Trump’s executive order on TikTok & WeChat, Friend of Pivot Jennifer Palmieri about women in politics, and guest host Andrew Ross Sorkin on a billionaire tax

Support for the show comes from Saks Fifth Avenue.

Sacks Fifth Avenue makes it easy to shop for your personal style.

Follow us here, and you can invest in some new arrivals that you'll want to wear again and again, like a relaxed product blazer and Gucci loafers, which can take you from work to the weekend.

Shopping from Saks feels totally customized, from the in-store stylist to a visit to Saks.com, where they can show you things that fit your style and taste.

They'll even let you know when arrivals from your favorite designers are in, or when that Brunella Cacchinelli sweater you've been eyeing is back in stock.

So, if you're like me and you need shopping to be personalized and easy, head to Sacks Fifth Avenue for the best follow rivals and style inspiration.

AI agents are getting pretty impressive.

You might not even realize you're listening to one right now.

We work 24-7 to resolve customer inquiries.

No hold music, no canned answers, no frustration.

Visit sierra.ai to learn more.

Hi, everyone.

This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network.

I'm Kara Swisher and Scott's out this week again because he takes an extended vacation for his whole life.

And we have famous Canadian Andrew Ross Sorkin of the Great Hair in his host seat this week.

Andrew is also a New York Times columnist, founder of Deal Book, and a CNBC's squawk box anchor.

He's all the things Scott wished he was.

Welcome, Andrew, to the show.

Thank you for having me.

But actually, a New Yorker, as we know, he just thinks I'm a Canadian because I don't know.

Why does he think that?

What is the movie?

I think he thinks I'm even keeled, but I'm going to show you, Karen, that I'm not that even-killed at all.

I'm excited because, by the way, Canadians are not letting us into their country, by the way.

Canadians are getting tough.

When the Canadians are mean to you, you know things are bad here in this country.

The wall is gone up on the north.

The wall, the north wall.

It is going to be, you know, winter is coming.

Anyway, there's so much to talk about.

We're going to, you know, talk a lot about Wall Street and Bernie Sanders and stuff that's sort of in your zone and billionaires and what we should do about it.

But I'd first like very quickly, before we get to the big stories, to talk about this

op-ed that that Dara Khos Rashahi wrote in the New York Times which I saw last night actually saying what companies like his should be required by law to provide gig workers a benefit you know a benefits fund but he did not think they should be classified as full-time workers he was bringing up a thing that uber always brings up but others have brought it up is the reclassification of workers and right now in the midst of this pandemic i'd love to get your thoughts on that um that op-ed and where you think this is going where workers designate i have such mixed views about this and i don't know where you are these days on that i'd love to hear your view too.

Sure.

My sense is that we need to do something for these workers and that they are workers.

And some of them should be categorized as employees.

Not all, but some.

And I've always thought that there should actually be a look back provision, which is to say to look at the end of a month or an end of a week and say, okay, did you work 35 hours?

Did you work 40 hours?

And by the way, it's important to figure out how to define those 35 or 40 hours or whatever number, because it shouldn't be just the number of hours that you were actually on the meter, meaning that somebody was in the back of the car and you were getting paid.

It should be, it should include some percentage, I imagine, of time when you're just on the road.

And I think that once you get to that 35, 40 hour period, you probably really should be classified as an employee and get those type of benefits.

I do, but I'm also sympathetic to the other side of the argument, which is the independent contractor argument and the flexibility argument.

And so if you're only going to work 10 hours a week or you're going to work 15 hours a week and you're going to do it in sort of a

not in necessarily the most consistent consistent way,

I'm not necessarily sure you should get all of the protections.

But by the way, there probably should be some fund to protect you because here we are in the midst of COVID-19 and this pandemic and

you can't work.

And so what do you do?

So that's why I said, and that's not to be the Canadian

without a crazy sense, but I think we should do something.

The question is sort of how much, and I don't know if you thought Darrow went far enough in the

well, I think he's sort of caught, like, right?

I think they, I think a lot of these companies have been built on the backs of workers, period, and their, and their labor.

And when, like I always say, when you pay $4 for an Uber, which you don't anymore, by the way, prices have gone up rather significantly,

you're not, the person suffering is the person in the front seat, you know, no matter how you slice it.

And so, or VCs are funding the whole thing.

And so I think the idea, and I had a discussion of all people with Gavin Newsom many years ago when he had just become governor about, or maybe he was lieutenant governor, about reclassifying workers in general.

There's a new way to think about employees.

And I think with this COVID-19 thing, you've really got to start thinking of like, who is a worker and what rights should they have?

Just like with President Trump saying he's going to protect, well, he's doing, it's Obamacare, it's called Obamacare, but protect pre-existing conditions or this or that, is there's a new way of thinking about workers that has to be changed completely, almost shattering the old way we think of it.

Okay, so here's the flip side.

And I'm just curious what you think.

The economics of this.

So uber as a company i mean one of the things is we all look at uber and we say look at this huge valuation but it's a money losing pit yeah at the moment and it's still a money losing pit even right even i mean this is a business that's now been around for a while it's no longer just a startup and the reason i say that is

what happens to the business model if and when you really do add all of these benefits, which we all want for employees.

But that's the cost.

It's a cost to society.

Someone's paying somewhere, whether it's it's an emergency room or a taxpayer.

But my question is: if the cost is so high, what happens to the business?

Does the business go away?

And is that better or worse ultimately for society?

I think that's a real question.

By the way, you could say to me, it's better for society that Uber doesn't exist.

And then there's other people who might say, it's better for society that Uber.

I just think it has to be the business it is.

It's the size it's supposed to be.

Like he was talking about that in the piece that, well, if we didn't do it and we had to pay people more, we'd be smaller.

I'm like, uh-huh, That's how we are.

That's how, you know, if I wanted to like fund my things forever, I could hire lots of people and make and give myself stock options.

It's just sort of a mentality.

I like the piece, and I think he is one of the more thoughtful people, even though he gets much attacked by,

you know, driver union groups and things like that.

He is sort of paying the price for Travis Kalinek's reign, essentially, what he put into place.

Oh, no, I think he's a very thoughtful guy.

And I actually enjoyed the piece.

I thought it was actually a very well-articulated argument.

The piece of it, though, and I do give credit to Uber for this and to Lyft and others, which is we have maybe through the subsidization of Silicon Valley, effectively democratized to some degree mobility in a way that didn't exist before, right?

So you can get a car now out in Queens to get into Manhattan in a way that just didn't exist.

You couldn't even find a taxi before.

And so there's also social benefits to that.

And so trying to figure out what the balance is between the social benefit of of being able to democratize mobility and get cars to places that would have otherwise not been there.

Now, yes, you're doing it on the back, if you will, of the employee.

The question is, what job would have that employee had if they weren't taking, if they weren't doing that?

And this is the ultimate problem.

And

I wish I had an answer.

You just had an answer.

I think that, you know, when I talk to drivers, and of course, that's not, I hate anecdotal people talking to cab driver stories, but all of them do like the freedom.

