Google and Apple team up to track COVID-19, Uber drivers face unemployment hurdles, and Robert Reich says 30% of people may be out of work by summer

Support for the show comes from Saks Fifth Avenue.

Saks 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 Caccinelli 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 Saks Fifth Avenue for the Best Fall Arrivals and Style inspiration.

To remind you that 60% of sales on Amazon come from independent sellers, here's Scott from String Joy.

Hey y'all, we make guitar strings right here in Nashville, Tennessee.

Scott grows his business through Amazon.

They pick up, store, and deliver his products all across the country.

I love how musicians everywhere can rock out with our guitar strings.

A one, two, three, four.

rock on scott shop small business like mine on amazon

hi everyone this is pivot from the vox media podcast network i'm kara swisher and i'm scott galloway how are you kara happy good good

passover uh i did it was lovely i had it with my ex-wife my son her nephew amanda the baby and some dogs and a cat.

So yes, it was lovely.

That's nice.

And what did you do?

It was nice.

It was was very, it was a very San Francisco kind of thing in D.C.

Listen, I was going to talk about the Pope delivering a lovely Easter Mass alone in St.

Peter's Basilica, or Andrew Bocelli singing from Milan, which was beautiful.

Live stream around the world.

But I think let's talk about us because I think it really is all about us.

The Pope or us.

That's a tough one.

Pope us.

I'm going with us.

I'm going with us.

I me too.

So, New York Media, which is part of Vox, which makes New York Magazine, which we love, is our new crash pad, which I think they don't understand what's happened.

I've got a message for our new EIC, David Haskell.

We're the bossiest employees you'll ever have, but we get to hang around with Olivia Nuzzy and others there, the great writers there.

And we get to talk about Andrew Cuomo's nipples now.

This is so exciting.

I was not expecting that.

That escalated fast.

We went from New York Mag to Cuomo's Nipples.

By the way, that guy's a dirty little dog.

Did you see Olivia's piece?

She wrote a great piece this week about Trump, but she wrote about the nipple gate.

So it was fascinating.

So you can help me here because

there was a lot of traffic back and forth about Pivot moving to New York Magazine.

I didn't even know we were at Vox and I don't know what any of this means.

Tell me, first off, if anyone can, I guess I never really understood what Vox is, so now it's not that important.

But

what does this mean for us?

What does this mean for the dog and the jungle cat?

No, it means nothing.

It means we just get to go to better parties, I guess.

I don't know.

I don't really know what the parties.

It's just New York Magazine.

You've read New York Magazine.

So we feel like we're saucier and it fits better.

You know, Vox Media owns Vox.com.

It owns Recode.

It owns all kinds of things.

And it also owns New York Magazine.

And so we are going over there and our stuff has been appearing there recently.

And so it's, it's, we have, you know, we have such a media business sensibility, Wall Street kind of stuff.

It fits in.

You know, it's just, it's media.

Nobody but insiders care actually,

but we still

have a lovely picture in the thing.

thing.

And we love, uh, we love everyone at Vox, but it, we, we now love New York Media more more because that's the kind of people we are.

We just switch allegiances so fast.

But I don't think it doesn't mean anything.

We just continue to be who we are, I think.

That's really

good.

Do we have any choice?

No, they don't have any choice.

As you get older, as you get older, you become more like yourself, which is neither good for either of us.

That's not good.

I have been the same way since I've been.

Oh, here we go.

Here we go.

So, you know what's awesome is we're talking about doing some sort of pivot slash New York magazine event.

Like Brooklyn meets South by Southwest meets dysfunction.

Yes, everyone's going to wear hazmat suits.

They're really beautiful.

I mean, we can't do an event for a while, Scott.

You need to put on your little hat.

Let's get the Fauci School not in the Fox News school.

We cannot, there will be no meetings for a while.

And when they do, we will be back with one.

That's what's going to happen.

And there's going to be just light touching when we do our event.

A light touch.

A loving light touch.

But that works well because I'm a gentle lover, Carol.

No, no, you're not to touch anybody.

I'm going to keep you in a hazmat suit and mask

gloves for as long as possible.

I'll tell you, the pandemic is still going on so that

you think that.

We'll have a whole fake news thing around you so you're getting news.

I'll have Erica pull it off with Rebecca, and you will think we're still in the pandemic in time.

My wife has yet another excuse.

But there's a pandemic.

But there's a pandemic.

Stay away from me.

All right.

We're going to get to our, this is, anyway, we're very excited.

New York Media is great.

And David Haskell is great.

And everybody else is great.

Anyway, all right, Scott, we're going to get back to tech and business because there's so much going on.

There's so much going on.

We've been talking about how privacy might change as the government tries to start tracking the spread of COVID-19.

Now, Google and Apple are teaming up to build software and smartphones that helps track the spread.

By the way, they already have software in.

and smartphones to track you.

The companies were releasing a new tool that will be built into the operating systems of billions of iPhones and Androids around the world.

Here's how it will all work people would opt in to use the tracking system and voluntarily report if they become infected then other phones in the vicinity will alert you if you're in close distance with someone who has been reported to having covet 19 once someone reports their information as a public health app the tool will send this phone's anonymous identifiers connected to device to a central computer servers other phones will constantly check those servers for the broadcast beacons of devices that come near in the past 14 days.

If there's a match, those people receive an alert that they likely have come and contacted.

Both Tim Cook and Apple Apple CEO and Suna Prachai, Google CEO, tweeted that the tool will have strong privacy protections.

Scott, I just want your reaction to this.

So

I'm very much in favor of it.

I understand there's a fear that governments use

crises as an opportunity to invade people's liberties and then they never give those liberties back.

Under the cloud cover of crisis or war, they violate people's personal freedoms.

I think FDR or Eisenhower actually said it best.

He said, I'm not going to violate people's freedoms in order to protect them when Hoover or whoever it was wanted to start spying on everybody.

Yeah.

But

for the most part, look, as long as Facebook's not involved, I think that Google and Apple, Tim Cook, from a brand standpoint, has doubled down on privacy.

You could argue that they will get better in managing people's private information, which gives them a skill set we would don't want them to have.

Right.

But in general, look, testing and then tracing, the tracing is incredibly important.

And we have, we're supposed to be the most innovative place in the world.

We have these unbelievable technologies.

Everyone carries a smartphone.

We have deep-pocketed, thoughtful, smart companies.

My sense is that is the equivalent of the Maytag, the Maytag factory being converted to produce B24 Superfluine Fortresses.

I like it.

What do you think?

What if I think, listen, interestingly, I contacted both Sundar and Tim this weekend about a lot of governments are interested in I was familiar with.

Did you tell me you worked for New York Magazine?

No, I did not.

They don't care about it.

They did ask about the baby.

But listen, listen to me.

I trust them, and I do.

I actually was forwarding things from governments who are very interested in using this, people I know in government.

