Podcasts about us china

PREVIEW. China's APEC Goal: Buying Time Amidst Internal Power Factions. John Batchelor and General Blaine Holt discuss the US-China APEC deal, suggesting China's only goal was to buy time. This time is crucial because Xi Jinping is an "ornamental leader," and various factions are vying for control of the Chinese Communist Party. The conversation also notes increasing unrest and rising public anger among the Chinese people. 1906

PREVIEW. The DeepSeek AI Model: Low Cost, Open Source, and Security Risks. John Batchelor and Jack Burnham discuss the US-China AI contest and microchips, noting China's ban on the best chips. DeepSeek, an open-source, low-cost model, is appealing but may not perform as well as American models. Concerns persist about its true costs, potential use of Nvidia chips, and security flaws like providing CCP talking points. 1954

Dan Nathan and Deirdre Bosa, CNBC's Tech Check host, delve into key topics around AI technology and investments. They discuss the growing influence of Chinese open-source AI models and compare US and Chinese AI CapEx spending, drawing on insights from a Bloomberg tweet thread. The conversation highlights China's commoditization strategy in AI and its implications for US-China tech competition. They also scrutinize tech companies like Core Weave, Meta, and AMD, examining their financial strategies, AI ambitions, and market performance. The challenges of power constraints, valuation concerns, and investor sentiment shifts in the AI and tech sectors are thoroughly explored. —FOLLOW USYouTube: @RiskReversalMediaInstagram: @riskreversalmediaTwitter: @RiskReversalLinkedIn: RiskReversal Media

Joe's Premium Subscription: www.standardgrain.comGrain Markets and Other Stuff Links-Apple PodcastsSpotifyTikTokYouTubeFutures and options trading involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone.

On today's show Andrew and Bill begin with the implementation of this month's deal between the US and China, including a variety of early indications that both sides intend to follow through with commitments made in South Korea, the PRC's clarification on its December 2024 export controls, and a report on the PRC implementing VEU system for rare earth exports to the US. From there: A variety of news and notes including a new textbook on Xi Jinping Economic Thought, Xi's visit to the Fujian aircraft carrier, a crackdown on improper asset seizures, and a flare-up with Japan's new PM after her comments on Taiwan contingencies inspire caustic language from a PRC diplomat. At the end: A pair of reports highlight questions about the AI future in China and elsewhere, while the New York Times reports on transnational censorship of a film festival in New York City.

In this episode of Econ 102, Noah Smith and Erik Torenberg explore AI's effects on productivity, how AI business models will shake out, the US and China's rare earth minerals industries, and China's economic challenges, including demographics, real estate, and involution.-Sponsors:NotionAI meeting notes lives right in Notion, everything you capture, whether that's meetings, podcasts, interviews, conversations, live exactly where you plan, build, and get things done.  Here's an exclusive offer for our listeners. Try one month for free at ⁠https://www.notion.com/lp/econ102⁠NetSuiteMore than 42,000 businesses have already upgraded to NetSuite by Oracle, the #1 cloud financial system bringing accounting, financial management, inventory, HR, into ONE proven platform. Download the CFO's Guide to AI and Machine learning: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://netsuite.com/102⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Found Found provides small business owners tools to track expenses, calculate taxes, manage cashflow, send invoices and more. Open a Found account for free at https://found.com/econ102-Shownotes brought to you by Notion AI Meeting Notes - try one month for free at https://www.notion.com/lp/econ102⁠AI can affect productivity in multiple ways: replacing humans, enhancing human productivity, creating new tasks, and increasing capital productivityAI may follow other essential industries with low profit margins despite creating enormous value:Like farming, solar power, and airlinesCode-related AI applications are seeing particularly strong adoptionVertical AI applications in specific industries (healthcare, legal, real estate) are gaining tractionChina controls the majority of rare earth mining and refiningThe US has sufficient rare earth deposits but faces two challenges:Regulatory barriers to miningLack of solvent extraction technology and know-howChina's fertility rate is lower than Japan and EuropeHowever, a "baby bulge" (ages 7-22) will support the workforce short-term-Timestamps:00:00 — Intro00:52 — AI's impact on productivity02:27 — Debating whether AI will increase productivity03:11 — Historical analogy: Electricity's impact on productivity, lessons for AI07:55 — Sponsors: Notion | Netsuite09:57 — Application layer companies, AI in coding, vertical AI applications12:49 — AI bubble vs. CapEx boom/bust, historical parallels (railroads, telecoms)16:54 — Brand loyalty, price wars, and profitability in AI models22:26 — US-China trade, rare earths, and supply chain challenges32:20 — Sponsor: Found33:33 — China's demographic and economic challenges, over-competition, and deflation54:06 — Recommendations for China's economic policy, rationalizing the economy-FOLLOW on X:https://x.com/eriktorenberghttps://x.com/Noahpinion-Please note that the content here is for informational purposes only; should NOT be taken as legal, business, tax, or investment advice or be used to evaluate any investment or security; and is not directed at any investors or potential investors in any a16z fund. a16z and its affiliates may maintain investments in the companies discussed. For more details, please see a16z.com/disclosures. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

On October 30, US President Trump and China's leader Xi Jinping met in Busan, South Korea. It was their first face-to-face meeting in 6 years. There was a lot at stake in this meeting for the US and China, as well as for the rest of the world. In my view, the outcome is best described as a fragile truce. The path forward for US-China relations remains uncertain – greater stability and predictability is possible, but not assured. Intense competition across several domains, especially technology, is likely.Today's episode focuses on the Trump-Xi summit and the future of US-China relations, featuring Mr. Dennis Wilder. Dennis is a senior fellow for the Initiative for U.S.-China Dialogue on Global Issues at Georgetown University, where he previously served as the managing director, and assistant professor of the practice in Asian studies in the School of Foreign Service. He served on President George W. Bush's NSC first as director for China and then as senior director for Asian Affairs. He also had a distinguished career in the CIA, where he held many positions, the last of which was senior editor of the Presidential Daily Brief.  Timestamps:[00:00] Introduction[1:57] Trump-Xi Summit: A Win for China? [09:03] Fact Sheet Discrepancies [14:37] Trump Administration's China Strategy[16:47] Achieving Chinese Exceptionalism[19:20] China's Confidence and Potential Instability[21:26] Why No Taiwan Mention? [24:48] An Inflection Point for Greater Stability? [27:50] Indo-Pacific View of the US-China Relationship

00:00 Intro00:54 China Curbs Fentanyl Precursor Exports to U.S.02:15 Fleming: China's Not Serious on Curbing Fentanyl06:55 Japan Rebukes Chinese Envoy's Beheading Threat to Its PM09:14 China Commissions Third Aircraft Carrier: The Fujian10:15 Chinese Scientist Convicted of Stealing U.S. Secrets11:19 President Trump Pardons Former NYPD Sergeant12:30 China's Exports to U.S. Fall in October14:07 Tesla Sales in China Fall to 3-Year Low14:07 Taiwan's VP Delivers Historic Speech to European Union19:32 Remembering Victims of Communism

APAC stocks were mostly subdued with the region failing to sustain the positive global risk momentum that had been spurred by US-China trade optimism and US government reopening hopes, while there were few fresh catalysts overnight to fuel the recent rally.US Senate voted 60 vs. 40 to pass legislation to fund the federal government and end the shutdown, while the bill now goes to the House.US House Speaker Johnson is seeking a Wednesday vote on the stopgap bill, and won't commit to an ACA subsidy vote.China is reportedly devising a plan to keep the US military from getting its rare earth magnets and is considering a ‘validated end-user' system to fast-track certain export licenses, according to WSJ.European equity futures indicate a positive cash market open with Euro Stoxx 50 futures up 0.4% after the cash market finished with gains of 1.8% on Monday.Looking ahead, highlights include UK Unemployment/Wages (Sep), EZ & German ZEW (Nov), US NFIB (Oct), Weekly Prelim Estimate ADP, Riksbank Minutes, Speakers including ECB's Lagarde, BoE's Greene & Dhingra, RBA's Jones, Supply from Netherlands, Earnings from Porsche SE, RWE & Alcon. Holidays: US Veterans' Day; Canadian Remembrance DayRead the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