I have not had someone say, but they also do complain.

It's a really interesting problem.

I think they don't even, they don't want to be in the office.

They don't want to be in a different place, and yet they understand.

I mean, I think that benefits are important.

So I think it'll be an interesting question of whether, where the government's role is.

It's worth noting, though, and I don't know if you feel this way as well.

Uber,

a driver in New York City for an Uber or even a Washington, D.C.

where you are, or Los Angeles to some degree.

They are the equivalent of employees because they are

most of those people are working 35, 40 hours, 50, 60, 70 hours a week.

Those are employees and they should get everything.

You go out to other towns and cities in this country and it's a different, it's a different situation.

I got picked up in the back of a pickup truck.

That happened to me in Omaha about a year ago.

And I said, how often you drive?

He says, well, you know, some weeks I do five hours.

Some weeks I go out on Saturday nights and get a little bit of money.

And I'm not sure on that, on that individual how I'd handle that.

Well, I think it's the idea of the floating worker.

And I think I hate calling them, you know,

the gig workers.

I hate that word.

I'd like to think of a new designation for an employee that's very different than, and they should float with their benefits.

I mean, that's the idea.

But that was the point of Obamacare.

But I remember sitting with President Obama probably the last year of his presidency, having a long talk about this and how he was looking out into the future a decade out.

He said, look, I think the world's going to be gig workers.

It's just going to be, there's going to be all sorts of gig workers, and that's why we have to do this now.

And it has to be flexible and portable.

And that's what, if that's the future of the economy.

Now, if that's not the future of the economy, then we can have a whole different debate.

It is the future of the economy.

Anyway, we're going to get to big stories.

We're going to talk about President T, and that's not TikTok.

It's actually what President Trump is calling himself today on Twitter.

I don't know if you're going to use that term for him.

It's a dangerous way to call it because there's only one Mr.

T.

There's only one.

There's only one Mr.

T, my friend.

And he's on the A team.

He is fantastic.

I love that guy.

Anyway, we're going to do big stories.

Late last week, President Trump said he would be restricting the use of the Chinese-based app WeChat and TikTok in the United States in one of the most problematic executive orders I've ever seen.

He said that after 45 days, transactions would be prohibited on the two apps, but it's still unclear exactly what that means.

And I think it was purposely left that way.

Now, TikTok is expected to sue the Trump administration.

They are arguing that President Trump's action is unconstitutional because it did not give the company a chance to respond.

WeChat doesn't know what to do.

Its stock went down.

The whole thing was extraordinarily confusing.

For a second, game companies were worried.

Apple's been worried.

Snap was worried.

It sent everybody into a state of confusion.

And meanwhile, a lot of the coverage was that TikTok's not really the biggest problem there is.

There's many others.

Most intelligence officials think that.

So,

what do you think is going to happen here?

And then, of course, Twitter jumped into the possible transactions,

which is another

thing.

Let's go through all the wrinkles.

I am

not long a Twitter TikTok transaction.

I think that's kind of a joke.

I think there's a lot of headlines that have been coming out in the past 72 hours that are being ginned up by bankers and all sorts of other people behind the scenes who are diverse.

Why not say Silverlake is in for a billion or whatever?

So

I think the end result is a Microsoft transaction, and I think the end result's a Microsoft transaction simply because it is complicated to physically move over all of this data from China.

And unless you're going to let Google do it or Amazon do it in this day and age of big tech and antitrust, that's not happening.

I think the only American company that's probably in a position really to pull this off in any quick amount of time.

is Microsoft.

Now, we can debate whether Microsoft is a good buyer.

They have a mixed track record of buying assets

and the consumer space.

They've done great with

Minecraft and Xbox.

Not so great, obviously, with things like Nokia and, well,

you don't remember.

You don't remember Mungo Park.

You don't remember that, but I do.

I don't think I remember Mungo Park.

That was part of the MSN network.

What do we think, by the way, was the LinkedIn transaction ultimately a success?

I'm not sure.

Yeah, I think it's fine in there.

I don't know.

I think they let it run separately.

Skype people don't think so.

They think it's not been innovative.

They haven't been innovating in there.

LinkedIn, I think, is the one of its kind.

So who's to know whether it's been innovating, right?

So it's not really like there's an enormous amount of competitors to LinkedIn.

So I see it as a Microsoft.

Let's walk through it.

So why does it have to be quick?

Do you think this, talk about this executive order?

Well, two things.

My understanding is it could take something on the order of 12 months to actually move the data.

So quick is in the eye of the beholder.

So even if it's even,

and that's a short amount of time.

So

why?

Because

the longer you believe this goes on,

if you believe that TikTok, see, I don't believe that TikTok, I don't think the Chinese government right this second is somehow abusing its position with TikTok.

Nor, by the way, do I believe that the Chinese government is abusing its position with Huawei right this moment.

I don't think that's the issue.

I think the issue is the potential for abuse in the future at a moment's notice.

That's the question.

And so

when do you try to put the wall down?

But you will, you know, we're going to have a splinter net.

That's what this is.

Yeah.

And I don't know what to do about it.

And I also worry about the implications for U.S.

businesses.

If you're a Tim Cook who's got so much business, if you're, if you're Tim Cook and you have a huge amount of manufacturing and sales in China, what happens?

Now, he may very well be protected because

of, you know, they have hundreds of thousands of employees that are working at Foxconn that would be out of business if somehow, you know, President Xi said, Cook, you're out of here.

I think that would be hard for them.

Same thing with a Starbucks.

But, you know, the Chinese are willing often often to take pain for a much longer period than

our ADD society.

So

that's what I worry about is sort of what the long-term implications.

By the way, this WeChat thing, I don't know if people appreciate this, is going to be a big problem for Apple too.

Yep, absolutely.

Because right now, if you're trying to do business with a Chinese company and you're an American, you still use, you use WeChat.

You use WeChat 100%.

And people, Chinese Americans here talking to relatives back home, not just that.

Lots of, lots of people.

So you take WeChat off the Apple platform and that's going to be, I mean, I don't know what the numbers are.

You can do the math.

There's math to be done, but I think it makes it a much less appealing product to buy if you're Chinese or planning to do business with folks in China.

Also, it's more complex.

Apple is the obvious one to point to, but the global supply chain there of everything that gets made, everything is really problematic.

Like everyone has a link in China, even though Google doesn't operate there, Facebook doesn't operate there.

So many U.S.

companies.

It's interesting the Chinese have not reacted.

Instead, what they've been doing is doing horrible things like arresting Jimmy Lai in Hong Kong.

Meanwhile, they're actually doing some substantive things to be

problematic for this country.

And so, and here we are arguing with them about this video dance service, essentially, right now.

Do you, where would President be better to focus?

Because it seems like he has got kind of, as usual,

the question is whether he could turn this around on the Chinese and say, hey, look, we're going to shut TikTok down unless you want to open up your market, right?

That's not going to happen.

Facebook and Google on the same terms that we do.

That's not going to happen.

