← Going Big! with Kevin Gentry
Loading summary
Transcript60 lines
- [00:00]
A
You know, in the end, what is life all about but trying to help other people? As Thomas Jefferson talked about the pursuit of happiness, well, what makes people happy? Is it having more wealth? Does that make people happy? I'm not sure. People that help other people tend to be happier and they feel more fulfilled. And so I feel more fulfilled giving away the money or buying things that are going to help other people feel better about their country or about themselves.
- [00:22]
B
Welcome to the Going Big Podcast. I'm your host, Kevin Gentry, and this is the place where we celebrate the bold moves and big ideas. Each week I sit down with inspiring leaders, entrepreneurs and change makers who are making a significant impact in their careers and in their communities. Whether you're looking to level up your leadership, pursue your passion, or just get inspired to take your next big leap, this is where those stories come to life. Now, if you're listening on iTunes, YouTube or anywhere else you tune into podcasts, be sure to hit that subscribe button so you'll never miss an episode. Now let's dive in to what it means to truly go big. Welcome to another episode of the Going Big Podcast. I'm your host, Kevin Gentry, and my guest today is David Rubenstein, who is surely one of the most influential figures in terms of global finance and business. He is the co founder and co executive chairman of of the Carlyle Group, which today is a global investment firm. And David took it from startup to a firm today that is managing hundreds of billions of dollars in assets. But David also has devoted a tremendous portion of his life, besides his business accomplishments, to really becoming one of America's most prominent champions of history, education and public service. David, through his philanthropy, has invested in preserving some of the most treasured landmarks such as the Washington Monument, the Lincoln Memorial, Thomas Jefferson's Monticello, as well as some of our most important documents such as the Declaration of Independence. David, also as a Baltimore native, is the principal owner of Major League Baseball's Baltimore Orioles, reflecting his long standing commitment to the community where he grew up and was raised. And I would also say that David, through his lifetime study, has surely spent more time and produced more in terms of understanding about how great institutions are built, how great leaders emerge, how and how nations endure. And so we've got a lot to talk about on the Going Big Podcast. David Rubenstein, welcome. It's great to have you.
- [02:53]
A
My pleasure. Thank you very much for having me.
- [02:55]
B
Well, I want to dive in right away with respect to the great documents I know that you've helped preserve, copies of the Magna Carta as well as the Declaration of Independence, the Emancipation Proclamation. We've been celebrating America's 250th anniversary. Is the Declaration of Independence the most important document in world history?
- [03:18]
A
Probably not. I would say the Magna Carta is probably more significant because it was a precursor to the Declaration. The Declaration largely applied to the United States. The Magna Carta probably applied to more than just England. But the Declaration is an extremely important document. And because it contains a sentence that is probably the greatest sentence ever written. We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they're endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That became the creed of our country. And while we had slavery when it was written, we had slavery for over 100 years afterwards. Eventually, the concept of actually making everybody equal men and women became kind of the creed of our country. And as we moved in that direction, other countries around the world adopted that sentence and began to say they wanted to have the same principles apply to their country. And as a result, that sentence and the document, therefore, is very influential. But I should point out that the United States operates not under the Declaration of Independence. We operate under the Constitution. And the Constitution, therefore, is probably a more significant legal document. But I would say it should be taken in context when you go to the National Archives. The two main documents are the Constitution and Declaration of Independence. So I wouldn't want to say one is more important than the other. One has more legal effect. One may have had more historical effect.
- [04:50]
B
Well, you've talked a lot about. I've heard you talk a lot about the Founders and how the document came together. And to some degree, Thomas Jefferson was maybe even a bit of a procrastinator in terms of having to write this thing and the sources he used. But here's a question for you. Of the five that were on the committee to draft the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson, Franklin, John Adams, Sherman and Livingston. If you could interview one of them today, what would you want to learn that we historians really don't know?