The AI trade is back in the green after a volatile week as new reporting emerges of a massive $18B financing deal for an Oracle-tied data center. We dig into the massive U.S. AI spend and how compares to China's advancing AI efforts. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Send us a textStay Connectedhttps://www.commstock.com/https://www.facebook.com/CommStockInvestments/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClP8BeFK278ZJ05NNoFk5Fghttps://www.linkedin.com/company/commstock-investments/

APAC stocks traded higher amid the improving US-China trade environment and with hopes of ending the US government shutdown as several Democrats supported Republicans to pass a measure through the procedural vote in a rare Senate session on Sunday.US Senate voted 60 vs 40 to advance the government funding bill through the procedural hurdle, moving it closer towards passage, after 8 Democrats supported the measure in a rare Sunday session.Chinese inflation data over the weekend which printed above forecasts, although factory gate prices remained in deflation.NVIDIA (NVDA) CEO said they have very strong demand in Blackwell chips and asked TSMC (2330 TT) for more wafers to meet strong AI demand.European equity futures indicate a positive cash market open with Euro Stoxx 50 futures up 1.4% after the cash market closed with losses of 0.8% on Friday.Looking ahead, highlights include Norwegian CPI (Oct), EZ Sentix (Nov), Chinese M2 & New Yuan Loans (Oct), Speech from BoE's Lombardelli, Supply from the UK, Earnings from Hannover Re, CoreWeave & Barrick Mining.Read the full report covering Equities, Forex, Fixed Income, Commodites and more on Newsquawk

What can the US learn from the benefits–and perils–of China's quest to engineer the future? Tech analyst and author Dan Wang joins Ian Bremmer on the GZERO World Podcast to discuss his new book "Breakneck," China's infrastructure boom, and the future of the US-China relationship. Over the last two decades, China has transformed into what Wang calls an “engineering state,” marshaling near unlimited resources to build almost anything–roads, bridges, entire cities overnight. That investment has created astounding growth, but also domestic challenges and soaring debt. It's also led to a stubborn belief within the Chinese government that society itself can be engineered from the top down, where the state treats its people like a building material that can be tweaked or destroyed if necessary. Wang and Bremmer dig into all things US-China: the future of the relationship, the surprising similarities between the two countries, and whether Washington can learn from Beijing's example without repeating its mistakes.Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Dan Wang 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.

One big story captures all six books selected by the Financial Times for their short list of best business books of 2025. As the FT's Senior Business Writer, Andrew Hill, notes, it's the story of the shift in global economic power from the United States to China. It's game over. From Dan Wang's Breakneck, which contrasts China's “engineering state” with America's “lawyering nation,” to Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson's Abundance, chronicling America's inability to build infrastructure, the shortlist reads like an autopsy of American decline. Edward Fishman's Choke Points examines the new age of economic warfare, while Eva Dou's House of Huawei reveals how Chinese companies vaulted past Western competitors. Even Stephen Witt's The Thinking Machine, ostensibly about NVIDIA's triumph, ultimately focuses on the US-China technology race. The judges, Hill admits, “very clearly narrowed in on this highly consequential US-China theme.” Whether chronicling rare earth minerals, clean energy dominance, or regulatory sclerosis, these books ask the same uncomfortable question: Is the American century over?* China's “Engineering State” vs. America's “Lawyering Nation” - Dan Wang's framework in Breakneck captures the fundamental difference: China builds (pouring concrete, clearing regulatory obstacles), while America litigates, creating layers of bureaucracy that prevent infrastructure development.* The Abundance Paradox - Klein and Thompson's bestseller reveals America's core dysfunction: a nation that once defined progress now can't build a high-speed rail link between its two most important California cities, spending billions for thirty yards of track.* Economic Warfare Replaces Free Trade - Edward Fishman's Choke Points documents how sanctions, tariffs, and supply chain control have become the primary weapons of statecraft, with “choke points” entering the policy lexicon as the new language of power.* China Already Controls the Future's Raw Materials - From rare earth minerals to clean energy technology, China has made strategic bets on tomorrow's economy while America remained wedded to oil and coal, creating dependencies that may be impossible to reverse.* Even American Success Stories Are Really About China - NVIDIA's $5 trillion valuation, chronicled in Stephen Witt's The Thinking Machine, isn't purely an American triumph—it's fundamentally about Taiwan, China, and the geopolitical competition for semiconductor dominance.Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

What can the US learn from the benefits–and perils–of China's quest to engineer the future? Tech analyst and author Dan Wang joins Ian Bremmer on the GZERO World Podcast to discuss his new book "Breakneck," China's infrastructure boom, and the future of the US-China relationship. Over the last two decades, China has transformed into what Wang calls an “engineering state,” marshaling near unlimited resources to build almost anything–roads, bridges, entire cities overnight. That investment has created astounding growth, but also domestic challenges and soaring debt. It's also led to a stubborn belief within the Chinese government that society itself can be engineered from the top down, where the state treats its people like a building material that can be tweaked or destroyed if necessary. Wang and Bremmer dig into all things US-China: the future of the relationship, the surprising similarities between the two countries, and whether Washington can learn from Beijing's example without repeating its mistakes.Host: Ian BremmerGuest: Dan Wang 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.

Today's Post - https://bahnsen.co/47ogHOD US-China Trade Deal Updates & Insights from The Bahnsen Group Annual Retreat In this week's episode of Dividend Cafe, host David Bahnsen reports from The Bahnsen Group's annual retreat in Dallas, Texas. He highlights the team's dedication to client experience and shares updates on the significant US-China trade deal. The discussion covers recent agreements between the two nations, including tariff reductions, market commitments, and cooperation plans. Bahnsen reflects on how market discipline has influenced policy decisions and gives insights on the potential economic impacts. Looking ahead, he hints at a forthcoming evaluation of the AI CapEx bubble burst in the next episode. 00:00 Welcome to Dividend Cafe 00:06 The Importance of Our Annual Retreat 01:41 US-China Trade Deal Overview 05:06 Key Elements of the Trade Agreement 10:18 Implications and Future Prospects 18:43 Conclusion and Upcoming Topics Links mentioned in this episode: DividendCafe.com TheBahnsenGroup.com

The recent conclusion of China's Fourth Plenum has shed light on the strategic direction of the 15th Five-Year Plan, highlighting key priorities such as boosting domestic consumption, advancing technological self-reliance, and expanding into new export markets. Following the Plenum, Chinese President Xi also met with US President Trump in South Korea, reaching a mutual agreement to pause key trade escalations for a year. What do these developments mean for the future of US-China relations, and can Chinese markets continue its bull run in 2026? This episode is presented by Richard Tang, Head of Research Hong Kong at Julius Baer and Hong Hao, Managing Partner and CIO of Lotus Asset Management Ltd.

The relationship between the US and China has been fraud with conflict for many years and its twists and turns have global effects. In this episode, George Yin joins Johannes Heller-John to decipher the China policy of the US and its continuities and changes over the last administrations. They also discuss what the EU can do to find its place amidst the rivalling superpowers.George is a Senior Fellow at MERICS and a Senior Research Fellow at the Center for China Studies, National Taiwan University. He is also Senior Advisor to the Straits Exchange Foundation and holds research affiliations with Harvard and Oxford Universities. Among other topics he looks at the China policy of the US.The conversation was recorded on September 26.For more on the topic, read George's comment piece "Art of the deal meets great power politics: Trump 2.0's approach to China" here.