And I just forwarded these emails to them.

But one of the things, if you had the third company here, was listed as Facebook or and Amazon,

what would you do?

I'd say no.

I'd say

four of them.

I just think, I think Facebook,

Mark kept hoping, Mark kept saying, Zuckerberg and Cheryl kept saying, we and big tech,

there's everyone else, and there's Facebook.

Facebook is an incredibly corrupt organization with a sociopath and his beard running around the world doing tremendous damage.

They are in a different,

they are on the gold medal stand of podium of a total lack of concern for the Commonwealth.

Now, big tech abuses their power.

They've overrun government.

Tim Cook wraps himself

in a likable Alabama football in order to continue to violate anti-monopoly laws and put Spotify not out of business, but he's abusing his power.

But that's what a CEO of a capitalist company does.

Google has all kinds of blood on their hands, but their leadership there, whether it's Sunder or Susan Ujiki, shows some sense of comity of man.

They're both such powerful organizations.

They have the skills, the budgets.

This is an exceptional time.

Okay.

All right.

So Facebook would be a totally different ballgame.

What if you added Amazon in there?

How would you feel about that?

I think Amazon is done.

I would feel fine.

Look, I think Amazon, Facebook, and Google, it's like a little bit of cumin, a little bit of time, some chicken, and then cyanide, i.e., Facebook shows up.

Yeah.

And it makes the meal a totally different complexion.

But

if you look at Amazon, I think Amazon deserves credit.

And I've been very critical of Amazon and think that we should break their asses up after this is all over.

But if you look at, I have a lot of students working at Amazon, Amazon, and I know personally that they're working their asses off to try and, A, it's in their best interest, but also they do see themselves as playing a critical, essential role.

And the supply chain here, you want to talk about a scary situation?

What if there was a modern-day Cesar Chavez who went and unionized every warehouse worker at Walmart and Amazon and said, at noon tomorrow, everybody just walk out and demand that we double their wages or the food supply just shuts down?

Well, that didn't happen.

You want to talk about panic?

Yeah, right.

I mean, these companies are essential and they're all working very, very hard.

All right, Mr.

Tech.

But let me just say they do have very different ideas around privacy.

Google and Apple certainly do.

We'll say more.

You know this better than I do.

Well, they do.

I mean, they have a different attitude around it.

And I think Google does ask for more information.

They're constantly, I turn off all the Google things on Maps, for example, and they're constantly asking me for it.

Once I turn off on Apple, they leave me alone until I come back and change things.

Okay, but that's the inherent trade.

And I'm sorry to interrupt, is that Google has said to Apple has said to rich people that privacy is a luxury.

And in exchange for buying a $1,500 phone and paying $99 for a power cord that costs us $1.20 to produce in Shenzhen, you get us pulling only 200 data points a day from your iPhone.

Whereas Android has said, hey, rest of the world, that can't afford the monthly household income in Turkey for a phone.

We're going to give you a phone for free, but we're going to molest your privacy.

And the majority of the world is cool with that.

I know it has a lot of bad ramifications.

so there's kind of a market for both but apple's doubled down on privacy which unfortunately has become a a luxury item of the rich all right okay all right so what do you think about government getting involved because i do think what you just said people do not take back this issue you know what i mean they don't take back the power once they get it once the ability to track people now they've been doing it before let's just be clear this is not new government have you know what whether it was through edward snowden other governments have been using these cell phones for a decade since they've been around trying to track people.

They've been trying to get more and more access.

And of course, the big fight between Apple and the government over encryption.

So it's an interesting development.

Now, I have always thought that the Snowden thing created such a disconnect between government and tech.

That was a problem around Russia and everything else, the relationship.

So this may restore that relationship.

I think it's just a question of who gets

the more prevalence of information.

And the other part is people not consenting.

Now, a lot of people who are sick may not consent to be saying they're infected, too.

That's the other thing.

If you're worried about insurance companies or anything else, you may not want to report that you're infected.

Well, we've got to, that's absolutely right.

And you said this.

You had an insight that stuck with me.

You said this all kind of comes back to ensuring people have some baseline level of health coverage such that we don't create bad behaviors.

And that's the type of bad behavior.

If someone's worried about their health insurance or not being able to get it, maybe they're not as forthcoming as they should be.

But my thesis all along around privacy and security is you think, well, why on earth has the U.S.

government not been more proactive

in pushing back on bad actors, specifically Facebook and Google?

And my thesis all along has been the following.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has a public hearing and they berate them and we're really mad at you, Mark.

We're really mad at you, Sunder.

And then they go into their private hearings and they say, all right, here's the 2,200 names of people who pose a security threat.

You're going to give us fucking everything on these people, every movement.

And then we're going to go out and we're going to publicly berate you and flog you, but then we're not going to do shit in exchange for you buttressing our national security and covert spy actions with your incredible data sets.

And I think there's an implicit agreement between the government and these agencies that we will continue to give you information on the bad guys, but you are going to, you are going to back the fuck off when it comes to certain DOJ and certain fights.

And the thing is, I don't think the public is privy to that deal, and maybe nor should we be, but there's something going on.

There's a lot going on here behind the scenes that we are not privy to.

100%.

That is absolutely true.

They're constantly in talks.

And I do think, you know, it's interesting.

The cheering also has to happen.

People are going to give me a hard time for it with China and others too, because a lot of this information, China is our principal partner.

going forward in the breakdown.

You know, the New York Times had an amazing story this weekend about sort of what happened, how incompetent the White House was.

And that's why Trump had a coronary occlusion this weekend about everything.

But one of the parts that I thought was most interesting was the China hawks versus the China trade people who wanted to do a trade deal.

We have to have a good relationship or some relationship with China, especially around data.

Data,

we have to in some way, because in this case, they didn't report enough.

There was hostility and then there was worry about making them mad.

And

we have to, in terms of pandemics, there has to be cooperation with all governments around the world around this data.

And I think the Chinese realize that too.

The Chinese, I mean, our brands, let's be honest, the China and U.S.

brands come out of this crisis with additional core association of corrupt and incompetent.

The Chinese were not forthcoming about data of actually what was going to happen, which caused a lot more death and disability than needed to happen.

Despite the fact that we had more time to prepare for it, we have more money, we spend more on health care, we have let more people be infected and die than any other nation.

We have been totally incompetent around this.

And both nations nations will have to answer for that.

But a pandemic doesn't really give a shit about your political party or your borders.

And we have absolutely a mutual shared interest in ensuring this doesn't happen again.

If there were ever a moment to call on our superpowers of species, and that's cooperation across borders, look, if the British, the Russians,

and the Americans can figure out a way to get along in the middle of the 20th century, we can figure out a way to get along with China around pandemics.

It just absolutely, and I know a lot of people in China, so do you.

They have their own national interest, but we have this mutually shared interest.