- [05:26]
A
Well, Jefferson is somebody I would like to ask, how did he manage to write that all men are created equal when he was a slave owner? And how did he respond to the criticisms that he had made of him of the fact that he had fathered at least six children with a slave? Could a slave really willingly consent to such a relationship? Jefferson never commented on the Sally Hemings relationship in his lifetime. So I'd like to ask him about the Hemings relationship. And all of the discussions that have occurred, and also why he said that in his epitaph on his tombstone, he wanted to have the Declaration of Independence, its authorship, as the most important part of his legacy, rather than being President of the United States for eight years. With Benjamin Franklin, I guess I would like to ask him how did he manage to come from such a modest background and, and become such a learned figure? He had not essentially any real education. And was it difficult for him to where, after living in England for so long and France for so long, to come back to the colonies and basically become a revolutionary, even though many people thought he would not? And for John Adams, I would like to ask him, why, as somebody who was a leader of the Revolution, did he not become more popular? How did he manage to lose his effort to get reelected? And he lost to Thomas Jefferson, his own vice president. So those are some questions I would love to ask those three individuals.
- [06:58]
B
Well, you know, you think about it, it really is fascinating. And in our lifetimes, to a large degree, the founders have been raised up pretty high. And it's in more recent times, I might suggest that some of these more probing questions have come up, like the ones you raised. But George Washington. All right, here's another one. I know you've been a big supporter of Mount Vernon and preserving all these things. If you could ask him something, what would you ask him? And I say this in the guise of you do all these interviews, you have your TV program, your podcast, if you had George Washington as a guest, what would you ask him?
- [07:33]
A
Well, there are three elements of his life. One, and the war. At what point did he think that he was likely to lose the war? And was he worried that he would likely be hung as a traitor? And his role as presiding of a Constitution at the Constitutional Convention, when he presided, did he really think the Constitution would last as long as it has? And why did he think that the Constitution as drafted, was going to work much better than the Articles of Confederation? And third, as president, why did he really want to quit relatively early into his time as president? And what did he regard as the most significant part of his presidency? And then last overall, I would like to ask him what it was like to be such a well respected, very wealthy individual, but basically owning more than 600 people, slaves during his lifetime, did he not recognize the unfairness of that?
- [08:28]
B
Well, another great president and great leader, indispensable leader for the United States, was Abraham Lincoln. Which of the two, if you had to pick the two to interview, which one would you find most interesting or. Or more consequential, whatever. If you had to choose, which one would you want to interview?
- [08:46]
A
Last night at the New York Historical Society, I interviewed Ken Burns, and I asked him, who would you regard as the greatest American? I would think he would have said Lincoln, because that's who I probably would have said. But he said, no, Washington. Washington was the indispensable person who won the Revolutionary War, presided over the country's Constitutional Convention, and. And presided as our first president. I would have said Lincoln because Lincoln held the country together and Lincoln ultimately freed the slaves. But if I had a chance to interview Lincoln, who would probably be my view as the greatest American, I would like to ask him why he felt it was so important to hold the Union together. Because if the Union had separated, he would still be president of the northern states, and he wouldn't have had to fight a war in which 700,000Americans died. And secondly, does he regret not issuing the Emancipation Proclamation earlier? He didn't issue it until January 1st of 1863, halfway into his presidency. And I just wonder if he regrets not having done it earlier.
- [09:49]
B
Well, nobody's perfect. But what do you think we misunderstand most about Lincoln's greatness?
- [09:58]
A
Well, with respect to Lincoln, I think people realize one of the great virtues he has, which is humility. He didn't brag and said, look, I wrote the Gettysburg Address all by myself, which is the best 277 words to describe what America is all about. He did it by himself. He didn't brag about it. He didn't brag about issuing the Emancipation Proclamation, nor did he brag about the fact that the war was won under his direction. So I admire greatly his humility. And in the face of some very difficult situations. Remember, he'd lost two children, one at the White House and one before he went to the White House. Very complicated marriage to Mary Todd Lincoln, and he didn't have the support of so many people in the country. Even people in the north thought he was unqualified to be president. He was not sophisticated enough, and he overcame all of those circumstances to become, in my view, one of the greatest Americans we ever had.
- [10:53]
B
There seems to be. People often say, maybe it's uniquely American, but certainly an element of our history is that many ordinary people go on to do extraordinary things. Washington grew up fairly ordinary as a child. Young man. Lincoln, too. Do you think that's an exceptionable part about America or just part of our history?