US-China Ceasefire and Competition in Technology and Space. Jack Burnham (Foundation for Defense of Democracies research analyst) characterizes the Trump-Xi meeting as a necessary "truce" that allows both nations to gain stability and strengthen their positions before the next escalation. Regarding rare earths, China is now employing the US "playbook," setting up a licensing structure rather than a full trade cessation. He emphasizes that building a complete rare earth supply chain outside of China, especially refining capacity, may realistically take seven to ten years. In technology, Beijing is pushing for domestic self-sufficiency in AI infrastructure, partly driven by paranoia that imported chips may contain backdoors or vulnerabilities. Burnham also details China's commitment to militarizing space, including copying US reconnaissance capabilities and practicing anti-satellite operations like "dogfighting." 1914

US-China Ceasefire and Competition in Technology and Space. Jack Burnham (Foundation for Defense of Democracies research analyst) characterizes the Trump-Xi meeting as a necessary "truce" that allows both nations to gain stability and strengthen their positions before the next escalation. Regarding rare earths, China is now employing the US "playbook," setting up a licensing structure rather than a full trade cessation. He emphasizes that building a complete rare earth supply chain outside of China, especially refining capacity, may realistically take seven to ten years. In technology, Beijing is pushing for domestic self-sufficiency in AI infrastructure, partly driven by paranoia that imported chips may contain backdoors or vulnerabilities. Burnham also details China's commitment to militarizing space, including copying US reconnaissance capabilities and practicing anti-satellite operations like "dogfighting." 1917 PRINCETON IN PEKING

President Trump and President Xi,  the two most powerful men in the world, met last week in Korea to try to, basically, calm things down.  China had just flexed its muscles, threatening to limit the export of key inputs like rare earth magnets and other critical minerals without which auto assembly plants in America could, within weeks, come to a standstill. America could inflict its own damage, by widening the net of sanctions on Chinese companies and individuals. Looking at the images on the TV screen, I began to wonder: In what areas are America and China still in agreement? Taiwan? No. South China Sea? No. Russia? No. Chips? No. Trade. A big no. That got me thinking about what lies ahead. To bring clarity and wisdom, I welcome Jorge Guajardo, former ambassador of Mexico to China to the show to ask him some fundamental questions: Since the US and China seem to have different values, different priorities and different regulations, can they ever see eye to eye? Who is decoupling more quickly, the United States or China. And how will Mexico play its cards as it finds itself squeezed between China and the United States with the car industry, investments and jobs looming large.

The prospect of a Chinese invasion and conquest of Taiwan is a major focus of US–China security competition. Apart from its political, economic, and moral consequences, some US experts argue that Chinese control of Taiwan would compromise the US military position in Asia, bolstering the case that the United States should commit its military to defend Taiwan's autonomy. Jonathan Caverley and Evan Montgomery will discuss the stakes of the US commitment to Taiwan, whether preserving Taiwan's autonomy justifies risking conflict with China, and the relationship between Taiwan and the broader military balance in the Indo-Pacific. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

US equity futures point to a softer open. Asian markets traded broadly higher, while European equities opened lower. Focus remains on US tech earnings afterhours. Qualcomm guided Q1 revenue above forecasts, though below the most bullish expectations, while ARM's profit outlook exceeded estimates, reflecting data center demand. In central bank news, the Fed's hawkish comments continued to weigh on sentiment, while the BoE decision today is seen as finely balanced. Meanwhile, the US-China trade truce continues to dominate headlines, but not much specific behind move as recent angst surrounding stretched valuations, big tech index concentration, narrow breadth and AI capex ROI remain overhangs, not expected to go away anytime soon. However, still no signs of panic, while buy-the-dip narrative has been extremely resilient on the back of elevated retail buying.Companies Mentioned: Charles Schwab, Forge Global, Marvell Technology, Softbank, OpenAI

00:00 Intro01:32 U.S., China Ease Tariffs in New Fentanyl Trade Deal02:59 Supreme Court Hearing: Trump's Sweeping Tariffs03:30 Appeals Court Backs Florida's China Property Ban05:00 Missouri Bans Chinese Land Deals Near Military Bases05:27 Zohran Mamdani Wins NYC Mayoral Election09:01 Fmr. CIA Operative on China, Russia Honeypot Tactics10:32 Starbucks to Sell Control of China Business13:08 Grant Newsham Speaks on U.S.–China Military Hotline15:24 Shein Sparks Outrage Over Childlike Sex Dolls18:34 Philippine Island on Edge Over Taiwan Strait Conflicts

Donate (no account necessary) | Subscribe (account required) Join Bryan Dean Wright, former CIA Operations Officer, as he dives into today's top stories shaping America and the world. In this episode of The Wright Report, Bryan covers Democrats' sweeping election victories, Trump's call to end the Senate filibuster, the possibility of an end to the historic government shutdown, cartel violence in Mexico, and Trump's warning about nuclear weapons testing. Democrats Sweep Elections Nationwide: It was a strong night for Democrats across the country. In Virginia, they won the governor's mansion, attorney general, and 13 new House seats — a political "bloodbath," as local analysts called it. Former CIA officer Abigail Spanberger became governor, while Jay Jones — who once joked about killing a Republican lawmaker and his children — was elected attorney general. Bryan warns these results reveal a growing radicalism within the Left that Americans can't afford to ignore. New York City Elects Its First Socialist Mayor: Zohran Mamdani won handily with foreign-born voters and young progressives, promising free housing, gun bans, and state control over industries. Bryan compares his victory to a "virus of humanity" spreading nationwide, warning that socialism's false promise of "free for all" could gain traction if Republicans fail to deliver economic results. Trump Pushes to End the Filibuster: President Trump renewed his call to eliminate the Senate filibuster after the Democratic sweep, urging Republicans to "terminate it" to pass voter reform and economic bills. Bryan argues that fears of Democrats abusing power later are misplaced — "that horse has already left the barn." Shutdown Nearing Resolution: Ten Democrat senators are now willing to negotiate a deal to reopen the government, marking the longest shutdown in U.S. history. A short-term plan could fund the military while delaying fights over Obamacare subsidies until December. Mexico's Cartel War and Trump's Dilemma: After the murder of Michoacán's mayor by the Jalisco cartel, Trump is weighing covert CIA and special forces operations inside Mexico. Bryan says the President is torn between patience and decisive action — and both paths carry enormous risk. Nuclear Testing and Rising Tensions: The U.S. will restart nuclear weapons testing for the first time since the 1990s, citing proof that Russia and China are secretly conducting their own tests. Bryan explains how new nuclear-powered cruise missiles and underwater drones are reshaping the global threat landscape.   "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." - John 8:32     Keywords: 2025 election results Democrats sweep, Abigail Spanberger governor Virginia, Jay Jones attorney general threat scandal, Zohran Mamdani socialist NYC mayor, Trump filibuster termination call, U.S. government shutdown negotiations, Michoacán mayor cartel murder, Trump CIA operations Mexico, U.S. nuclear testing restart, Russia China cruise missile Poseidon drone

Joe's Premium Subscription: www.standardgrain.comGrain Markets and Other Stuff Links-Apple PodcastsSpotifyTikTokYouTubeFutures and options trading involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone.

