there is not a single university that can teach you what’s going on because we’re talking about stuff that is so precise, so focused that no one is building a degree around that. There is no way. Nuno Goncalves PedroI think that makes sense. Maybe bring it back to core skills. We’ve talked about a couple of core skills, but maybe just to structure it a little bit for you, our listener. I think there’s a big belief that critical thinking will be more important than ever. We already talked a little bit about that. I think there’s a belief that analytical thinking, the ability to, again, distinguish fact from opinion, ability to distinguish elements from different data sources and make sure that you see what those elements actually are in a relatively analytical manner. Actually the ability to extract data in some ways. Active learning, proactive learning and learning strategies. I mean, the ability to proactively learn, proactively search, be curious and search for knowledge. Complex problem-solving, we also talked a little bit about it. That goes hand in hand normally with critical thinking and analysis. Creativity, we also talked about. I think originality, initiative, I think will be very important for a long time. I’m not saying AI at some point won’t be able to emulate genuine creativity. I wouldn’t go as far as saying that, but for the time being, it has tremendous difficulty doing so. Bertrand SchmittBut you can use AI in creative endeavours. Nuno Goncalves PedroOf course, no doubt. Bertrand SchmittYou can do stuff you will be unable to do, create music, create videos, create stuff that will be very difficult. I see that as an evolution of tools. It’s like now cameras are so cheap to create world-class quality videos, for instance. That if you’re a student, you want to learn cinema, you can do it truly on the cheap. But now that’s the next level. You don’t even need actors, you don’t even need the real camera. You can start to make movies. It’s amazing as a learning tool, as a creative tool. It’s for sure a new art form in a way that we have seen expanding on YouTube and other places, and the same for creating new images, new music. I think that AI can be actually a tool for expression and for creativity, even in its current form. Nuno Goncalves PedroAbsolutely. A couple of other skills that people would say maybe are soft skills, but I think are incredibly powerful and very distinctive from machines. Empathy, the ability to figure out how the other person’s feeling and why they’re feeling like that. Adaptability, openness, the flexibility, the ability to drop something and go a different route, to maybe be intellectually honest and recognise this is the wrong way and the wrong angle. Last but not the least, I think on the positive side, tech literacy. I mean, a lot of people are, oh, we don’t need to be tech literate. Actually, I think this is a moment in time where you need to be more tech literate than ever. It’s almost a given. It’s almost like table stakes, that you are at some tech literacy. What matters less? I think memorisation and just the cramming of information and using your brain as a library just for the sake of it, I think probably will matter less and less. If you are a subject or a class that’s just solely focused on cramming your information, I feel that’s probably the wrong way to go. I saw some analysis that the management of people is less and less important. I actually disagree with that. I think in the interim, because of what we were discussing earlier, that subject-matter experts at the top end can do a lot of stuff by themselves and therefore maybe need to less… They have less people working for them because they become a little bit more like superpowered individual contributors. But I feel that’s a blip rather than what’s going to happen over time. I think collaboration is going to be a key element of what needs to be done in the future. Still, I don’t see that changing, and therefore, management needs to be embedded in it. What other skills should disappear or what other skills are less important to be developed, I guess? Bertrand SchmittWorld learning, I’ve never, ever been a fan. I think that one for sure. But at the same time, I want to make sure that we still need to learn about history or geography. What we don’t want to learn is that stupid word learning. I still remember as a teenager having to learn the list of all the 100 French departments. I mean, who cared? I didn’t care about knowing the biggest cities of each French department. It was useless to me. But at the same time, geography in general, history in general, there is a lot to learn from the past from the current world. I think we need to find that right balance. The details, the long list might not be that necessary. At the same time, the long arc of history, our world where it is today, I think there is a lot of value. I think you talk about analysing data. I think this one is critical because the world is generating more and more data. We need to benefit from it. There is no way we can benefit from it if we don’t understand how data is produced, what data means. If we don’t understand the base of statistical analysis. I think some of this is definitely critical. But for stuff, we have to do less. It’s beyond world learning. I don’t know, honestly. I don’t think the core should change so much. But the tools we use to learn the core, yes, probably should definitely improve. Nuno Goncalves PedroOne final debate, maybe just to close, I think this chapter on education and skill building and all of that. There’s been a lot of discussion around specialisation versus generalisation, specialists versus generalists. I think for a very long time, the world has gone into a route that basically frames specialisation as a great thing. I think both of us have lived in Silicon Valley. I still do, but we both lived in Silicon Valley for a significant period of time. The centre of the universe in terms of specialisation, you get more and more specialised. I think we’re going into a world that becomes a little bit different. It becomes a little bit like what Amazon calls athletes, right? The T-Pi-shaped people get the most value, where you’re brought on top, you’re a very strong generalist on top, and you have a lot of great soft skills around management and empathy and all that stuff. Then you might have one or two subject matter expertise areas. Could be like business development and sales or corporate development and business development or product management and something else. I think those are the winners of the future. The young winners of the future are going to be more and more T-pi-shaped, if I had to make a guess. Specialisation matters, but maybe not as much as it matters today. It matters from the perspective that you still have to have spikes in certain areas of focus. But I’m not sure that you get more and more specialised in the area you’re in. I’m not sure that’s necessarily how humans create most value in their arena of deployment and development. Professionally, and therefore, I’m not sure education should be more and more specialised just for the sake of it. What do you think? Bertrand SchmittI think that that’s a great point. I would say I could see an argument for both. I think there is always some value in being truly an expert on a topic so that you can keep digging around, keep developing the field. You cannot develop a field without people focused on developing a field. I think that one is there to stay. At the same time, I can see how in many situations, combining knowledge of multiple fields can bring tremendous value. I think it’s very clear as well. I think it’s a balance. We still need some experts. At the same time, there is value to be quite horizontal in terms of knowledge. I think what is still very valuable is the ability to drill through whenever you need. I think that we say it’s actually much easier than before. That for me is a big difference. I can see how now you can drill through on topics that would have been very complex to go into. You will have to read a lot of books, watch a lot of videos, potentially do a new education before you grasp much about a topic. Well, now, thanks to AI, you can drill very quickly on topic of interest to you. I think that can be very valuable. Again, if you just do that blindly, that’s calling for trouble. But if you have some knowledge in the area, if you know how to deal with AI, at least today’s AI and its constraints, I think there is real value you can deliver thanks to an ability to drill through when you don’t. For me, personally, one thing I’ve seen is some people who are generalists have lost this ability. They have lost this ability to drill through on a topic, become expert on some topic very quickly. I think you need that. If you’re a VC, you need to analyse opportunity, you need to discover a new space very quickly. We say, I think some stuff can move much quicker than before. I’m always careful now when I see some pure generalists, because one thing I notice is that they don’t know how to do much anything any more. That’s a risk. We have example of very, very, very successful people. Take an Elon Musk, take a Steve Jobs. They have this ability to drill through to the very end of any topic, and that’s a real skill. Sometimes I see people, you should trust the people below. They know better on this and that, and you should not question experts and stuff. Hey, guys, how is it that they managed to build such successful companies? Is their ability to drill through and challenge hardcore experts. Yes, they will bring top people in the field, but they have an ability to learn quickly a new space and to drill through on some very technical topics and challenge people the right way. Challenge, don’t smart me. Not the, I don’t care, just do it in 10 days. No, going smartly, showing people those options, learning enough in the field to be dangerous. I think that’s a very, very important skill to have. Nuno Goncalves PedroMaybe switching to the dark side and talking a little bit about the bad stuff. I think a lot of people have these questions. There’s been a lot of debate around ChatGPT. I think there’s still a couple of court cases going on, a suicide case that I recently a bit privy to of a young man that killed himself, and OpenAI and ChatGPT as a tool currently really under the magnifying glass for, are people getting confused about AI and AI looks so similar to us, et cetera. The Ethics, Safety, and Privacy Landscape Maybe let’s talk about the ethics and safety and privacy landscape a little bit and what’s happening. Sadly, AI will also create the advent of a world that has still a lot of biases at scale. I mean, let’s not forget the AI is using data and data has biases. The models that are being trained on this data will have also biases that we’re seeing with AI, the ability to do things that are fake, deep fakes in video and pictures, et cetera. How do we, as a society, start dealing with that? How do we, as a society, start dealing with all the attacks that are going on? On the privacy side, the ability for these models and for these tools that we have today to actually have memory of the conversations we’ve had with them already and have context on what we said before and be able to act on that on us, and how is that information being farmed and that data being farmed? How is it being used? For what purposes is it being used? As I said, the dark side of our conversation today. I think we’ve been pretty positive until now. But in this world, I think things are going to get worse before they get better. Obviously, there’s a lot of money being thrown at rapid evolution of these tools. I don’t see moratoriums coming anytime soon or bans on tools coming anytime soon. The world will need to adapt very, very quickly. As we’ve talked in previous episodes, regulation takes a long time to adapt, except Europe, which obviously regulates maybe way too fast on technology and maybe not really on use cases and user flows. But how do we deal with this world that is clearly becoming more complex? Bertrand SchmittI mean, on the European topic, I believe Europe should focus on building versus trying to sensor and to control and to regulate. But going back to your point, I think there are some, I mean, very tough use case when you see about voice cloning, for instance. Grandparents believing that their kids are calling them, have been kidnapped when there is nothing to it, and they’re being extorted. AI generating deepfakes that enable sextortion, that stuff. I mean, it’s horrible stuff, obviously. I’m not for regulation here, to be frank. I think that we should for sure prosecute to the full extent of the law. The law has already a lot of tools to deal with this type of situation. But I can see some value to try to prevent that in some tools. If you are great at building tools to generate a fake voice, maybe you should make sure that you are not helping scammers. If you can generate easily images, you might want to make sure that you cannot easily generate tools that can be used for creating deep fakes and sex extortion. I think there are things that should be done by some providers to limit such terrible use cases. At the same time, the genie is out. There is also that part around, okay, the world will need to adapt. But yeah, you cannot trust everything that is done. What could have looked like horrible might not be true. You need to think twice about some of this, what you see, what you hear. We need to adjust how we live, how we work, but also how we prevent that. New tools, I believe, will appear. We will learn maybe to be less trustful on some stuff, but that is what it is. Nuno Goncalves PedroMaybe to follow up on that, I fully agree with everything you just said. We need to have these tools that will create boundary conditions around it as well. I think tech will need to fight tech in some ways, or we’ll need to find flaws in tech, but I think a lot of money needs to be put in it as well. I think my shout-out here, if people are listening to us, are entrepreneurs, et cetera, I think that’s an area that needs more and more investment, an area that needs more and more tooling platforms that are helpful to this. It’s interesting because that’s a little bit like how OpenAI was born. OpenAI was born to be a positive AI platform into the future. Then all of a sudden we’re like, “Can we have tools to control ChatGPT and all these things that are out there now?” How things have changed, I guess. But we definitely need to have, I think, a much more significant investment into these toolings and platforms than we do have today. Otherwise, I don’t see things evolving much better. There’s going to be more and more of this. There’s going to be more and more deep fakes, more and more, lack of contextualisation. There’s countries now that allow you to get married with not a human. It’s like you can get married to an algorithm or a robot or whatever. It’s like, what the hell? What’s happening now? It’s crazy. Hopefully, we’ll have more and more boundary conditions. Bertrand SchmittYeah, I think it will be a boom for cybersecurity. No question here. Tools to make sure that is there a better trust system or detecting the fake. It’s not going to be easy, but it has been the game in cybersecurity for a long time. You have some new Internet tools, some new Internet products. You need to find a difference against it and the constant war between the attackers and the defender. Nuno Goncalves PedroThe Parental Playbook: Actionable Strategies Maybe last but not the least in today’s episode, the parent playbook I’m a parent, what should I do I’ll actually let you start first. Bertrand, I’m parent-alike, but I am, sadly, not a parent, so I’ll let you start first, and then I’ll share some of my perspectives as well as a parent-like figure. Bertrand SchmittYeah, as a parent to an 8-year, I would say so far, no real difference than before. She will do some homework on an iPad. But beyond that, I cannot say I’ve seen at this stage so much difference. I think it will come up later when you have different type of homeworks when the kids start to be able to use computers on their own. What I’ve seen, however, is some interesting use cases. When my daughter is not sure about the spelling, she simply asks, Siri. “Hey, Siri, how do you spell this or this or that?” I didn’t teach her that. All of this came on her own. She’s using Siri for a few stuff for work, and I’m quite surprised in a very smart, useful way. It’s like, that’s great. She doesn’t need to ask me. She can ask by herself. She’s more autonomous. Why not? It’s a very efficient way for her to work and learn about the world. I probably feel sad when she asks Siri if she’s her friend. That does not feel right to me. But I would say so far, so good. I’ve seen only AI as a useful tool and with absolutely very limited risk. At the same time, for sure, we don’t let our kid close to any social media or the like. I think some of this stuff is for sure dangerous. I think as a parent, you have to be very careful before authorising any social media. I guess at some point you have no choice, but I think you have to be very careful, very gradual, and putting a lot of controls and safety mechanism I mean, you talk about kids committing suicide. It’s horrible. As a parent, I don’t think you can have a bigger worry than that. Suddenly your kids going crazy because someone bullied them online, because someone tried to extort them online. This person online could be someone in the same school or some scammer on the other side of the world. This is very scary. I think we need to have a lot of control on our kids’ digital life as well as being there for them on a lot of topics and keep drilling into them how a lot of this stuff online is not true, is fake, is not important, and being careful, yes, to raise them, to be critical of stuff, and to share as much as possible with our parents. I think We have to be very careful. But I would say some of the most dangerous stuff so far, I don’t think it’s really coming from AI. It’s a lot more social media in general, I would say, but definitely AI is adding another layer of risk. Nuno Goncalves PedroFrom my perspective, having helped raise three kids, having been a parent-like role today, what I would say is I would highlight against the skills that I was talking about before, and I would work on developing those skills. Skills that relate to curiosity, to analytical behaviours at the same time as being creative, allowing for both, allowing for the left brain, right brain, allowing for the discipline and structure that comes with analytical thinking to go hand in hand with doing things in a very, very different way and experimenting and failing and doing things and repeating them again. All the skills that I mentioned before, focusing on those skills. I was very fortunate to have a parental unit. My father and my mother were together all their lives: my father, sadly, passing away 5 years ago that were very, very different, my mother, more of a hacker in mindset. Someone was very curious, medical doctor, allowing me to experiment and to be curious about things around me and not simplifying interactions with me, saying it as it was with a language that was used for that particular purpose, allowing me to interact with her friends, who were obviously adults. And then on the other side, I have my father, someone who was more disciplined, someone who was more ethical, I think that becomes more important. The ability to be ethical, the ability to have moral standing. I’m Catholic. There is a religious and more overlay to how I do things. Having the ability to portray that and pass that to the next generation and sharing with them what’s acceptable and what’s not acceptable, I think is pretty critical and even more critical than it was before. The ability to be structured, to say and to do what you say, not just actually say a bunch of stuff and not do it. So, I think those things don’t go out of use, but I would really spend a lot more focus on the ability to do critical thinking, analytical thinking, having creative ideas, obviously, creating a little bit of a hacker mindset, how to cut corners to get to something is actually really more and more important. The second part is with all of this, the overlay of growth mindset. I feel having a more flexible mindset rather than a fixed mindset. What I mean by that is not praising your kids or your grandchildren for being very intelligent or very beautiful, which are fixed things, they’re static things, but praising them for the effort they put into something, for the learning that they put into something, for the process, raising the