And that is both nations really love Nespresso pods.

Both nations really love,

you know, really love their Netflix, whatever the equivalent is over there.

And the economy, I mean, think about, think about the economic interests here if this, if the economy gets entirely shut down again.

So you're, I think you're absolutely right.

The question is, what is the agency?

What is the systems for that shared cooperation when you have a president who is attacking what is one obvious shared system, and that's the World Health Organization.

So

how do we move forward?

What is the infrastructure?

What is the NATO?

What is the United Nations, which a lot of people would argue has failed here?

NATO has been tremendously effective.

What's the construct?

Well,

that movie where the meteor was headed towards Earth and we all cooperated.

Here we go.

That's what we need.

That's what we do.

But I think you're right, 100%.

I think you're right.

I think the question is, if Apple and Google can collaborate, governments can collaborate.

And yet, at the same time,

do the fighting and the collaboration.

Again, you're right.

I think if we were in a relationship with Stalin, the most awful person on the planet, among the many awful people on the planet, one of the most.

And it's critically important on these kinds of things to have some kind of cooperation.

Again, probably behind the scenes, there's more than

we realized, but at the same time, the language has to go down a lot.

And then later we can discuss what happened here.

But we have to take a quick break, come back with one big story, and we have a big friend of pivot this week when we get back.

Not all journalism is the same.

Take The Guardian.

Our coverage has something unique, fierce independence.

Nobody owns us or tells us what we can and can't say.

So we're free to report the whole picture.

We connect what's happening in Washington to the rest of the globe, expose corruption wherever we find it, and give fresh perspective on everything, from wellness and soccer to culture, the climate, and more.

Read, watch, and listen to The Guardian for free at theguardian.com.

We all have moments where we could have done better, like cutting your own hair,

yikes, or forgetting sunscreen so now you look like a tomato.

Ouch.

Could have done better.

Same goes for where you invest.

Level up and invest smarter with Schwab.

Get market insights, education, and human help when you need it.

Learn more at schwab.com.

Okay, Scott, we're back.

We talk about the gig economy a lot and tech companies that foster this growth and take advantage of these gig workers.

But let's talk about Lyft and Uber drivers during the pandemic and part of the stimulus bill that is meant to help them and other gig workers.

While the stimulus packages made unemployment resources available to some gig workers, there are unique obstacles for rideshare drivers that come from old state labor department guidelines of who is eligible.

So, while the federal government has said that it's on its way, some states aren't quite prepared to make it happen.

This has left gig workers like a huge number of ride-sharing drivers unable to collect their unemployment checks.

So Illinois didn't have a process.

New York, the story isn't much better.

Local drivers associations claims that Uber hasn't been providing New York's Department of Labor with the earnings data it needs to process unemployment insurance applications.

With delays in the states, Uber finally acknowledged in email to drivers that it would take weeks before states could start processing claims and even longer before drivers received assistance.

So,

you know, I've talked to some people at Uber.

Things are, you know, the business is really down, down, down in the hole, essentially.

But what do you think about this

gig worker issue in terms of paying them and specifically about ride-sharing

drivers?

I think Uber and Lyft are a menace to society.

I think that these organizations have primarily made a small number of people exceptionally wealthy because they figured out software that has totally violated minimum wage standards and the dignity of work.

We were outraged when fast food companies tried to put in place software that clocked people out.

When McDonald's wasn't busy, we were outraged.

But basically, they have institutionalized software such that you don't get paid unless they're making money.

And they've also figured out a way to call them contractors such that they're not obligated to give them health insurance, meaning that these people are in incredibly vulnerable positions when they put themselves in an enclosed space called a car with a third party that they don't know.

We've put them in an incredibly vulnerable position, despite the fact that the first hundred employees at Uber probably made somewhere between $10 million and a billion dollars each.

We've put them in an incredibly compromised position economically where a large portion of them don't make minimum wage.

So they feel as if they have to put themselves in harm's way.

And then fucking Dara Kasushahi, the new lipstick on cancer, has the gall to write a letter to government urging them to bail them out with unemployment.

Meanwhile, Uber hasn't paid any federal income tax because they've taken advantage of our obsession and our idolatry of innovators and run this stock up such that it's worth more than the auto industry, who is, by the way, continuing to pay their workers, by the way, pays people on average 27 bucks an hour, by the way, gives people health insurance.

So what do you really think, Scott?

I mean, well,

you know, I'm going to stop you.

I'm going to stop you.

I do think, you know, their opposition to AB5, which I've called a healthcare bill, really,

and the way we, it's not just them, it's we live off the backs of these people.

It's 100%.

When you pay $4 and $5 for a long drive, it's crazy.

You know you're getting a deal and you know who's not getting a deal, which is the driver in the front seat.

So the question is, will we just have to pay more for these rides?

I mean, I just.

Yeah, but

if you're waiting on consumers, calling on consumers better angels to go, well, I really shouldn't pay $9.99 for that little black dress because I know the supply chain is unethical.

I'm going to pay $29.99.

Don't hold your breath.

I'm going to wear a black dress, but okay.

There you go.

What we need is regulations that say a company that's now worth more than the U.S.

auto industry has to pay taxes.

A company where people have paid billions of dollars or have made billions of dollars needs to figure out a way to pay its people minimum wage and then not come crying to the government saying you need to give these people unemployment.

Uber right now, here's an idea, Uber, pay your people.

Here's an idea.

Do what the majority of companies are trying to do, and that is continue to pay people even if they can't work.

Uber is still, even after this crisis, you know, Uber, the decline, is still worth more than Ford General Motors and I think Fiat Chrysler.

But they, but, you know, everyone's talking about, well, what do they do?

Their business is down.

They do a secondary.

They say, we're looking after our quote-unquote partners.

We're going to pay these people 60, 70% of their salary.

We're going to ask, we're going to give them danger pay.

We're going to say, if you do this, the rates go up.

We're going to ask consumers to pay a lot more, to pay double rates.

I think most consumers would do that.

But there's been this enormous transfer, like everything, of stakeholder value from government, who gets no revenues or little revenues other than capital gains tax from from the people at uber exercising their options they don't get any tax revenue or very little tax revenue and then uber has created this infrastructure this army of people that need unemployment who have no health insurance so uber and lyft and our idolatry of innovators have all come together to create an absolute menace and tax on society called ride hailing it's a fundamental and you're really you you are seeing it in this crisis because

they are we've been saying they're unprotected and now this is so clear how unprotected they are but let me just shift to another story um a big story the privatization of delivery you know the u.s postal service employees do have a lot of rights they have a lot of everything but there's an idea because they they're now losing so much money is it time to let fedex and ups take over this and so uh u.s postal service is suffering from declining demand due to coronavirus um it was already on the on the ropes they informed congress it will run out of cash in september without federal assistance very similar to amtrak and other things in considering a fourth bailout package democrats have been amenable to the bailouts but Republicans want to block that.