With the US racing to develop AGI and superintelligence ahead of China, you might expect the two countries to be negotiating how they'll deploy AI, including in the military, without coming to blows. But according to Helen Toner, director of the Center for Security and Emerging Technology in DC, “the US and Chinese governments are barely talking at all.”Links to learn more, video, and full transcript: https://80k.info/ht25In her role as a founder, and now leader, of DC's top think tank focused on the geopolitical and military implications of AI, Helen has been closely tracking the US's AI diplomacy since 2019.“Over the last couple of years there have been some direct [US–China] talks on some small number of issues, but they've also often been completely suspended.” China knows the US wants to talk more, so “that becomes a bargaining chip for China to say, ‘We don't want to talk to you. We're not going to do these military-to-military talks about extremely sensitive, important issues, because we're mad.'”Helen isn't sure the groundwork exists for productive dialogue in any case. “At the government level, [there's] very little agreement” on what AGI is, whether it's possible soon, whether it poses major risks. Without shared understanding of the problem, negotiating solutions is very difficult.Another issue is that so far the Chinese Communist Party doesn't seem especially “AGI-pilled.” While a few Chinese companies like DeepSeek are betting on scaling, she sees little evidence Chinese leadership shares Silicon Valley's conviction that AGI will arrive any minute now, and export controls have made it very difficult for them to access compute to match US competitors.When DeepSeek released R1 just three months after OpenAI's o1, observers declared the US–China gap on AI had all but disappeared. But Helen notes OpenAI has since scaled to o3 and o4, with nothing to match on the Chinese side. “We're now at something like a nine-month gap, and that might be longer.”To find a properly AGI-pilled autocracy, we might need to look at nominal US allies. The US has approved massive data centres in the UAE and Saudi Arabia with “hundreds of thousands of next-generation Nvidia chips” — delivering colossal levels of computing power.When OpenAI announced this deal with the UAE, they celebrated that it was “rooted in democratic values,” and would advance “democratic AI rails” and provide “a clear alternative to authoritarian versions of AI.”But the UAE scores 18 out of 100 on Freedom House's democracy index. “This is really not a country that respects rule of law,” Helen observes. Political parties are banned, elections are fake, dissidents are persecuted.If AI access really determines future national power, handing world-class supercomputers to Gulf autocracies seems pretty questionable. The justification is typically that “if we don't sell it, China will” — a transparently false claim, given severe Chinese production constraints. It also raises eyebrows that Gulf countries conduct joint military exercises with China and their rulers have “very tight personal and commercial relationships with Chinese political leaders and business leaders.”In today's episode, host Rob Wiblin and Helen discuss all that and more.This episode was recorded on September 25, 2025.CSET is hiring a frontier AI research fellow! https://80k.info/cset-roleCheck out its careers page for current roles: https://cset.georgetown.edu/careers/Chapters:Cold open (00:00:00)Who's Helen Toner? (00:01:02)Helen's role on the OpenAI board, and what happened with Sam Altman (00:01:31)The Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) (00:07:35)CSET's role in export controls against China (00:10:43)Does it matter if the world uses US AI models? (00:21:24)Is China actually racing to build AGI? (00:27:10)Could China easily steal AI model weights from US companies? (00:38:14)The next big thing is probably robotics (00:46:42)Why is the Trump administration sabotaging the US high-tech sector? (00:48:17)Are data centres in the UAE “good for democracy”? (00:51:31)Will AI inevitably concentrate power? (01:06:20)“Adaptation buffers” vs non-proliferation (01:28:16)Will the military use AI for decision-making? (01:36:09)“Alignment” is (usually) a terrible term (01:42:51)Is Congress starting to take superintelligence seriously? (01:45:19)AI progress isn't actually slowing down (01:47:44)What's legit vs not about OpenAI's restructure (01:55:28)Is Helen unusually “normal”? (01:58:57)How to keep up with rapid changes in AI and geopolitics (02:02:42)What CSET can uniquely add to the DC policy world (02:05:51)Talent bottlenecks in DC (02:13:26)What evidence, if any, could settle how worried we should be about AI risk? (02:16:28)Is CSET hiring? (02:18:22)Video editing: Luke Monsour and Simon MonsourAudio engineering: Milo McGuire, Simon Monsour, and Dominic ArmstrongMusic: CORBITCoordination, transcriptions, and web: Katy Moore

In this episode, Bill O'Grady and Mark Keller unpack the concept of escalation dominance in the US-China relationship and how societies endure pain. They consider the likelihood and potential depth of recession, examining the trade-offs that arise when the Fed and other policymakers intervene to prevent downturns and identifying areas of malinvestment in today's markets. Additional topics include the forthcoming Supreme Court ruling on tariff legality and their outlook for gold.Submit your question for a future episode to: mailbag@confluenceim.com.

On today's program, sponsored by Elbit America, Dr. Jim Lewis of the Center for European Policy Analysis and Mark Montgomery of the Defense of Democracies and a Cyberspace Solarium Commission senior adviser join Defense & Aerospace Report Editor Vago Muradian to discuss last trade truce between the United States and China and how it will impact technology exports including advanced chips Beijing seeks and Washington has sought to deny; how America and its allies should work together to create a secure tech ecosystem, including chips and rare earths; and the challenges associated with building nuclear submarines for Korea in the United States.

First, we talk to The Indian Express' Manraj Grewal Sharma about a major drop in Indian visa acceptances in Canada. She shares why Canada has rejected 74% of the student visa applications from India, the impact it's having on Indian students and Canadian universities.Next, we talk to The Indian Express' Diplomatic Affairs Editor Shubhajit Roy about the recent developments in US-China relations, what they signify and how they might impact India and the rest of the world. (11:33)Lastly, we talk about a collision between a passenger train and a goods train in Chhattisgarh's Bilaspur that killed eight people. (20:10)Hosted by Niharika NandaProduced by Niharika Nanda and Shashank Bhargava Edited and mixed by Suresh Pawar

In this episode, Tracy sits down with agricultural economist, strategist, and author Michelle Klieger to discuss the shifting global trade landscape and what it means for farmers. From the post–World War II rise of free trade to the Trump-era shift toward protectionism, Michelle breaks down how we got here, what's really happening in the U.S.–China trade war, and how these policies are reshaping agriculture across the world. If you've ever wondered what "Make America Great Again" means for farm markets — or how global trade politics directly affect the prices, policies, and opportunities farmers face — this episode is a must-listen.

On today's show Andrew and Bill break down the latest deal between the US and China, beginning with details from the White House over the weekend, why the PRC is likely happy with a tactical retreat and the new status quo, and why stability is likely at least through April. From there: Why the PRC was motivated to deal despite its goals of eliminating tariffs and export controls, clarity about American pain points, questions about Congress and what comes next, and the costs of China's strategy for the past month. At the end: Reporting on a doomed push from Nvidia to sell Blackwell chips to China, new subsidies for China's AI leaders, a potential Nexperia resolution, and questions the forthcoming fentanyl cooperation between the US and China.

The United States, China and Russia are the three main powers of the current era that are vying for dominance on the global stage, all with their own sets of imperatives and challenges. In our recent ClubGPF live discussion, GPF Chairman George Friedman examined the three nations and the main issues they currently face: culture wars and political division in the US, a declining economy in China, and a frozen war in Russia. Visit http://www.geopoliticalfutures.com for world-class geopolitical analysis and discussion.