- [11:14]
A
Well, if you go back and look at great people, rarely are the people who are great in the first third of their lives, people who later in the second, third, third, become significant. You know, many of our presidents were not very significant, in fact, when they were young. I can only think of one person who was President of the United States about whom it would have been said in his first 20 or 25 years he should be president or could be, and that was Bill Clinton. He was a Rhodes scholar and a very talented student. But most people who become President of the United States kind of meandered through their first third of their life and. And then through a lot of fortunate circumstances, got to be in a position to run for president and got to be president. So it is interesting how the people who are often the stars early on don't become the stars later. So you might think back to your own high school class. I don't know who your high school class superstars were or when you're in college class, but whoever was the president of student government, the all American athlete, the Rhodes scholar, the great national honor scholar in their class, those people rarely amounted to many things. In my observation, the people that really change the world are people who persist through the first third of life, overcoming a lot of challenges and obstacles, and then because of that resistance to challenges and obstacles, strengthen themselves to the point where in the second third of the life and third, third become real leaders.
- [12:34]
B
Well, thank you. And this is really what I was referencing in the introduction. You've done so much study of this and you've got. I got this great book that you wrote several years ago about how to invest. And you talk about also the extraordinary importance of the CEO about leadership. A couple of things to touch on, but let's say it's 1776 and George Washington walks into Carlisle. You're there. Would you invest in this guy? He has very little prospects. He has no army. He's up against the mightiest force in the world. The government really doesn't support him very well. I mean, how would you size him up at that point?
- [13:14]
A
Well, he came from a relatively established family and was somewhat patrician. And very often patricians don't turn out to have the common touch you might want in a great leader, I should say, as investing in him. He was not a very good business person. He tried in many ventures before and after. President of. The President of the United States and. And virtually none of them worked out. So I would say he's a person who was admired by his colleagues, but he was a bit standoffish, not a hail fellow, well met. He Was not educated. He barely went to school, really had tutors, but never went to college or anything like that. He would probably be somebody I would say I'd like to have as a spokesman, perhaps for my organization, but I'm not sure I'd want to have him running it.
- [14:02]
B
All right, well, some related questions. Was the American Revolution the best startup in history?
- [14:11]
A
Well, the American Revolution produced a country which 250 years later became the most powerful country on the face of the earth. Militarily, culturally, politically, any way you can measure it. Since, certainly Since World War I and obviously since World War II, the United States has dominated the world in ways that very few countries have dominated the world. So it was an incredible startup. But none of the founding fathers, if asked at the time, will the United States dominate the world over the next 250 years? Virtually none of them would have thought they were happy to have the country survive. In fact, Thomas Jefferson didn't think it would last more than 15 years. So I would say it is a great startup, but it took a long time to be realized. You know, when you make investments, you usually want to see the startup over five or 10 or 15 years, give a return. This is a, like a 250 year return. The return's very good, but it took a while.
- [15:09]
B
All right, well, this is fine. Okay, so let's say you've put together an investment memo. What would you have noted was the biggest risk issue? If you were looking at it at the time, the country at the time,
- [15:18]
A
the biggest risk was that the country had slavery. And whether a country that had two and a half million whites and a half a million slaves could really exist is an issue. Secondly, the country was only on the eastern seaboard, and therefore it didn't control land west of the Adirondacks, let's say, or Appalachian area. Third, there were people who were really not in favor of the United States really surviving. Remember? Well, we had challenges from other governments. The English, actually, in the War of 1812, came back and tried to recapture the United States. At some point in time, we thought that the French and maybe the Spanish would try to be enemies of ours. And we had problems with, in Mexico, with the Mexican government trying to take large parts of what later became the United States. So it wasn't obvious to anybody in 1776 the United States was going to be what it became. Nobody would have thought that.
- [16:15]
B
All right, well, then fast forward to today. Let's say America is coming to you just now. What would you take? Would you look at it as A good investment today, looking forward into the future.