Republicans have long wanted to privatize the U.S.

Postal Service.

But the Trump administration seems hostile to the idea of a Postal Service bailout.

In the past, Trump has pushed them to boost revenue by raising what they charge Amazon and others.

So what do you, you're a capitalist, what do you think of privatizing them?

And you know what's happened with prisons and everything else.

And poor people aren't able to pay what FedEx and others have have cost, essentially.

Look, the USPS is a gift.

The USPS has decided early early on that every American deserves to get their mail, and they've built infrastructure.

Our guest that we're about to have on has this wonderful theory that the prosperity of a nation is a function of how well we train and educate our human capital and to connect it with infrastructure.

And that it's less dependent upon the profitability of the companies that are domained within those borders.

And I love that philosophy.

And one of the great infrastructures in the United States has been that if you decide to live in the country, we're going to decide that at a basic minimum, you need access to the grid or power through Melarus bonds, or we publicly finance certain infrastructure for you.

And we also ensure that six days a week, someone shows up and gets you your mail.

And I'm not sure that, sure, there are things we should talk about.

The thing that is

the USPS on an annual level actually is cash flow positive, where they go negative is because they are doing what Uber and Lyft aren't doing.

And that is they have sinking fund to pay for people's retirement benefits.

Because we've decided, you know what, former postal office workers who work 40 hours should have some dignity

after they retire.

And unfortunately, they haven't managed it well.

It's very expensive.

It's a massive liability.

But this is what would happen if you privatized it.

You would have, for a lot of people, it would be more efficient.

You would have stakeholder value leaked to the USP, to FedEx, UPS, Amazon, some others.

And then what a shocker.

You'd have a lot of people living in rural America that would have to pay a lot more to get their electric bill and the utility bill.

And then you'd have a lot of workers instead of having USPS with benefits and with retirement benefits, you would have Amazon workers that are quote unquote

that would have quote unquote the liberty of buying a Mercedes van at a reduced price, would work harder, would be more efficient, wouldn't have retirement benefits, wouldn't have health benefits.

So we're going to pay for these guys.

It's just a question of where we pay for them.

Also, the USPS has been, similar to the Armed Service, is a great employer of people of color.

So look, does the USPS need to be run better?

Does it deserve to have some private power?

But it's also been a wonderful part of our infrastructure and a victory for Americans that we've said, no matter who you are, no matter where you live, we're going to get you your mail six days a week.

It's part of our infrastructure.

Socialist Scott Galloway.

I really do.

I like this version of Scott Galloway.

But listen, post offices are terrible.

I think they're badly.

I use post offices maybe more than you do, I suspect.

They're terrible.

Post offices?

Yes, I use post offices and I use them a lot.

And I have to say, they're compared to what you can get from FedEx or UPS.

I think UPS

has has been

really good.

I mean, in terms of using them, up and down, depending on the store, but in general, pretty good and reliable.

Postal Service, not the frontline people, the people who deliver mail are wonderful.

Sometimes when you're in these offices or getting stuff from them, it's very hard.

And I see that they're competing with others and it's really hard for them to do so.

I don't quite know why it's that way.

You know, I think it's part of the-

You can't fire the workers.

I think there's part of that.

At the same time,

you're right.

People, everyone deserves to have mail delivered.

Now, the issue is, how much more mail are we going to have in the future, right?

We do have to change with the times.

Like, physical mail is really like mine has gone down considerably, so is yours, but not packages.

So, I, you know, I sometimes, when Trump went off on Amazon, I was like, well, I'd love to know how much they are being charged, if they're being charged.

I'd like to have an actual not Trump administration official look at this.

Like, are they charging enough?

Are they doing enough?

And again, maybe Bezos should get into it too.

So everybody feels more competition and then the consumer benefits.

Or maybe there's a way to have like a very inexpensive way to do this.

I do think typically when things are privatized, it leads to abuse.

Prisons are my number one example of that.

But I think most things that get privatized get abused, especially among people of color, poor people, anyone who has,

who who does, who can't afford, you know, like you were saying, the luxury of privacy or the luxury of this.

And so that would be my biggest worry that everyone does deliver to have, should have the mail delivered to them.

And this, it's so problematic that I think probably fixing the post office is what I'd rather do.

Well, there is a hybrid, right?

And that is, it becomes a utility.

And that is, it's a private company that can access the markets.

There's some the market pressure on costs, but there's regulators who say, okay, if you're the cable company and we're giving you a monopoly in New York, you have to provide broadband to every household.

Right.

You have to, you, you can't, they tax it.

You can't slow down speeds in areas where you're not making a lot of money.

You could be,

it could, you could turn the USPS.

It's not X or Y.

There is a hybrid where they turn it into sort of a regulated utility that's run.

You know, Florida Power and Light is run like a business, but you have to run lines and you have to provide power and you can't cut up power within a certain amount of notice, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

So

maybe there is a hybrid, but the USPS, I think, gets a bad rap.

The thing that has really hurt it is that letter, you know, to your notion, to your point, that we don't open our, we don't get mail.

I know this is going to sound like an elitist comment.

I haven't opened my mail in a decade.

I just don't, I just don't even know where my mail goes.

I don't, anything I get through the mail that's not a box dropped on my door is either bad news or something I don't want to read.

It's just unimportant.

It's true.

It would docuSign.

So letters, where they made all their money was people spending, you know, whatever it is,

45 cents or $8 on something they need to get there overnight that weigh nothing.

What has gone up dramatically is all the shit we're ordering, right?

In boxes.

And while that ordering at that volume has skyrocketed, it's much more expensive to handle that.

So they're as important as ever.

It's just the unit economics on the things they're delivering have gotten have gotten much worse.

There's got to be some sort of hybrid.

You didn't get my engraved invitation to have dinner.

Oh, I'm so sorry.

Your handwritten love letter.

My My handwritten love letters.

Brady Chanel number five.

Here it is.

Talking of the dog.

My dearest Scott, like that kind of stuff.

That's right.

I do it in longhand with a feather.

Nights are long thinking of you.

Yes, the nights are long here at the front.

The weather is cool.

Have you heard?

We're at New York Magazine now.

All right, listen, we got to go.

We have a friend of Pivot, an important person, and he only has a limited amount of time for us.

So you need to ask some questions here.

This is a person you need to talk to.

Try to act normally this time.

Yeah, I'm excited about this one.

Okay, there's a lot of smart opinions.

I expect you to ask a lot of good questions.

We're on the line with Professor Robert Reich.

He is so famous as an economist, the author of a book, The System, Who Rigged It and How to Fix It.

And he is currently a professor at UC Berkeley.

He has held positions in the administrations of Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Bill Clinton, and was Secretary of Labor from 1993 to 97.

Welcome, Professor Reich.

I'm going to let Scott start with the questions.