And once you declare that something's a national security threat, it's sort of hard to play chess with that piece, I think.

Right.

Oh, you can't.

People say this to me a lot on Twitter, the idea that, you know, oh, we can just open, if they open up, I'm like, we're the United States with a free and open internet and they're China with an autocratic one.

Why do you imagine they would do that?

Like, they're not going to suddenly become a democracy.

They're not going to set, it's not what they, that's not how they play.

And so it's impossible to even demand that of them because it's never going to happen because it's not like we're telling a, you know, a giraffe to be a lion or whatever.

But then is it magical thinking to think that there's a better way?

No, no.

But because one of the things you're noticing among Republicans and Democrats is that

almost everybody is moving more hawkish, right?

They're everyone's going to outhawk each other on China.

And the question I have is whether there is some middle ground.

Is there a way to thread this needle that we're not?

Well, here's the problem.

China is really our rival, but we also have to get along with them because they're the other power.

And meanwhile, they're going around the globe, putting Chinese technology everywhere.

And so you talk about a splinter net.

It's going to be a Chinese internet and then us, like with less and less and less power in doing it this way, because I think we overestimate the power we have right now

in the future.

And one of the things that's problematic with, say, going to Microsoft and making these ridiculous time demands is that, and look, if I thought he was smart, I'd I'd say he's trying to keep on the pressure.

I just think he just wakes up and thinks of a crazy thing and then tweets it.

I don't think there's any

strategy here, especially if Peter Navarro.

I think Peter Navarro pops into his office system and crazy, he goes with that.

And then Steve Minusian comes in and tries to clean it up while he's trying to do, you know, a COVID deal on this side, which is more important.

But I think one of the things that's that should have happened is this company should have gone public and then created an independent company with all kinds of investors

that operated in this country.

That's That's what they should have done.

That would be the American way to me, not to be like force married to Microsoft.

But mind you,

the next shoot to drop that we're hearing about is the possibility that these companies won't be allowed to IPO here at all

as a form of punishment.

Well, if that happens, then it completely undoes all of the

all of the issues you just talked about.

If you could get the investor base to be here, if you could have some more employees here, then it changes the dynamic.

But

we're going to a full wall.

Right, which is crazy.

That means, how does it change the American business landscape, which has been a stable place to do business and been an open place to do business?

To me, I think we'll lose.

If we're in a wall war with China, guess who's going to win?

Guess who has the great one?

It's China, not us.

And we're not good at it either.

Long-term.

Look, I've always thought that long-term, and I hate to say this about America.

I think long-term, the Chinese, I don't want them to overtake us, but I think it's very possible.

The question I'd ask is if you're an entrepreneur today, if you're a graduate from Stanford University and you're thinking to go to Silicon Valley or Austin or wherever in the United States, where would you go now?

Is the United States not the place you'd go?

Would you get on a plane to India?

Would you fly to Beijing?

Where would you go?

Yeah.

Now, well, it should be here.

It should be here, but we're becoming more and more, and we're just not good at this.

This is not the, the reason the internet is so strong is because it's a free and open internet.

And we could do it in a safe way and create a new company that's also a counterpoint to Facebook.

That's great.

It's not a counterpoint to Facebook inside of Microsoft.

It's just another thing Microsoft owns that could be a competitor, but also could get pulled into the giant Microsoft, which is still big, even though they're not under antitrust scrutiny right now.

Okay, if we're having this conversation in five years from now,

TikTok is owned by Microsoft.

in this hypothetical.

Are we talking about it in the same breath with Facebook?

If they spin it off and let it run as an index, because the reason someone asked me this morning why is TikTok successful is the people running it are doing a great job at product.

And it doesn't, let them do it and get the security in there.

And I think if they spun, if they brought it in and spun it off, that would be the best thing for it.

I think independent companies are always the best way to go for these companies.

Well, let me ask you one other thing.

Do you think that they can break up the, if you believe that Facebook is a monopoly, do you think that they represent a genuine competitor

that could actually upend this whole situation.

Yes.

Yes.

Because I think it's a wonderful product.

Do you use it, Andrew?

We're going to move on to our next story quickly, but geez.

Start using it.

Get yourself a burner phone like Kara Swisher.

But you got to tell me, should I be doing?

Here's the real thing, though.

Should I be doing dances, lip syncs?

No, what's no, don't dance.

Andrew, that would be the end of your career.

What happens if I did lip syncs to Kara Swisher podcasts, like Sarah Cooper, but I was Kara Swisher?

That is an excellent thing.

I could do a Galloway.

Nobody will watch it.

Like a Galloway.

How about Galloway?

Yeah, you're right.

You say gangsta.

I was thinking maybe

Dave Pornoy.

He should be on Pornoy with his, you know, he's got those, you know, you will be on TikTok as Andrew Ross Sorkin.

I think it's a great platform.

And I think it's a real shame what's being happening.

I'll do a little ad here.

What is Kara Swisher doing on TikTok right now?

I am thinking about it right now.

I don't know yet.

Not yet, but I think about it every single day for an hour.

I look at it.

I study it.

What about the demo?

So part of me thinks that we all want to capture the younger demo.

No, that's not it.

Okay, you think that the older demo is coming?

I think everyone's coming.

Yep, it's a great platform.

This is my prediction.

Anyway, we're going to go to a quick break and come back to talk about a new proposed tax on the ultra-wealthy.

And we'll be joined after that by a friend of Pivot, author and political advisor, Jennifer Palmieri.

Support for this show is brought to you by CVS CareMark.

CVS CareMark plays an important role in the healthcare ecosystem and provides unmatched value to those they serve.

They do this by effectively managing costs and providing the right access and personalized support.

The care, empathy, and knowledge that CVS CareMark provides its customers is proven time and time again with their 94% customer satisfaction rating.

Go to cmk.co/slash stories to learn how we help you provide the affordability, support, and access your members need.

Support for Pivot comes from groons.

If you've ever done a deep internet dive trying to discover different nutrition solutions, you've likely had the thought, surely there's a way to improve my skin, gut health, immunity, brain fog, without offending my taste buds.

Well, there is.

It's called groons.

Groons are a convenient, comprehensive formula packed into a daily snack pack of gummies.

It's not a multivitamin, a greens gummy, or a prebiotic.

It's all of those things and then some for a fraction of the price.

In a groons daily snack pack, you get more than 20 vitamins and minerals, 6 grams of prebiotic fiber, plus more than 60 ingredients.

They include nutrient dense and whole foods, all of which will help you out in different ways.

For example, Groons has six times the gut health ingredients compared to the leading greens powders.

It contains biotin and niacinamide, which helps with thicker hair, nails, and skin health.

They also contain mushrooms, which can help with brain function.

And of course, you're probably familiar with vitamin C and how great it's for your immune system.

On top of all, groons are vegan and free of dairy nuts and gluten.

Get up to 52% off when you go to groons.co and use the code PIVOT.

That's G-R-U-N-S dot C-O using the code PIVOT for 52%

off.

Okay, Andrew, we're back and you haven't said one offensive thing.