- [16:27]
A
Of course, it depends on your rate of return and your holding period. If you're going to hold on for 250 years more, it might be difficult to think that a civilization that was so dominant for 250 years can still be as dominant 250 years from now. Secondly, there's no doubt we have challenges in the country today that would probably impair our ability to be a great country in 250 years unless we make changes. We have a population that's not really growing very much. We don't have as much immigration, which has been a strong part of our population over the years. We also have a very large amount of debt that has to be dealt with at some point. And. And we also have to recognize that other countries are growing faster and may be willing to work harder than we are. So the United States is a place that Warren Buffett has said, nobody's ever made any money betting against the United States. And I wouldn't bet against the United States. But also, it's hard to project 250 years into the future in my likely lifetime over the next 10, 20 years or so, I think the United States will still be a dominant, important country. There's no doubt that China and India, among other countries, will rival us with for global leadership.
- [17:37]
B
What concerns you most today, if I could put you on the spot, relative to thinking through the framework of, as an investment, Is it the debt? Is it the competition of China? Is it even to some degree, I might say some changes with respect to how we view the role of government in terms of free speech, free expression. There's a lot of stuff going on today. We've weathered a lot over the years. But what from, from an investment risk standpoint, worries you the most?
- [18:07]
A
Well, there's no doubt that that is a problem. The growing unfunded liabilities with Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid. There's no doubt that China is a more significant force than it was when Richard Nixon went there in 1972. There's no doubt that the country, I would say, has population issues. We're an aging population. But to me, the greatest problem the country faces is ourselves. There's a famous cartoon where somebody looks in the mirror and says, I've seen the enemy, and the enemy is us. And by that I mean that right now, the country is fairly bitterly divided, not quite as divided as we were in the Civil War, divided between the people that believe that the United States should be doing things that eliminate diversity, to eliminate all kinds of Sensitivities for people that may not be looking like you and me. There's a division that is right down the middle. And I'm afraid that this is keeping us from being as strong as we'd like. I wish the country had more bipartisanship rather than partisanship. For the last 11 years, I've hosted a dinner for members of Congress once a month where I ask members of Congress to come sit with people from the opposite party and try to educate them about American history by having a great author. There's. And people like it, and members love it because they say they can be free there to talk to people from the opposite party. But when it's publicly exposed, they are really not able to do that because Democrats and Republicans are not supposed to socialize very much. And it's also a factor that to raise money to stay in politics, you have to appear to appeal to the far left or the far right. If you go to raise money and say, I'm going to be right down the middle and I'll just have to decide each case on its own merits and you're not going to raise very
- [19:51]
B
much money, well, good for you for doing that. But let's leave it on an even more positive note. What are you the most optimistic about from that same framework for the future for us?
- [20:02]
A
The thing I'm most optimistic about the United States is that we have a reasonably educated population. Not perfectly so. We still have 18% of our population that's functionally illiterate, but a reasonably educated population. We have a strong immigration base. And I think the strong that a lot of the United States success over the years have been brought about because of immigrants. I hope we can have more. Third, we have very good educational institutions. I think the best educational, certainly higher educational institutions in the world. We have fourth, a very strong entrepreneurship culture. Five, we have the rule of law, which has been very important. And I think the result of that is that the United States is a more stable organization, stable country than many of our peers might be around the world. And last, I would say the United States has a certain sense of manifest destiny. That was a phrase from 100 plus years ago. But there's a sense the United States is trying to do something important on the face of the earth. And I think that is imbued in a lot of the people who populate our country, that we're really here to do something meaningful and significant. And I think that drives people and that's one of our strengths.
- [21:11]
B
Okay, I'm going to put you on the spot, a little bit on this one. Who are the great patriots? I mean, you're looking back at Jefferson or Washington, and then you talked about Lincoln. But are there some great patriots today that we should be encouraged by?
- [21:24]
A
Well, there are a lot of great patriots. Let me just mention a few people that I particularly admire. One is Admiral William McRaven. He led the special operations forces that captured Osama bin Laden. It wasn't an easy mission, but he did that. A person in my firm I greatly admire, as well as Admiral James Stavridis, who was the Supreme Allied Commander and did an incredible job of upholding NATO and making NATO become very strong. And he was also, as an admiral of the leader of the Southern Command at one point. So he's an incredible leader and somebody I admire as a great patriot. There are a lot of people in politics that I admire as great patriots as well. But I would say among the most of the people that I've, not counting presidents, but of all the people that I've met over the years, probably one of the most impressive people is James A. Baker iii. He was a partner in my firm for another year, a number of years, chief of staff to President Reagan, also Secretary of treasury under President Reagan, Secretary of State under President Bush. And he was the gold standard in those positions. And now he's now 96 years old and still going strong for 96 years old. But he's somebody I think was a great patriot in terms of what he did to help our country.