This week: Polymarket teamed up with the Golden Globes, displaying a live ticker for betters on the broadcast. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck, discuss the rising popularity of prediction markets and the potential consequences of having real world events–from award shows to geopolitical actions–be the basis for gambling payouts. Then, the Trump administration began an investigation into Fed chair Jerome Powell and the renovation of the central bank. The hosts cover Trump's fraught history with the Fed and the backlash from Trump's own party. And finally, a new international ranking shows that Harvard has lost its top spot as a scientific institution following a recent pattern of Chinese dominance in the field. The hosts examine the long-term consequences of America's divestment in scientific research and higher education.In the Slate Plus episode: Would ICE accept your job application?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli and Cheyna Roth. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week: Polymarket teamed up with the Golden Globes, displaying a live ticker for betters on the broadcast. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck, discuss the rising popularity of prediction markets and the potential consequences of having real world events–from award shows to geopolitical actions–be the basis for gambling payouts. Then, the Trump administration began an investigation into Fed chair Jerome Powell and the renovation of the central bank. The hosts cover Trump's fraught history with the Fed and the backlash from Trump's own party. And finally, a new international ranking shows that Harvard has lost its top spot as a scientific institution following a recent pattern of Chinese dominance in the field. The hosts examine the long-term consequences of America's divestment in scientific research and higher education.In the Slate Plus episode: Would ICE accept your job application?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli and Cheyna Roth. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week: Polymarket teamed up with the Golden Globes, displaying a live ticker for betters on the broadcast. Felix Salmon, Elizabeth Spiers, and Emily Peck, discuss the rising popularity of prediction markets and the potential consequences of having real world events–from award shows to geopolitical actions–be the basis for gambling payouts. Then, the Trump administration began an investigation into Fed chair Jerome Powell and the renovation of the central bank. The hosts cover Trump's fraught history with the Fed and the backlash from Trump's own party. And finally, a new international ranking shows that Harvard has lost its top spot as a scientific institution following a recent pattern of Chinese dominance in the field. The hosts examine the long-term consequences of America's divestment in scientific research and higher education.In the Slate Plus episode: Would ICE accept your job application?Want to hear that discussion and hear more Slate Money? Join Slate Plus to unlock weekly bonus episodes. Plus, you'll access ad-free listening across all your favorite Slate podcasts. You can subscribe directly from the Slate Money show page on Apple Podcasts and Spotify. Or, visit slate.com/moneyplus to get access wherever you listen. Podcast production by Jessamine Molli and Cheyna Roth. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