Nothing sexist, nothing problematic.

It's really a problem if you don't move in here into Scott's territory.

I know, but do you guys have HR people or how does that work?

Me, I'm the HR person, Andrew.

That's what it is.

That's essentially what it is.

He actually, he gets right to the line is his problem is what happens here.

But anyway, please don't be offensive.

Be Andrew just the way you are.

I'm just me.

I'm trying to not be the former McDonald's CEO.

That's what I'm trying not to be.

Oh, my God.

Jesus criminals.

Is that the story?

It's always about email.

It's always about sexting.

Sexting.

It's always about.

And for those who don't know this, the ex-McDonald's CEO, they're trying to claw back money that he he got because it looks like he's sleeping with everyone at McDonald's right?

Supposedly on the side of fries supposedly he gets fired says it was only one person they say that he didn't have a sexual relationship they didn't look into it there was a see no evil here no evil please leave with 40 million dollars and we won't talk to you again and we won't talk about this someone shows up about a month ago and says hey there was a lot more going on here they now start looking through his emails why they didn't do that a year ago and now they want all the money back but i wonder i love that he was using his corporate email to send dirty pictures to his private email.

I was like, what?

Like, keep your emails.

Don't cross your email streams.

You know, what's going on there?

It was crazy that it was so easy to find.

And of course, everybody knew about it, as is the case.

You keep a separate phone for that, right?

No, stop it.

I know.

I do not send dirty.

I have never,

I can't even fathom.

I can say they don't, I don't know how they would find one because there isn't one.

But it's amazing that these people are so careless with technology, whether it's Slack or email or text.

And it just continues to amaze me that these people use their corporate phones for personal peccadilios.

And also, you know, the work thing, of course, is, you know, that he lied about.

It's just amazing.

You think he'll lose his money?

I think he will lose the money.

The question is whether he's sold.

I'm still arguing with Les Moon.

Yeah, but this is not like a bank, when they claw back money, it's restricted shares.

So they have never accessed them.

What happens if this guy sold the shares, went to Vegas and lost it all?

Yeah.

Or bought a house or who knows what?

You know, it's McDonald's fault for not doing an investigation, honestly.

And the shareholders will suffer.

100%.

There'll be lawsuits not just against him, but against the company and the board.

100%.

Okay, but speaking of rich people doing bad things, Senator Bernie Sanders is introducing legislation that would tax the richest Americans who made outsized money during the course of the pandemic, which is pretty much tech CEOs, tech founders and CEOs.

The legislation is called the Make Billionaires Pay Act.

I love the name of it and could pose a one-time 60% wealth tax on billionaires.

Oh my God, it's a lot of money.

It used to cover healthcare expenses of the uninsured for a year.

The proposed bill would cost Jeff Bezos $42.8 billion, Mark Zuckerberg $22.8 billion, and Elon Musk $27.5 billion.

Then Elon Musk needled Sandals about the proposal over Twitter.

So this is your area, Andrew.

Tell me what's going on with the billionaire attacks and how you feel about them.

Oh, goodness.

Because this is Elizabeth Warren part two.

I don't know what the right number is, but I will say this, and I don't know if you feel the same way.

I think that this pandemic has been a war, a genuine war, and there have been people who have gotten

on the front lines, whether they are doctors and that's their contribution to our country, or whether they are the people at the cash out or at the register at Walmart.

And I feel like I now thank them in a way that I never did before, and frankly, I'm a shame that I didn't.

I think that those of us who have been blessed enough both to be able to stay at home largely during this pandemic and blessed enough with some sense of means, and I'm no billionaire, but I think that there have been people who have made a lot of money and even those who have not made as billions,

I think there's a contribution that needs to be made.

to this country.

I think in the same way that those cashiers made a contribution to this country during the pandemic, I should make a contribution.

And I'm a minnow on a relative basis to Bezos.

So yeah, I think that people should give up something.

So what do you think of the right action?

number how do you know i don't know what the right number is i also don't i also don't know if it should really be i mean look i also wonder should it really be a one-time thing i'm not necessarily in favor of a wealth tax but i'm definitely in favor of closing all of these loopholes around you know uh when you die uh i it's crazy to me that we don't do anything there i think the idea that people can give to charity frankly uh and i love charity i want to encourage philanthropy but if you want to sell your shares pay capital gains on them and then give it to whoever you want to go with God and do it.

But the idea that you just are giving your shares away and they've never been taxed, that seems crazy to me because most people don't have that opportunity.

It means effectively that every taxpayer is subsidizing everybody else's charity, the billionaire's charity.

That is correct.

You sound like a non-gear guy.

Well, no, so I don't know what they're doing, but I don't.

What do you think of this act?

Now, this is a good idea.

I don't think it's going anywhere fast.

I think it's all for show.

I think it's going to have us talking about it.

It's going to get people a little bit crazy.

And maybe, maybe the ultimate journey we're on is that we will close some of these other loopholes eventually.

But do I think that there's going to be a massive tax, a one-time tax, maybe there will be a one-time tax, but not at probably a lot of time.

Well,

they have made a lot of money in this pandemic, right?

Not only have they made a lot of money,

I'll make even a further argument.

A number of them, including Amazon and Walmart, have made a lot of money because they've been advantaged by government policy, which is to say every small business was told you can't open.

And so Walmart and Amazon were able to own everything.

And look, they stepped up.

I give them an enormous amount of credit because I was able to live in my home without having to leave.

And there were employees, again, people who went to the front line and did the work.

And they paid them more.

And I give them credit for that as well.

But still, you look at the vast amount of money that's been made during this period.

And it would be nice if some of that was contributed back into the quote unquote system.

So, but how do you do that?

I I mean, why this is, I mean, it's been a running joke, this sort of attack on billionaires.

I remember, you know, the VC, Tom, is Tom Perkins, who said it was like Kristallnach, which was incredible to make that horrible comparison.

But, you know, this sort of attack on billionaires never seems to go anywhere.

But the numbers that these, the wealth that these people have gotten during this pandemic, when many, most people are out of work, is really like millions and millions of people.

So what's work is really.

That's why I'm saying, I think

a one-time tax.

I don't think I'd, by the way, focus it just on billionaires, though.

I think I'd focus it on anybody who's made

a lot of money during this period.

Well, who would push this?

If Biden wins, would he push that through?

By the way, it'll be January, which means possibly some of the pandemic will be gone.

Americans are forgetful people and they love rich people.

So what do you, is there any political will here?

I actually think, well, it depends.

Do you think Elizabeth Warren is either going to be the VP?

I don't think so.

But do you think that she's going to be the Treasury Secretary or some other role?

Maybe.

Maybe she'll have some influence in this that we don't know about.

I think it's possible there will be a discussion.

Also, tell me where the stock market is, by the way,

come Christmas this year.

If you think it stays where it is now, sure, we should absolutely tax it.

It's also very possible to me that things turn south in a terrible way.

So speaking of that, I want to get in your area of expertise.

I'm going to try to channel Joe Kern and I think I won't.