- [22:43]
B
All right, well, this is terrific. I'd like to dig into this even a little bit more. And it's again, you got the frameworks of history, the frameworks of investment, but also about how you evaluate leadership. So now take a little bit different turn. What did Jimmy Carter see in you that maybe you didn't even see when you went to work for him at the White House?
- [23:05]
A
Well, I have to be very honest. Jimmy Carter was going to be the nominee of the party in 1976. He finally had some money to hire more staff. So the person who was his top policy advisor, Stuart Eisenstadt, had the authority to go hire more people. I was working on Capitol Hill. He interviewed me. I got an offer to go work in the general election campaign for Carter. I never met Carter during the campaign. Also, Carter was 34 points ahead of Gerald Ford when I started, and Carter won the election by only one point. So it's not as if my contribution was probably valued very much by him. I was in the White House because my boss became the domestic advisor, and I was his deputy. But I was three weeks into the White House before I even met Carter. I never met him, so I'm not sure he actually thought I was so wonderful. But in the end, I had a reputation then for being a hard worker. I wasn't married, I had no kids, and basically I worked around the clock. I didn't take a day off for four years. And I got to know the president's positions as well as anybody. And so I tried to make myself indispensable in the sense that people would rely on me for facts about what Carter believed in or what Carter was going to do. And I tried to take responsibility for certain areas others hadn't really wanted to get involved with. So I'm not sure Carter would say he loved me, but I think he tolerated me. I'm not sure he loved that many people that were working for him, but he tolerated us.
- [24:24]
B
Well, okay, so when you evaluate leadership, again, some of these perspectives are really interesting. Do you look for things like grit and dedication and humility, or is there a spark, maybe, that you see?
- [24:41]
A
Well, when I'm looking for people to see if they're great leaders, I want people that have a certain amount of self confidence, but not arrogance. I'm looking for people that have a certain amount of humility, though they recognize that if they're overly humble, people may not follow them. I'm looking for people that have a sense of where they want to take a given organization or a country, people that have a vision of where they want to go. I'm looking for people that know how to communicate with their subordinates, their followers. You can't be a great leader if you don't have followers. And some people don't know how to communicate an effective way with their followers, and therefore they don't get very many followers. So I'm looking for somebody who knows how to communicate as well. I'm looking for somebody that wants to do something more important than promote himself or herself, but has a greater view on accomplishing something for the greater good, let's say an organization or the country. So I'm looking for different kind of skill sets. You don't have to be the most brilliant person to be greatest leader. You don't have to be the greatest talker of all time, the greatest writer of all time. We need to have a certain sense of why you're here on the face of the earth, what you're trying to do, and why what you're trying to do is worth getting other people to follow you. Some people have that skill set, some people do not.
- [25:47]
B
All right, well, I have lived in Virginia all my life. I happen to be a big fan of our former governor, Glenn Youngkin, who I didn't know until he ran for governor, but he spent a long time at Carlisle. What do you remember that you saw in him in terms of leadership potential?
- [26:04]
A
Glenn was a high school basketball star, recruited to play at Duke, but told he wouldn't get into the game so he would be a reserve. So he went to Rice. Didn't get in the games at Rice either, but he became the captain of the team, went to Harvard Business school, went to McKinsey. I hired him from McKinsey about 30 years ago. the time, I thought he was a very personable, very intelligent person who had great leadership skills. And he rose at Carlisle to be our co president and co chief executive. What I saw in him was a willingness to listen to other people, a modesty. Compared to his skill set. He could have been more arrogant. I saw in him somebody that really had a hard work quotient, a very good work quotient, somebody who was a very good family man, four children and a loving relationship with his wife. A very deeply religious person. I saw the kind of qualities that I think anybody would admire in somebody like that. And I would say if Glenn ever decides to run for president, I'd say it'd be hard to find somebody more qualified or more, I would say, capable of doing that job.
