If Your Business Solves A Problem, You Get Rich w/ Patrick Donohoe #TheOnePercent

Happiness is chemicals that fire. When our brains think we have a higher chance of surviving. And the only way that we do that is by solving problems. We solve the threats that we have to our own survival. Love that we literally unlock happiness by solving problems. So biologically we are wired to solve problems. Unfortunately, we tend to fire short term versus long term if we're in a threat situation. And most people today have the perception of threat. Even though our livelihoods and our survival is as good as it has ever.

Been.

It takes one free person to create change. This is the show for them. We are the creators of the free world. This is capitalism.com and we are the 1%.

Hey, a quick note for you Amazon sellers and brands who want to be on Amazon and haven't made it a priority yet. I am often asked about changes with reviews or changes with Amazon terms of service or changes with what's working with ranking and all of that kind of jazz. And I'm proud that I have partnered with one of our backroom members. His name is Jeff. He runs an agency that specializes specifically in optimizing your Amazon presence. So if you're a brand that is neglecting Amazon and you've heard me talking about it and you're like, we know, we gotta get this together, or if you're an Amazon seller and you know you need to turn your attention to audience building and funnels and the stuff that is really going to grow your company, I would recommend that you give a quick shout to my boy Jeff at Turnkey Product management. They're@TurnKeyProductManagement.com and as I said, they're in the back room. They work with my team and the rest of the big companies and equity groups that are involved in our little circle. And they're usually ahead of everybody else in terms of what's working, what's compliant, what review strategies are cool and kosher and are actually effective. And they're not out there hawking a.

Bunch of info products.

They're out there actually doing it. So they're an implementation agency that just handles it for people and they run their own businesses, some of which they have built and sold, kind of like yours truly. So I feel really good about partnering with them and recommending the big companies and the brands that I work with to outsource their Amazon management over to Jeff and his team. So if you're looking to add some automation into your arsenal, I would recommend the good folks@TurnKeyProductManagement.com and Jeff and I are on speed dial with each other and are collaborating on what's working. So you're always getting what's the latest and greatest in the Amazon world. So contact those guys if you're looking to outsource, source, automate, and optimize your Amazon presence@TurnkeyProductManagement.com.

Okay, My guest today is Ryan Moran. You like to go by your middle name too, dude, right? Ryan Daniel Moran.

There's lots of Ryan Moran's out there.

That's right, Ryan Daniel Moran. But there's only one that owns capitalism.com. but Ryan is the founder of capitalism.com and host of the 1% podcast. He's a father, a Browns fan, and a future owner of the Cleveland Indians, which makes me assume that you're from Ohio.

Well, I mean, I think the Browns fan is kind of a dead giveaway. It's the only reason to.

You know, the only reason to suffer in 20 years of losing seasons is if you've got some sort of boyhood loyalty to them. So.

But I'm sure there's a story behind, like, why not the Bengals instead of the Browns? Especially if you're a Cleveland fan, right? That's not for today.

Grew up in Cleveland, so that should do it. Cool.

All right. So, Ryan, this is going to be an awesome podcast. I'm stoked because, you know, you. You know, you're the owner of capitalism.com. i'm sure there's a really cool story to that. You know, in addition to actually having that site. I mean, there's kind of a big responsibility, I would assume, if you have that domain and you're branding that domain and how you've come to understand capitalism. So I'd like to start there if that's cool. So let's start with how you are defining capitalism right now in the present moment.

Yeah, I think my favorite definition of the word capitalism is from Hayek, where he says that it's an increasing system of strangers serving one another. It's the system through which we are incentivized to serve one another. I had an economics professor in college. His name was Dr. Ivan Pongrasic, and he had escaped. He had escaped Soviet Russia and escaped because he was almost caught smuggling Elvis records and Fender guitars across the borders. And they made it punishable by death if he did that. And he said, so you know what I did? I raised the price.

And he used to say, you know, he used to talk about.

Capitalism was just the system through which we practiced freedom. And in order for us to get ahead we have to serve one another. It's where we are, where we are incentivized to do so. And so I think that's also why we see such a pushback on the left today against capitalism, is because we've forgotten that it's simply the way that we exercise freedom. And when we go in and try to fix freedom or force freedom, or try to allocate freedom to be more, quote, responsible, we distort it. And we all agree that personal freedom and freedom is a high aim. And when we can put capitalism as just the protector of freedom, the system through which we have freedom, I think that's a universal principle that no one can disagree with.

So, and how you, what you were just saying, it seems like everyone would agree with you on this notion of freedom. So why don't they? Why is there such a disdain for.

Capitalism for, because of short term desires? If your reference point is 10 years ago, then you are naturally going to look ahead only for the next few years. But if your reference point is 100 years, 200 years, 500 years, a thousand years, well, the path forward is really obvious. It's kind of like trading stocks versus being an investor. It's kind of like flipping houses versus being an income investor. It's kind of like trying to make money on the Internet versus building an Internet business. Capitalism is the same. If a 20 year old is looking at the state of the world compared to when he or she was 8, there's not a very good reference point for how the world acts. So all that person is going to see is problems. They're going to see who doesn't have health care. They have no reference point for who had health care 100 years ago. They're gonna look at the way that they think the world should be versus through the lens of problems rather than looking at the trend of the world over the last hundred years. If you have never traveled, if you haven't lived a few decades, if you haven't studied history of you would have a short term view of the world in which you only saw problems. So our job is to paint a different picture and to be relentless defenders of that freedom so that the loud voices don't get a foothold in what we know the world needs to do.