I won't get you angry.

No one likes Andrea.

But

what if Joe Biden wins and the stock market does this?

What happens to IPOs?

Where is the market?

You're saying when you just said it, you think it's going to tank.

Don't you think that means we need President Trump there to bring it back for us?

Because there's never been a better stock market than under him.

This is not true, but I'm going to say it because I'm Joe Curdin.

But

where do you imagine the stock market's going to do?

Because it's been separate from the economy.

It's been going different ways from the economy.

So I look at the stock market right now and I say it's a binary event for the professional investors are basically saying, I want to be in the market because I am betting on a vaccine.

And if I'm not in the market when the vaccine is announced, I've lost the game.

Now, I'm not 100% convinced that the vaccine alone is going to fix things because I worry that if there's really not a vaccine until, and I imagine we're still

March, but we could be, by the way, you know, we're here in August.

It could be August before everybody has the true access and opportunity to get that vaccine.

And then tell me how many people either aren't working or have been pushed out of their homes.

Permanently.

Permanently, you know,

we just had this big unemployment number and it's better than it was, but it's going to slow.

And you're, by the way, seeing big companies start to take advantage of this moment.

They're starting to realize that they can do more with less.

Yes.

And that's not necessarily, I mean, it's not necessarily good news.

It's terrible news.

And those will be really lost jobs, not just furloughed jobs or temporary laughs.

Those are people who are not.

So

I think it's going to be a tough slog.

The only distinction I'd make in all this is that it is true that the bigger have gotten bigger and the bigger will get bigger.

And so there's some argument to be made that the Amazons and Facebooks and Netflix and all of those folks are still going to

lead a roaring market.

What about IPOs?

I want to finish up on this.

Like there are a couple of the IPOs have done rather well because there's nothing else out there.

That's my get, right?

There's nothing else out there.

Under this money issue.

This is a supply and demand issue.

It's why you're starting to see all these SPACs, these blank check deals, which by the way, historically were considered crazy and people thought were almost explained a SPAC.

People thought this was criminal.

So a SPAC is what's called a special purpose

acquisition corporation.

And the idea is you basically buy into a blank check company.

You give somebody money.

They then have 18 to 24 months, depending on the timing, to go buy another company.

They often take a huge piece of whatever they buy.

In the old days, they used to say that this was a

compensation mechanism masquerading as an investment vehicle um and they have become so popular you've seen uh chamath polyhapatiya do it with virgin galactic you've seen it with uh a number of others nicola went public this way and by the way it's a part of it's a it's a transparency dodge because a company says i don't know if i can make it in a typical ipo because i'm going to have to run around and prove to everybody i'm going to have to show all this stuff you ultimately do have to show everything but it's the

the timing of it's different you can get something it's not a true ipo

so where are the true ipos i think they're waiting on the sidelines because they don't know what to do i mean look you know we all thought this was supposed to be the year of the airbnb ipo well the airbnb ipo can't happen because you tell me what's going to happen to the airbnb i i think brian cheski is a very smart and thoughtful guy but boy has he gotten you know stuck in the middle of this thing.

Right.

But I think there's a lot of that.

I think there's a lot of that.

So what else is out there?

How do you look at the IPO market?

I think it's going to be generally slow going,

in part because people are worried about

the underlying businesses.

But meanwhile, I think these SPACs, funnily enough, are taking off because they think that they can go up and start to acquire lots of things and do it relatively quickly.

So we'll see.

Well,

is there anything

Washington can do about this?

Or is it going to be purely a situation with investors willing to step out again after this becomes better.

I think it's investors stepping out, and I also think it's companies waiting for the right price.

I mean, that's the other thing.

You know,

who wants to go into a market that they're not sure about?

Now, by the way, some of these will work.

Some of these IPOs will work.

But

is there any that you're looking at?

I'm trying to think if there's anything like on our rate.

There's nothing.

There's not like a massive list that I'm usually sitting on.

Kodak.

Kodak.

Kodak, another method.

That all things should fall apart.

Oh, Jesus.

You know,

investigative reporters are going to have the time of their life looking into what the government did in terms of funding this, all these, all these COVID money frauds.

Like, there's one after the next every day.

It's, it's really going to be some, it's going to go on and on.

I think it's going to be that.

I think it's going to be the vaccine makers.

I mean, it's funny how much we all want to bet on these vaccines and we want to root for these healthcare companies.

But you look at all the stock sales that have been

made by the insiders during this period.

Crazy.

Crazy town.

Yeah.

Yep, absolutely.

All right.

Speaking of politics, Andrew, we have a friend of Pivot on the line who knows a lot about politics.

Jennifer Palmieri is the author of a new book, She Proclaims, Our Declaration of Independence from a Man's World.

She was also the director of communications for the Hillary Clinton 2016 presidential campaign and the White House director of communications during the Obama administration.

Welcome to Pivot, Jennifer.

Very happy to be with you.

Thank you.

So just so you know, Jennifer's in a car because she loves power wherever she is.

She's in New Jersey.

They don't have power in New Jersey.

So she's broadcasting from a car on her phone and with her laptop.

So thank you, Jennifer.

Thank you.

Super happy to be with you.

So there's a lot of things we're going to talk about, but let's quickly, I want to get to the vice presidential candidate because you know we're going to ask about that, which is soon to be happening.

But your new book sets up a blueprint for how women should step out of the patriarchal bounds in their work and life.

And, you know, that's been an ongoing struggle.

I have a patriarchal person here with Anthony Ross Sorkin, obviously.

But

talk a little bit about these ideas.

What prompted you to write this?

Because this is, you know, this has been an issue.

You were in the Hillary Clinton campaign just this week.

There was a controversy around a Maureen Dowd column around that, like being noticed.

Talk a little bit about why you decided to do this.

Yeah, so the Clinton campaign sort of opened my eyes, right, that about how women, how much it matters that we don't have role models of women in a national leadership role.

And, you know, I have never thought of myself as a woman in a man's world.

Like, I thought that was self-defeatist to consider yourself that way.

And I've always had great male colleagues and male mentors.

You know, I don't feel like men want to hold women back.

But what I realized was if you don't change the power systems that we operate under,

women don't make progress, right?

I had the reason, I had like a sort of aha moment where I thought, I'm not doing great in a man's world.

I'm doing great making it run well for them.

I'm doing great propping it up.

And I think we have women internalized so much about how we expect to not do as well as men.

We expect to not make as much money as they do.

We think we sort of have to lower our voice to sound like them or, you know, dress, you know, dress like them that we just gotten too much into a rut of trying to follow their path.

And that worked for a while, and it is no longer working.

Like we have stagnated.

So, can you imagine that again?

I'm going to push back a little bit because this has been something, you know, Gloria, everyone's been pushing this since suffragette times.

And you talk about that a lot.

And you talk about a lot of women, for example, that should be well known, like Jeanette Rankin, like

Ida Wells, and many others, Sojourner Truth, who do not get attention.

This has been a struggle since forever, not even well before that, you know, in Europe and in other countries, forever.