Professor Reich.

Hello, Kara, and hello, Scott.

So it really is an honor to have you.

And also, first off, kudos to you for deciding.

I'm sure you could have taught anywhere in the world, and you decided to speak at the institution that will graduate more kids from low-income households than the Ivy League combined.

That's right.

That's right.

UC Berkeley, where the dog went.

Anyways, it's fantastic to have you on the program.

Let's bust right into it.

The rescue/slash bailouts.

What did they get right?

What did we get wrong?

How would you change it?

Well, a lot of it is wrong right now because most of the money is

seems to be going to big corporations who don't need it.

It really is a bailout, not unlike the bailout of the banks in 2008.

And to make matters worse, much of it is not transparent.

That is, it's very hard to tell exactly who's getting what and why

and under what circumstances.

Meanwhile, average working people and the poor people who need it are getting $1,200, a one-time payment.

It's not even exactly clear how that is determined.

There's a phase-out starting at $75,000 up to $100,000, but it's just one-time, and people need much more than that.

There's a $600-a-week

addition to unemployment insurance, but the unemployment insurance system is overwhelmed.

The entire system is crashing in most states.

People can't even get through on the telephones.

Very, very very long lines websites that are not working so hopefully that is going to be straightened out but overall if you look at the big picture you see the big powerful organizations in our society that is big corporations doing quite well oh incidentally they also managed to get exempt from the second coronavirus legislation from the requirement that they provide paid sick leave and that's i'm talking about the big corporations.

So they're using their political power as they usually use their political power.

And unfortunately, as is very often the case now in America, average people, working people, and the poor are getting the scraps.

So talk about this idea.

Sort of, this is highlighted.

We were just talking about this with gig workers.

There were issues with them, and this is highlighted.

There's a lot of race and class inequalities exist in the U.S.

for generations.

Who do you think is most at risk right now?

And how do you repair what you were just talking about?

Well, I think that

there's a lot at risk, obviously.

I mean, you've got essential workers, so-called essential workers, who are mostly, again, low-income, disproportionately poor, black and Latino, working in hospitals, working in

delivery, warehouse.

They are sanitary workers.

These people are

not

even getting hazard pay.

They're not getting protective equipment that they need.

They're subjected every day to a lot of risks, a lot of dangers.

And then you've got, and I would say that that number is getting to close to a third of the workforce.

That is,

I'm just extrapolating from where we are today.

About a third of American, about 30% of the American workforce, that's more accurate,

is deemed essential in these kinds of occupations.

And then you've got another,

I think we're going to be up to about 30% unemployment

probably by the end of,

at this rate, we could easily be there by the end of May or June.

And that's just, I mean, we're talking about 47, 48 million people who do not have a source of income.

And then you've got the other 40%

of the workforce are now working remote.

They're managerial, professional, technical workers for the most part.

They

are inconvenienced,

but like you and I talking right now, we're doing okay.

I mean,

we'll get our paychecks.

So again, the class system in America is revealed even,

I think, even more sharply than it was before.

Is there a professor, is there an opportunity here, thinking about this post-Corona?

If you think about some of the nations in Europe, we have a lot of benchmarks for bailouts and rescue packages.

And it feels, I think you can make the argument that the ones that are working are the ones who focus on protecting people as opposed to protecting companies.

Do you think we could come out of this?

Do you think where I'm headed is

if we were to say, all right, we're going to protect people, we're going to use this, we're going to realize essential workers are the ones that have been paid the least, we're going to raise minimum wage, we're going to ensure that people get paid 60, 70, 80% of their salary until this is over, but we're going to let big corporations or even medium-sized corporations, we're going to let them fail.

Is there an opportunity here to say, all right, there's a difference between capitalism and cronyism and that we need to protect people, not companies, and let some of these companies fail?

You know, that's where I come out.

They're not going to fail.

The big airlines are not going to fail, believe me.

They're always renegotiating their debt with their creditors.

They've been doing it for 30 years.

The same with the big hotel chains and the cruise operators who don't even pay any taxes anyway.

You know, these big, big companies, they have a lot of assets, a lot of collateral.

They're not going to fail.

The small businesses, I think, are in real danger.

And those small businesses are always in danger.

But I think the payroll protection program, if it really did work

and the small businesses kept people on their payrolls, I mean, sent them home for safety, but kept them on their payrolls, that would be a good thing.

But the money is being sifted.

The way it was organized, you know, it's typical.

It goes through the big banks.

And the big banks don't want to take risks.

And even though the cost of money is zero now, the big banks are not really standing up to the plate.

So that money is not getting out the way it should.

I'm encouraged.

There's one idea that actually Senator Hawley from Missouri and Representative Jayapal from Washington both independently came up with the idea, which is very similar to what many European countries are doing, and that is

the United States Treasury would directly support the payrolls up to

I think that Hawley's proposal is 80% of

what somebody was getting up to the median wage.

And Jayapaul is talking about 100% up to $100,000.

But nevertheless, the idea is very similar.

The Treasury makes a direct payroll contribution.

It is for the payrolls.

It's for nothing else.

And it is to keep these people on the payrolls.

And obviously, the businesses that, you know,

their biggest cost is the payrolls.

And they will be required to keep people on the payroll

money.

It's just a more simplified simplified version of the payroll protection proposal.

The other thing that caught my eye is that there is a movement to provide hazard pay and better protection for essential workers.

And Elizabeth Warren is championing that in the Senate.

And we've got a couple of members of Congress who are pushing that

in the House side.

That also needs to happen, a kind of bill of rights for essential workers.

For essential workers.

Now, one of the things that Scott and I talk about is that a lot of what's happening going forward is the acceleration of trends already in place.

Retail was already sort of on the ropes to start with, and the trends were going towards Amazon and delivery.

A lot of companies were on the ropes in that regard, especially analog companies, restaurants and others are being pressured because of delivery and et cetera.

When we come back, do you see that happening?

Because one of the things is accelerating current trends that were in place or

not?

Or do you feel like maybe people will take a pause and say we shouldn't?

Because a lot of people feel tech companies are going to be in a real advantaged position when we get out of that.

And then I'd love to comment on the money they're giving away, whether you think it's that.

I'm afraid that that's the case.

I mean, the five big tech companies were already

in positions of extreme economic dominance.

We used to call them oligopolies.

I mean, they are really exercising monopoly power even before the pandemic.

And what we see is that companies like Amazon are now raking in huge amounts of money.

They don't, you know, basically Amazon paid almost no taxes last year.

Amazon is a huge political force as well as an economic force, and the two go together.

And Amazon is going to be even stronger.

It's now hiring about 120,000 additional workers.

It doesn't provide them with paid sick leave unless they actually test positive.

And even then, they only get two weeks.

Walmart is also raking in a big amount of money.

And Walmart is not treating its workers particularly well, as you know, is hiring 100,000 additional workers.