So what would your, if you were in a debate contest and you stood on the other side, like, how would you defend that? You know, we're not, you know, 1750 Ryan. We don't trade, you know, wine and bread and potatoes. Right? We're in a, we're in a civilized, you know, modern society where, you know, health care should be a right, like, how do you take that stance and defend it up against capitalism?

The way that we defend that stance is by coming back to the fundamental agreement that we want the same things. I have a very high percentage of liberals converted because most of them have the perspective that a conservative or a libertarian just doesn't want poor people to have health care. So we have to dispel that myth. We just have to say, look, I have the same goal as you of ensuring that the least of those around us have access to quality, affordable health care. I have the exact same goal. Let me tell you why my plan, if you will, is a better way to get that than somebody else. I heard Naval Ravikant talk about universal basic income recently. He was talking with Scott Adams, and Scott Adams asked him what he thought of universal basic income. And Naval said, oh, we're going to have it. It's just going to come from the private sector. We're going to have phones be so cheap that Google will just give them out so that you use their apps and their platform. But you'll basically have a universal standard of living. We don't need it to come from the government. And that type of an argument is how I persuade the other side to come to our side of the argument. You say we're after the same goal. Your way of getting there is to trust Trump and all of his friends to come up with a plan. How confident are you in that happening? My plan is this, and I have a very high percentage rate of getting people to convert after that.

Well, it's, you know, and I'm going to go back to your side. You know, it's one of those, like, challenges will always occur, but there's always people looking to solve challenges. It's kind of like an instinct in us, right?

We see challenge, but we look for opportunities. You know, I always look at, you know, the Jungle Book, right, where, you know, Mowgli is this, you know, character that's different from the rest of the forest because they're there to survive. And he has this, like, instinct to come up with solutions for this and solutions for, you know, solutions for that. And it's like, that's. That's human nature. And even though we have challenges, when you do create that environment of freedom, people are able to exercise and be. Are able to try things and try this and try that. And ultimately, you know, there's solutions that create the betterment of every of everyone at the same time. Right. It's one of those, there's a little time involved there. Whereas, you know, writing a check to somebody is the easiest thing to do. And typically people want that, like you said, short term solution. And that's where they tend to go in to gripe about.

So our brains are wired to produce happiness as a byproduct to increases of survival chances. So.

Happiness is actually kind of an illusion. Happiness is chemicals that fire when our brains think we have a higher chance of surviving. And the only way that we do that is by solving problems. All the threats that we have to our own survival love that we literally unlock happiness by solving problems. So biologically we are wired to solve problems. Unfortunately, we tend to fire short term versus long term if we're in a threat situation. And most people today have the perception of threat, even though our livelihoods and our survival is as good as it has ever been.

Yeah, I mean, Ray Dalio, I heard him speak a couple months ago and he was talking about this whole idea of universal basic income and the threat of artificial intelligence. And you know, all these people are going to be displaced by jobs. But you know, there's so many solutions that the government can come up with. Right. But it's one of those, like, there's something about humans where there has to be a fulfillment side of their life. Right. And if there's not, then life is, you know, becomes the opposite of what you're saying. It's unhappy when you're not able to solve those problems. It robs people, right. Of the opportunity to, you know, find that fulfillment or find that happiness.

I'm really disappointed in Ray Dalio.

He has some interesting stances on it.

I think most those of us who identify as capitalists or libertarians should be disappointed in Ray Dalio. I don't know where his tune changed of seeing the pie that he created and started to feel guilty about it. But his entire thesis lately on this speaking tour that he's been going on is that we need a better way to allocate pieces of the pie. And what Dalio mistakes and seems to overlook is that there is no pie. There is no limited amount of value. He should know. He created a big one. He helped a lot of people along the way.

Well, he aggregated a lot of capital. I don't know if capitalism.

Yeah, actually that's a good distinction. That's a good distinction. I guess based on his background, when he's raising capital from a lot of places, maybe he would have more of a. There's a fixed amount versus it being a creation is a great distinction, Patrick. But overall, as a community, I think we should be very disappointed in the message that he's starting to spread.

Well, let's get into a few other things. I want to really kind of dive into your story around capitalism.com because, as I mentioned, it's one of those things you buy it and you can monetize, but at the same time, if you share or if you have a philosophy around what it means and what you want the world to understand what it means, then that's a. That's a big. A big responsibility. So let's. Let's get into that. What's the story behind, you know, your intrigue and interest in the idea of capitalism? Or maybe your parents were these staunch, like, you know, Libertarian F.A. hayek, you know, followers, and you went to Mises University when you were little, and maybe it was like, I love your story.