My fellow pro-growth/progress/abundance Up Wingers,China's spacefaring ambitions pose tough competition for America. With a focused, centralized program, Beijing seems likely to land taikonauts on the moon before another American flag is planted. Meanwhile, NASA faces budget cuts, leadership gaps, and technical setbacks. In his new book, journalist Christian Davenport chronicles the fierce rivalry between American firms, mainly SpaceX and Blue Origin. It's a contest that, despite the challenges, promises to propel humanity to the moon, Mars, and maybe beyond.Davenport is an author and a reporter for the Washington Post, where he covers NASA and the space industry. His new book, Rocket Dreams: Musk, Bezos, and the Inside Story of the New, Trillion-Dollar Space Race, is out now.In This Episode* Check-in on NASA (1:28)* Losing the Space Race (5:49)* A fatal flaw (9:31)* State of play (13:33)* The long-term vision (18:37)* The pace of progress (22:50)* Friendly competition (24:53)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversation. Check-in on NASA (1:28)The Chinese tend to do what they say they're going to do on the timeline that they say they're going to do it. That said, they haven't gone to the moon . . . It's really hard.Pethokoukis: As someone — and I'm speaking about myself — who wants to get America back to the moon as soon as possible, get cooking on getting humans to Mars for the first time, what should I make of what's happening at NASA right now?They don't have a lander. I'm not sure the rocket itself is ready to go all the way, we'll find out some more fairly soon with Artemis II. We have flux with leadership, maybe it's going to not be an independent-like agency anymore, it's going to join the Department of Transportation.It all seems a little chaotic. I'm a little worried. Should I be?Davenport: Yes, I think you should be. And I think a lot of the American public isn't paying attention and they're going to see the Artemis II mission, which you mentioned, and that's that mission to send a crew of astronauts around the moon. It won't land on the moon, but it'll go around, and I think if that goes well, NASA's going to take a victory leap. But as you correctly point out, that is a far cry from getting astronauts back on the lunar surface.The lander isn't ready. SpaceX, as acting NASA administrator Sean Duffy just said, is far behind, reversing himself from like a month earlier when he said no, they appear to be on track, but everybody knew that they were well behind because they've had 11 test flights, and they still haven't made it to orbit with their Starship rocket.The rocket itself that's going to launch them into the vicinity of the moon, the SLS, launches about once every two years. It's incredibly expensive, it's not reusable, and there are problems within the agency itself. There are deep cuts to it. A lot of expertise is taking early retirements. It doesn't have a full-time leader. It hasn't had a full-time leader since Trump won the election. At the same time, they're sort of beating the drum saying we're going to beat the Chinese back to the lunar surface, but I think a lot of people are increasingly looking at that with some serious concern and doubt.For what it's worth, when I looked at the betting markets, it gave the Chinese a two-to-one edge. It said that it was about a 65 percent chance they were going to get there first. Does that sound about right to you?I'm not much of a betting man, but I do think there's a very good chance. The Chinese tend to do what they say they're going to do on the timeline that they say they're going to do it. That said, they haven't gone to the moon, they haven't done this. It's really hard. They're much more secretive, if they have setbacks and delays, we don't necessarily know about them. But they've shown over the last 10, 20 years how capable they are. They have a space station in low earth orbit. They've operated a rover on Mars. They've gone to the far side of the moon twice, which nobody has done, and brought back a sample return. They've shown the ability to keep people alive in space for extended periods of times on the space station.The moon seems within their capabilities and they're saying they're going to do it by 2030, and they don't have the nettlesome problem of democracy where you've got one party come in and changing the budget, changing the direction for NASA, changing leadership. They've just set the moon — and, by the way, the south pole of the moon, which is where we want to go as well — as the destination and have been beating a path toward that for several years now.Is there anyone for merging NASA into the Department of Transportation? Is there a hidden reservoir? Is that an idea people have been talking about now that's suddenly emerged to the surface?It's not something that I particularly heard. The FAA is going to regulate the launches, and they coordinate with the airspace and make sure that the air traffic goes around it, but I think NASA has a particular expertise. Rocket science is rocket science — it's really difficult. This isn't for the faint of heart.I think a lot of people look at human space flight and it's romanticized. It's romanticized in books and movies and in popular culture, but the fact of the matter is it's really, really hard, it's really dangerous, every time a human being gets on one of those rockets, there's a chance of an explosion, of something really, really bad happening, because a million things have to go right in order for them to have a successful flight. The FAA does a wonderful job managing — or, depending on your point of view, some people don't think they do such a great job, but I think space is a whole different realm, for sure.Losing the Space Race (5:49). . . the American flags that the Apollo astronauts planted, they're basically no longer there anymore. . . There are, however, two Chinese flags on the moonHave you thought about what it will look like the day after, in this country, if China gets to the moon first and we have not returned there yet?Actually, that's a scenario I kind of paint out. I've got this new book called Rocket Dreams and we talk about the geopolitical tensions in there. Not to give too much of a spoiler, but NASA has said that the first person to return to the moon, for the US, is going to be a woman. And there's a lot of people thinking, who could that be? It could be Jessica Meir, who is a mother and posted a picture of herself pregnant and saying, “This is what an astronaut looks like.” But it could very well be someone like Wang Yaping, who's also a mother, and she came back from one of her stays on the International Space Station and had a message for her daughter that said, “I come back bringing all the stars for you.” So I think that I could see China doing it and sending a woman, and that moment where that would be a huge coup for them, and that would obviously be symbolic.But when you're talking about space as a tool of soft power and diplomacy, I think it would attract a lot of other nations to their side who are sort of waiting on the sidelines or who frankly aren't on the sidelines, who have signed on to go to the United States, but are going to say, “Well, they're there and you're not, so that's who we're going to go with.”I think about the wonderful alt-history show For All Mankind, which begins with the Soviets beating the US to the moon, and instead of Neil Armstrong giving the “one small step for man,” basically the Russian cosmonaut gives, “Its one small step for Marxism-Leninism,” and it was a bummer. And I really imagine that day, if China beats us, it is going to be not just, “Oh, I guess now we have to share the moon with someone else,” but it's going to cause some national soul searching.And there are clues to this, and actually I detail these two anecdotes in the book, that all of the flags, the American flags that the Apollo astronauts planted, they're basically no longer there anymore. We know from Buzz Aldrin‘s memoir that the flag that he and Neil Armstrong planted in the lunar soil in 1969, Buzz said that he saw it get knocked over by the thrust in the exhaust of the module lifting off from the lunar surface. Even if that hadn't happened, just the radiation environment would've bleached the flag white, as scientists believe it has to all the other flags that are on there. So there are essentially really no trace of the Apollo flags.There are, however, two Chinese flags on the moon, and the first one, which was planted a couple of years ago, or unveiled a couple of years ago, was made not of cloth, but their scientists and engineers spent a year building a composite material flag designed specifically to withstand the harsh environment of the moon. When they went back last summer for their farside sample return mission, they built a flag, — and this is pretty amazing — out of basalt, like volcanic rock, which you find on Earth. And they use basalt from earth, but of course basalt is common on the moon. They were able to take the rock, turn it into lava, extract threads from the lava and weave this flag, which is now near the south pole of the moon. The significance of that is they are showing that they can use the resources of the moon, the basalt, to build flags. It's called ISR: in situ resource utilization. So to me, nothing symbolizes their intentions more than that.A fatal flaw (9:31). . . I tend to think if it's a NASA launch . . . and there's an explosion . . . I still think there are going to be investigations, congressional reports, I do think things would slow down dramatically.In the book, you really suggest a new sort of golden age of space. We have multiple countries launching. We seem to have reusable rockets here in the United States. A lot of plans to go to the moon. How sustainable is this economically? And I also wonder what happens if we have another fatal accident in this country? Is there so much to be gained — whether it's economically, or national security, or national pride in space — that this return to space by humanity will just go forward almost no matter what?I think so. I think you've seen a dramatic reduction in the cost of launch. SpaceX and the Falcon 9, the reusable rocket, has dropped launches down. It used to be if you got 10, 12 orbital rocket launches in a year, that was a good year. SpaceX is launching about every 48 hours now. It's unprecedented what they've done. You're seeing a lot of new players — Blue Origin, Rocket Lab, others — driving down the cost of launch.That said, the main anchor tenant customer, the force driving all of this is still the government, it's still NASA, it's still the Pentagon. There is not a self-sustaining space economy that exists in addition or above and beyond the government. You're starting to see bits of that, but really it's the government that's driving it.When you talk about the movie For All Mankind, you sort of wonder if at one point, what happened in that movie is there was a huge investment into NASA by the government, and you're seeing that to some extent today, not so much with NASA, but actually on the national security side and the creation of the Space Force and the increases, just recently, in the Space Force's budget. I mean, my gosh, if you have $25 billion for this year alone for Golden Dome, the Missile Defense Shield, that's the equivalent of NASA's entire budget. That's the sort of funding that helps build those capabilities going forward.And if we should, God forbid, have a fatal accident, you think we'll just say that's the cost of human exploration and forward we go?I think a lot about this, and the answer is, I don't know. When we had Challenger and we had Columbia, the world stopped, and the Space Shuttle was grounded for months if not a year at a time, and the world just came to an end. And you wonder now if it's becoming more routine and what happens? Do we just sort of carry on in that way?It's not a perfect analogy, but when you talk about commercial astronauts, these rich people are paying a lot of money to go, and if there's an accident there, what would happen? I think about that, and you think about Mount Everest. The people climbing Mount Everest today, those mountain tourists are literally stepping over dead bodies as they're going up to the summit, and nobody's shutting down Mount Everest, they're just saying, well, if you want to climb Mount Everest, that's the risk you take. I do wonder if we're going to get that to that point in space flight, but I tend to think if it's a NASA launch, and it's NASA astronauts, and there's an explosion, and there's a very bad day, I still think there are going to be investigations, congressional reports, I do think things would slow down dramatically.The thing is, if it's SpaceX, they have had accidents. They've had multiple accidents — not with people, thank goodness — and they have been grounded.It is part of the model.It's part of the model, and they have shown how they can find out what went wrong, fix it, and return to flight, and they know their rocket so well because they fly it so frequently. They know it that well, and NASA, despite what you think about Elon, NASA really, really trusts SpaceX and they get along really well.State of play (13:33)[Blue Origin is] way behind for myriad reasons. They sat out while SpaceX is launching the Falcon 9 every couple of days . . . Blue Origin, meanwhile, has flown its New Glenn rocket one time.I was under the impression that Blue Origin was way behind SpaceX. Are they catching up?This is one of the themes of the book. They are way behind for myriad reasons. They sat out while SpaceX is launching the Falcon 9 every couple of days, they're pushing ahead with Starship, their next generation rocket would be fully reusable, twice the thrust and power of the Saturn V rocket that flew the Apollo astronauts to the Moon. Blue Origin, meanwhile, has flown its New Glenn rocket one time. They might be launching again soon within the coming weeks or months, hopefully by the end of the year, but that's two. They are so far behind, but you do hear Jeff Bezos being much more tuned into the company. He has a new CEO — a newish CEO — plucked from the ranks of Amazon, Dave Limp, and you do sort of see them charging, and now that the acting NASA administrator has sort of opened up the competition to go to the moon, I don't know that Blue Origin beats SpaceX to do it, but it gives them some incentive to move