What do you think has changed?

Do you think something has changed?

And what do you imagine the barriers, at least in this country, are, especially politically?

I think that for, you know, women won suffrage 100 years ago next week, right?

Okay, so that gave us sort of an entry into the man's world, into politics, professional world.

And for many decades, we made really steady progress.

And then about 30 years ago, we started to stagnate.

And I think it is because there are now, you know, it's not like there's a magic law to change, although I think the ERA is a good idea because you should have that in the Constitution.

But really, it's the things in our own head.

So there were things that for a while kind of women had as survival tactics.

Like, for example, I am in competition with other women.

If that woman gets that job, that means I won't.

If there's too many women at the meeting, it means I'm not going to get in there.

And if you think you are in competition with other women for a limited amount of success that women can attain, what you are saying is I do not belong here, right?

You are saying, I am a guest.

And like, that is what we have to banish because if you play into that, if you consider other women a threat, if you think marginalized, if you think if you're a white woman like me and you think a black woman is even further marginalized than I am, so I'm not going to help her.

You are propping this all up.

I mean, I think this is why we're not making progress is because we're fighting each other for scraps.

And you have to, you know, what I have realized, and this is a change I've made in my own life in the last few years, like I have women's back and they have my back in a way I have never experienced before.

And, you know, when you fight to make sure that you're paid what you are worth, that's going to help another woman down the line.

And when you cut yourself, when you undersell yourself, that is devaluing all women.

And I think.

Our fates are more linked than we ever appreciated.

And that is, it's like, you got to get at the root of that, a feeling of acting like you are a visitor, which is why the book is called She Proclaims, because we have to say this stuff out loud.

Otherwise, I think we're going to continue to internalize it.

And it's really,

it's debilitating.

And

your own actions, and if you undercut yourself, you're doing that for all women.

I have a question for you, which is how do you think that the BLM movement has either changed this discussion, potentially even pushed attention to other places?

The reason I say this is I'm part of various hiring endeavors.

And, you know, a couple of months ago, every conversation was about gender, was about gender parity.

Now every conversation is

we need to have the right diversity, but specifically African-American diversity.

And how you think that

that is now moving this conversation

in all sorts of directions?

I mean, it's a tough, you had some super tough conversation to have, right?

And I have, I've written about this specifically about a white woman in this moment.

And there's really interesting stuff from history on this, Andrew.

Like Frederick Douglass and Susan B.

Anthony got into a really heated debate

at a convention in Albany about this question, if white women deserve to get the vote at the same time as black men.

And he said, you know, when black, when women, because they are women, have their heads bashed in a sidewalk, when women, because they are women, are hung from a tree and lynched, you know, then their need will be as dire as mine.

But right now, my need is more dire, right?

And that doesn't mean that the women don't, white women don't also, you know, shouldn't also like throw off the shackles of the patriarchy.

But I accept as a white woman, My lot in life is way better than any black American, right?

I don't have the fears that they have.

I don't have this.

I haven't had to live that experience.

But what white women need to understand is these same power systems that keep people of color from reaching their potential are the same power systems that keep you from reaching your potential.

And when you make the patriarchy a refuge, which white women have historically done, right, it's not awesome for us, but it's better than being on the outs.

We're propping it up.

And so you have to like band together in a way that you haven't before with people of color.

Well,

one of the complaints is that, you know, and it's been since the feminist revolution of this sort of

not seeing that, not seeing those connections as well as they should.

So here we are in a presidential race where it's highly likely a woman of color is going to be selected.

And by the way, when people talk about it, what's really interesting, everyone talks about the various candidates, whether it's

Kamala Harris or Stacey Abrams or Susan Rice or Barbara, you know, all around the country.

My feeling was like, look how many amazing choices there are.

Like, it's not like any of them are completely qualified.

What has happened here?

And what do you make of this selection?

And who do you think is going to be selected?

Just talk about the bigger landscape of this, having worked for Hillary Clinton.

What is happening right now with this question?

I'm super optimistic about this, right?

Because to your point, Carol, there are so many amazing women that are actually qualified to be president of the United States.

And, you know, if you go back to the 2008 race, Hillary Clinton had to work really hard to convince voters, Pauline chose this, that she was able to be commander-in-chief.

She eventually got there.

Of course, she didn't become the nominee, right?

But we all accept that a woman can be president, and there are women whose

ability to step into that job is not being questioned.

And there's like a super diverse group, and that's incredible, right?

That bodes super well for the future.

I'm going to say who I think is going to get it because I'm not going to cop out, Kara.

I'm going to make it.

Okay, good.

Because I would piss you off.

I know.

I've always thought it was going to be Kamala Harris, so I'll be consistent.

And I think it's going to be...

Why is that?

Why do you think that?

You know, I may be, look, we're all a prisoner of our own experience.

And my experience working for women is, wow, they go through hellfire, particularly when they run against Donald Trump.

And so I think a woman who like knows how to land a punch can take a punch.

She went through a pretty tough race.

You know, she didn't win, obviously, but she held her own.

And she's really great.

You know, she is, she's good at defending herself and she's good at

taking Trump on and taking pence Pence on.

The reason why Biden might not do it, I know he wants to recreate that relationship he had with President Obama, right?

Where they were like true partners and, you know, real, you know, his like informal advisor and he knows Susan Rice better.

So they're close.

You know, I worked with them both in the White House and I could see him going with Susan for that reason.

I love Susan Rice.

Oh my God, you must love her.

I'm sure she's been on here and she's just like a, so awesome, but she hasn't had elected experience.

That

are voters going to be uneasy about that?

They might.

So that's why I have thought Kamala is a better choice.

And I think that in this environment to not to pick a white woman,

I feel like that's a mistake, even if you know black voters will tell you, like, we vote for white people all the time because for a long time that was the only choice we had.

But for black voters to hear every day, it's the press will remind them, Joe Biden is taking you for granted because you didn't put a black one on the ticket.

That is really dangerous stuff.

Boy.

You think Kamala would make a great president?

The reason I ask is because in an honest moment at a cocktail party, at basically any cocktail party around this country, I think right now, people think about this vice president potentially differently.

Obviously, we want Joe Biden to be alive, kicking, and healthy throughout the next four years and for many years longer than that.

But people often say, you know, you need this person's going to be a heartbeat away.

Yeah.

Yeah.

And that's, you know, never more true than with this pick.

And I know that that's like certainly on Joe Biden's mind, right?

The same thing that is as with McCain.

And I think Harris meets, you know, she clearly meets that bar.

And that's the most important decision a vice, a

presidential candidate makes is like,

can this person take over on day on day one?

And she's, you know,

I think, you know, I think I know Joe Biden values electoral experience, right?

He's has a lot of electoral experience.

There's something special about representing people, not just like worrying about the political outcomes of the decision you make, but understanding this is going to affect people.

And yes, the politics may say X, but I got to think about the person I am representing here.

And she's done that for, you know, millions and millions of Californians.

And, you know,

she,

I just think that if you, when you add it all up, that that is why she makes the most sense, as difficult as it will be for her.