Yeah, so I'll try and do it in 30 to 45 seconds. I went to college to be a pastor, and, spoiler alert, did not go that route. I had an economics professor who basically gave a talk that changed my life where he was talking about how the greatest way that we can find God's will or find our greatest purpose or find our maximum dollar amount, however you divide that up like our highest calling, is by using the marketplace and seeing price as an indication of where there was need of, where there was a value, where there was opportunities to create something that completely changed my brain and altered the course of my life and my career. Add that in with some doubts that I had about my faith. You know, it was a perfect time for me to make a switch. So I ended up going to school and studying economics while building my first business, while the 2008 crash and the election were all going on at the same time. And so those are my formative years. And the opportunity to acquire the name that represented all of my biggest interests was presented to me, and it was to acquire capitalism.com and since then, we've been building out events and a platform for entrepreneurs because I believe ultimately we only change minds and we change direction by changing individuals. I don't think that debate on a grand scale is how we ultimately change people's mind. I think we lead by example. And so at capitalism.com, we help entrepreneurs build businesses and invest the profits. And I'm playing the long game, because the more millionaires you create, the more kids you have with those financially educated individuals as parents. And I think that's ultimately how we Change perspectives.

Okay, so let's talk applied capitalism. So teaching businesses right, There are a lot of ways to approach this, but business has changed significantly right, over the last decade as far as how capital is raised.

In some cases, profitability doesn't even matter. To raise capital, just an idea matters. But how are you applying what you've learned about capitalism and that philosophy to what you teach others about businesses and maybe how you treat your own businesses?

Well, Cap, in your basic capitalist theory, things get easier over time. Resources get freed up, you have more access to opportunity. And that is your point about things changing so much in the last 10 years. Capital is abundant. The opportunities for advertising are cheaper than ever, at higher scale than ever. Any message can go viral at any time. So things continue to get easier. I don't buy into this narrative that it's somehow getting harder. It's getting easier and there are more and more opportunities. However, it's changing faster and faster. So you have more creative destruction than ever before, which, I mean, we all love it until it happens to us, right? Yeah, but if we're going to be consistent with our argument, then we have to just either adapt or go find a new business. So to me, we're just seeing capitalism in action. We're seeing lots of new opportunities be liberated. We're seeing a lot of new resources become available. These are things that didn't exist for us as a society as recently as 10 or 20 years ago.

Yeah, I mean, Joseph Schumpeter, that whole creative destruction principle.

Is powerful, but again, it goes to more of the long game than the short game. Right. Where a lot of the lessons are learned after a lot of the chaos ensues, hence 2008, 2009, where there's some incredible lessons learned by people. I think we've become stronger because of that, not weaker. So, all right, so let's back up just two steps then. So looking at what you discovered as more of a philosophical approach to capitalism based on the economics people of the past, which are not all obviously pro capitalism, but you then started to apply that to business. But it sounds like you experienced some of that creative destruction.

What do you mean, experience that creative destruction?

It sounds like you may have experience business going under or maybe a business obsolete, or maybe you hired the wrong team or like, did you go through some.

Principle?

I mean, haven't we all? I mean, if you're not failing more often than you are succeeding, you probably aren't a real entrepreneur.

Yeah, that's totally true.

I mean, I was just journaling about this Last night about the fact that it really only takes one big breakthrough in order to pay for all of your failures.

Thankfully, we live in this world in which basically, basically all of our needs are met for almost no money. I mean, we're really close to having a universal basic living standard at this point. Unfortunately, we're all comparing ourselves in terms of status, which is why there's this myth of wealth and equality, which of course we all know is a myth. But since we have our basic needs met, you can pretty much fail at scale until you win. So again, we all love it until it happens to us. But if you can develop that muscle of being comfortable swinging and missing, then one at bat is all it's going to take in order for you to have the impact that you want to have. I have stopped measuring progress in dollars because dollars are a commodity at this point. Wealth is just a way to make things happen for faster. I think the more dialed in you are to the type of life that you want and the things that you want to do, money becomes a byproduct of doing that really well, and it becomes gasoline for you to make it happen faster. So I have changed my tune a little bit where I became an entrepreneur because I wanted money. And then you realize that all money is is a tool to make change happen. So if you identify the change that you want to have, then you can swing and miss all you want. Eventually, pay dirt happens. And that book justifies your failures and allows your successes to happen that much faster. Which, by the way, is the purpose of money and capital in the first place. To fuel the distribution of goods and services, to fuel the distribution of good work. That's really what it's there to do.

So how do you. So what do you use as your primary measurements of whether or not you're business is successful?

Yeah, part of it is am I happy? And part of it is do I like doing what I'm doing? Another is client happiness.

And scale. Meaning are people voluntarily sharing what it is that we're doing? There's a. There's a. There's a. I had a professor in college who was supposedly like an expert in this idea of the diffusion curve of distribution. If you get those loud early adopters, they bring them to the rest of the world. If you have a core group of rating fans, they bring your message or your market, they bring your product and service to the rest of the world. So part of how I'm evaluating on it is are people talking about it? Are people diffusing it for Me. And if that's the case, then I know I've done something well in the world.