But the other high-tech companies are also, because so much of what we now have to do is over remote lines and the internet, they are doing better than ever before.

And I think this is going to entrench their positions as well.

The answer when the pandemic is over, if we have the political will, is to

revisit antitrust law

to see if

that economic is necessary.

But that's not going to happen because they've been also trying to do these sort of personal things like Jax Dorsey's $1 billion contribution.

How do you look at those at the same time?

Or Mark Benioff delivering masks or them doing things like frontline foods?

Very, and of course, as Scott says, releasing a press release every time they call, not cough, you can't cough right now, but you know what I mean?

That every time they do something, they release a press release about it.

Well, you mean in terms of their goods, you mean the voluntary, charitable, philanthropic things they're doing?

Well, you know, it's public relations.

Obviously, they're doing it.

I mean, Jeff Bezos is putting in $100 million

for

food banks, and that's nice, but

that's about 11 hours of his income.

I mean, it's ridiculously small compared to what

these companies are raking in.

It's the same with Jamie Dimon's J.P.

Morgan Chase.

I mean, J.P.

Morgan Chase is doing a lot of nice little voluntary things around the country, but it's a tiny, tiny fraction of the growing amounts of money that these banks are raking in as well.

Corporate social responsibility is really public relations.

It's got to be understood as nothing but public relations.

It's a thinly veiled effort to distract attention from the market power and the

really the kind of bullying that is going on in the economy by some of these big companies.

Yeah, it really is lipstick.

So I want to take a different tact here, and that is, Professor, both you and I, I teach at NYU, you teach at Berkeley.

These corporations, well, let me put this out there and have you respond.

These corporations are doing exactly what they're supposed to do.

They're private organizations.

They're for-profit.

We can hope that they have more regard for the Commonwealth.

They almost never do.

Isn't it really partially our fault as educators to not create a generation of people that make the sacrifice and

vote for leaders that will think more long term, that will realize that unless we have a dignity of work, unless we have minimum wage such that people can afford some baseline level of housing and health care, that we're just setting ourselves up for war, famine, or revolution at some point?

Haven't we failed as citizens and as voters and as educators to create a generation or a general complexion or gestalt in our society where we put in place the people who recognize these threats and are willing to vote for people who will think more long-term?

Well, that's a big question.

I think the answer is no,

and that's a self-serving answer to some extent, except I look at my students at UCAL Berkeley and students really that I teach around the country at public institutions.

This generation is probably more committed to positive social change, social justice, than any generation of students I've taught in the past 40 years.

No,

the problem is, I think, more complicated than that.

I mean, Trump, look at Trump's polls right now.

He's got white voters without college degrees are still, 61% of them are in favor of Donald Trump, as opposed to 32% of them, white voters without college degrees, who take an unfavorable view of Trump.

I mean, it's, you know, the Democratic, if I'm going to blame anybody, and I think the blame game is easy,

but I think the Democratic Party over the last 40 years abandoned the white working class, abandoned the working class, not just the white working class.

I mean, I saw it happen.

So you've got a lot of,

you know, there's really no political representation for

the working class in this country.

Nobody is standing up for the working class.

Nobody has been standing up for the working class.

The Democrats began to focus on basically the suburban swing vote, upper middle class, and the Republicans were taken over, well we saw, quite early by the big banks and big corporations and Donald Trump is kind of a Trojan horse for all of them.

So I think the big failure

is a failure of

our political system

to recognize that there are a lot of people who are desperately, barely holding on i mean the pandemic even before the pandemic the white working class the working class itself white and black latino you know had not got a raise in 40 years adjusted for inflation

i mean that's that that's the big problem uh you know there's i think that uh so you were a vocal you were a vocal supporter of bernie sanders uh what part of his ideology and platform do you hope and expect to be carried out by joe biden or do you not at all do you feel that this is going to be well

i think that's the that's that's the big question right now.

I mean, does Biden understand that he needs young people and progressives in order to win?

I'm not sure that he does.

I think basically the way he wins is peeling off some of the

white women who were Trump supporters.

I don't think there are enough of them.

I think that he cannot win without the white, without, I'm sorry, without the progressives

and

young people.

And

does he he's got to understand that first.

That case has got to be made to him first.

I hope he

understands that.

I mean, it would be the simplest thing in the world for him to say, well, I was against

something

like Medicare for all before the pandemic.

Now I see how urgent it is that, you know, you've got so many people who've lost their employer provided health care because they've lost their jobs.

I now understand that Medicare for all is critically important.

He could say that now,

but I, you know, the latest comment he made a couple of days ago was, well, maybe we can move Medicare eligibility down to age 60.

I'm sorry, that's not going to get your youth vote behind you.

It's not going to get the progressives behind you.

Yeah, I would agree.

It's really strange.

I think my concern is that the vice president, whether you like what Trump is doing or not, he is giving press releases every day.

He comes across as a president in a crisis.

You know, I would argue he's,

I think a lot of people would argue that it's been an incompetent, almost negligent handling of the crisis.

But then there's the vice president in his basement waving to his kids through a glass window.

I don't think he's coming off as effective or the person to lead us right now.

What do you think of the idea?

You've been on transition teams.

You served in cabinets.

What do you think of the idea of

the presumptive Democratic nominee appointing as a cabinet right now and and really starting to talk openly and honestly and talk about big structural change across all of these things.

It just feels like to a certain extent we Democrats with this upcoming election have been a little bit neutered.

And I'm trying to think how we get off our heels and onto our toes here other than just complaining about the president.

Well, I think that

if Biden, obviously the presumptive nominee, were to either suggest a cabinet or to put together

an advisory group of of citizens that

are thought of by the rest of the country as people who know what they're doing.

I think that would be probably a very good move.

I don't like

the Tom Friedman idea of trying to put together a bipartisan cabinet because I think that

American politics has been moving so far to the right.

That's not going to get your white working class behind you.

The policies that would come out of a bunch of Republican cabinet members, if that were what Biden did do,

is not going to be anything that really the country needs.

I mean, what you do need is to move in the direction that Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders

were moving in.

Were Biden to decide that his vice president was going to be Elizabeth Warren, I think that would be a huge help to him and to

getting young people and progressives engaged in the election.

Last question.

You're absolutely right.

I think you're absolutely right about that.

He's taking far too long in this crisis, I think, at this point.

But when you, I want to get back to the stimulus checks that people have.

What would you do for individuals you were just discussing who are going to be just fine?

Which of those who have finances or salary that has not changed because of COVID-19?

What should they do with their stimulus check?

And then lastly, what should be the next step by Congress to

fix the issues you were talking about?

Well, if you don't need your stimulus, I mean, if you're doing fine and if your income is, you know, $90,000, $100,000 a year and you get $1,200, I mean, turn around and give it to a food bank.

I mean,

why?

I mean,

that's sort of a no-brainer.