fast, which I think they really need.I know it's only a guess and it's only speculation, but when we return to the moon, which company will have built that lander?At this point, you have to put your money on SpaceX just because they're further along in their development. They've flown humans before. They know how to keep people alive in space. In their Dragon capsule, they have the rendezvous and proximity operations, they know how to dock. That's it.Blue Origin has their uncrewed lander, the Mark 1 version that they hope to land on the moon next year, so it's entirely possible that Blue Origin actually lands a spacecraft on the lunar surface before SpaceX, and that would be a big deal. I don't know that they're able to return humans there, however, before SpaceX.Do you think there's any regrets by Jeff Bezos about how Blue Origin has gone about its business here? Because obviously it really seems like it's a very different approach, and maybe the Blue Origin approach, if we look back 10 years, will seem to have been the better approach, but given where we are now and what you just described, would you guess that he's deeply disappointed with the kind of progress they made via SpaceX?Yeah, and he's been frustrated. Actually, the opening scene of the book is Jeff being upset that SpaceX is so far ahead and having pursued a partnership with NASA to fly cargo and supply to the International Space Station and then to fly astronauts to the International Space Station, and Blue Origin essentially sat out those competitions. And he turns to his team — this was early on in 2016 — and said, “From here on out, we go after everything that SpaceX goes after, we're going to compete with them. We're going to try to keep up.” And that's where they went, and sort of went all in early in the first Trump administration when it was clear that they wanted to go back to the moon, to position Blue Origin to say, “We can help you go back to the moon.”But yes, I think there's enormous frustration there. And I know, if not regret on Jeff's part, but certainly among some of his senior leadership, because I've talked to them about it.What is the war for talent between those two companies? Because if you're a hotshot engineer out of MIT, I'd guess you'd probably want to go to SpaceX. What is that talent war like, if you have any idea?It's fascinating. Just think a generation ago, you're a hot MIT engineer coming out of grad school, chances are you're going to go to NASA or one of the primes, right? Lockheed, or Boeing, or Air Jet, something like that. Now you've got SpaceX and Blue Origin, but you've got all kinds of other options too: Stoke Space, Rocket Lab, you've got Axiom, you've got companies building commercial space stations, commercial companies building space suits, commercial companies building rovers for the moon, a company called Astro Lab.I think what you hear is people want to go to SpaceX because they're doing things: they're flying rockets, they're flying people, you're actually accomplishing something. That said, the culture's rough, and you're working all the time, and the burnout rate is high. Blue Origin more has a tradition of people getting frustrated that yeah, the work-life balance is better — although I hear that's changing, actually, that it's driving much, much harder — but it's like, when are we launching? What are we doing here?And so the fascinating thing is actually, I call it SpaceX and Blue Origin University, where so many of the engineers go out and either do their own things or go to work for other companies doing things because they've had that experience in the commercial sector.The long-term vision (18:37)That's the interesting thing, that while they compete . . . at a base level, Elon and Jeff and SpaceX and Blue Origin want to accomplish the same things and have a lot in common . . .At a talk recently, Bezos was talking about space stations in orbit and there being like a million people in space in 20 years doing economically valuable things of some sort. How seriously should I take that kind of prediction?Well, I think a million people in 20 years is not feasible, but I think that's ultimately what is his goal. His goal is, as he says, he founded Amazon, the infrastructure was there: the phone companies had laid down the cables for the internet, the post office was there to deliver the books, there was an invention called the credit card, he could take people's money. That infrastructure for space isn't there, and he wants to sort of help with Elon and SpaceX. That's their goal.That's the interesting thing, that while they compete, while they poke each other on Twitter and kind of have this rivalry, at a base level, Elon and Jeff and SpaceX and Blue Origin want to accomplish the same things and have a lot in common, and that's lower the cost of access to space and make it more accessible so that you can build this economy on top of it and have more people living in space. That's Elon's dream, and the reason he founded SpaceX is to build a city on Mars, right? Something's going to happen to Earth at some point we should have a backup plan.Jeff's goal from the beginning was to say, you don't really want to inhabit another planet or celestial body. You're better off in these giant space stations envisioned by a Princeton physics professor named Gerard O'Neill, who Jeff Bezos read his book The High Frontier and became an acolyte of Gerard O'Neill from when he was a kid, and that's sort of his vision, that you don't have to go to a planet, you can just be on a Star Trekkian sort of spacecraft in orbit around the earth, and then earth is preserved as this national park. If you want to return to Earth, you can, but you get all the resources from space. In 500 years is that feasible? Yeah, probably, but that's not going to be in our lives, or our kids' lives, or our grandkids' lives.For that vision — anything like that vision — to happen, it seems to me that the economics needs to be there, and the economics just can't be national security and national prestige. We need to be doing things in space, in orbit, on the moon that have economic value on their own. Do we know what that would look like, or is it like you've got to build the infrastructure first and then let the entrepreneurs do their thing and see what happens?I would say the answer is “yes,” meaning it's both. And Jeff even says it, that some of the things that will be built, we do not know. When you had the creation of the internet, no one was envisioning Snapchat or TikTok. Those applications come later. But we do know that there are resources in space. We know there's a plentiful helium three, for example, on the surface of the moon, which it could be vital for, say, quantum computing, and there's not a lot of it on earth, and that could be incredibly valuable. We know that asteroids have precious metals in large quantities. So if you can reduce the cost of accessing them and getting there, then I think you could open up some of those economies. If you just talk about solar rays in space, you don't have day and night, you don't have cloud cover, you don't have an atmosphere, you're just pure sunlight. If you could harness that energy and bring it back to earth, that could be valuable.The problem is the cost of entry is so high and it's so difficult to get there, but if you have a vehicle like Starship that does what Elon envisions and it launches multiple times a day like an airline, all you're really doing is paying for the fuel to launch it, and it goes up and comes right back down, it can carry enormous amounts of mass, you can begin to get a glimmer of how this potentially could work years from now.The pace of progress (22:50)People talk about US-China, but clearly Russia has been a long-time player. India, now, has made extraordinary advancements. Of course, Europe, Japan, and all those countries are going to want to have a foothold in space . . .How would you characterize the progress now than when you wrote your first book?So much has happened that the first book, The Space Barons was published in 2018, and I thought, yeah, there'll be enough material here for another one in maybe 10 years or so, and here we are, what, seven years later, and the book is already out because commercial companies are now flying people. You've got a growth of the space ecosystem beyond just the Space Barons, beyond just the billionaires.You've got multiple players in the rocket launch market, and really, I think a lot of what's driving it isn't just the rivalries between the commercial companies in the United States, but the geopolitical space race between the United States and China, too that's really driving a lot of this, and the technological change that we've seen has moved very fast. Again, how fast SpaceX is launching, Blue Origin coming online, new launch vehicles, potentially new commercial space stations, and a broadening of the space ecosystem, it's moving fast. Does that mean it's perfect? No, companies start, they fail, they have setbacks, they go out of business, but hey, that's capitalism.Ten years from now, how many space stations are going to be in orbit around the earth?I think we'll have at least one or two commercial space stations for the United States, I think China. Is it possible you've got the US space stations, does that satisfy the demand? People talk about US-China, but clearly Russia has been a long-time player. India, now, has made extraordinary advancements. Of course, Europe, Japan, and all those countries are going to want to have a foothold in space for their scientists, for their engineers, for their pharmaceutical companies that want to do research in a zero-G environment. I think it's possible that there are, within 10 years, three, maybe even four space stations. Yeah, I think that's possible.Friendly competition (24:53)I honestly believe [Elon] . . . wants Blue to be better than they are.Do you think Musk thinks a lot about Blue Origin, or do you think he thinks, “I'm so far ahead, we're just competing against our own goals”?I've talked to him about this. He wishes they were better. He wishes they were further along. He said to me years ago, “Jeff needs to focus on Blue Origin.” This is back when Jeff was still CEO of Amazon, saying he should focus more on Blue Origin. And he said that one of the reasons why he was goading him and needling him as he has over the years was an attempt to kind of shame him and to get him to focus on Blue, because as he said, for Blue to be successful, he really needs to be dialed in on it.So earlier this year, when New Glenn, Blue Origin's big rocket, made it to orbit, that was a moment where Elon came forward and was like, respect. That is hard to do, to build a rocket to go to orbit, have a successful flight, and there was sort of a public high five in the moment, and now I think he thinks, keep going. I honestly believe he wants Blue to be better than they are.There's a lot of Elon Musk skeptics out there. They view him either as the guy who makes too big a prediction about Tesla and self-driving cars, or he's a troll on Twitter, but when it comes to space and wanting humanity to have a self-sustaining place somewhere else — on Mars — is he for real?Yeah, I do believe that's the goal. That's why he founded SpaceX in the first place, to do that. But the bottom line is, that's really expensive. When you talk about how do you do that, what are the economic ways to do it, I think the way he's funding that is obviously through Starlink and the Starlink system. But I do believe he wants humanity to get to Mars.The problem with this now is that there hasn't been enough competition. Blue Origin hasn't given SpaceX competition. We saw all the problems that Boeing has had with their program, and so much of the national space enterprise is now in his hands. And if you remember when he had that fight and the breakup with Donald Trump, Elon, in a moment of peak, threatened to take away the Dragon spacecraft, which is the only way NASA can fly its astronauts anywhere to space, to the International Space Station. I think that was reckless and dangerous and that he regretted it, but yes, the goal to get to Mars is real, and whatever you think about Elon — and he certainly courts a controversy — SpaceX is really, really good at what they do, and what they've done is really unprecedented from an American industrial perspective.My earliest and clearest memory of America and space was the landing on Mars. I remember seeing the first pictures probably on CBS news, I think it was Dan Rather saying, “Here are the first pictures of the Martian landscape,” 1976, and if you would've asked me as a child then, I would've been like, “Yeah, so we're going to be walking on Mars,” but I was definitely hooked and I've been interested in space, but are you a space guy? How'd you end up on this beat, which I think is a fantastic beat? You've written two books about it. How did this happen?I did not grow up a space nerd, so I was born in 1973 —Christian, I said “space guy.” I didn't say “space nerd,” but yeah, that is exactly right.My first memory of space is actually the Challenger shuttle exploding. That was my memory. As a journalist, I was covering the military. I'd been embedded in Iraq, and my first book was an Iraq War book about the national guard's role in Iraq, and was covering the military. And then this guy, this was 10 years ago, 12 years ago, at this point, Elon holds a press conference at the National Press Club where SpaceX was suing the Pentagon for the right to compete for national security launch contracts, and he starts off the press conference not talking about the lawsuit, but talking about the attempts. This was early days of trying to land the Falcon 9 rocket and reuse it, and I didn't know what he was talking about. And I was like, what? And then I did some research and I was like, “He's trying to land and reuse the rockets? What?” Nobody was really covering it, so I started spending more time, and then it's the old adage, right? Follow the money. And if the richest guys in the world — Bezos Blue Origin, at the time, Richard Branson, Paul Allen had a space company — if they're investing large amounts of their own personal fortune into that, maybe we should be paying attention, and look at where we are now.On sale everywhere The Conservative Futurist: How To Create the Sci-Fi World We Were Promised Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