So let me. Let me kind of break into that a little bit. There was a company recently called. It was a restaurant chain called Even Stevens. You know, have you ever heard of them before?

I've heard of them.

Chapter 11, bankruptcy right now. But they had this, you know, this culture of doing good and impacting people. And, you know, their business model was set up where someone bought a sandwich, one sandwich was donated to, you know, the poor. But they're in bankruptcy right now. So how do you kind of reconcile, you know, from a profitability standpoint? Right? How do you reconcile that? I mean, wanting to do good, wanting to impact people, but yet at the same time bringing in more than is going out.

I used to work at Dunkin Donuts when I was in high school.

Dunkin Donuts?

Yeah. When I was in high school, my first real job, if you will.

I worked at Dunkin Donuts. And at the end of the night, we had hundreds and hundreds of extra donuts. We had a lot of them, and a lot of them went to waste, threw them away. And a lot of them we donated to food shelters. There was so much waste. We could give some to shelters. I could take some to school the next day, and I did. We would. We could throw away a bunch. I mean, there are a lot of wasted donuts. The only way that you can have that type of good waste, if you will, is if you're running a profitable enterprise. So the people who talk about, you know, the Toms shoes model, and they have their own financial problems with the idea of, you know, we're going to give first. It's a great idea, but you can give a lot more when you're running a profitable enterprise. Profit is excess. Profit is extra. It's what it's. And it is a reflection of a gap in the marketplace that's a really good thing. You are doing good by making profit. Profit is a reflection of doing good.

It's not the, like, bad thing you get. I mean, profit is. Is the reflection of you doing good. And with that, you can do whatever you want. You already gave your debt, you already paid your debt to society by doing the good thing in the first place. And you have profit as a byproduct. So if you want to take that and now have more additional impact, mazel tov. Go for it. You're under no requirement to do so, but you will do more good putting all of those sandwich profits into more sandwiches and you'll probably have excess that you can then sustainably give away. So I think that the idea of doing something that matters and getting paid for it is self perpetuating and self rewarding on its own. And then you can do what you'd like with the profits.

Okay, so the reconciliation then is what.

I'm assuming is obviously you want to be benefiting customers.

You want to have a good time.

And be happy and feel fulfilled in what you're doing.

But at the same time, dollars are important from a measurement standpoint to ensure.

That there's more coming in than going up.

Yeah, the reconciliation is. Even Stevens would have done a lot more good in the world if they were running a profitable enterprise.

Totally. Because they are not doing now.

Yeah, exactly. They can't do anything now.

All right, dude, so let's get. Let's get into the hot.

Let's get into the hot buttons because.

This is a good transition.

Because there, you know, as much as we would think that there are more supporters of, you know, free market and laissez faire capitalism and allow people in the markets to solve problems. You know, there is a growing.

Philosophy, Right. That has existed for a while, Right. Using the narrative of social good and that, you know, the capitalists and money hoarders are, you know, these fat guys that live in big mansions. Right. So let's talk about, you know, first Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, who I think is a really interesting political phenomenon the last last couple of years, and then Andrew Yang. Maybe we'll start with aoc. So what's your, what's your pulse on her? How do you view the attraction to what she is saying and why she's gained so much ground from just building a big audience in the inner circles of the Democratic Party, but also just in society as well.

Well, my pulse on her is that she is extremely smart. She's very smart. I think she is, but one of the smartest politicians ever. I think the idea that she is a stupid 29 year old millennial is a false narrative. And if you think that you've played right into her hand. I mean, if she was not 29 years old, she would be the Democratic frontrunner for president. You know, a waitress turned social media celebrity is already leading the direction of the Democratic Party. I mean, you do not do that being an idiot. You just don't. The only person in politics smarter than AOC is Donald J. Trump.

Yeah, I was just gonna say, like, what. How do you see the parallel between her and Donald Trump? Because it was the same way with him.

It still is. They're the two smartest people in Washington, D.C. did you think she got to.

That point, like, overnight? Like, how? Where did she. Because she just came onto the scenes in a really short period of time. And is that a natural ability to be that persuasive? Like, where is this coming from? Obviously, you know, she. Maybe she was a waitress at just an incredible restaurant in New York City, but, like, where did it come from?

I think it came from a combination of talent. She's incredibly intuitive in terms of what she needs to say in order to get attention. It's talent with what she looks like. Because if she was a white, ugly dude, she wouldn't have the following that she did. We have to be real about. Like, we can't ignore that. Come on. We all have natural privileges. And what she looks like is one of hers. And the other was timing. She's perfectly well timed her message for her talent stack. In the state that the Democratic Party is in, where it's essentially a leaderless party, she walks in and is the benefit of applying that talent stack to this timing. So I think it's been a combination of all of those things. Just like Donald Trump was a combination of all those things, although he had a much longer game than she did. She's the benefit of social media, and she's got a good social media strategy, and she entered into the conversation when it needed a polarizing figure to counter the current president.

So you're taking the stance that this is a pretty deep stake in the ground, not a flash in the pan.