- [27:06]
B
Well, what if, when you were interviewing him out of Harvard Business School and you'd asked him, what do you want to do 25 years from now? And he said, I want to run for governor of Virginia, would you have believed him?
- [27:17]
A
I would have said, you're delusional. In fact, when he did say he left, was leaving Carlisle to run for governor, I said, glenn, you have no chance of getting elected governor. The state is more liberal than you are. Democrats are gonna elect it. You're not a Republican. You've never been in politics, you're not well known, you don't have a big brand name. It's not gonna work. And you're coming from private equity, which is not all that popular. So that's what I told him. I said, glenn, you have no chance. And of course, he, fortunately, from his point of view, did not listen to me.
- [27:45]
B
Well, I'll just confess as part of this podcast right now, that In August of 2021, Glenn Youngkin, who I still did not know very well, asked if my wife and I would host A fundraiser for him. And I said. And I hung up the phone and said to my wife, oh, I cannot believe what I just did. People are gonna think we're losers. I mean, all these Republicans we do things for, they lose. And my wife said, well, first of all, you said you were gonna do it. And second of all, I think he can win. And so I really grew to appreciate him over time. But it's amazing stuff. Well, you mentioned James Baker, other people like that. What do we generally miss, in your judgment, as we try to analyze future leaders that maybe you've, over time, developed?
- [28:30]
A
And see, I think really good leaders are secure, not insecure. And Jim Baker surrounded himself with a lot of very high powered, very smart people. He wasn't insecure, thinking they might overshadow him or they might say, well, they're the real geniuses behind him. He was very secure in his knowledge of what he could do and not do. And I think he was very admirable in the sense that he would surround himself with very good people, people who went on to do great things in life. I also think he was a person who knew how to get along with people and how to motivate people. The trick in leadership is getting people to do what you want, and you have to know how to motivate people. And he had a great way of doing that. So in the 15 years that he was associated with Carlyle, I could see up close why he was so successful. He had a great sense of humor, he was very smart, knew how to get along with people, and knew how to motivate people. And he wasn't insecure about having really smart people around him.
- [29:31]
B
These are some great insights. And I want to move on to a different topic, but for anyone listening who really wants to understand how they might be a better leader or a better person, we'll even say, or how they might size up leadership better. Do you have any recommendations in terms of even resources or. Or biographies of people to study or things that just over time you've accumulated in terms of this accumulated wisdom?
- [29:58]
A
There are a lot of great biographies of great leaders. George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, others who've been great leaders in our country's history, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Teddy Roosevelt. I would read some of those biographies. I'd read biographies of people who weren't presidents, but it may have been business leaders, educational leaders, cultural leaders, and try to absorb some of the lessons that they tried to distill to others. Also try to make your own belief, develop your own sense of what your skill set Is everybody's not a brilliant person. Everybody's not a great natural speaker or writer. But figure out what your strengths are, how you can work on what might be some of your relative weaknesses, and try to always think about what is gonna motivate other people to wanna follow you and why what you're doing is gonna really do something better for the organization or the country that you're involved with. And don't focus only on how much glory you might get.
- [30:52]
B
All right, thank you. And some other questions I think relevant to this, but also to today. A lot of young people in America today are a bit disillusioned. They look at student debt and housing costs and others. I hear our own kids say they think like the stock market is rigged or something like that. It is. There are things that they just can't quite figure out as to how wealth is created. Particularly now with all the stuff coming as a result of artificial intelligence. What might you say to a young person today who doesn't quite grasp American capitalism?
- [31:30]
A
Well, the country has had a capitalism system pretty much from its start. Capitalism has its flaws. It produces income inequality. It really doesn't necessarily make everybody strong enough to rise to the top. But capitalism, as Winston Churchill said about democracy, is the worst form of economic construct, except every other one. Every other system that has developed over the years, socialism or communism or things like that have not worked as well to create as much wealth for people, as much happiness for people. So I would say while the system isn't perfect, it's a better system than anybody else has ever developed. And that while it might seem difficult now to deal with the job market because artificial intelligence might be squeezing out some careers or squeezing out some jobs, in the end, new technological developments and progress as it occurs and has generally led to more jobs and more wealth and more opportunities. So I wouldn't be discouraged for young people about inability to maybe get a job right away or get the exact job they want. But what you should do is find something that you're interested in and experiment for as long as you can to find a job that really fulfills you. You know, life is very short, and you don't want to go through life doing something you can't stand or that you regard as drudgery. Find something you're good at, you're interested in, and then pursue it. And ultimately I think you'll be happier and more successful.