I think that

just getting back to

the question of what we ought to do now and what Biden ought to do now and

where Trump is right now, I think that so many people

are

beginning to see the kind of pathological, narcissistic, divisive

Trump

for what he is.

If he goes through,

and I think he's likely to do this, and not only fires all his IGs,

but also fires Anthony Fauci and anybody who disagree with him.

I think that

his favorabilities, even in the swing states, are going to be really starting to suffer.

You know, he wants to reopen America much too soon.

That could ignite even more of

a surge in coronavirus deaths and cases.

There's so many ways in which Trump could be, and in many many ways is blowing it.

I think the big question really that we touched on is how do the Democrats, how does Biden really take advantage of the crisis and come forth with bold ideas and get people excited by the possibility of not only getting out of this crisis, but also moving on to an America that is a much better America than we had before.

I worry about Biden's use of the phrase, which he keeps using,

which is getting back to normal.

Normal

is what got us hope.

Normal is 40 years of stagnant wages.

Normal is the Democratic Party basically turning its back on the working class.

Normal is the growth of the American oligopoly and oligarchy.

I mean, we don't want normal.

I mean, normal is the problem that got us where we are today

and

makes it so likely that

these working class Americans are going to vote for Trump.

All right.

Thank you so much, Professor Reich.

And we'll be looking more for a lot of things you're writing and talking about.

Professor Reich's latest book is called The System, Who Rigged It and How to Fix It.

He's a professor at University of California at Berkeley.

Thank you so much for coming on Pivot.

Well, thank you, Kara.

And thank you, Scott.

Thank you, Professor.

Okay, Scott.

Well, he agrees with you.

You have become, you are, you are like the East and West Coast versions of each other, I think.

I feel that that's what's happening here.

Yeah, me and Professor,

minus the credibility and the stature.

We're exactly the same.

And the accomplishment.

Yeah.

No, Professor Eisenko.

All right, we're going to take a quick break and we'll be back for wins and fails.

Wish you could become a morning person.

You know, the type of before the sun, early morning runs, first one to the office with donuts and a smile.

How do they do it?

Easy.

With a new Galaxy Watch 8, sleep tracking and personalized insights from Samsung Health help you improve so you can wake up to a whole new you.

One who, dare I say it, skips the snooze?

It's possible.

Train your sleep with Galaxy Watch 8.

Learn more at Samsung.com.

Requires compatible Samsung Galaxy phone, Samsung Health app, and Samsung account.

When your investors, customers, and workers demand more from your business, make it happen with SAP.

The AI-powered capabilities of SAP can help you streamline streamline costs, connect with new suppliers, and manage payroll, even when your business is being pulled in different directions.

To deliver a quality product at a fair price while paying your people what they're worth too, so your business can stay unfazed.

Learn more at sap.com slash uncertainty.

Okay, we're back, Scott.

Wins and fails.

There's so many this week that I don't even know where to start.

I think you should start, though.

I think you should start with a win.

My win is an idea from you.

I watched Unorthodox.

Yeah.

I thought it was wonderful.

Just wonderful.

And I love the fact that it didn't seem like it wasn't these big production $100 million an episode.

It was fairly simple, just a wonderful story.

I like that it, I learned a lot about,

I just had the Orthodox culture, Hasidic.

I didn't, you know, I just, I'm a, I'm kind of a non-practicing Jew.

But I just found it interesting.

I thought the

young actress in it was outstanding.

Outstanding, wasn't she?

I thought it was just very,

very moving.

And

I have another one for you.

I have another one for you.

Bring it up.

I do like the TV.

It's called Run.

I want to make this agreement with you.

It's from

this pair of Phoebe Wallerbridge

is from her production studio, along with a friend of hers who's in it.

And it's about two ex-lovers from college.

They have a sign where they say run.

They type, they text each other, run, and then they go on the run.

And that's what it's about, changing your life.

Not going back to normal, Scott.

I'm going to do that too.

I am so ready to run.

Aren't you ready to run right now?

I'm going to text you that says, run, and then you're going to meet me at Grand Central Station.

We're going to catch a train to nowhere.

I am so ready to get in a car and just drive, Carol.

I know.

Oh, my God.

I know.

It is crazy.

Like, we all wish for more time at home, and then we're like, no, not

simply.

All right.

So, my win.

I liked SNL, even though it was weird as heck.

I liked their effort.

I thought it was fun.

The Zoom one one was funny.

Zoom one was great.

That was really great.

I couldn't feel like that.

I was just so freaked out about where these people live.

Was that their actual homes?

Yes.

That was an insight.

These people have fantastic.

They're fantastically talented and they don't have great taste in home furniture.

Well, some of them don't.

Some of them, and then some had adorable children.

Some of them,

I thought Colin Joe's house was lovely.

Well, he's dreaming.

He's dreaming.

Charlotte Johannes.

Anything looks good wrapped around him.

That guy's dreaming.

Nobody liked Tom Hanks' kitchen.

I don't know why.

Oh, the cherry wood?

What is he thinking?

Rita, how did she let that happen?

I totally noticed that.

I was expecting Santa Monica Airy, like Malibu was more like.

A little stainless steel, a little soap stone.

I mean, come on.

Bring in the dog.

I'm ready.

Looking in people's homes is like,

it is.

It is

funny.

It's like, that's where Tom Hanks eats.

Anyway, I thought the opening monologue wasn't very good.

I thought, you know what?

No laughter.

The lack of laugh track is a problem.

It's real hard.

The electricity of being amongst and next to each other, it's really, we are such a social species.

It is really.

All of them.

I mean, I've gotten used to the talk shows now without laugh tracks, but because they're adorable, but it's really hard.

It's really stupid.

That's why we're so good.

We do not have a laugh track and yet we are hysterical.

Listen, what's your fail?

What's your fail?

My fail,

my fail is after talking to Professor Reich.

My fail is Joe Biden.

Boss,

you got to get off your heels.

Appoint Kamala Harris or Stacey Abrams as your VP.

Appoint Michael Bennett as your Secretary of Education.

Start getting out there, talking about all these issues, talking about what you would do.

Start playing offense, boss.

You come across as an old man hiding in your basement right now.

This is, you are going to lose this for us.

This is so important.

Announce your VP, announce your cabinet.

Every day, take a different issue.

What do you think of the Warren idea?

I think it's a great idea.

Yeah, she's, she's

talk about attack dog.

Man, would she go on the attack?

Oh, definitely get her out there and say, this is my new, you know, secretary of whatever.

And absolutely.

But he has got to get off his heels.

He's got to be in his head.

Why is it on his heels?

What do you think is going on?

I don't know what's going on.

I think they think, well, let's, either the campaign is in disarray, which I would find hard to believe right now, or they think that let's just sometimes the best thing to do is stay out of the way of a train wreck.