I am curious to see what she does over the next few years. We'll see. But if you look at her overall strategy, she's already being effective in the way that she wants to be effective. The Green New Deal is her wall. So I know there are people who disagree with me, but I'm very confident. The wall is not a real thing. The wall was never a real thing. The wall was a marketing tool. Donald Trump knew there was never going to be a wall across the border. He knew this. And because he knew this, he knew he would always have a rallying cry to point at the enemy. If his supporters didn't get their wall, they could always say, well, it's gonna happen. The Democrats are standing in the way. There's never going to be a wall. It's a marketing ploy. It's the same thing with a Green New Deal. AOC comes out with this ridiculous plan that we're all talking about, and she's now changed the narrative to be about which pieces of the Green New Deal are feasible and which ones aren't. And based on that, we're going to calculate it and discuss it and argue about it.

That's exactly what she wanted.

Exactly. That's exactly what she wants. And she'll get pieces of it over time and she'll always be able to look across the aisle and say, see, they said no. They said no. Which was why it was a brilliant move to make the Democrats vote on it.

That was painting them to a corner. It was actually very smart of the Republicans to do that.

Well, I would say that whole Mike Lee velociraptor crap totally played into her hands. I thought that was one of the. I understood where he was coming from, but I'm like, dude, really? Like, how do you think that's gonna make you look any better?

Well, I do think that she is here, at least for the next few election cycles. I'm curious to see how her message changes. I'm curious to see over once Donald Trump is reelected and then go by and you have, you will basically have two leaderless parties because Mike Pence isn't the incumbent. He will never be president. The Democrats will have no leader at that point.

And I think Pete Buttigieg could have been that. But I think he blew his shot. And as a result, I'm curious to see where AOC is in six years. She'll just, I think she'll just miss the caught up, cut off to run again. So she could play kingmaker at that point. And if that's the case, then she's around to stay.

What's your so going to her facade, which I agree. I mean some of the stuff that she says, it's just like nobody says that like there's an agenda behind it. So what does your crystal ball say her agenda is like what is she, what is she trying to accomplish? Political career or do you think that there's something more nefarious behind the scenes like, you know, socialism and communism?

I think.

You know, I think back to the Occupy Wall street movement and I think to.

I mean, I don't know if you ever visited any of the Occupy.

I was one right next to my office.

Okay. Well, I had so much fun going and debating those and eventually what happened? The movement kind of died and went away and then became Bernie Sanders supporters. So.

They gave way to another failed movement. And I kind of think socialism is such a tired idea. I don't fear the noise that it has in the world. Right now, because no one actually wants it. So I think the movement of capitalism, the movement of freedom is too powerful at this point in order for. And that will prevent a socialist uprising from taking hold. So my crystal ball says that AOC will continue to point her finger at enemies. She'll continue to have a wave of followers, and I think she'll continue to be impactful on the left, but her message will change. Unless, of course, we have another economic meltdown, then all bets are off. And then at that point, I have no opinion. I have no idea what happened.

All right, so let's go to your next. The next hot button, which is Andrew Yang, which I would say is.

He's been on your show. Right. I should have boycotted this. I know. Well, it's.

What, you know, it's one of those.

Before he was president, he was on your show. Yeah, before he was president, he was running for president.

No, he was actually officially running for president when he was on. But it was like recently his book came out. But, you know, it is. It's interesting to see what he's done. I think he also is maybe not taking as, you know, abrasive of the stance as aoc, but still, you know, he's a, you know, with doing the whole hologram. You know, he's going to show up to debates in a hologram or whatever. I mean, he's doing a pretty good job marketing it. Like, what do you. How do you look at Andrew Yang's philosophy, which I would say.

Is definitely part socialism, part progressive, part just accommodating the rising Y generation?

First of all, Andrew Yang says that a universal basic income is capitalism starting from, not zero. And I say no, universe, basic income is socialism with lipstick. It is not an enhanced form of capitalism. It's just a different way to redistribute from the government.

I don't care for Andrew's policies well one bit, but he's running a flawless campaign. He's running an absolutely flawless. I have to give him credit for doing an amazing job at running for president, but I don't care for him one bit. Most of you, I think he knows he's misleading people. I think he knows that he's making up problems that don't exist.

I mean, if you watched his Joe Rogan interview, he just sat there and talked about problems that are not real.

Like truckers being replaced. Truckers are actually. Their wages are going up. There's a shortage of truckers because there are many, so, so many other unskilled opportunities. There are so many low skilled jobs and so many opportunities for low skilled people that there's a shortage in truck drivers because nobody wants to work those long hours driving a truck. And so what has happened? Truck driver salaries have gone up, there's recruiting happening to get people to become truck drivers. So no, we don't have a problem in all the truck drivers going away. We have an increased demand, prices going up. And so I think he makes up problems where there are not problems to address, but he's getting a lot of attention for it.

And he's not the only one that's on that bandwagon. Like there's a lot of the Silicon Valley elites that tend to feel the same way. So when you do have that insight into technology and the speed at which things are becoming automated, I mean, the argument, I would say has some merit to it, wouldn't you think? As far as, you know, the automation of certain unskilled things. But you're just, you're just saying that the transition to that is going to take longer than people think. Like what's, like where are you coming up with just.