- [32:57]
B
Well, talking about your philanthropy, it's a perfect segue. Among the many things that you have done is you have purchased these rare documents now, when you're giving these massive gifts to the Washington Monument and Lincoln Memorial, these institutions of higher education, we can see it, but with these rare documents, are you taking it out of the public view? Is there a criticism that what's happening when you buy a rare copy of the Magna Carta or the Declaration of Independence?
- [33:29]
A
All the historic documents I have are on display at public places. The Magna Carta at the National Archives, for example. I have nothing in my house or any home I have because I want people to see it. And the reason is this. I. I have a view that when you see historic documents, you're more likely today to understand the history, more likely to read about it, more likely to feel educated about it. If you were just to see it on a computer slide of what the Declaration says, it's not going to be as meaningful. Maybe 100 years from today, 200 years from today, seeing something on the computer slide will be the same as seeing the historic document. But that's not the case today. So what I do is I buy these documents, put them on display where people can see them, and hopefully learn more about these documents. That's my purpose. So that's how I kind of think I can justify doing this. But in the end, I'm just a temporary custodian. Eventually somebody else will own these documents. Hopefully, it'll do the same thing I'm doing, putting them on display.
- [34:26]
B
Well, I've got some more questions about your philanthropy. I mean, given all that you've created in your life through Carlisle and the resources that you've been able to accumulate, why did you choose to focus on philanthropy? And why in philanthropy did you choose to focus on historical preservation, if that's the way you wanted? If we can describe it that way?
- [34:48]
A
Well, with respect to philanthropy, I grew up in very modest circumstances, so I really wasn't growing up in a tradition of great philanthropy. But when I made a fair amount of money by normal human standards, not by the Elon Musk standards, which are gargantuan, but by normal human standards, I realized that I could be, you know, spend all the money and have lots of homes and so forth. But I didn't think that was as fulfilling or as justified in terms of what I think is appropriate for somebody like me to do. So I looked for various philanthropic things to do, and I got involved, as other people do, with educational institutions which gave me scholarships. I got involved with, you know, things in the Washington area where I've been involved, and particularly historic buildings and so forth. But all of this is really designed to kind of give back to the country and to say thank you for enabling somebody of modest means to rise up and to be able to help the country and benefit from the country. So it's really a thank you to the country. That's why I'm doing it. And I hope other people will do the same kind of things. I was one of the original signers of the Giving pledge. There were 40 of us in the beginning. There are probably 250 of us now who agreed to give away at least half of our net worth.
- [35:56]
B
And.
- [35:57]
A
And I will give away a lot more than that. And I guess my view is I don't want to be buried being that wealthy because I'm wealthy. What good is that going to do me to be buried with a lot of wealth? I want to see it being used while I'm alive. And hopefully, if I live a long enough time period of time, I can see more of what I've been interested in supporting. And that's one of the things that motivates me to keep going.
- [36:19]
B
Well, you talked earlier about we should all try to find our unique contribution, our gift. Years ago, I worked with a philanthropist who worked together on just a very significant, major partnership that he wanted that was very important to him, took a long time to come to, but he told me just before he passed away that that gift was more meaningful in his life than the business he had built, which was quite considerable and quite consequential. Tell us what kind of sense of meaning and purpose you get out of what you've chosen to do in your philanthropy.