And they're thinking, just let Trump continue to do what he's doing.

They need to be out there with an alternative because if

regardless of how badly Trump is handling this, it is hard for a wartime president, and this will come across this war to not be reelected unless we are constantly in a thoughtful way providing an alternative.

And I don't believe with Professor Reich, we keep waiting for the.

the final straw that'll break the backs of swing states around Trump's behavior and we keep waiting.

What we need is to provide provide a cogent alternative leader.

And Biden, you know what, if there was ever this statement ever made was more relevant, it's a greatness is in the agency of others.

Well, Biden, you need to start demonstrating some greatness in the agency of others.

We're going to forget he's running for president.

Yep, I agree with you.

I agree with you.

All right, I'm going to do my fail, and I want you to comment on it really, is this fire Fauci thing that Trump retweeted?

Man, like

so irritating.

The right, I got to say, Fox News again, once again, as usual, they're pushing that.

They're pushing the hydro hydrochloroquine which of course there's lots of studies now being pulled back because of heart issues uh as i noted before um

and uh the just the just the the drumbeat never you know what i was thinking this weekend as they started in on the on fauci and like get back to work and after the times and the washington post had like stories about their epic fail was literally they're doing it again and they're shameless in terms of people dying they just they're like let's let people and you you and i both want to just get out in a car and run and go out and have, you know, go to a restaurant also and everything else.

So what do you think of this?

I'd love your thoughts.

Look, we need in times like this, we need our heroes.

And one of the telltale signs of a narcissist is anyone who starts to get, I don't even think it's the fact that Fauci hasn't fully embraced hydrochloroquine that's upset the president.

I think it's the fact that he's getting attention and that people seem to like him.

I made him a star was in one of the stories.

I made him a star.

Like, that's how he thinks of things.

He's such a fuck

in that way.

I think it's really, I think it's really upsetting because

we need talented, thoughtful, reasoned people who are data-driven.

It's just another example.

I mean, this could get, it's just strange.

I was talking to a friend of mine who's a hedge fund manager.

Unless we get to 50% her, 50% of the population with immunities, which would involve probably two to three million deaths because we'd have to expose the majority of America in Europe.

Unless that happens, and I don't think we're willing to endure that cost, we're going to need vaccination.

And the only way we get to vaccination is to call on our superpower as a species.

And that's around massive cooperation and steady, thoughtful hands, and people that have a certain level of respect across borders, across agencies, across parties.

There aren't that many of them right now.

And Dr.

Fauci is one of them.

And the fact that the president would distract him with this bullshit and put that kind of strain and stress on his family.

Look at all the texts on the media this week.

It was craziness this weekend.

Very upsetting.

That's a terrible fail.

I was sort of like, something's, well, no, something's always happening there.

Anyway, very big fail.

Very big fail.

And a very missed opportunity for Trump, by the way.

If he looked even slightly decent, he would win in a landslide.

100%.

He is missing his opportunity.

What's Kara up to this week?

What are you doing this week?

I have interviews with Mark Cuban, Tim Ferris.

Is he running for president?

I keep hearing that rumor again that Mark Cuban or Mark

are running for president.

I have Jeffrey Katzenberg.

I have so many podcasts.

How's Quibby doing?

Do we know anything about Quibby?

I'm going to ask him what you want me to ask him.

I'm talking about...

What's Quibby doing?

And why does this thing make any sense?

Didn't you bring a squirt gun to

a gunfight here?

How does this?

All right.

I will ask that specific question.

I actually watched several Quibby shows.

I liked them quite a bit.

Really?

What's your favorite?

You're my new favorite.

Thanks, a million.

I know it sounds so goofy, but I liked it.

I like Chrissy Teigen.

There's several I like.

Oh, she's the new Judge Judy?

Yeah, whatever.

It's kind of silly and stupid, but it definitely had passed the time.

I'll tell you that.

I was waiting in a line.

That's exactly.

So I don't know if it has, you know, I don't know if I'd keep using it.

That's a good question.

Well, no, it doesn't.

It's like some day, 90 days free or something.

But you did give me your credit card.

I did it through Apple.

Okay.

Yeah.

That means, so that's technically a sign up.

Yeah, it is 100%.

Anyway, we'll see.

I'll ask them.

And then Mark Cuban is going to be great.

Tim Ferriss is going to be great.

I got lots.

And of course, I have you on Thursday.

You'll always have me on Thursday.

We'll always have each other.

We do.

We will.

I'm writing a lot of people.

That's New York magazine not gonna get

stop what is the thing you miss most besides me about life pre-quarantine and what is the first thing you'll do when we aren't in lockdown

other than chipotle um yeah chipotle obviously you know i miss we used to on on friday nights and over the weekend we had just a wonderful circle of friends that have a lot of kids and being social but having the noise the comforting noise of your kids crying and laughing behind you as sort of a backdrop It's like, I love, I love being around my kids.

I just don't like being engaged with them, but I like having them around.

So I want to be back.

I want to be back in social situations with people I care about with my kids around.

I don't.

All right.

And that's the first thing you'll do.

Have luck, yeah?

Yeah.

A big party.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I was thinking that

I was walking and I was like looking at all the bars and restaurants closed and it was beautiful.

It's a beautiful weather here.

And I thought, all the fun we've missed.

Like, I don't know.

I just said it out loud.

I go, amanda we've all the fun we've missed um and uh i think i will uh i think i will i think i'll go to a restaurant i think a restaurant in vegas i miss vegas and then you and i are going to run to vegas to get married obviously that's going to be it's wedding it could happen number three it could not happen i'm up for something different i it could never happen it will never happen oh let's be honest you're the future ex-Mrs.

Galloway do you know what I'd like to do I'm supposed to get married and I'm not gonna be getting married for a much longer time now.

At the wedding, you can get up and say you object.

Okay.

I would never say that.

I would never get in the way of that.

I want you to run down the aisle and say, please marry me.

I truly love you.

Okay.

And then we could do a New York magazine cover on it.

It'll be great.

Anyway.

That's compelling media.

Okay.

Yeah, it is.

So anyway, we'll be back on Thursday.

Don't forget, if there's a story in the news you're curious about and want to hear our opinion on, email us at pivot at boxmedia.com to be featured on the show.

Well, you know what the difference between a gay and a straight wedding is, right?

What?

The parents are crying, but for different reasons.

Oh, my God.

That's so 1990.

That's so.

They had a gay wedding in 1990s.

That's how it went.

I'll be there with Lucky.

I'll dance at Lucky.

Oh, that'll be just great.

Anyway, read us out, Scott Galloway.

Today's episode was produced by Rebecca Sinanis.

Our executive producer is

Erica Anderson.

Special thanks to Drew Burroughs and Rebecca Castro.

If you like what you heard, please download.

Wherever you listen to podcasts or subscribe.

We'll be back later in the week for a breakdown of all things tech and business.