Yeah, I think a universal basic income, if it replaced all other government programs would be a step in the right direction. But that's not what Yang argues for. Yang is arguing for just doling out checks to everyone.

And not only is it not appropriate, it's not needed. Again, we talked about how the standard of living continues to rise and real prices continue to decline. That trend is going to only continue just like we talked about in the example of Google giving out free phones. That is going to continue to happen and it's happening in a faster and faster rate. I mean, look how new the idea of a grocery store is in our society. We take it for granted, but a grocery store has only existed for this much of our history. And we talk about food prices. Food prices are at an all time low. I can go to the grocery store and get goji berries from church China for eight bucks. Are you kidding me? It's the whole idea of I pencil, you know that famous piece about all.

Let it read that go into the pencil. Right. So no, I'm not of the opinion that a universal basic income is even necessary because we continue to have a fall in prices and standard of living.

Yeah, no, it's one of those, yeah, it's one of those things where it's hard sometimes to distinguish unless you're a professional marketer like yourself, you know, you to distinguish kind of what is, what's.

Really being said and you know it.

Makes total sense from a Donald Trump standpoint. A lot of his tactics, whether it was the debate tactics or his tweets or his, you know, punchlines.

Right.

The amazing nature in which he marketed himself and.

Right.

And one, but I look at AOC.

And some of the same things and.

You know, I would say that, you.

Know, you have some insight that most don't because you can read between the lines.

And I can see that with Andrew Yang. I think, I don't think he's as conspicuous.

I think he is, you know, using something where there is some sort of a strong, a stronghold behind his theory. Because silicon elites, they have all this concern with, you know, artificial intelligence and.

How quickly, you know, we're, you know.

Moore's Law and how this is all happening and you know, it's just getting out of control. We're gonna have to provide for people's well being.

Right.

So it's, it's a, it's a compelling narrative, but you're basically saying that it's, it's that he doesn't necessarily believe in it, it's just a narrative for him to run on.

Yeah, I mean, if you look at again, how our brains are wired, we are influenced by momentum and direction more than anything else. So the projection of where things are going in the future now you and I and everyone here listening knows that the trend of the world on a macro level is pretty damn impressive. And the things that we're just about to invent and create are that much more impressive. So in order to get attention, Andrew has to stand there and say, look, there's this thing going on that is going to replace all of the jobs and now he has to set the trend for how things are going. He talks about suicide rates going up. He doesn't mention that they're higher in the affluent than they are among those at the bottom. He just talks about the correlation between suicide rates and economic hardship. Economic hardship is at an all time low. So he is just going to talk about the paint a picture of a trend that is happening because you are likely to pay attention if you fear the future. If the future is a coming trend that is dangerous. And of course he has a terrible solution of giving out people, of giving out free money to people, which is why he's capturing attention. He's doing a wonderful job at it, but I think he is doing it intentionally misleading.

Well, society in general has been highly.

Influenced by movies and TV and what we've been told the future is. We're always looking to the Future. I've just never made the connection until now that there are these, you know, short term, short term kind of spikes and interest and intrigue. Right.

On purpose to gain attention and popularity.

Based on, you know, just how we're programmed.

How we've been. Yeah, how we've been programmed.

In a sense.

Today is the first time that a message can be delivered at scale, meaning like click of a button, you could have.

Sure, sure, sure, sure, sure. It's like viral, you know, the nature of being viral.

So because of that, it is now, we are now incentivized to do whatever gets attention on a mass scale, especially when you're doing something like running for president.

So this is new in our evolution for that to even be possible. And so that's why I think you are so interesting. Kind of a battle with the truth and a battle with reality.

Well, let's do this because this has been awesome conversation. Thank you for sharing your insight. Hopefully this is valuable to the audience.

Why don't you talk about maybe something that's a little more positive, which is.

You obviously are getting negative feedback on.

Just ideas of capitalism, which is understandable. But what are you seeing as the positive things? How are you seeing people open up.

To the ideas of freedom and entrepreneurship and the opportunities that exist and are open to, wow, we live in such an amazing time. Maybe talk about your pulse there. And if you see that growing in popularity, that perspective.

Yeah, absolutely.

If we remove the labels, if we remove the way that we define it, freedom and capitalism is more popular than ever. I mean, look at your average college graduate who is now faced with the decision of, do I get a job or do I start my own thing? Now look at, look at young people today where the most popular desired job is to be a YouTuber. Look at some of my peers who are saying, you know, what I want to do for a living is play video games on Twitch. It's like these were absurd ideas ten years ago. But because we have so many new opportunities, the opportunities for entrepreneurship are greater than they have ever been. So. And entrepreneurship requires personal responsibility. You become libertarian real quick when you're an entrepreneur because you realize you want to keep what you earn, and you only get to earn what is made on your own merit. So based on that, I'm very bullish, very.