It's been a year since President Trump returned to office, this time with fewer constraints, a better understanding of how government works, and a much more muscular view of US foreign policy. This week on the GZERO World Podcast, Harvard's Stephen Walt joins Ian Bremmer to help answer a simple question with complicated answers: what kind of presidency is he building this time around?Over the past year, we've seen a dramatic expansion of presidential power and a rewriting of America's role in the world. There's been a retreat from multilateral institutions, targeting of long-standing allies, and a view of global politics where great powers dominate, and weaker ones fall in line. It's a big departure from 80 years of the postwar order America spent building and leading. How much more will change by the time he leaves office?Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Stephen Walt  Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

“There's nothing dead about the Indian classics. It's not a revival of anything. It's not a museum piece. I think our classical tradition is alive through the stories our parents and grandparents told us…[and through popular culture]…..but with few exceptions, we don't know about the classics from our neighboring state, right? I always hope that the girl in Chandigarh can read a Mangal Kavya from Bengal, a boy in Patna can read a Telugu classic. Someone sitting in your old hometown, Pune can read Bulleh Shah.”

It's been a year since President Trump returned to office, this time with fewer constraints, a better understanding of how government works, and a much more muscular view of US foreign policy. This week on the GZERO World Podcast, Harvard's Stephen Walt joins Ian Bremmer to help answer a simple question with complicated answers: what kind of presidency is he building this time around?Over the past year, we've seen a dramatic expansion of presidential power and a rewriting of America's role in the world. There's been a retreat from multilateral institutions, targeting of long-standing allies, and a view of global politics where great powers dominate, and weaker ones fall in line. It's a big departure from 80 years of the postwar order America spent building and leading. How much more will change by the time he leaves office?Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Stephen Walt  Subscribe to the GZERO World with Ian Bremmer Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Ahead of Donald Trump's return to Davos next week, John welcomes Harvard professor and former Council of Economic Advisers chair Jason Furman to discuss the DOJ's bungled attack on the Fed, Jerome Powell's unlikely emergence as an anti-MAGA paladin, and the state of the American economy under Trump's second-term stewardship. To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Claire Dacey is a wonderful gift of music, too-little known. Her arrival on the folk music scene was delayed, in part, by her studies in Biology, Botany, Field Naturalist, and finally, Ph.D. studies at Harvard in Physiological Plant Ecology. Twas near the end of these studies when she realized her passion for music could be her chosen path, alongside her work of introducing folks to the more-than-human world and neighbors.

It is January, which means we have all collectively lost our minds. We are currently under the "Resolution Delusion"—the belief that because the calendar changed a number, our DNA has fundamentally altered. In this high-energy episode, we take a flamethrower to the "props" of the fresh start. We talk about the $40 notebook made from a cow that went to Harvard, the tragedy of the "Gym Tourists" texting on treadmills, and the lie that is Kale. Stop pretending you're going to be a Navy SEAL by Tuesday. Let's aim for "Slightly Less Disappointing" instead. To unlock full access to all our episodes, become a premium subscriber on Apple Podcasts or Patreon. And don't forget to visit englishpluspodcast.com for more content and learning.

When you're ready to become a bona fide thought leader in your zone of genius, Devin D. Marks will uplevel your public speaking game.  DEVIN is the nation's #1 (and world's first) TED-style speaking coach. His firm, CONNECT to COMPEL, has served 100s of short-talk speakers — including Harvard's Dr. Robert Waldinger for his all-time TOP 10 TEDx Talk (50 million views). The result: 100s of millions of views for clients. He helps coaches, authors, and experts spread world-changing ideas. Devin was also the most downloaded episode from this podcast in 2020, and you can find that episode here.   Devin's Gift to You - The Message Temple. Use this framework to shape any talk or message. Coupon Code for 100% off "TheMT-25"   **  Don't even know where to begin in improving your interpersonal skills? Are you ready to leave social stress behind and go from where you are to where you want to be? Confidence on Cue: a powerful 5-minute audio that resets your mind before any meeting, presentation, or social interaction. Book a Social Strategy Session HERE Have a question that needs an answer. Email me at Hello@SocialConfidencePro.com  LinkedIn Instagram TikTok

Steelers correspondent Mark Kaboly from The Pat McAfee Show joined the show. The conversation started with Mark's days at Cal U, aka, Harvard on the Mon. Kaboom said he went to a lot of bowling alley bars back in the day. Mark has moved on to the coaching search and how Art Rooney and Omar Khan will handle this. Mark expects Khan to have ‘a lot of say' in the process. Mark feels like it will be a coach from the same cloth that Bill Cowher and Mike Tomlin were cut from – mid-30's, first-time head coach and *possibly* defensive minded. Mark believes Art's son, Danny Rooney, will have input in the choice. Mark said right now Chris Shula feels like the favorite to be the next guy, just based on their history and the list of coaches they will interview. Mark said if they go with the defensive mind, that guy better have a young, offensive mind with him or have a really convincing plan to change the offense. Where does Nate Scheelhaase rank on Mark's list? Mark got into the challenges of commanding a room and being the ‘leader of men' it takes to be a head coach. Mark said Brian Flores was an intimidating figure and that players were ‘afraid' of him. More w/ Mark – There will, reportedly, be 3-4 more names added to the Steelers list of interviews. Mark feels like the initial 8 names are their main targets, but that's not to say the new ones can't surprise. Mark said Mike McCarthy is too old and hasn't coached in a minute, which makes him feel like they should stay away. If there isn't interest in Curt Cignetti, what about Norwin and Pitt product Mike Shanahan? Kaboom thinks Kevin Stefanski would be a ‘great' fit here because it's not Cleveland. Does Brian Flores have more options than Pittsburgh to be a head coach? What would be the pros and cons of a tank? More w/ Mark – Mark reacted to the stories of how the players reacted when Mike Tomlin told them he was stepping down. Kaboom is skeptical just how good Tomlin will be on television and if he's even all that interested. Mark isn't all that sure if he coaches again, but said the right situation would always do the job. Kaboly said Mike seemed like the same guy to him and wasn't ‘worn out' like a lot of people are saying. What could the staff look like under a new head coach? Kaboom thinks the entire QB room is up in the air, outside of Will Howard, who will serve as a backup at-best. Does Mark have any interest in Malik Willis? Mark felt like Cam Heyward may have hinted at retirement during the season, but his level of play would say otherwise. Is it time to trade TJ Watt? The guys asked Mark if he had any thoughts on the James Harrison disdain for Tomlin. Who was the big-name player that wasn't upset over the Tomlin news? Mark doesn't think it will be that much longer before the Steelers hire their guy.

It's finally happening. We are watching Gilmore Girls! Join us in this journey on social media - @gilmorethemerrierpod.ABOUT: GILMORE GIRLS (SEASON 1 EPISODE 1)Rory is accepted into the elite Chilton prep school. Bad news for Lorelai: she must make amends with her parents to borrow the money for Rory's tuition. The money is available--with strings attached.AIR DATE & NETWORK FOR: GILMORE GIRLS (SEASON 1 EPISODE 1)October 5, 2000 | The WBCAST & CREW OF: GILMORE GIRLS (SEASON 1 EPISODE 1)Lauren Graham as Lorelai Gilmore Alexis Bledel as Rory GilmoreBRAN'S GILMORE GIRLS (SEASON 1 EPISODE 1) SYNOPSISWelcome to Stars Hollow, founded in 1779 and thriving! We meet Lorelai as she walks into Luke's Diner and asks for coffee. He tells her she has a problem because she's a coffee junkie—but there's nothing he can do about it. Why? Because he loves her. I mean… maybe not. It's the pilot.We also meet her 15-year-old daughter, Rory. While getting coffee, a random dude hits on both of them separately. Classic Gilmore Girls—so close in age they could be sisters.Lorelai heads to work at the Independence Inn, where we meet her coworkers: Michel, a rude French man who runs the front desk, and Sookie St. James, the wildly talented and chaotic chef—and Lorelai's best friend. Sookie dreams of one day owning an inn with Lorelai.Meanwhile, Rory is hanging out with her best friend, Lane Kim. They're discussing an upcoming hayride that Lane's mom is forcing her to attend in hopes of setting her up with the son of one of her friends.Then Lorelai gets BIG news: Rory has been accepted to the ultra-exclusive prep school, Chilton. This is huge, because it makes Rory's dream of going to Harvard that much more possible. Lorelai tells Rory, and she is pumped.But the joy doesn't last long. Lorelai finds out how much Chilton costs—and it's a lot. They need the money immediately, or Rory can't start on Monday. There's only one option, and it's the worst one: asking her wealthy parents for help. Lorelai shows up at their house, and it's immediately clear the relationship is rocky. They agree to pay—but on one condition: weekly dinners with Lorelai and Rory. Lorelai reluctantly agrees.At school, Rory is packing up her things when she bumps into Dean, the new kid from Chicago. They talk, and Rory quickly starts to like him, despite the extremely concerning fact that he admits he watches her every day because she's “nice to look at.” Sir.After a sweet afternoon with Dean, Rory tells Lorelai she's not sure she wants to go to Chilton anymore. Lorelai is confused and upset, but it suddenly clicks—it's because of a boy. Lorelai tells Rory she will not allow her to throw her life away for some random guy. Rory is going to Chilton whether she likes it or not. It's not a great night… nothing a little Macy Gray can't help.It's finally time for the first Friday night dinner, and it's a disaster. Lorelai's father, Richard, brings up Rory's dad, Christopher, and all the success he's having with his internet startup in California. Lorelai spirals. She and her mom, Emily, end up fighting in the kitchen, and Rory overhears everything—including the fact that her grandparents are paying for Chilton.By the end of the night, Rory recognizes her mom's bravery and agrees to go to Chilton. The episode ends where it belongs: the Gilmore girls sitting in Luke's Diner, talking. Watch the show on Youtube - www.deckthehallmark.com/youtubeInterested in advertising on the show? Email bran@deckthehallmark.com Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

In 1999, Harvard researchers showed participants a video and asked them to count basketball passes. Halfway through, a person in a gorilla suit walked into the center of the frame, beat their chest, and walked off. More than half the participants never saw it. The gorilla was obvious, unmistakable, right there on the screen—and their brains made it completely invisible.This is called inattentional blindness. And it's happening to you right now with money.Your brain processes eleven million bits of information per second. Your conscious mind can handle about forty. That means your neurology is deleting 99.9996% of reality before you ever become aware of it—including money-making opportunities that are passing right in front of you every single day.These are wealth scotomas. Blind spots specifically calibrated to hide financial opportunities from your perception. They were installed in childhood, before you had any say in the matter. They've been running ever since, silently filtering out the very abundance you've been trying to create.This activation is different from anything you've experienced. We're not adding anything to your mind. We're removing the obstructions that have been blocking your natural ability to see opportunity. We're reprogramming your Reticular Activating System—the part of your brain that decides what you notice—to let through what it's been deleting for decades.A wealthy person and a struggling person can walk down the same street, meet the same people, hear the same conversations. One sees opportunity everywhere. The other sees nothing but confirmation of how hard life is. Same reality. Different filters. Different lives.Your filters are about to change. The opportunities that have been invisible are about to become obvious. The wealth that has been hidden in plain sight is about to reveal itself.

President Donald Trump has redefined the authority of the American presidency. In a recent interview with the New York Times, he said he is constrained only by his “own morality.” Trump has often exercised power in ways that have raised alarms including weaponizing the Department of Justice to go after political opponents, capturing the leader of Venezuela without Congressional approval, sending the National Guard into cities to squash protests and imposing tariffs. As we approach the one year anniversary of Trump's inauguration, we'll talk about the expansion of presidential power and what it means for democracy. Guests: Steven Levitsky, professor of government, Harvard, co-author of "Why Democracies Die" and "Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point." Vikram Amar, professor of law, UC Davis School of Law Lara Brown, political scientist and author, Her lastest book is, "Amateur Hour: Presidential Character and the Question of Leadership." Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tom opens this week's livestream with an update on the upcoming New Biology Experience at Polyface Farm (June 2026)-Registration is still open, and space is limited. Tom will be joined by New Biology Clinic specialists and enrichment facilitators for a weekend of talks, food, music, and community. Join here.This session features two in-depth topics:1. How Money Actually Works-Tom reads and responds to recent articles from Mises.org, reflecting on the nature of fiat currency, the illusion of central banking, and the political consequences of how money is created.-He ties these ideas back to a section he wrote on money in Human Heart, Cosmic Heart (2016), describing a hypothetical system where one person creates all the money and inevitably owns everything—a parody of the current system.The 2 articles that Tom discussed is here.2. Does H. pylori Cause Stomach Ulcers?-Responding to a listener question, Tom critically analyzes the famous study by Barry Marshall that claimed to fulfill Koch's postulates.-He breaks down the methods used in Marshall's self-experiment.-Tom contrasts this with a 2025 Harvard article acknowledging that 80–90% of people with H. pylori never develop ulcers, challenging the idea that this bacterium is a singular causal agent.Q&A:Was Koch's postulate actually fulfilled for H. pylori and ulcers?Support the showWebsites:https://drtomcowan.com/https://www.drcowansgarden.com/https://newbiologyclinic.com/https://newbiologycurriculum.com/Instagram: @TalkinTurkeywithTomFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/DrTomCowan/Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/CivTSuEjw6Qp/YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCzxdc2o0Q_XZIPwo07XCrNg

The great lie of the Epstein scandal isn't just what he did, but how the powerful around him suddenly claimed they couldn't remember him at all. Presidents, princes, billionaires, academics, bankers, and celebrities who once courted his money and shared his jets all reached for the same script when the walls closed in: I barely knew him. It was a coordinated act of survival, not an accident. Institutions like Harvard, MIT, Deutsche Bank, and JP Morgan played the same game, pretending they never saw the red flags. Legacy media, instead of hammering the contradictions, often published these denials straight, allowing amnesia to masquerade as truth. Forgetting became strategy, and strategy became cover.But memory leaves evidence. Flight logs, photographs, donations, and testimonies remain, and every denial only underscores the complicity of those who looked away. The survivors don't get to forget; they live with scars while the powerful rewrite history. What the amnesia act reveals is cowardice: a willingness to erase reality to protect reputation. Epstein built his empire on memory, yet his circle tried to survive through erasure. In the end, their denials brand them more deeply than their associations ever could—because the attempt to forget is itself proof they remembered perfectly well.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Announcing the February Gays Reading Book Club Pick...⭐️ MISSING SAM by Thrity Umrigar, the bestselling author of HONORAt first glance, MISSING SAM looks like a classic thriller: a woman goes missing after a morning run and her wife is left behind to search for answers. But very quickly, this book becomes something much deeper. The book is about what happens when grief collides with prejudice. About how quickly suspicion attaches itself to certain bodies. About love, marriage, and what it means to feel unsafe not just in the world, but inside your own community.New to the club? Get your first book for just $1!When you join the Gays Reading Book Club with Allstora, here's what you get:A SIGNED copy of the book!30% off everything on Allstora's websiteAccess to our Book Club chatEvery subscription donates a children's book to an LGBTQIA+ youthA book club that exclusively supports LGBTQIA+ authorsAnd more along the wayThrity Umrigar is the bestselling author of nine previous novels, including Honor, which was a Reese's Book Club Pick, as well as four picture books and a memoir. Her books have been published in over twenty countries and in several languages. A former journalist, she has contributed to the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, the New York Times, the Cleveland Plain Dealer and other newspapers. She is a recipient of the Nieman Fellowship to Harvard, and winner of the Cleveland Arts Prize, the Seth Rosenberg prize and a Lambda Literary award. She is currently a Distinguished University Professor of English at Case Western Reserve University.Sign up for the Gays Reading Book Club HERESUBSTACK! MERCH! WATCH! CONTACT! hello@gaysreading.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

What if the real secret to happiness isn't success, money, or achievement—but love, relationships, and how we show up for one another? In this episode of Celebrate Your Story, I sit down with Professor Arthur Brooks, a Harvard professor and behavioral scientist who has dedicated his life to studying what makes people happy. Arthur is a best-selling author and one of the most thoughtful voices on happiness, faith, and meaning today. Our conversation goes far beyond theory. We discuss family, marriage, faith, money, purpose, and why many high-achieving individuals still feel empty. Arthur shares insights from decades of research, including why chasing "the number" never works, why love must come before ambition, and how happiness is built through enjoyment, satisfaction, and meaning—not fleeting feelings. We explore the science behind relationships, the role of faith and prayer, the importance of commitment, and why serving others is the surest path to a meaningful life. As someone who's spent nearly 50 years in the business of helping people express love through flowers and gifts, this conversation deeply resonated with me. It's a reminder that while products may change, relationships are everything. If you've ever questioned what success is really for, how to live with greater purpose, or how to turn your life into something that truly matters—this is a conversation you don't want to miss.

Are you exhausted from constantly fighting temptation and sin? In this episode, Dr. Alex Lloyd reveals why focusing on NOT sinning actually makes you sin MORE—and what to focus on instead. Drawing from the Seven Deadly Sins, Harvard's Grant Study (the longest study on human flourishing), and Viktor Frankl's work on meaning, Alex and Harry unpack the paradox of righteous living. ✓ What You'll Discover: ✓ Why the "Seven Deadly Sins" are actually rooted in wrong thinking, not just actions ✓ The original 4th-century list called "evil thoughts" (logosmoi) ✓ Why happiness as a goal makes you LESS happy (and what to focus on instead) ✓ Harvard's 80-year study conclusion: "Happiness equals love, full stop" ✓ The two death traps: following your heart vs. rigid stoicism ✓ Why 50% of your heart's information is factually wrong ✓ How to practice Intervention 2 (crying out to God) with the right heart posture ✓ The Prodigal Son secret: what God really requires from you Key Topics Covered: The Seven Deadly Sins vs. Evagrius Ponticus's original list of "evil thoughts" Why sloth became "acedia" (spiritual apathy/despair)—and why that matters Viktor Frankl's "Man's Search for Meaning" and the trap of hyper-intention The Harvard Grant Longitudinal Study: what determines human flourishing Why 90% of New Year's resolutions fail by January 21st The difference between nocebo, placebo, and de facto truth Biblical forgiveness, humility, and surrender vs. perfectionism How to use the Tree of Life intervention with belief mapping

Superpowers for Good should not be considered investment advice. Seek counsel before making investment decisions. When you purchase an item, launch a campaign or create an investment account after clicking a link here, we may earn a fee. Engage to support our work.Watch the show on television by downloading the e360tv channel app to your Roku, LG or AmazonFireTV. You can also see it on YouTube.Devin: What is your superpower?Joshua: Resilience.Millions of families with children suffering from rare diseases endure years of frustration and uncertainty, seeking answers from specialists who rarely collaborate. Joshua Resnikoff, CEO and Cofounder of Sunstone Health, has been there. His middle child's years-long fight for a diagnosis inspired him to tackle this systemic inefficiency with AI-powered innovation.Sunstone Health uses AI to analyze healthcare claims data, identifying children who may have genetic conditions, like pediatric epilepsy or autism, and accelerating their path to diagnosis and care. “On average right now, it takes seven years for a family to go from first symptom to a care path that works for them,” Joshua explained in today's episode. “We can take that seven-year process and condense it down into 12 weeks.”This groundbreaking approach provides a win-win solution for families and health plans alike. By identifying patterns in data, Sunstone Health not only helps families avoid the “diagnostic odyssey” of endless referrals but also reduces healthcare costs. “Ultimately, we are saving the plans, the insurance, the employers—whoever is the financial backstop for that family—a lot of money,” Joshua said.The company's innovative model charges health plans only when results are delivered, making it a no-risk decision for employers looking to improve care while managing costs. Sunstone Health has already touched the lives of nearly half a million people through partnerships with health plans, scaling rapidly since its pilot phase.In addition to changing lives, Sunstone Health is raising capital via regulation crowdfunding on Wefunder. This community round allows families and supporters to invest in the company's vision alongside professional investors. “We opened up a few hundred thousand dollars so families could join our mission,” Joshua shared. The campaign has been so successful that Sunstone Health has reopened the round to accommodate more investors.This episode highlights the power of technology and mission-driven innovation to solve seemingly intractable problems. With AI and dedication, Joshua and his team are transforming the lives of families navigating the challenges of rare diseases.tl;dr:Joshua shared how his personal experience inspired Sunstone Health's AI-powered diagnostic solution for rare diseases.Sunstone Health condenses the average 7-year diagnostic process into just 12 weeks for families.The innovative model benefits families and health plans by aligning financial incentives with better care.Sunstone Health is raising capital through regulation crowdfunding, welcoming families and investors to join its mission.Joshua's resilience, driven by optimism and grit, has been key to Sunstone's success and growth.How to Develop Resilience As a SuperpowerJoshua identified resilience—what he calls “grit”—as his defining superpower. He explained, “To do something like this, it just takes a lot of resilience and determination.” Building a company to tackle the systemic inefficiencies in healthcare required overcoming countless challenges. From skeptics who dismissed the problem as “too big to solve” to navigating obstacles in scaling Sunstone Health, Joshua's perseverance has been key. He shared, “There are going to be such deeply dark and frustrating times as a founder…you just have to stay optimistic.”Joshua's resilience was evident early in life when he taught himself to code in BASIC as a child, spending hours figuring out how to make things work. Later, while working full-time as a biomedical engineer at Harvard, he co-founded a company that unexpectedly went viral, selling eco-friendly travel mugs featured on Oprah's blog and in the New York Times. Despite juggling two demanding roles, he stayed determined and made both endeavors successful.Tips for Developing Resilience:Stay Optimistic: Focus on opportunities rather than obstacles, even in challenging situations.Pursue What You Love: Work on projects that deeply resonate with you to sustain motivation through tough times.Embrace Determination: Commit to pushing through difficulties with persistence and grit.Learn from Challenges: View setbacks as opportunities to grow and improve.By following Joshua's example and advice, you can make resilience a skill. With practice and effort, you could make it a superpower that enables you to do more good in the world.Remember, however, that research into success suggests that building on your own superpowers is more important than creating new ones or overcoming weaknesses. You do you!Guest ProfileJoshua Resnikoff (he/him):CEO and Cofounder, Sunstone HealthAbout Sunstone Health: Sunstone Health is an AI-powered precision health platform designed to help families and health plans recognize developmental delay earlier—before uncertainty turns into years of fragmented care and unnecessary cost. By analyzing health system data to identify early patterns of developmental complexity, Sunstone helps guide children toward clearer next steps while supporting families through what is often a long and confusing journey. The result is earlier clarity for families, more coordinated care for clinicians, and meaningful cost reduction for employers—without disrupting existing care or asking families to wait when the signs are already there.Website: sunstonehealth.comCompany Facebook Page: facebook.com/SunstoneHealthOfficialCompany Twitter Handle: @Sunstone_HealthOther URL: wefunder.com/sunstone.healthBiographical Information: Biomedical engineer and entrepreneur in translational science and consumer products. 14 patents, work showcased in national news, and has scaled businesses to >3000x ROI. Focused on using business as a force for good.LinkedIn Profile: linkedin.com/in/joshuaresnikoffSupport Our SponsorsOur generous sponsors make our work possible, serving impact investors, social entrepreneurs, community builders and diverse founders. Today's advertisers include Crowdfunding Made Simple. Learn more about advertising with us here.Max-Impact Members(We're grateful for every one of these community champions who make this work possible.)Brian Christie, Brainsy | Cameron Neil, Lend For Good | Carol Fineagan, Independent Consultant | Hiten Sonpal, RISE Robotics | John Berlet, CORE Tax Deeds, LLC. | Justin Starbird, The Aebli Group | Lory Moore, Lory Moore Law | Mark Grimes, Networked Enterprise Development | Matthew Mead, Hempitecture | Michael Pratt, Qnetic | Mike Green, Envirosult | Dr. Nicole Paulk, Siren Biotechnology | Paul Lovejoy, Stakeholder Enterprise | Pearl Wright, Global Changemaker | Scott Thorpe, Philanthropist | Sharon Samjitsingh, Health Care Originals | Add Your Name HereUpcoming SuperCrowd Event CalendarIf a location is not noted, the events below are virtual.SuperCrowdHour, January 21, 2026, at 12:00 PM Eastern. Devin Thorpe, CEO and Founder of The Super Crowd, Inc., will lead a session on “From $10 to Impact: How Anyone Can Become an Impact Investor.” Drawing on his experience as an investment banker, impact investor, and community-building leader, Devin will explain how everyday people can start investing small amounts to support mission-driven companies while pursuing financial returns. In this session, he'll break down the basics of regulated investment crowdfunding, show how impact and profit can align, and share practical steps for identifying opportunities that create real-world change. As an added benefit, attendees can become an Impact Member of the SuperCrowd for just $4.58 per month to receive an exclusive private Zoom meeting invitation with Devin, free tickets to paid SuperCrowd events, and the opportunity to directly support social entrepreneurs, community builders, and underrepresented founders.SuperGreen Live, January 22–24, 2026, livestreaming globally. Organized by Green2Gold and The Super Crowd, Inc., this three-day event will spotlight the intersection of impact crowdfunding, sustainable innovation, and climate solutions. Featuring expert-led panels, interactive workshops, and live pitch sessions, SuperGreen Live brings together entrepreneurs, investors, policymakers, and activists to explore how capital and climate action can work hand in hand. With global livestreaming, VIP networking opportunities, and exclusive content, this event will empower participants to turn bold ideas into real impact. Don't miss your chance to join tens of thousands of changemakers at the largest virtual sustainability event of the year. Learn more about sponsoring the event here. Interested in speaking? Apply here. Support our work with a tax-deductible donation here.Demo Day at SuperGreen Live. Apply now to present at the SuperGreen Live Demo Day session on January 22! The application window is closing soon; apply today at 4sc.fun/sgdemo. The Demo Day session is open to innovators in the field of climate solutions and sustainability who are NOT currently raising under Regulation Crowdfunding.SuperCrowd Impact Member Networking Session: Impact (and, of course, Max-Impact) Members of the SuperCrowd are invited to a private networking session on January 27th at 1:30 PM ET/10:30 AM PT. Mark your calendar. We'll send private emails to Impact Members with registration details.Community Event CalendarSuccessful Funding with Karl Dakin, Tuesdays at 10:00 AM ET - Click on Events.Join C-AR Annual Reporting: Requirements, Deadlines, and Lessons Learned from the Field on January 14, 2026, an informative online webinar designed to help crowdfunding issuers and professionals clearly understand C-AR annual reporting requirements, key deadlines, and real-world insights to stay compliant and prepared.Join UGLY TALK: Women Tech Founders in San Francisco on January 29, 2026, an energizing in-person gathering of 100 women founders focused on funding strategies and discovering SuperCrowd as a powerful alternative for raising capital.If you would like to submit an event for us to share with the 10,000+ changemakers, investors and entrepreneurs who are members of the SuperCrowd, click here.Manage the volume of emails you receive from us by clicking here.We use AI to help us write compelling recaps of each episode. Get full access to Superpowers for Good at www.superpowers4good.com/subscribe

Sumérgete en la primera parte de la épica de Ted Kaczynski, El Unabomber, un genio matemático de Harvard que se convirtió en el terrorista doméstico más notorio de EE. UU. Descubre su peculiar infancia, su brillantez académica y el polémico experimento psicológico en Harvard que pudo haberlo transformado. Acompáñanos a explorar su camino hacia el aislamiento en Montana y el inicio de su cruzada contra la tecnología a través de una ola de correos bomba. La historia de la mente detrás del manifiestoTambién puedes escucharnos en Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Amazon Music o tu app de podcasts favorita.Apóyanos en Patreon:https://www.patreon.com/leyendaspodcastApóyanos en YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/c/leyendaslegendarias/joinVisita nuestra página para ver contenido extra:https://www.leyendaslegendarias.comSíguenos:https://instagram.com/leyendaspodcasthttps://www.tiktok.com/@leyendaspodcasthttps://twitter.com/leyendaspodcasthttps://facebook.com/leyendaspodcast#Podcast #LeyendasLegendarias

Briefing the President one day, forgetting how to cook bacon the next. What happens when a high-achieving powerhouse (Harvard grad, Wall Street alum, and Obama White House staffer) suddenly loses her most prized asset: her mind? Marisa Renee Lee joins the boys to get brutally honest about her "dumpster fire" journey with Long COVID. From the visceral pain of biting through a night guard in her sleep to the terrifying moment her larynx was 70% blocked while on a "restorative" trip to Greece, Marisa's story is a raw look at identity, ego death, and the absolute chaos of a body in revolt. We dive into the controversial intersection of vaccine injury and infection, the skepticism Black women face in the U.S. healthcare system, and the three questions that forced her to reframe her life as "currently disabled".For all things Marisa - https://www.marisareneelee.com/aboutYou can watch this entire episode over on YouTube.Follow Sickboy on Instagram, TikTok and Discord.

What if the deepest human drive isn't happiness, survival, or even love, but the need to matter? Philosopher and MacArthur Fellow Rebecca Newberger Goldstein joins Michael Shermer to discuss The Mattering Instinct, her argument that the desire to feel significant lies at the core of human behavior. That drive helps explain our greatest achievements, from creativity and moral courage to scientific and artistic excellence. It also helps explain some of our darkest outcomes, including extremism, violence, and ideological fanaticism. Goldstein examines why people will give up comfort, status, and sometimes even their own lives to feel that they matter. She questions why meaning cannot be captured by happiness metrics or self-help formulas, and why the same psychological force can produce saints, scientists, athletes, cult leaders, and terrorists. The conversation moves through free will, entropy, morality without God, fame, narcissism, and the crucial difference between ways of mattering that create order and those that leave damage behind. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein is an award-winning philosopher, writer, and public intellectual. She is the author of ten books of acclaimed fiction and non-fiction, including 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction and Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity. She holds a PhD in philosophy of science from Princeton University and has taught at Yale, Columbia, NYU, Dartmouth, and Harvard. A fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, her work has been supported by the MacArthur "Genius" grant and fellowships from the Guggenheim, Whiting Institute, Radcliffe Institute, and the National Science Foundation. Her new book is The Mattering Instinct: How Our Deepest Longing Drives Us and Divides Us.