- [36:54]
A
Well, when I built Carlisle, my mother, who was not an educated person, didn't have any real appreciation of money, was happy, I guess. But she actually said, you're doing something useful with her life. When I started giving away large sums of money, so I made. You know, making your mother proud is one of the great things in life. And so my mother took a greater sense of what I was doing with my life than just by making money. And so that was important way for me to look at it. I also think that in the end, what is life all about but trying to help other people? As Thomas Jefferson talked about the pursuit of happiness, well, what makes people happy? Is it having more wealth? Does that make people happy? I'm not sure. Many of the most tortured souls I know are very, very wealthy. People that help other people tend to be happier and they feel more fulfilled. And so I feel more fulfilled. But giving away the money or buying things that are going to help Other people feel better about their country or about themselves, or giving scholarships where this is the greatest way to help young people, which is through scholarships. I got scholarships when I was in college and law school, and I give away a lot of my money on scholarships now.
- [37:59]
B
On Tyler Cowan's podcast a while back, you said that at Carlisle you weren't the investor as much as you were the recruiter and the strategist and the builder. You have a family office, so presumably you're not directing the investing there. But If I ask ChatGPT who is David Rubenstein, it tells me that you're one of the greatest investors of all time. So you've got this great book about how to invest. What is your personal brand? How do you think you should be defined at this point, particularly in your life?
- [38:36]
A
Well, ChatGPT has its failings and that description of me would be a perfect example of it. When I built Carlyle, I did not have investment background. I really never was that interested in money growing up. I just didn't think it was something that I cared about all that much. I didn't come from wealth, I didn't aspire to have wealth. When I started a company, it took off and we did well, but I wasn't the investor. I sat on the investment committees, but I had partners who had MBAs from really good business schools, Harvard or University of Chicago, and they were day to day doing the investing while I was recruiting people, raising the money, being the face of the firm. So I had a different role, and that was the role that I was probably more qualified for because I really hadn't had a big investment background. I'd really never been an investor. So I think it just shows that what you should do is try to take advantage of your skill set and help an organization, if you can, with what you're good at and let other people be good at what they're doing. Well.
- [39:35]
B
All right. Well, as I bring it to a close, I have these two last questions. First. So you've spent your life evaluating great businesses. You've been evaluating leaders, people who have leadership ability, institutions. If a young David Rubenstein walked into your office today, what advice would you give him to now lead that life of purpose and meaning?
- [40:04]
A
I would tell that person to experiment with many different kinds of careers or professions because you need to find something you really enjoy. Nobody ever created great success for themselves or happiness doing something they really don't like. If you're going to be successful at something, you have to enjoy it and, and it might take you four or five jobs to find something you're really good at. So experiment. Secondly, worry about what makes you happy. Not necessarily your parents or other people. You have to find something that makes you fulfilled. Third, I would tell people that they're going to be much more fulfilled in life if they ultimately find a way to give back to society and not just worry about how big their house is or how big their yacht might be. Those are things that are very ephemeral and are not really going to produce a lot of happiness.
- [40:49]
B
So that's a great way to end because this is the Going Big Podcast about casting a big bold vision, doing big consequential things. I think we can all agree that you have achieved that in multiple ways in your life. So what advice would you give to any of us about how we should think about going big relative to all that you just said earlier?
- [41:08]
A
Find something that means something to you. Find something that you feel that when you're obituary is written, you would like that to be in the first sentence of the obituary. Joe Blow did this with his life. Isn't that wonderful? And then try to pursue that by giving your time as well as your resources. I like to remind people that philanthropy is derived from an ancient Greek word that means loving humanity. It doesn't mean rich people writing checks. And you can love humanity with the most valuable thing you have, which is your time. You can never get more time. You can get more money. So always get involved with your time and give your time in a way that you feel is justified and that you feel will make a difference. And that's how I would look at it in my advice.
- [41:54]
B
Wow. What a great way to close this out. David Rubenstein, this has been a real pleasure today. Thank you for joining us.
- [41:59]
A
My pleasure. Thank you for having me.
- [42:02]
B
Thanks for tuning in to the Going Big podcast. I hope to today's conversation left you feeling energized and ready to tackle your biggest goals. Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a review on iTunes, YouTube or wherever you listen to podcasts. It really helps spread the word and it gets these inspiring stories out to more people. You can also find more content, resources and updates at our website, goingbigpodcast.com Remember, the only limits are the ones you don't challenge. The limits that you impose on yourself. Keep pushing, keep growing, and above all, keep going big. See you next time on the Going Big Podcast.