I don't think, you know, a lot of people are like, oh, this person, whoever this woman is, she's definitely going to be the nominee in 2024.

Wow.

This person's in for, this woman is in for a rough road.

And everything she does

from the moment she's named will be viewed through the prism of

her ambition.

And like, oh, she's positioning herself to be, you know, to outstage Joe, or she's positioning herself to be president right away.

And she's going to bear that for, you know, four plus years.

And that kind of scrutiny is not awesome.

So there's a lot of other candidates.

That's an opportunity for a lot of Democrats to step in.

Totally, the opportunity.

That's like tailor-made in my experience for somebody to come in from the outside and knock off this person that's been in the spotlight and under scrutiny for a long time.

I have two more questions, and then maybe Andrew has a final one.

But one is, what would you, what advice would you have for that running mate then?

presumably woman of color

who is going to be selected what would be your advice i'd say not be quiet but you know i i'd say be a leader but what would you say um you're gonna get attacked a ton uh and that is part that's the job right uh and trump will go down rap trump uh will go down rabbit holes with you and that is um and that will be to his you have to understand you got to recognize when that is to his detriment and it's okay for you to pile on or when you are helping him by fighting back it's very hard to win a one-on-one personal attack game with Donald Trump because he will get nasty.

He's willing to get nastier than anybody else.

So she's going to have to like bear with that and it's not going to be pleasant for her.

I do think there's an opportunity for Biden though, because, you know, what we learned on the Clinton campaign was Hillary never responded to a personal attack from

Trump.

We learned watching the Republicans that that was a death spiral.

But when he attacked somebody else, she would defend them.

And that is a great moment for her, right?

And so if biden can come in and defend his running mate um against attacks from trump and pence that could be a really good moment for joe biden and we all know he does righteous indignation really well that's how he started his campaign fighting you know railing about the charlottesville race riots um and so it could be a moment for him too that's the advice

and my last question is what if uh trump wins what does this mean for women going forward I think it's, you know, I, when Trump won in 16, I was like, oh my God, what are women going to think?

They're going to be, they're going to feel so chastened.

And we didn't, right?

We were pissed and we felt empowered and looked like there was something out of our way.

He had very heavy support from white women, but go ahead.

53% of white women voted for Donald Trump.

It is a part of the long line of shame that, you know,

white women have to appreciate.

So

I think that

I don't like it would be, I think it's like a crushing thing for America.

Like this is not a drill.

This is like the Republic drilling at stake.

And, but I do believe what I've seen how women, how I've seen women react in the last few years, I think that they will fight back harder.

What the hell not?

What else are we going to do?

What else are we going to do?

Andrew?

Okay, so here's my big question for you.

Because Kara and Scott talk, obviously, about big tech on Pivot all the time, and invariably somehow Elizabeth Warren's name gets into that conversation.

And now we're talking about taxes on billionaires and everything else.

What role would Elizabeth Warren have in a Biden administration in which she have more power in an administration or in the Senate?

She would probably have,

oh, you know, she's going to be a force either way.

I mean, I don't, you know, because inside the administration, you probably are able to have more influence because you can get into the nitty-gritty of

governing.

And there are some really powerful levers there if you know how to use them.

In the Senate, she can be a force to stop something bad, or like, you know, her vote will matter a lot if she wants to like hold out and push Biden to the left.

Her vote will matter a lot.

But I still, and she can make herself a kingmaker, a deal maker, right?

There's appeal for her either way.

I do kind of think, knowing what a sort of like nuts and bolts, methodical policy person she is, she would probably want to do that from within the administration.

I know that that page is a little bit more.

Treasury Secretary, whatever.

What else do you think Treasury Secretary?

I think, you know, like she might be able to do that weirdly from commerce.

There's, there are underappreciated or a new position as she created with, you know, CFPB.

Or she could go back to that, you know, but like wherever she is, she's gonna

She's gonna she's gonna matter.

Okay, well, this is very helpful.

I really appreciate you coming on and thank you despite all our technical difficulties.

Jennifer Palmieri is the author of a new book.

She proclaims.

Oh, oh, he's clapping for you.

She proclaims our Declaration of Independence from a man's world.

Thank you so much, Jennifer.

I really appreciate you all.

Thank you.

It's great to see you both.

All right, Jennifer, thank you so much.

And Andrew, one more quick break.

We'll be back for Wins and Fails.

Commercial payments at Fifth Third Bank are experienced and reliable, but they're also constantly innovating.

It might seem contradictory to have decades of experience, but also be on the cutting edge of the industry.

But Fifth Third does just that.

They don't believe in being just one way for your business, because your business has more than just one need.

Like needing your payments to be done on time, safely, and without any bumps today, but also needing to know you won't be hitting any bumps tomorrow.

That's why they handle over $17 trillion in payments smoothly and effectively every year, and were also named one of America's most innovative companies by Fortune magazine.

After all, that's what commercial payments are all about.

Steady, reliable expertise that keeps money flowing in and out like clockwork.

So Fifth Third does that.

But commercial payments are also about building new and disruptive solutions.

So Fifth Third does that too.

That's your commercial payments, a Fifth Third Better.

Thumbtack presents.

Uncertainty strikes.

I was surrounded.

The aisle and the options were closing in.

There were paint rollers, satin and matte finish, angle brushes, and natural bristles.

There were too many choices.

What if I never got my living room painted?

What if I couldn't figure out what type of paint to use?

What if I just used thumbtack?

I can hire a top-rated pro in the Bay Area that knows everything about interior paint, easily compare prices, and read reviews.

Thumbtack knows homes.

Download the app today.

Andrew wins and fails.

Now, I'd love to hear yours.

I think my fail was a story in the New York times today about talkspace an article that reported how employees own therapy and mental health issues have been used against them within the company it was a really disturbing article um by cashmere hill and i forget the other reporter who was working on it but it was really quite a quite a thing about these sort of mental health apps that are meant to help us whether they're meditation or whatever to being being abused so that was my fail

is it too political for me to say that my fail was trump's executive order from bedminster go right ahead which Which one?

Which one of the many?

All of the unconstitutional ones.

Yeah.

Which were all of them.

You want to stack rank them?

You want to stack rank them for unconstitutionality?

I think, you know, trying to get rid of Social Security under the name of payroll taxes is sort of a unique approach to life.

Yeah, okay.

That's at the top of my list at the moment.

All right.

And where do you think that zeroes out?

It doesn't happen, or is it just what?

He's just sort of flailing around.

But let me say, let me say, and I'm sure we'll get I'll get flamed for this.

There's some genius to this.

There was some genius to it in that for those who are not paying attention, there's something sort of clever about it because he's going to force the Democrats to potentially either come to the table or to look bad or something.

Really?

Because I do.

I think that there are people out there that look at this and think to themselves that he's trying to do something that the Democrats are not.

Obviously, that's not the case and it's not true, but there was something clever about it, though.

I'm going to push back.

I'm just disgusting.

I'm disgusting.

All right.

Wow.