Optimistic about the trend of young people. Yes, Allowed core is following AOC and all of their peers are making $1,000 a month from YouTube and they don't need Andrew Yang to dole out cash to them. And so because of that? I mean, do any of them want to give up those opportunities? No. It's why I don't fear when Elizabeth Warren says she wants to break up Google. It's not going to happen. They're creating too many opportunities for people. So I'm incredibly optimistic. I see the political theater going on right now as entertaining, but not a threat at all. I think the trend of capitalism, the trend of freedom is way too strong. And we continue to, I think, see that trend accelerate. If we look at a macro view, if we look at 100 years ago, if we look at 50 years ago, and I think technology is only going to accelerate that because, remember, only half the world has Internet access. There's still an entire half of the world just coming online and having access to information, of having access to opportunities.

The global marketplace is about to double.

Well, isn't SpaceX, isn't that.

That's one of their big projects?

Is that the satellite Internet and bringing.

That to Africa and India and parts where they don't have the infrastructure?

Yeah. And when that happens, you're just going to see.

A boom like we have never seen before. And that requires markets, that requires freedom, that requires capital. And so.

I think we are still on the up and up, and that is illegally continue.

So let's. And that's where, you know, the optimism part of me is really, really excited about the future, my future, my kids future. At the same time, I look at, you know, sins of the past, or maybe not sins, but things that have happened that have put, you know, just the world, in a sense, in a tough spot, whether it's, you know, the unfunded obligations that we have with the amount of debt that's out there, with, you know, Social, Social Security having major issues, pensions having major issues. But I also look at, you know, these days where you have a big percentage of the NASDAQ who, you know, is on the brink of junk status. Just looking at how capital is being raised to fund companies that aren't necessarily making a profit and the only way they can meet payroll is to continue to get rounds of funding. So how do you reconcile, you know, your optimism with, you know, just some of the real things that we're facing right now?

Yeah, that is a fantastic question. And it's for those reasons that sometimes I do look at certain companies and go, for example, right at the time that we're recording this, Zoom went public. And we're using Zoom to record this right now.

I know, like 70 bucks, didn't it go to, like, it's like 100% more than what it was initially priced at.

Yes. I don't remember the valuation, but it was stupid.

It's an awesome technology, but still, you.

Know, but it's a stupid valuation.

So I do think we are ripe right now for that to adjust. But I think we can look squarely in the face of government policy, specifically interest rates as dictated by the Federal Reserve. I know they're independent, but please, they're the fourth branch of government. Come on, let's just call it what it is.

So they manipulating interest rates. I think we all kind of agree that that has been a problem. Problem. And it's the reason why we have the asset prices that we have. And so those things have to adjust. They have to adjust. But I am bullish on the fact that when we get punched in the mouth and if we have an economic collapse that all of those opportunities get funded into the new things that have already been opened up. Again, I mentioned the number one job among children under 12. They want to be YouTubers.

So you're going to have.

I'm not suggesting that all the coders are now going to become YouTube stars. That would be a boring channel. But the reality is we're on the cusp of new waves of opportunities just starting to hit mass. And so when we have a reset or if we have a transition and it's simply going to be one era to the next era, it's what happens after every meltdown is you open up new industries that didn't exist before, contrary to what Andrew Yang would like you to believe that will happen in the next one.

Hey, do you have a theory that the greater the hardship. Right. The more you expand the possibility on the other side of the spectrum?

Right.

I think that's in personal life. I think that's in business, too. And yeah, the scars hurt, especially in the short term, or the wounds hurt in the short term. Right. But the process in which you heal, like, builds a stronger muscle to actually do more and be more. And we have some pain. I mean, there's a. There's a lot of pain. But the lessons that are going to be learned from society are going to be incredible. It may not feel like that when, you know, you're the one that's not getting your pension check.

Right.

Your Social Security check, or, you know, the cost of things have gone up or however the economy responds to it. Right. But at the same time, you look at just what good is going to come from it. Because as we mentioned in the beginning, like, people are hardwired to solve problems. Right. And to help others overcome challenges. That's the other thing too, is like, that's all Adam Smith theory of, you know, and they didn't necessarily have the word capitalism back then, but, you know, it's like people like just observe the marketplace and they've kind of like, intuitive, intuitively figure out, I'm gonna go do this, because that'll benefit that, but it'll also benefit me. Right? It's weird how we operate, but it's gonna be, as you put it at scale now.

No one grows. When times are good, you grow from pain. It's why the bailouts were so damaging. Not just because of the misallocation of resources, not just because of taxpayer cost. It was dangerous because we deprived ourselves of the beauty of pain. Pain makes us grow, it makes us better, it makes us solve bigger problems. And as a result, we've gotten so damn soft, we are so afraid of getting punched that we don't even enter the ring. So we don't even have a chance victory anymore. So the time we get punched in the mouth, you're gonna have a lot of really scared people running around who will have to learn how life works, which is exactly what should happen.

I get the benefit of working with a lot of entrepreneurs, and I did a little bit of a podcast interview tour the last couple weeks where I interviewed in person, Gary Vaynerchuk, Brian Lee, who has $3 billion companies at 47, three of them amazing, and Bedrose Coolian, the founder of Fit Body Bootcamp. All three of them are the children of immigrants, all three of them. And so I saw this as a trend come up. And so I asked him about it. And the kind of. The universal feedback among those three was came here with nothing, had to learn how to create and solve problems and work hard. People who were born here, people who have had it good since they were born, they don't have that hustle, they don't have that ability. When I go to Ukraine and speak to entrepreneurs who are first generation capitalists, they're hungry, man. Like any, any sniff of freedom, they cherish, they hung onto, they cling to, they fight for any advancement that they have from where they grew up, where their parents were oppressed by the government, where they had to. Where they had to escape tyranny.

They're ready for opportunities. And here we are wanting to go back to the old, to go back to government control like we accomplish what everybody else wants. And so we're getting soft. And so we could use a good Punch in the mouth. And it will be a welcome refreshment when it happens.

Yeah.

And it's.

It's long overdue. But everything you. Everything you're saying is, is I. I would. I would echo that. Right. And I see it in my kids. Right. And it's. You know, my wife is. She grew up in the hood of Mexico. And, you know, it's been. It's been interesting. Her brothers have moved here.

Right.

And sometimes, you know, when there's a safety net, it's amazing what people will do to not learn the lesson. Well, they'll try to. So that's the other part of human nature is even though we're compelled, right, to create value, we're compelled to solve problems. We're also compelled to be lazy sometimes. We're compelled to find shortcuts.

Store of energy. Yes.

Yeah. And that's. It's one of those, you know, other attributes of, you know, of humankind that, you know, you mean to be deliria. Because, yeah, kids these days are. But at the same time, you know, they're meant to, I don't know, just. I would say, understand how efficiency plays into solutions. And so when those times get difficult, I have a good feeling that they'll have the wherewithal to learn technology, understand technology and how that applies to whatever the challenge is at hand.

So they will have to.

There's no choice in the matter.

Capitalism. That is the beauty. So one final piece on this.

I've made the argument that the way that we, I think, can convert people who disagree with us. You asked about, you know, converting people to our side of the argument is if you remind them that capitalism is the only system in which bad ideas fail. You know, when things collapse, a lot of bad ideas will go with it. A lot of companies that raised money, as you said, and can only make payrolls by raising another round, they will fail because they didn't have value in the marketplace. You can't say capitalism is the only system in which good ideas succeed, because theoretically, you could have a government create a great solution. The chances of that happening are very, very low. But it's possible. But capitalism is the only system where bad ideas go away, and we will see that in the next crash. Unless, of course, the government gets involved again, which is, of course, antithetical to capitalism.

Well, dude, thank you for what you're doing. I mean, I think this has become kind of a calling for you. At least that's what it sounds like. And I know it's a big responsibility, but thanks for all you're doing to advocate these ideas and how can people learn more about you, follow you? I know you're really active on social media. What are the best ways?

Yeah, well.

My handle is ryandaniel moran on Instagram. My podcast is capitalism.com. but really, I just know that there's a generation of young people out there who need an outlet for entrepreneurship, and it's the only way that we're going to convert them to our side of the aisle. Somebody compared me once to if Robert Kiyosaki had a rich son, it might be me taking the torch to this generation that is so polarized on capitalism versus socialism. So I'm Ryan Danielmoran. Or just Capitalism on Instagram. And capitalism.com is where we put all our stuff.

Ryan Daniel Moran, it's been a pleasure, my friend. Thank you so much for taking the time. And we'll make sure we push all the information out to our list so we can get you some, some traction there because I know you are putting up some amazing content. And you know what I also love about you is that you, you know, you're bold and you speak, you speak your mind and you're a secret truth. And so it's inspiring. So thank you.

Appreciate it. Thanks for having me.

Foreign.

Real quick shameless plug here. If you've ever seen my company logo for capitalism.com, it's a red sea with a flame at the end. And the reason why that's the company logo is because I believe that our purpose as a company and my purpose as a leader is to light other fires. And that means creating content for entrepreneurs who go on to build great companies, working with entrepreneurs to help them break through their plateaus and to invest in companies that really have a shot of breaking out, teaching this stuff so that.

More success stories get created.

I like to light fires. That's. That's what I'm here to do. One of the ways that I do that is inside of our monthly membership, which is called called the 1%. And inside there, we send out a monthly newsletter which features case studies of success stories, what's working right now from some of the best people in the world who are doing this stuff, who are building businesses and investing the profits. And we feature business ideas that you can literally rip off and steal. We often even just throw keyword lists at you and say, go for it. Hey, we might even invest in this.

Post in the community.

You'll probably find an investor too. And the idea is to bring together investors, entrepreneurs, influencers in one place where we can light fires really, really quickly. We also have a year long curriculum that is made to help you build businesses, invest the profits, increase your profits, create the change you want to see in the world. You can't not change as a result.

Of going through this.

So you can find out more@capitalism.com if you've been listening to the podcast and you're missing community, you're missing opportunity, you're missing connection, you're missing being a part.

Of a movement that is going to make you a better entrepreneur. This is going to fix that for you.

It also gives you discounts on our events and our other products. And it's more than worth 10, $10.

For every dollar we charge.

That's my rule as an entrepreneur. I don't collect a dollar unless I know I can provide 10. And this absolutely meets that. So that's@capitalism.com the number one hope to see.