Asian nations are walking a tightrope between Washington and Beijing – juggling trade, tech and security pressures as the heavyweights vie for influence. On today’s Big Take Asia Podcast, host K. Oanh Ha speaks with Adam Farrar, Bloomberg’s senior geoeconomics analyst for Asia Pacific, to unpack what may have been overlooked at the APEC summit as the Xi-Trump show came to town. Read more: Xi Calls for Stable Supply Chains After Sealing Trump Truce Further listening: Trump Got an ‘Amazing’ Meeting. China Got Much-Needed Time Listen and follow The Big Take Asia on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcastsSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

From the BBC World Service: Markets in Asia rose in reaction to the outcome of the APEC meetings in South Korea as the U.S. and China stepped back from the brink of a full-fledged trade war. Plus, reports suggest India is looking for new sources to replace the oil it currently buys from Russia. And, we look at Cameroon's mining industry, which is often done by small-scale miners working in risky environments with basic tools.

From the BBC World Service: Markets in Asia rose in reaction to the outcome of the APEC meetings in South Korea as the U.S. and China stepped back from the brink of a full-fledged trade war. Plus, reports suggest India is looking for new sources to replace the oil it currently buys from Russia. And, we look at Cameroon's mining industry, which is often done by small-scale miners working in risky environments with basic tools.

Once a stalwart of Hong Kong's journalism scene, Wang Jian has found a new audience on YouTube, dissecting global politics and US-China relations since the pandemic. To his fans, he's part newscaster, part professor, part friend By Lauren Hilgers. Read by G Cheng. Help support our independent journalism at theguardian.com/longreadpod

This episode of Crypto Town Hall is a candid, in-depth discussion about the current state and future of the crypto markets, with a specific focus on Bitcoin, Ethereum, stablecoins, and the rise of institutional adoption. The hosts, Scott and Dave Weisberger, lead a roundtable-style conversation with regular guests and industry insiders, covering recent price action, market sentiment, critical macro events, and the intersection of crypto and AI. The show also features a special segment with Mauricio Di Bartolomeo, co-founder of Ledn, who provides expert insights into the growing Bitcoin-backed lending industry and the impact of institutional involvement.