Oh, wow.

That's not very Canadian of you.

Listen to me.

Ashley Parker.

Ashley Parker

wrote a piece about how he's just flailing and yelling and tweeting and making noise, and nobody's paying attention.

And nobody is, you know.

Remember how everybody went crazy every time he tweeted?

Nobody's doing that anymore.

Like, this was like, I think this is just so much noise.

No, we're over it.

We're over it.

But that, but if you're watching Fox News, you're not over it yet.

Well, that's another another thing.

You're right.

You're right.

You're right.

That's fair.

But

I still think it's people find him confusing now.

My mom, who watches Fox News all the time, as you know, who is my

entire non-anecdotal study group here.

But the fact of the matter is, she's like, what is he talking about?

Like, you know, she's sort of confused by all of it.

And of course, all she hears is Democrats suck.

That's really what a message that gets through.

But I think that I think there's too much.

I was just thinking the other day, there's too much Trump.

Too much Trump.

Just too much of him.

Like, he needs to go in the basement with maybe

Vice President Biden.

But there's a lot of Trump, and I think he's going to get us tired of him.

All right.

So, Wynn, what's your win?

Okay, so my big win, we will not know whether he's a winner or not, but I'm putting him in the winner category.

We'll do the show again in five years to find out.

Barry Diller today, IAC,

buying 12% of MGM resorts.

I don't know if you saw him do this today.

No, I didn't.

Fascinating decision.

Tell me more.

Barry buys 12% of MGM resorts today with the hope of helping them become an online gambling platform around the world.

He's buying it at basically 50% off from pre-COVID days.

And he makes the argument that either we'll do the digital piece and take over the online gambling world.

And even if we don't, we'll still win because

his time horizon is going to be longer than everybody else's.

And he imagines Vagos to be back.

See, speaking of Canny, oh, wow.

I thought that was unique.

I thought it was unique for the IAC to buy into a, usually they're all digital.

This is a digital play on top of a bricks and mortar operation.

That's fascinating.

He's always, you know, he's always been ahead.

He doesn't always take advantage of being ahead.

Like he was early to home shopping network.

He's early to online stuff.

He doesn't always take the most advantage, but he's certainly in place.

And that's an interesting move.

That is a really, and from him, especially, he knows that world.

And he gets, I think the issues online gambling and the legality and all the rules, that's much more difficult.

And by the way, some things like stockbroke stuff like Robin Hood is online gambling.

That's what it's become, 100%.

Yeah, you know, in that way.

But gambling, gambling is another thing.

That's a good win.

I like that win.

That's a really good win.

I would give a win to

Sheldon Adelson getting yelled at by President Trump.

So I guess I have to give to President Trump.

I just like when he yells at people who've given him $60 million.

I think that's kind of fantastic.

It all leads back to Vegas.

Vegas, baby.

That's what I was thinking.

It made me think of Vegas.

Actually,

I do think what Bill Gates is doing around this vaccine especially in the face of so many memes about him being sort of the george soros of the vaccine world um at least sort of negative conspiracy what are we going to do about this by the way karen no no no when i say no but i'll tell you something i have watched george soros who got you know got involved you know all these conspiracies came out and I think his reputation around the world has never been, he's never been able to fully recover from it.

And I think that there's a tipping point going on here with Bill.

And I worry about it because I actually have a huge amount of admiration for Bill Gates and what he's done,

especially in these last 20 years and with COVID and everything else.

I mean, by the way, before 20 years ago, creating Microsoft, of course, but I wonder whether, you know,

what these conspiracy theories, they're not real, but because it feels so real that it's so visceral all the time that I wonder whether it permeates generations of people's brains.

I don't know.

I just, I feel like a lot more people are getting attacked in this way either by QAnon or these memes or memes that are generated by China or Russia or whoever at the time.

I think in this case, it's not just, it's one, the anti-vaxxers, but they're closely linked.

They're all closely linked with each other in a way.

I think this has been around forever, this kind of thing.

And whether it was, you know, the...

the elders of Zion or whatever, there's always been this happening in this country.

I just think it's gotten amplified and weaponized with these tools.

But Bill Gates certainly does not deserve the kind of attacks he's getting in the conspiracy area and what he's doing.

Because I do think the foundation is doing a lot to distribute the COVID vaccine.

But I do think a lot of people won't take it.

There's a whole bunch of anti-vaccines.

People aren't going to take it.

It's going to be a big issue.

As Scott Gallery says, Darwin rules.

That's how I look at it.

Anyway, Andrew, this is so great.

Thank you so much.

It's a pleasure.

You know, Scott is listening wherever he is.

What should we say about him?

We should, I just want to thank Scott.

I love Scott, and the opportunity to sit in for him has been a privilege.

Yeah, thank you so much.

And your hair is so much better.

But Andrew, what kind of question are you looking for from a listener this week?

Stephanie Ruhl asked one last thing.

What topic would you be interested in hearing about and answering a question about?

I want to know whether people actually feel comfortable going back to work.

And actually, I'm going to make it more difficult.

I want people, I want to know whether people actually like working from home better.

Good question.

I think that's an excellent question.

That's what I want.

I want to talk to people who are like, you know what?

This whole thing is going to be,

you know, I want it to be different.

I like this better.

All right.

Okay.

Or not.

Or they hate it.

Or they hate it.

Why not?

Why not?

Anyway, email us at pivot at boxmedia.com to be featured on the show.

And please answer Andrew's plaintive question.

Also, don't forget, if you can't get enough pivot, we're going to do a live stream of events for the month of August.

It's called Pivot Schooled from New York Magazine and Vox Media Podcast Network.

We've done one and we've had thousands of people come and they're really great.

This week, we have another one on Wednesday.

You can get tickets at pivotschools.com.

There's also a link in our show notes.

Today's show was produced by Rebecca Sinanis.

Fernando Finite engineered this episode.

Erica Anderson is Pivot's executive producer.

Make sure you subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, or if you're an Android user, check us out on Spotify and, frankly, wherever you listen to podcasts.

If you liked our show, please recommend it to a friend.

Thanks again to Andrew Ross Sorkin for co-hosting this week.

Thanks for listening to Pivot from New York Magazine and Vox Media.

We'll be back later this week with Andrew for another breakdown of all things tech and business.

Support for the show comes from Google Pixel.

It's about time your smartphone gets smarter.

For your next upgrade, meet the Google Pixel 9 Pro.

You can experience its stunning new design, the advanced AI power of Gemini, and their best camera yet.

A camera built to capture everyone in beautiful resolution, including the person taking the photo.

When the extraordinary is possible, never settle for less.

You can learn more about the new Google Pixel 9 with Gemini Live on the Google store.

This month on Explain It To Me, we're talking about all things wellness.

We spend nearly $2 trillion on things that are supposed to make us well.

Collagen smoothies and cold plunges, Pilates classes, and fitness trackers.

But what does it actually mean to be well?

Why do we want that so badly?

And is all this money really making us healthier and happier?

That's this month on Explain It To Me, presented by Pureleaf.