Most people think self-doubt is the enemy. Dr. Shadé Zahrai knows better — it's actually a signal. After spending years researching the neuroscience of confidence and studying thousands of high performers, this Harvard-trained leadership expert has cracked the code on why self-doubt never fully disappears and what top performers do differently when it shows up. In this raw conversation, Dr. Shadé breaks down the exact four drivers of self-doubt that hold people back, why waiting to feel confident is the wrong goal completely (confidence comes after action, not before), how expectation bias creates the reality you experience, and why the opposite of self-doubt isn't confidence at all — it's self-trust. But this isn't theory — it's applied neuroscience. We get into the five elements that increase your perceived confidence (posture, eye contact, gestures, vocal tone, and walking speed), why smiling doesn't equal weakness, how to use the CUT method to handle manipulators, and why writing things down by hand increases recall by activating different parts of your brain. If you've ever felt like self-doubt is holding you back, or if you're tired of waiting to feel ready before you take action, this episode will rewire how you think about confidence, competence, and what it actually takes to trust yourself. Check out Dr. Shadé Zahrai's new book Big Trust: Rewire Self-Doubt, Find Your Confidence, Fuel Success — out January 20th. Pre-order now: https://www.shadezahrai.com/bigtrust Download Dr. Shadé's free Morning Clarity Reset tool: https://bit.ly/morningclarityritual Keep up with Dr. Shadé Zahrai Website: https://www.shadezahrai.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/shadezahraiLinkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shadezahrai/YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/@Dr.ShadeZahraiTikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@shadezahrai I say it all the time: building real wealth doesn't require a flashy startup — it just takes one boring, cash-flowing business. Join me at Main Street Millionaire Live to get my exact playbook for finding, buying, and scaling a business. Stop wondering how ownership could change your life, and come find out: https://contrarianthinking.biz/MSML26_BDYT ___________ 00:00:00 Introduction 00:01:28 The Scar Study: How Your Beliefs Create Your Reality 00:03:43 The Four Drivers of Self-Doubt 00:08:18 You Are Not Your Doubts: The Ping-Pong Ball Analogy 00:11:20 Affective Labeling: Name Your Emotions to Tame Them 00:14:21 The Opposite of Self-Doubt is Not Confidence, It's Self-Trust 00:16:57 Manifestation Done Right: The Michael Phelps Pre-Mortem Strategy 00:23:41 The Five Elements of Charisma: Posture, Gestures, Eyes, Voice, and Walk 00:43:52 How to Win Any Room: The Five-to-One Question Rule 00:47:42 The CUT Method: How to Handle Manipulative Behavior 01:01:15 Imposter Syndrome and the Citibank Napkin Story 01:07:18 The Top Five Regrets of the Dying 01:22:51 Morning Clarity Reset: The One Daily Ritual That Changes Everything ___________ MORE FROM BIGDEAL

Bank executives were caught off guard after President Donald Trump said suggested American credit card companies face a 10% cap on the interest rates they can charge. Senate Banking Committee ranking member Senator Elizabeth Warren discusses her conversation with the president, the mechanics of a rate cap and the broader affordability crunch facing consumers. Then, as 2026 is still fresh, many Americans are already struggling with New Year's resolutions and the pursuit of happiness. Arthur Brooks, Harvard professor and Free Press columnist, shares his own resolutions and explains what research says about finding meaning and happiness in the year ahead. Plus, President Trump weighs in on Iran, and Netflix is reportedly considering an all-cash bid for Warner Brothers. Sen. Elizabeth Warren - 15:27Arthur Brooks - 28:55 In this episode:Arthur Brooks, @arthurbrooks Sen. Elizabeth Warren, @SenWarrenBecky Quick, @BeckyQuickJoe Kernen, @JoeSquawkAndrew Ross Sorkin, @andrewrsorkinKatie Kramer, @Kramer_Katie Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Episode 121 - Today's guest is a powerful example of what's possible when passion, resilience, and purpose come together. Lupita McGregor Almuhana is the Founder and CEO of Stressie, a tech-enabled wellness platform delivering fast, personalized, evidence-based tools to help people manage stress and thrive at work. With nearly two decades of experience driving growth in global marketing and business development—and a lifelong mindfulness practice that took her from yoga studios to India—Lupita bridges science and soul in everything she builds. Her resilience was shaped early, beginning work at just 14 to help support her single mother, an experience that instilled a powerful work ethic and empathy-driven leadership style. Holding a master's degree in psychology from Harvard, Lupita is on a mission to make mental health support accessible, scalable, and human-centered for today's workforce. This conversation explores entrepreneurship, purpose-driven leadership, and how technology can elevate wellbeing in the workplace. Website - https://www.stressieapp.com/ 

What happens when your mind makes a convincing case for staying safe—but your body is quietly asking you to move toward something warmer? In this beloved conversation, Glennon, Abby, and Amanda return to their very first talk with Martha Beck, whose work has helped them come home to themselves again and again. Martha offers a simple, radical way to stop living by consensus, quiet the spinning mind, and reconnect with the inner compass that knows what is true. This episode is an invitation to pause, feel what you feel, know what you know—and begin again. - How to tell the difference between fear-based thinking and the deep wisdom of your body- The question Martha asked Glennon when she was scared to choose love—and why it changed everything - How to gently cultivate joy when life feels exhausting, overwhelming, or impossibly hard More episodes with Martha Beck: 67. How to Get More Joy with Martha Beck 121. Martha Beck & Rowan Mangan: Polyamory & Throuple Life 252. Martha Beck Helps Amanda Let Go253. Is it Real Love or Spider Love? With Martha Beck 375. How to Stop Worrying with Martha Beck About Martha:  Dr. Martha Beck, PhD, is a New York Times bestselling author, coach, and speaker. She holds three Harvard degrees in social science, and Oprah Winfrey has called her “one of the smartest women I know.” Martha is a passionate and engaging teacher, known for her unique combination of science, humor, and spirituality. Her recent book, The Way of Integrity: Finding the Path to Your True Self, was an instant New York Times Best Seller and an Oprah's Book Club selection. Her new book, Beyond Anxiety: Curiosity, Creativity, and Finding Your Life's Purpose, is available now. Follow We Can Do Hard Things on:  Instagram — ⁠https://www.instagram.com/wecandohardthings⁠ TikTok — ⁠https://www.tiktok.com/@wecandohardthingsshow⁠

Harvard law professor Richard Re discusses the evolution of the Supreme Court from the Warren court to the present day, highlighting the historical context of the court's decisions, the role of swing justices, and the current dynamics of originalism and textualism in judicial interpretation.The Agenda:—What is the conservative Warren court?—Reversal in power dynamics—The swing justice era—The Roberts court has the lowest rate of overturning precedents—Common good constitutionalism reflects a generational pivot in legal thought—Textualism is now seen as the generally accepted mode of interpretation—Deference's varied meaningsShow Notes:—Richard Re: To a Conservative Warren Court—Oral argument live blog for Tuesday, January 13—Justices Alito and Thomas dissent in the Parents Protecting Our Children case—Did Justice Kagan debilitate the administrative state?—Not Enough Respect for the Judiciary—Or Too Much?—Supreme Court Increasingly Favors the Rich, Economists Say—Does the Supreme Court Favor the Rich?—Has the Supreme Court Helped Save Democracy? Advisory Opinions is a production of The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a non-partisan, conservative perspective. To access all of The Dispatch's offerings—including access to all of our articles, members-only newsletters, and bonus podcast episodes—click here. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Most people think confidence comes from success.In reality, confidence comes from self-trust—and most people never learn how to build it.In this episode of The Mark Divine Show, Mark sits down with Shadé Zahrai, award-winning leadership strategist, Harvard-trained researcher, and author of Big Trust.Together, they unpack why:Self-doubt is not the enemy—it's a signal- Psychological safety fails when people don't trust themselves- Waiting to “feel confident” keeps people stuck- Inner critics sabotage leadership, performance, and relationships- True confidence is built through trust, not validationShadé introduces her Big Trust framework, breaking down:- The four core traits that shape self-image- The internal archetypes that quietly run your behavior- How to turn doubt into data instead of self-sabotage- Why self-trust must come before action, not after- Practical tools to quiet the inner critic and lead with clarityThis conversation bridges neuroscience, leadership psychology, and lived experience to help you stop outsourcing your worth—and start trusting yourself under pressure.If you've ever felt capable but hesitant, accomplished but unsure, or driven but internally conflicted—this episode will give you language, structure, and tools to change that.