A few more details on the US-China tariffs and lower rates begin on November 10. Listen for more on Two Minutes in Trade  

Tony Zhang, Blaine Reed and Rich Excell are back again. What are they talking about? AI Is there anything else to talk about? Seriously though.  What about yield curves and credit spreads and Fed policy and US/China trade talks and earnings analysis and seasonal stock patterns?  Yep, covered that too.  For a recap of the last 2 weeks and what to look for going forward, have a listen.  Remember to like/share/subscribe

From July 18, 2024: On today's episode, Matt Gluck, Research Fellow at Lawfare, spoke with Michael Beckley, Associate Professor of Political Science at Tufts, and Arne Westad, the Elihu Professor of History at Yale.They discussed Beckley's and Westad's articles in Foreign Affairs on the best path forward for the U.S.-China strategic relationship—in the economic and military contexts. Beckley argues that in the short term, the U.S. should focus on winning its security competition with China, rather than significant engagement, to prevent conflict. Westad compares the current moment to the period preceding World War I. He cautions that the U.S. and China should maintain strategic communication and avoid an overly narrow focus on competition to stave off large-scale conflict.They broke down the authors' arguments and where they agree and disagree. Does U.S. engagement lower the temperature in the relationship? Will entrenched economic interests move the countries closer to conflict? How can the U.S. credibly deter China from invading Taiwan without provoking Beijing?To receive ad-free podcasts, become a Lawfare Material Supporter at www.patreon.com/lawfare. You can also support Lawfare by making a one-time donation at https://givebutter.com/lawfare-institute.Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/lawfare. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Jordi Visser is a macro investor with over 30 years of Wall Street experience. He also writes a Substack called “VisserLabs” and puts out investing YouTube videos. In this conversation, we unpack the Fed's interest rate cuts, the U.S.–China trade dynamic, and what they signal for global markets. We also dive into the Bitcoin, AI, and tokenized assets — explaining how these forces, alongside Tesla's innovations, are shaping the next major investment cycle.======================Check out my NEW show for daily bite-sized breakdowns of the biggest stories in finance, technology, and politics: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠http://pompdesk.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠======================This episode is brought to you by Figure (⁠https://figuremarkets.co/pomp⁠), the platform to Earn and Borrow. Need liquidity without selling your crypto? Figure offers Crypto-Backed Loans, allowing you to borrow against your Bitcoin, Ethereum, & SOL with 12-month terms and no prepayment penalties. They have the lowest rates in the industry at 8.91%, allowing you to access instant cash or buy more Bitcoin without triggering a tax event. Your BTC collateral is protected by decentralized MPC custody. You can always see your BTC ownership in your FM account and verify holdings in your personal BTC vault on chain. Unlock your crypto's potential today. Visit their app to apply (⁠https://figuremarkets.co/pomp⁠) for a Crypto Backed Loan (⁠https://figuremarkets.co/pomp⁠) today! Figure Lending LLC dba Figure. Equal Opportunity Lender. NMLS 1717824. Terms and conditions apply. Visit figure.com for more information. Figure Markets Credit LLC. 650 S. Tryon Street, 8th Floor, Charlotte, NC 28202. (888) 926-6259. NMLS ID 2559612. Terms and conditions apply.======================In this episode, Pomp spotlights easyBitcoin.app—the app that pays you 1% extra on recurring buys, 2% annual bitcoin rewards, and 4.5% APY on USD. Download it now for iOS or Android at https://easybitcoin.onelink.me/F1zP/klc4v1p8 and start earning today. Your capital is at risk. Crypto markets are highly volatile. This content is informational and not financial advice.======================DeFi Development Corp. (Nasdaq: DFDV) is pioneering a new category in crypto investing with the first Solana-focused Digital Asset Treasury. DFDV offers public market exposure to Solana's growth, yield, and onchain innovation, offering investors a leveraged way to participate in a trillion-dollar opportunity. Learn more about why Solana and why DFDV at ⁠SolanaTo10K.com⁠.======================Timestamps: 0:00 – Intro2:08 – Fed rate cut and market reaction4:34 – US - China trade agreement and impact7:54 – How to navigate government shutdown, labor market, and AI22:03 – Generational divide, wealth gap, and rise of socialism in politics26:46 – Bitcoin sentiment and why investors are frustrated33:21 – Tokenization, stablecoins, and the future of payments38:40 – Token revolution and the merging of AI & crypto42:27 – Tesla, robo-taxis, and the future of self-driving cars

President Donald Trump announced a trade truce with Chinese President Xi Jinping after a 90-minute meeting in Busan, South Korea, on Thursday. But what actually came out of the truce seems… less than meets the eye. According to Axios, Trump reduced tariffs against China in exchange for promises from the Chinese president to buy American soybeans and oil. However, the deal appears to be largely temporary, with few actual binding details that would make it any different from those made during Trump's first term in office or even earlier this year. So for more details on the trade truce and Trump's Asia trip, I spoke to Evan Madeiros. He's the Penner Family Chair in Asia studies at Georgetown University with a focus on East Asia and US-China relations.And in headlines, Immigration and Customs Enforcement refuses to cease operations during Halloween festivities in Chicago, the Trump administration restricts the amount of refugees it will allow into the US every year, and Trump administration officials held a classified briefing on the president's escalating boat-strike campaign – but only invited Republicans.Show Notes:Call Congress – 202-224-3121Subscribe to the What A Day Newsletter – https://tinyurl.com/3kk4nyz8What A Day – YouTube – https://www.youtube.com/@whatadaypodcastFollow us on Instagram – https://www.instagram.com/crookedmedia/For a transcript of this episode, please visit crooked.com/whataday Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

The US-China Tariff Truce and AI's Market Trajectory Guest: Chris Riegel Chris Riegel discusses the temporary US-China tariff truce and Nvidia's potential re-entry into the high-end AI chip market in China. He notes retailers are currently absorbing tariff costs but anticipate price spikes in the first quarter of 2026, despite offsets from reduced energy costs. Riegel affirms that artificial intelligence is "real" and economically transformational, though market aspects may prove "bubbly," comparing the current technological stage to the "bottom of the first inning" of a major economic change. 1953

Donald Trump and Xi Jinping have met for the first time since 2019 to discuss a possible truce in the US-China trade war. The leaders of the world's two biggest economies shook hands and spoke of friendship ahead of the "amazing" meeting in South Korea. President Trump said they agreed a cut in tariffs and a rare earth minerals deal. Also: the US says it will begin testing its nuclear weapons to keep up with Russia and China; Hurricane Melissa moves towards the Bahamas and Cuba after causing unprecedented devastation in Jamaica; Brazil's president condemns the police raid that killed more than 130 people in Rio de Janeiro; the long lost wolf spider is re-discovered in the UK; what drives those who want to live forever; and the art of presidential gift giving.

Ryan and Saagar discuss OpenAI whistleblower, US detains pro Palestine British man on speaking tour, food stamps withheld by Trump, US China trade deal. To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show AD FREE, uncut and 1 hour early visit: www.breakingpoints.comMerch Store: https://shop.breakingpoints.com/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hey BillOReilly.com Premium and Concierge Members, welcome to the No Spin News for Monday, October 27, 2025. Stand Up for Your Country.  Talking Points Memo: Bill breaks down President Trump's trip to Asia and explains why reaching a trade deal with China is so important. Yun Sun, Ph.D., Director of the China Program at the Stimson Center, joins the No Spin News to discuss the U.S.–China negotiations and what Xi Jinping wants out of the deal. Why Donald Trump keeps teasing running for a third time. As the government shutdown reaches Day 27, air traffic control issues are on the rise. Bill looks at a clip showing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson (D) clashing with a reporter. Final Thought: Check out Michael Levine's review of 'Confronting Evil.' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices