← Slate Money
Slate Money
What’s A.I. Doing to Our Energy Bills?
00:53:55
Data centers are driving up energy prices, mobile homes might become more affordable, and…what’s up with the South Korean stock market?
Loading summary
Transcript197 lines
- [00:09]
A
Hello and welcome to Sleep Money, your guide to the business and finance news of the week. I'm Felix Hammond of Bloomberg. I'm here with Emily Peckifaxios.
- [00:20]
B
Hello.
- [00:21]
A
And Elizabeth Spires of the New York Times.
- [00:23]
C
Hello.
- [00:24]
A
And we have news. It is not a slow summer week. It is all manner of stuff going on because there's a housing bill that got passed and we're going to talk about about that. There is a executive order by the governor of New York banning data centers, data center construction. We're going to talk about that. There is a massive arbitrage in the price of SK Hynix shares, depending on whether they're in New York or Seoul. We're going to talk about that. We have a Slate plus segment on bank earnings, which is actually weirdly also a Slate plus segment on Freedom Gas. So you should be a Slate plus member to listen to that. It's a fun show. Stay tuned. It's all coming up on Slate Money.
- [01:17]
B
Ready to experience something new? Alltrails helps you find your next hike, whether you're looking for something nearby or planning a trip.
- [01:27]
C
Read reviews from real people like you
- [01:29]
B
to choose your trail and know what to expect. You can also download the map in case service gets spotty. Plan and experience your next hike with Alltrails, the app for exploring the outdoors. Download it today and find your outside. Slate Money is brought to you by Charles Schwab. Decisions made in Washington can affect your portfolio every day, but what policy changes should investors be watching? Listen to Washington Wise, an original podcast for investors from Charles Schwab to hear the stories making news in Washington right now. Host Mike Townsend, Charles Schwab's managing director for legislative and regulatory affairs, takes a nonpartisan look at the stories that matter most to investors, including policy initiatives for retirement, savings, taxes and trade, inflation concerns, the Federal Reserve, and how regulatory developments can affect companies, sectors and even the entire market. Mike and his guests offer their perspective on how policy changes could affect what you do with your portfolio. Download the latest episode and follow@schwab.com WashingtonWise or wherever you listen.
- [02:45]
A
So let's start with data centers because my home state governor, who's also both of your home state governors, because we all three live in New York State, just signed a Belinta law saying that no data centers can be built in New York State for the next year. Is that correct? Emily, you're looking.
- [03:06]
B
Was it a bill? No, it's an executive order.
- [03:09]
A
Oh, sorry, my bad. She just signed an executive order she didn't even need the new York State assembly to do this. She just unilaterally banned data center construction in New York State for the next year. And this is one of the few things that a politician can do these days that is popular among both Democrats and Republicans. It has bipartisan appeal because the electricity bill is too damn high. And we're all blaming data centers for the fact that electricity bill has gone up and therefore if we ban data centers, we can fight back at Sam
- [03:46]
C
Altman I'm going to push back a little bit more there settle than that. First of all, it's a moratorium of up to one year while a regulatory framework is developed. And this kind of stuff that they're looking to do is pretty reasonable. It's, you know, they want to assess the data center energy demand, water and use quality, air quality and so on. And also they want some community buy in which if you are a politician in the current environment, when 70% of people heavily oppose data centers, that's just a common sense thing to do. Even if you're a Republican. Like, you understand that this is what I was saying.
- [04:19]
A
I mean, totally. This is electorally popular. And in a democracy things happen that are popular.
- [04:26]
C
It's also common sense though. Wouldn't you want to understand the environmental and cost impacts before you issue regulatory permits? There's a business case for doing it too. You're not issuing permits without fully understanding the cost in addition to, you know, the benefits of having them.
- [04:43]
A
So yeah, like environmental review is one of those things that sounds perfectly reasonable but is generally used in the real world as a way of stopping things from happening. It's very sort of NIMBY coded in its own way. I'm not saying that the environment doesn't matter, but it's also not as though environmental review just didn't exist hereunto.
- [05:06]
B
You know, I think this is beyond environmental review. I listened to Governor Hochul on the Odd Lots podcast this morning. She talked about basically if these big data centers come in, they have to find a way to get electricity. It's not an automatic green flag for them to just use electricity that's currently available. Like they need to have a plan to either help bring in their own supply or some kind of concessions, some kind of pay for so the community's electric costs don't go up. Because that's like the top concern.
- [05:37]
C
Yeah, we don't want it to strain the grid, especially whenever New York needs more investment in, you know, reinforcing what we already have.
- [05:45]
A
Right. So this is the big picture, which is that the Grid expands constantly but slowly. And it is normally, you know, roughly just a tiny bit bigger than peak demand. And then as long as that's the case, everything is happy. What has happened with the advent of data centers is that demand has risen much more quickly than we can remember in recent decades. There's been a much faster increase in demand than there has been in supply. You can't increase supply that quickly. And so the grids everywhere are strained and that is causing electricity bills to rise. And I am totally aligned with Governor Hochul in this idea that if you want to build a data center, you don't want to just plug that into the mains, you know, and plug it into the grid. What's great is if you can be like, you know, I'm going to recommission a nuclear power plant. We have talked about doing this in New York State. It is going to power my data center. It's not even going to be connected to the grid. It's just going to be like a little off the grid combo of data center and power plant and they can feed each other and the rest of us are unaffected. And it shouldn't affect electricity bills. But ultimately what it does do is it increases the amount of electricity being produced in the state. And that's a good thing because we want more power and especially we want more green power, which nuclear is. So that part of can you please not build data centers on the expectation you can just plug them into the grid and get all the electricity you need? I think that is eminently sensible.
- [07:16]
B
Yeah. And also another thing that I think maybe is getting lost. Data centers have enormous power demands and that's pushing up electricity prices like everywhere in the country. And data centers are kind of annoying because they don't employ that many people. Hochul made this point, everyone's made this point. Like New York State has a deal with micro on to come here. But the idea there is like thousands of jobs will come too. But with data centers, the jobs are like construction jobs. And once the things are up and running, they're just sucking down electricity and they're not paying back any money to very many employees or whatever. So we know that. But even before this AI boom we're seeing now, and the data center construction boom we're seeing now, we had an electricity shortfall in the United States. Like I, I did a what next TBD a couple of years ago about problems with the overall grid in the US which is sort of like aging. It's not opt. It could be greener. Like there's all kinds of problems going into this. So, like, I don't know, maybe there's a bright side here that because there's so much data center driven demand and so many complaints that, like, maybe we'll see some grid modernization and greening. Despite the White House best efforts right now, even though they tried to stop this, wind farms, the offshore wind farms, other projects like they, they appear to be still moving forward because of this issue. Like, because the demand is so great.
- [08:35]
A
Yeah. And one of the things I just want to under here is that, yes, precisely because the grid was already kind of stretched before this data center thing happened, the amount of marginal extra power demand that you need from data centers in order to send prices up a lot is actually quite low. Data centers are not, are still not consuming a particularly large proportion of all electricity produced in the country. But you only need them to consume a small extra amount of electricity in the grand scheme of things, in order for their effect on prices to be enormous. Because, like, once you reach, you know, 100% of capacity, then things start breaking and prices have to go up a lot in order to persuade various other, you know, manufacturers or whoever to use less, because that's the only thing you can do. You need prices to rise so much that someone somewhere uses less electricity.
- [09:28]
B
Supply and demand is so fun.
- [09:31]
C
I mean, to that point, just to put some numbers behind that, PJM is estimating that prices are going to be up. They're going to add $16.4 billion in costs to ratepayers based on what, an auction Just. They just paid $325 per megawatt for electricity in an auction.
- [09:49]
A
And that's up per megawatt day? Not per megawatt.
- [09:52]
C
Yeah, megawatt day, up from $28.92 a couple years ago. And so they're estimating that the increase for next year for ratepayers will be 16.4 billion total. And that does include, you know, industrial ratepayers, too. But data centers account for 6.3 billion of that.
- [10:10]
A
Right. And we remember these are increases. These are, you know, increases over and above the large amounts of spending. And they're, you know, distributed across 100 million people. And in terms of how much that turns out to. In terms of how much does my electricity bill rise? It's not that easy to calculate, but there is definitely, depending on where you live, there has been a substantial increase in electricity bills, especially in New York State. Less so in places like Texas and Oklahoma, where there's a lot of renewable energy coming on stream, both solar and wind. And I think that the one bright spark here, just to enter, just to bring China into the conversation one way and we're going to start bringing it in in another way in a minute. But the one bright spark here is that thanks to incredible productivity advance in solar panel manufacturing in China, the cost of solar energy is now mind blowingly cheap. And it is an incredibly useful and cheap way of increasing capacity, increasing the amount of electricity in the country. And solar farms are being built out all over the place. You know, I go back and forth on rooftop solar. I've been a little bit skeptical that rooftop solar can help, but maybe it can. But certainly solar farms are huge and they aren't great baseline electricity because at night they don't produce a lot of electricity. But battery technology is coming along as well. So you know, China is helping us out here in terms of being able to provide cheap electricity to America by the means of solar panels. China is also the main reason why opponents of this Hokule bill are opposing this Hokul bill. They're basically saying, look, electricity is all well and good, but we are in a sort of existential fight with China for control of the AI. Future data centers are basically just another way of saying AI. And if we can't have American data centers, that means we can't have American AI. Everyone's going to start using Chinese AI, which is already like a fifth of the price of American AI. If you use like the Chinese models, they cost $5 per whatever, whereas the Chinese Americans cost 25. What China is going to wind up doing to AI what it has already done with electric vehicles, which is dominate the entire market. And we don'. Want that.
- [12:26]
B
Wait, can, before we talk about China, can we just go back like a few ticks to the issue of electricity costs? I feel like you're being a little dismissive of what's happened to Americans electric bills over the past couple of years. Speaking personally, my electric Bill is up 50% over the past 10 years, which is like a lot of money.
- [12:47]
A
Isn't that pretty much in line with inflation?
- [12:49]
B
I don't think so. I can check, but no, my mortgage pay, I mean, no, people's electric bills are up by a significant amount around the country. And I think if you live in New York City, you don't notice it as much because New York City electric bills are a joke. I mean, as far as I remember, like you live in these tiny apartments and it doesn't cost that much to power them. But if we ask Say, like, the listeners to write in and tell us about their electric bills. I bet they're pretty shocking.
- [13:17]
A
No, I definitely agree that, like, the number one issue in the midterm elections and in, like, this democracy or semblance of democracy that we live in is affordability. And utility bills are part of the affordability spectrum. And ultimately, electricity is a form of energy. A lot of it still, especially in New York, is made by burning hydrocarbons. And one of the reasons why electricity is expensive is because hydrocarbons are expensive. You know, it happened first, you know, starting with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, then we had the US War on Iran. And all of these things are making hydrocarbons more expensive. And that is also hurting. Like, the effect of data centers is significant. The effect of global geopolitical unrest is also significant. There's a bunch of things that are causing energy prices to go up and electricity prices are up, but they're not up nearly as much as diesel prices. You know, if you are operating in a world of using diesel to do anything, you're in a world of pain right now. If you're an airline burning jet fuel, God help you, you're in a terrible place.
- [14:18]
C
Right.
- [14:18]
B
But, like, most Americans don't directly purchase diesel fuel, but almost everyone has an electric bill.
- [14:25]
C
Yeah. Also, there are two things that if the administration wanted to take the edge off of this politically, they could do. And one is a lot of Trump's tariffs are affecting what you were talking about, the sort of Chinese production of solar panels, because some of the components are still tariffs. So it's increasing the amount of money people have to pay to build these things. But the other thing is that a lot of the costs are really being paid by industrial consumers and particularly American manufacturers, because they have to pay capacity rates that are similar to much larger companies like Amazon and Meta, who really have an incentive to, you know, and the money to pay for this. But in American manufacturing, you know, people are operating at very small margins. So when those capacity rates go up, it potentially puts, you know, smaller manufacturers out of business.
- [15:12]
A
So, wait, what's the policy you're proposing?
- [15:14]
C
First of all, different capacity rates for companies like Amazon and smaller manufacturers with no margins.
- [15:21]
A
You're saying basically that smaller manufacturers should pay less for electricity than big companies?
- [15:26]
C
Yes, they're using less of it. You know, it should be pro rata, if possible.
- [15:31]
A
I mean, I'm saying, like, per kilowatt.
- [15:33]
C
No, no, no. Capacity fees, which are different. They're sort of. They're calculated based on an estimate of how much capacity the company might need. So this isn't just paying per wattage, it's the. Some of the fees that you pay on top of that.
- [15:46]
A
Yeah, I feel like at the margin, if you reduce the price of electricity to any given segment of the population, whether it's small manufacturers or individual households or anyone, reducing the price, as we know, tends to, at the margin, increase demand. And what you really want to do is decrease demand. We don't have enough electricity to go round. What Hochul is doing in her own way is trying to decrease demand by saying, stop building data centers. The real problem in any electricity grid is always peak demand. Like around, you know, when there's a big heat wave or something, everyone's turning on their air conditioner. At the same time, if you can't increase the total amount of energy in the grid, which is something which takes a very long time, what you have to do is find ways to reduce peak demand, which means trying to give incentives to manufacturers to do more of their electricity usage at night and that kind of thing. The policy response that I would love to see here, and I do think that Hochul has done this, is try and come up with ways to encourage people to use less electricity. And this is a kind of blunt force object saying, well, let's just, let's not build data centers. I think there are interesting other ways to do it too.
- [16:55]
C
A few weeks ago, Zoran put out just a pretty anodyne thing that was like, hey, don't maybe keep your air conditioner at some reasonable place instead of like 59 degrees.
- [17:05]
A
78 is what you said.
- [17:07]
C
And there was a big 78.
- [17:08]
A
78 is what you said. Yeah.
- [17:10]
C
Even though, you know, there are people in red states giving exactly the same advice who are Republicans. And the reaction to it from a lot of people was like, oh, this is what socialism looks like. And so politically it's like, who, who would you be asking to use less? Because I think consumers are already very priced. They already are strained under their electrical bills and they probably are not going crazy.
- [17:33]
A
Well, so I'll give you one example. Most people with at home EV charges, when they get home and they plug in their ev, it just starts recharging. It is very simple at the grid level or at the automobile level or at the EV charger level in various different places to sort of add in some programing to say, if I come home in the middle of the day and plug in my ev, don't start charging it until nighttime when electricity demand is much lower and we don't need to worry about peak demand anymore. Don't charge your EVs during periods of peak demand. This is kind of a no brainer. It happens in a lot of the rest of the world. It really doesn't happen in America for reasons that basically everyone just wants everything when they want it on demand. And that's the sort of culture we're in. But we need to get away from that culture if we're going to actually affect demand. And this is one of the reasons why, you know, a small increase in demand for electricity ends up with a very large increase in price for electricity is because no one is willing or even at the margin feels able to meaningfully reduce their consumption of electricity. When was the last time your electricity usage went down?
- [18:45]
C
I mean, how would you even message that though? When everybody understands that the electricity hogs are the data centers going to, you know, consumers and saying actually this is your responsibility. Seems like, you know, it's not a good political decision, but I think it's not a very convincing argument.
- [19:00]
A
No, no, it's a very hard message politically. But it is necessary given that consumers, you know, ultimately consume an order of magnitude more electricity than data centers do. They're where the, I guess for the
- [19:11]
B
policy you don't put it in consumers hands to be like don't charge at this time or that time. You have to sort of figure out
- [19:16]
A
a way to, you can do it at the grid level, basically.
- [19:18]
B
At the grid level.
- [19:19]
A
Yeah.
- [19:19]
B
Yeah. Felix, while you were talking, don't be mad, I was looking at Fred.
- [19:24]
A
I love that. I am, I am never mad at anyone looking at Fred.
- [19:27]
B
So I mean, I was totally listening. But, but also I just wanted to let you know that the CPI for electricity over the past 10 years is up about 48% while the, the regular CPI over the past 10 years is just 40%. So the cost of electricity, they're roughly the same risen. No, that's more. That's almost 10 point difference.
- [19:48]
A
Eight percentage points over 10 years.
- [19:50]
B
I'm rounding it's 10.
- [19:52]
A
It's like, it's more. It's. It's more.
- [19:54]
B
But it's more.
- [19:54]
A
It's more. Yeah, yeah, it's true. It's more.
- [19:58]
B
Okay, thank you.
- [20:00]
A
It's not a lot more, but it's more.
- [20:01]
B
It's more. It's more. I mean, I think it's a lot more.
- [20:04]
A
But let's just tie up the bow here which is if we pick on data centers as like the easy boogeyman that everyone hates, that we can pick on to try and make it look as though we're doing something about this electricity bill situation. Is it a reasonable worry? Should we be worried on a sort of geostrategic level that this is just playing into the hands of China in terms of the great AI race between the US and China?
- [20:33]
B
That's what I want to know.
- [20:35]
C
If we to go back to the renewable conversation, if this were really. I feel like that's a little bit of a red herring because if this were really a concern, one of the things that you would do is stop tariffing components that are necessary for renewables and stop preventing renewable projects from going forward, which the Trump administration is still doing even with Wiccan power. Just by putting roadblocks in the permitting process and stonewalling the process that you have to use to get these things online, even though they're super, that's the fastest source to get online.
- [21:05]
B
I think the question simply is to succeed in the AI race to quote, unquote, win it, do you need to have a lot of data centers in your country? I don't understand if you do or you don't. Do you guys? So the short we don't build these data centers, what then?
- [21:19]
A
I think the short answer is yes. The Chinese AI models are powered by data centers in China and US AI models are powered by data centers in the US Is there some amazing neoliberal free market world in which you can divorce the model from the physical location of the Data center and OpenAI and Anthropic can go and run their models in China? I'm not even sure that's possible in theory. It's certainly not possible in practice.
- [21:53]
B
Right now, as as we're recording on Friday, everyone is talking about this new model from China. They have some company literally called Moonshot AI. They have some new model. It's way cheaper and open source. And the current vibe worry is that everyone's going to use the cheaper Chinese model. Anthropic and AI are going to suffer because they're totally overpriced. They're spending all this money and long term that might mean that China dominate. They're source cheaper models dominate in AI. AI becomes a commodity that people use to do other things in that world. Maybe it's fine to have China running these models using their data centers. We use them cheaply open an AI and Anthropic fail, which would be interesting. Maybe not fail, but you know, they're not as big as everyone wants them to be or whatever and turns out totally fine. We don't have data centers, our power bills go back down. China takes on all the cost of running this commodity called artificial intelligence, and it's all good. What do you think of that?
- [22:54]
A
I love that utopian vision. I think that's great. I don't know anyone in the AI world who would be on board with that. And it's not. And it's not just because, you know, they want their anthropic RSUs to be worth lots of money.
- [23:12]
B
I mean, they.
- [23:14]
A
It is an article of faith among everyone from Dario Amodei to MSF Sabas to Sam Altman to everyone that the governments have both have and should have. But they do have a bunch of ability to see into these models, to control what they're doing, what they're not doing. And that having the model within your nation gives you an extremely important strategic advantage in the geopolitical sphere.
- [23:51]
B
Also just the informational advantage. Right. You don't want China controlling our knowledge.
- [23:55]
C
But what about open source models? I mean, doesn't that.
- [23:58]
A
So, like, whether it's open source or not, like China still can use the information that is being churned out? If all you're doing is grabbing a model from China and then running it on a US Data center because it's open source, and so you can just take that model and run it domestically, that's fine, but it doesn't solve the data center problem. If you're taking the model from China and you're running it on a Chinese data center, then everyone is just assuming that your information is going to wind up in the Chinese government one way or another.
- [24:31]
B
We don't want that.
- [24:32]
A
This is what Palantir has been talking about quite a lot, which is this idea that companies can't trust anyone to really not leak their data. And so Palantir is like, we will bring all of your AI thinking in house onto servers that you actually own and are in your own buildings. When you're not even going to use an OpenAI data center, you're going to use your own data center because. And they're very much selling this to the Europeans. They're like, you can't trust the Americans with your data, therefore you need to build your own data center and run the AI models on site in Europe. That's the only way that you can trust that your information is safe. And so I do think the physical location of the data center is. Everyone seems to be agreeing that it's a. It's a really important consideration. Okay, so, yeah, and Elizabeth is absolutely right that, you know, insofar as this is like an energy problem, there are ways to try and encourage more energy capacity in the US But I do think that's a long, slow thing which for various sort of Republican Party reasons isn't going to be happening anytime soon. Which just leaves us with a sort of basic question. Do we continue to build data centers in the US in the knowledge that they suck up electricity and electricity prices will continue to go up, or do we not build data centers in the US and see a bunch of strategic advantage moves to China? And it's an interesting question and I can see arguments on both sides. Yeah, Elizabeth, which one would you choose?
- [26:05]
C
I don't think it's a binary. I think we need to be a little more cautious. I think Hochul's approach is smart and I don't think that it longer term prevents data centers from being built here.
- [26:31]
A
Slate Money is sponsored this week by Monarch. You know, your relationship with money usually starts long before you have any. When you're growing up, money felt like something you worried about, more than talked about. And a lot of us carry those habits into adults. It's one of those weird things we don't think about enough. We put to the back of our minds. And what we really need is some kind of a robot that can just worry about all of those things for us and tell us when there's something we need to do or we need to worry about. And guess what? There is. It's called Monarch. Most apps only tell you what you've already spent. Monarch helps set goals. It helps map out big purchases. It will help you see if you're actually on track before it's too late to adjust. And it has an AI. You can ask the Monarch AI assistant anything you like about your finances, like how much did I spend on travel last summer? Or can I afford this vacation without touching my savings? Monarch is There it is in natural language. You should just go ahead and let Monarch look at your money, work out what you're doing, tell you whether you're on track. Write your own money story with Monarch. Use code slateonark.com to get your first year of Monarch Core half off at just 50 bucks. That's 50% off your first year at monarch.com with code slate. Slate Money is sponsored this week by im8, which is a nutritional supplement. Are you feeling tired? Are you feeling sluggish? Do you feel like your organs need a boost? If you do, then im8 is the way to simplify your supplement routine once and for all. It has 16 supplements in one drink for $2.61 per day. It is co founded by David Beckham. It is built by leading doctors and researchers. 95% of people who tried it for 12 weeks felt more energy and that is from a clinical trial that was conducted by the Standpoint San Francisco Research Institute. All you need to do is take a little sachet, shake it up with some water and drink it. It is the easiest thing in the world. If you go to im8health.com slate money or click the link on in the description and use code slate money you will get a free welcome kit five free travel sachets plus 10% off your order. That's code slate money@im8health.com code slatemoney@im8health.com slatemoney these statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.
- [29:16]
B
Is your kid's birthday coming up? Don't stress the prep. The party Shop at Michaels is your one stop shop for every theme from Bluey to Rodeo. Transform your space into a birthday wonderland with dream worthy tablescapes and decor starting at 99 cents plus get free helium inflation on select balloon styles. Whether you're crafting a one of a kind bash or grabbing the essentials, Michaels has everything to make their big day legendary. Shop now and order ahead for delivery or in store pickup. Michaels everything to celebrate anything.
- [29:57]
A
We should also talk about the thing that finally became law this week, which is the Housing Act. It's been, what is it Emily, like 75 years since the federal government passed a housing act. Something like that.
- [30:10]
B
Yeah. So they passed the 21st century road
- [30:13]
A
to Housing act and road is capitalized for some reason. I guess it stands for something.
- [30:17]
B
Renewing opportunity in the American Dream.
- [30:19]
A
Oh brilliant. Brilliant. I want to talk about two different parts of this law. Let's start with the one that everyone knows about this, which is that it started off life banning big Wall street investment house private equity type people, Blackstone type people from either building new rental apartments or buying homes and turning them into rentals. The, the ban on building new rental apartments got dropped out, thank Christ. But the ban on buying houses and turning them into rentals is in there. And I will be the first to admit that this is not going to have a huge effect. The number of houses that these companies have been buying up and turning into rentals is not enormous. And so in the grand scheme of things it's not a big deal. But at the margin it's just annoying to Me, because basically what, what these companies are doing, as I see it, is they're doing a sort of like rent versus buy calculation. And they're like, look, it is cheaper to buy than to rent in these places. So what we're going to do is we can convert housing from owner occupied to rentals. And in places where rentals are expensive, then that increases the supply of rentals and it makes it easier to rent. And basically what we're doing is we're exporting, we're reducing house price inflation, which I'm very happy that people are annoyed about. Now we've finally got out of the world where everyone assumes that all voters just want house prices to go up all the time. Now we're worried that houses are too expensive and so we're doing things like passing this bill to stop them being so expensive. But the way we're stopping house price inflation is by basically creating more rent inflation and renters are much less likely to vote. So I feel like what we're doing is at the margin we're just reducing the supply of rental buildings in America and that's bad.
- [32:09]
C
I think you might be great about that because there's, there's a prediction in the bill that says first of all, it only affects companies, institutional investors that already own more than 350 single family homes. So the smaller institutions that have done this are completely untouched anyway. But I can't imagine that on a percentage basis or ratio basis that's even remotely a major source of how rentals are moving onto the market. Right.
- [32:33]
B
Well, I guess the argument that Senator Warren, some others are making is just like the private equity industry and institutional investors are like, hey, like this is a very small slice of the housing market. It's not going to have any effect overall. But then like Warren and others will say that's true nationwide. But there are some pockets of the country where private equity and institutional investors have come in and bought up so much single family housing stock that it has, it has impacted prices in that area, both rentals and for single family
- [33:01]
A
homes increases the prices of homes for sure. And that's what people are worried about. And my point is just that they worry much more about home prices than they do about rents. If they worried about rents, then they wouldn't do this.
- [33:12]
B
Yeah, that's probably true. Yeah. When I mentioned about rents, I think the Senator was kind of like what?
- [33:17]
C
I think the political optics of it though are part of what's pushing it too. It's, you don't want large institutional investors who Maybe don't have any real contact or investment in local communities, preferring that to say a local landlord or people who live in the communities.
- [33:32]
A
I mean, number one, because we're not banning the institutional investors from building like large multifamily rental units. Like that's how that happens. The way it happens is not like institutional investors buying up houses one by one. I mean, that does happen a little bit. But like if the bit about building got dropped out of the bill, which it should have done and was then that is still going to happen. They're still going to build and that's still going to be like, you know, some company in New York owns a bunch of rental apartments in Arizona. I'm not worried about that. I think that's fine.
- [34:03]
B
Private equity started buying up single family homes in the wake of the housing crisis, you know, back in, I guess in 0809, et cetera. And like at that time, were they not providing a bit of a service? No one wanted to buy a lot of the house. The houses were sitting around empty.
- [34:17]
A
There was a vulture investors, they were going, they were providing a bid for houses that no one could afford to buy.
- [34:22]
B
And now houses are really expensive. We have this supply crunch. Although we should one day. Someone, me, you, someone. What is the supply shortage? Some say a million, some say 7 million. No one knows, no one understands what it is.
- [34:36]
A
Lawrence Yan always says it's about two and a half million, I think.
- [34:39]
B
Who believes Lawrence Yan? I mean, he's the NAR's chief economist. I mean people do believe him. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to malign him. But anyways, but like now, yeah, with now with houses in shorter supply, especially affordable houses in shorter supply, they're not providing the service that they once did. All two other things I'll say about the institutional investor ban. One is I think it gave the bill, which does a lot of other stuff, the political support it needed to pass. Like that's why it passed is because people got really amped up about that.
- [35:08]
A
Yeah, it has that nice like anti Wall street populist tinge to it now. So a bunch of Trumpists and a bunch of progressives can get behind it. Yeah, I can see that.
- [35:16]
B
I think that was really important for it.
- [35:18]
C
One other factor that's just structural. A lot of this stuff has been sort of sitting on the docket for 30 years. So I think even Republicans needed some legislative wins. And so it was kind of a convenient time to go back when affordability is the biggest issue on everybody's Agenda and say, what do we have in the backlog that we wanted to do? And that makes sense. So stuff like, you know, Emily, you wrote about ending the chassis requirement for mobile homes. Like that feels like a total common sense sort of thing that could have been done a long time ago so
- [35:51]
A
that we're going to come to chassis in one second. But I mean, the big picture about home price affordability is the, this bill, for all that it's, you know, the first bill in 70 years or whatever is going to have precisely zero effect on the number one thing that affects home price affordability, which is mortgage rates. And mortgage rates are six and a half percent right now. And so long as mortgage rates are at 6 and a half percent and house prices are weather, even if house prices don't go up anymore, even like you would need house prices to come down a lot, like to the point at which people start feeling pain from house prices coming down, you know, they would need to come down 30, 40% in order for houses to be affordable with mortgage rates of six and a half percent. So the problem here is mortgage rates in terms of real problem in terms of house price affordability is mortgage rates. And none of this is going to help.
- [36:41]
B
I mean, yes, and there really isn't enough housing supply. And the bill does try to address that, you know, in these, like all these.
- [36:51]
A
Okay, so talk about chassis.
- [36:52]
B
Chassis. So I didn't know what that was or how to pronounce it until recently because I am, you know, incapable of even driving. So a chassis is this steel thing that you put underneath the manufactured house that makes it a mobile home effectively. It lets you, like, transport it from where you build it to where you put it, and then it lets you move it again. And in 1974, because there was mobile homes and manufactured homes were being built shoddily, there was all different kinds of regulations depending on what part of the country you're in for these things, which is, by the way, how all housing regulation works. The federal government at the time was like into passing laws, so it passed a new housing code, a federal housing code. And part of the code said that manufactured homes had to have a permanent chassis. And even at that time, I have learned, thanks to an amazing Vox article, that the manufactured housing industry was like, what? We don't want to do this. It's so expensive. These cost extra. And sometimes it doesn't need it. Like, it doesn't get moved again. It turns out by like the year 2000, only 5% of manufactured homes actually moved after they Were, you know, planted.
- [38:02]
A
The first mobile homes are not mobile.
- [38:04]
B
Not mobile. So they have been fighting for years to get rid of the chassis requirement. And according to them, so we'll take it with a grain of salt. They say the builders that builds the other kinds of homes that are built on site, not manufactured in a factory have been pushing back and saying no, no, we must have the permanent chassis. Not because of any like concern or you know, because they just want, they
- [38:27]
A
want that Lego, they want a comparative advantage.
- [38:29]
B
So finally manufactured home guys got their rule rollback in this legislation and people are saying that a, it's going to save them a lot of money because it's five to $10,000 per chassis. So now they can reuse the chassis. I'm just going to keep saying it. Chassis, they're going to reuse the chassis and that it's not just even about the cost savings, that by removing the chassis requirement they can do better cooler stuff with the manufactured homes. Better homes.
- [38:56]
A
One of the things you mentioned, which is blindingly obvious once you think about it, but it never occurred to me is if you remove the chassis requirement to have like a whopping great big steel thing underneath your house, guess what? You can have a basement now have a basement.
- [39:10]
B
You can have a house that's not, you know how a manufactured house, you have like the staircase going up into it. You can have it closer to the ground.
- [39:17]
A
Yeah, you don't need to have that weird like quasi stoop. You can just walk straight in.
- [39:20]
B
Yeah, you don't need the quasi stoop. And then there's hopes that there'll be more innovative. I sound like Felix designs and things like that. Because it's cheaper to make a house in a factory than it is to build a house house on site for obvious reasons. Right. You could do it inside. Weather's not a constraint. You can have a permanent workforce. You can have more control over your inventory and things like that. And I guess some Nordic countries, they build most of their houses and factories. I didn't take the time to look into that a little more, but I thought Felix might know or maybe.
- [39:48]
A
Elizabeth, Modular housing is totally a thing. And again it's something that has historically been used mostly in multifamily, but it totally can be used in single family. And prefab housing has been the way the housing of the future for the past 35 years. I've lost count of the number of articles I've read about. Here's some company doing prefab housing and it's going to revolutionize housing construction. We're all going to be in prefab houses and then that company goes bust and then here's some company. But yes, I do think that the removal of the shares requirement is going to help at the margin. I don't think it's going to bring us into the prefab utopia, but all of these things are.
- [40:30]
C
It heavily helps lower income communities because number one, it's fast. If you're doing new builds even for about the same price you would pay for a mobile home, you still have to go through permitting. It's going to take some time. There's just a lot more stuff that you have to do. And also it helps with zoning regulations in certain areas because at least where I grew up there were zoning regulations about where you could and couldn't put mobile homes. But you could have something that is effectively the same as a mobile home that does not own a chassis and it would be okay in the zoning laws to build from scratch. And the fact that it did have a chassis actually knocked people out of certain neighborhoods. So I think where it helps is really people who are lower income and they need an option that they can have cheaply without going through a new build process.
- [41:18]
A
And for the middle classes, bless them, we've talked about them before, we'll talk about them again. Adus people, it makes those adus a lot easier to place in your backyard.
- [41:29]
B
Yeah, and the legislation I think encourages more ADUs accessory dwelling units and just like less permitting blocks. It's very abundance coded for people who
- [41:39]
C
know what that everybody can have their tiny house in the backyard.
- [41:42]
A
Who doesn't love having a tiny house in the backyard?
- [41:44]
B
I mean, seems cool. Could be a good source of rental income though. Who knows what that electric bill will be. This episode is powered by AT&T Business. For every small business owner, there's a moment they remember when they realized they wanted to start their own business. It can be a life changing moment. But those first steps are never easy. Figuring out the right building blocks, your goals, your schedule, your mindset. You have to think about an entire ecosystem. Not just the big stuff, but the little bits too. In this day and age, a major point for any successful business is strong connectivity. Spotty Internet has led to some terrible work calls in my life. But when you're running a business, connectivity can make or break you. AT&T business has the tools, team and expertise you need for a reliable network you can depend on. They make connecting easy. And that's the main thing you want in a provider. Less time stressing so you can focus on the million other things on your plate. Can I hire more people? Should we get a bigger office space? Don't lose sleep over the small stuff. Keep focusing on the big things. AT&T business built to work get AT&T business@business.att.com. Most AI tools can answer simple questions, but only rippling AI can help solve business problems. That's because Rippling AI is built on your live global workforce data, giving it the full context it needs to make smarter recommendations and take action across departments. Say you want to know which top performers are at risk of leaving. Just ask Rippling AI and get an instant report with supporting data such as comp ratios, recent performance reviews, 10 year trends, and more. Then it can turn those insights into to real action. It might recommend a 10% spot bonus to retain a top performer based on the data. All you have to do is review the recommendation, tap, confirm, and the bonus is added to the next payroll run. Rippling AI understands your workforce, systems and workflows, helping you make faster, more informed decisions across your business. Don't settle for AI. That's all talk. Head to Rippling AI Slate and get AI that turns insight into action. That's R I P P L I N G A I Slash Slate Sign up for exclusive access today.
- [44:15]
A
Let's move on to my favorite subject of the week, which is SK Hynix Arbitrage. Because you know we've been talking about highfaluting public policy stuff. Let's do Core Slate Money Finance Nerd stuff. Emily, you that you're the one who best articulated the state of affairs. Tell me what the question is and I will do my best to give you an answer.
- [44:38]
B
Why do shares of SK Hynix, the South Korean memory maker, cost more if you buy them in the US Market than they do if you buy them in the South Korean market? Why is there a price premium? Why are investors willing to pay more in the US Stock market for the same thing?
- [44:55]
A
Oh, that is a really good question.
- [44:57]
B
I have a theory.
- [44:59]
A
I have a theory too, but what is your theory?
- [45:01]
B
It's easier to buy the shares in the US Market than it is to buy them in the South Korean market.
- [45:06]
C
If you're used to if you're a
- [45:08]
B
US if you're American. Americans have money and they like to buy this stuff and it was billed as like a hot new thing, so they got all amped up about it.
- [45:16]
A
We talked about this last week when we talked about the SK Hynix IPO thing where SK HYNIX for all that, it is dominating the Korean stock market and has been soaring, you know, helping the Kospe hit new records. And all the rest of it still looks cheap by the standards of AI coded companies in America. If you look at its forward pe, it's still really low. And so Americans are like, yeah, compared to the price of Nvidia, it's cheap. And SK Hynix provides Nvidia with most of its memory that it needs on its chip. So let's buy SK Hynix. And they're kind of doing an Nvidia SK Hynix arbitrage. They're like, SK Hynix might look expensive relative to the cost of buying the shares in Korea, but it still looks cheap relative to the cost of buying shares of Nvidia in the US So let's just buy SK Hynix in the US because it's quite difficult for American retail investors at least to buy shares in Korea. But then the question is, why isn't there an arbitrage? Why aren't there institutional investors who are perfectly capable of buying shares in Korea? Why aren't the institutional investors just taking that demand and basically funneling it into Korea? Why is there like this 50% premium for SK Hynix in the US versus Korea? And I remember, I have to, you know, Mayor Culpa on this one, this time last week on Slate Money, we were talking about SK Hynix and we were talking about the ipo. And I said, well, obviously there's not going to be some big first day IPO pot because this is just adrs of a company that exists in Korea. And so the price is anchored by the cost of the shares in Korea. I was so wrong about that. There was a big IPO pop. And what happened was the price of the shares in the United States went way higher than the price of the shares in Korea. And this is my favorite thing, and this is why I really wanted to talk about it, is because what we are talking about now is shares, their stocks, their securities. We're not actually talking about a company anymore. One of the things we talk about a lot on this show is like the difference between a share and a company. And this is a prime example. What we are talking about here is little casino chips that people are buying and selling. And the Korean stock market in particular has become a total casino. And the Koreans have been gambling on the Korean stock market and it's insanely volatile and it's completely crazy. And people are buying SK Hynix ADRs because they think they're going to go up and they're selling them when they think they're going to go down. And they're a new thing you can gamble with. And nominally these are shares of a company. And what we should care about is the value of the company. And what you can do is you can multiply the number of shares by the price of the share to get the value of the company and all that kind of stuff. But this shows the limit of that. This shows the limit of that kind of basic efficient markets hypothesis stuff, because really, people are just gambling. And there is a world in which those two prices will converge. It is possible they will converge, but it is also possible that they will diverge. And there's not a pure arbitrage, Right? There are two reasons why there isn't a pure arbitrage. The first reason is just time zones. They don't trade during the same time. The second much more important reason is that it is very easy to convert the American shares into Korean shares, but it is actually impossible to convert the Korean shares into American shares. You can take the ADRs and take them to Korea and convert them into 10 shares in Korea. You can do it that way, but unless you can do it the other way, you can't really do the arbitrage. And so, yeah, there's. The capital controls in Korea are strict enough to make the arbitrage difficult. So the only other thing you can do is just sell one and buy the other and hope they converge. But there's no particular reason to believe that they'll converge at any time. So why would you do that?
- [49:01]
C
Is that primarily because of regulatory restrictions in Korea? Like they have to grant the equity holders permission and there's some gambling restrictions that maybe apply?
- [49:10]
A
Well, the gambling restrictions are not. Don't apply to this particular constraint. But yeah, the Koreans in general are protective of their stock market and they don't want to make it easy for those shares to leave the country and for those investments to leave the country, which is what would need to be happen in order to increase the supply of shares in New York to bring the price down in New York.
- [49:30]
B
What I've been wondering about, as you said, Felix, the South Korean stock market has been really volatile lately. And a lot of. A lot of it's driven by retail investors who are buying these leveraged ETFs that sort of amplify gains and amplify losses and settle every day. And it's very chaotic. And their stock market is very much driven by AI, which we've talked about, I think, like, 55% of the cost be now is just Samsung and Hynix. I think I have to check that. But should we be worried that this is all going down and it. Is it going to mean something for the US or like something systemic, do you think?
- [50:04]
A
No.
- [50:05]
B
Okay.
- [50:07]
A
There are always weird stock markets that get dominated by one or two companies, you know, and it's fine. Canada has always been like that. Remember when Canada was dominated by Research in Motion and it was like half of the entire Canadian stock market, and then it was Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan, and then it was Shopify.
- [50:25]
C
But what about sector concentration?
- [50:27]
A
Yeah. Like, if you buy the Cosby, what you're doing is you're buying those two stocks. Everyone's aware that what you're doing is buying those two stocks. You're not investing in Korea as a country, you're just investing in those two stocks. And so you make the decision whether or not you want to buy those two stocks, and then you get a volatile asset.
- [50:42]
B
So what happens to South Korea when those two stocks, you know, they've gone up quite a lot? They're probably going to come down quite a lot, I would think. I don't know. Maybe not. But when they do.
- [50:52]
A
Yeah. So the people who are gambling on the stocks going up will lose money, and the people who are gambling on the stocks going down will make money, and the Korean economy will just keep on going. Because the Korean stock market, you know, as your beloved colleague Matt Phillips always says, the stock market is not the economy.
- [51:07]
B
Right.
- [51:08]
A
And especially in Korea, the stock market's not the economy. Especially in Korea, the stock market is just those two stocks.
- [51:13]
B
But when so many retail investors are invested in the stock market, it does become more like the economy. Do you know what I mean? I think that might be.
- [51:23]
C
There is a data point that something like 40% of South Korea lists below the poverty rate, and a lot of people are using savings and retirement funds to buy these stocks. Yeah.
- [51:33]
A
I mean, but that's two different things. Right. The whole point is if you're below the poverty line, then you don't really have savings and retirement funds to blow on the stock market. I'm sure it is possible to find poor Koreans who should not be gambling on the stock market, who are gambling on the stock market. You know, it is possible to find poor Americans who should not be gambling on the lottery. We have this issue with sports betting in America because that's now ubiquitous. There are lots of place, there are lots of gambly type Things that poor people do that they shouldn't be doing. And that is bad, you know, but like I'm not more worried about Korean stocks and the wealth effect on Korea if they go down than I am about like, like, I think this is a gambling problem, not a wealth problem, I guess is my point. The other thing I just wanted to mention is that smart hedge funds have kind of learned their lesson. The two names that everyone knows in the hedge fund, the two great cautionary tales in the hedge fund universe. One is LTCM and the other one is MF Global. Both of them blew up because they saw an arbitrage. They were like this thing trades at this price here and that price there. So if I buy the one here and sell the one there, then eventually they'll converge and I'll make money. And then they didn't converge, they diverged and then they lost money and then they blew up. In order to place that trade, in order to do the arbitrage, number one, you need to be able to short the ADRs, which is incredibly hard. There aren't enough of them. And getting a borrow is incredibly difficult. But even if you can short the ADRs, you also need a theory of the case for why these two things are going to converge. And there's no outside force. There's no like, you know, if SK Hynix gets acquired, say by some bigger company, and then every share gets paid out at the same amount, then that is a forcing mechanism which would force the shares to be worth the same amount at a certain point. But absent that kind of a forcing mechanism, there's no particular reason why this arbitrage can't go on forever. Like, do you guys remember when Palm Pilot was a subsidiary of 3Com and then it issued its own stock and the market cap of PalmPilot was like 10 times the market cap of 3Com, even though 3Com owned PalmPilot. Like these weird arbitrages and artifacts do crop up in stock markets from time to time.
- [53:50]
B
Okay,
- [54:09]
A
But anyway, we should have a numbers round. Elizabeth, what's your number?
- [54:12]
C
So My number is $55 million and that's the amount of an equity round for a company called Pool House. They just opened a 21,000 square foot bar in London. They kind of have you've ever seen golf simulators that you can go into bars and stuff and play?
- [54:28]
A
Tell me this is a swimming pool simulator.
- [54:30]
C
No, this is a billiards. So they have a kind of like AI tracking camera projector thing where if you're playing pool And I suppose if you're bad at it and you want to try to be good, it'll show you, like, the path of where the balls are supposed to go. And I sort of read this with interest because I'm a shitty pool player and I would probably try this, but I'm kind of curious about how similar the golf market and the pool market are, because it's the same major company that's doing both of these. And I just think of pool as the kind of sport that people play primarily while they're drunk at bars. And golf, still being a very competitive, rich person sport, is the sort of golf customer the same as the pool customer. Like, I just don't think the pool customers care as much about.
- [55:15]
A
It's not like virtual tables, it's real pool tables, but then they just project lines on it.
- [55:20]
C
Real tables with virtual kind of displays.
- [55:23]
B
That's cool.
- [55:24]
A
I have this little game on my phone that I play a lot called Pocket Run Pool by our favorite friend of the pod, Zach Gage. And yeah, when you're trying to pop a ball in pocket run pool, it shows you the line of where the ball is going. And it helps very much in terms of trying to work out whether it's going to go in the pocket. I could do with that in real life. I think this is a great advantage. And I'm sad I missed out on this $55 million equity round.
- [55:48]
C
Well, next time you go back to London, you could. You can go to the pool hall.
- [55:51]
A
There you go.
- [55:52]
C
Try it.
- [55:53]
A
My number is 100,000, which is the number of dollars that was won on earned, let's say, on sports betting sites by a chap named Gabriel Perez. And Gabriel Perez was the, up until recently, the teleprompter operator for Donald Trump. And so he would go onto the sports betting sites, you know, on the mentioned markets, and they'll be like, is Donald Trump going to mention Ukraine in this speech? And he would just read the speech and be like, yep, he's going to mention Ukraine. And he would bet on. Bet on Donald Trump mentioning Ukraine. And he made $100,000, but now they have suspended him, so he can't do that anymore. I have to give you my favorite quote from White House spokesperson Davis Engel saying, quote, the White House has strict ethics guidelines that we expect all staffers and officials to follow. So now, you know, people ethics and scare quotes. There are strict ethics guidelines in the White House.
- [56:54]
B
I feel like, you gotta hand it to this guy, because isn't Trump known for, like, going off Teleprompter all the time.
- [57:00]
C
So.
- [57:00]
A
Oh my God. So this is what he did, by the way. So he would have the speech right in front of him as prepared for delivery with, you know, Trump mentioning Ukraine. And then he would get to the bit of the speech where Trump was supposed to mention Ukraine and Trump would go off on a tangent and never get around to Ukraine. And then in real time, as Trump is giving the speech, he would go into the betting markets and close out the bet so that he didn't lose money on it.
- [57:28]
B
Good for him.
- [57:29]
A
With one hand he's operating the teleprompter and on the other hand he's on Kalshi, like saying, quick, cancel this bet.
- [57:34]
B
Fantastic.
- [57:37]
A
All right, Emily, what's your number?
- [57:38]
B
Okay, My number is 45.90. $45.90. That is the US price of the Zara death pants. These are pants sold at Zara.
- [57:50]
C
Wait.
- [57:50]
A
And do they make you die?
- [57:51]
C
What are the Zara death pants?
- [57:53]
B
They're also. I must know, you're not familiar, they're also called death trousers. These are very wide leg, silky looking pants that are kind of long. And women are tripping over their own pants, falling and posting about it on TikTok. One Toronto woman said, these pants nearly killed me. And you know, she had to be sent to the hospital and got stitches. And I think people's tripping over their own pants that nearly kill them is sort of, if you want to think about it, if you want to go deep, there's a metaphor there for some things that are happening in our country. I'm just going to let you draw your own conclusions, your own options.
- [58:29]
C
Do people not know how to hem their pants? Or is this just, just like it's now fashionable to have your pants just kind of.
- [58:35]
A
No one hems their pants anymore.
- [58:37]
B
And so loose and so flowy. I've done this. I've stepped on my own pants before.
- [58:42]
A
Do you not know how to hem your pants, Emily? Because I will admit, I do not know how to hem my pants. I have a very lovely woman named Ly who will hem my pants for me. But no, I do not hem my own pants.
- [58:53]
B
The whole thing is hilarious.
- [58:54]
A
And like, wait, Elizabeth is shaking her head. Elizabeth, you hem your own pants?
- [58:58]
C
I do not all of them, but I do. If it's like jeans or something that I can manage.
- [59:02]
B
We're both like, wow, you can do us with your.
- [59:05]
A
Do you have a sewing machine?
- [59:06]
C
Yeah, my mom used to do it. I hand do my jeans and stuff.
- [59:11]
B
But you're Superior.
- [59:12]
A
But when you say you do it by hand, you mean do you do it by hand or do you use a sewing machine?
- [59:16]
C
You hand stitch? Yes. Yeah, I hand stitch.
- [59:18]
A
Wow.
- [59:19]
B
I know how to hand stitch, but I haven't done it since I was like six.
- [59:24]
C
I mean, if it's like nice pants, I take them to the tailor because I'm not gonna cut and, you know, like nice material.
- [59:31]
B
I just accept whatever's given to me. I'm like, these are a little long, these are a little short.
- [59:34]
C
And then you can do that because you're tall. All of my pants have.
- [59:40]
B
But that was the craziest part of these videos. No one was like, don't buy these pants. Don't wear these pants. They were like, what you need to do is roll them up. There was tips and tricks, but there was no, like, don't buy the pants. Do you know what I mean?
- [59:51]
C
None of the tips were take them to the tailor.
- [59:53]
B
No, not that I saw.
- [59:55]
A
They're $45. It costs more money to take them to the tailor than it does to buy them in the.
- [60:00]
C
I guess that's fair.
- [60:02]
B
Could bring back skinny jeans and solve
- [60:03]
A
all the problems I regret the fact that we are ending this podcast on the notion of bringing back skinny jeans. Please do not bring back skinny jeans. But with my apologies, I will say that is it for us this week. I have now left you on the idea of bringing back skinny jeans.
- [60:24]
B
Don't trip over your own pants.
- [60:25]
A
Don't trip over your own pants. Don't bring back skinny jeans. Do subscribe to Slate plus because if you subscribe to Slate plus, you will listen to us have a conversation about all of the money that is being made from the stock market by financial services companies. Otherwise, thanks for listening. Thanks for emailing us on slatemoneythesleep.com thanks to Jessamyn Molly for producing and we will be back with more Slate money next week.
- [61:00]
B
Most AI tools can answer simple questions, but only rippling AI can help solve business problems. That's because rippling AI is built on your live global workforce data, giving it the full context it needs to make smarter recommendations and take action across departments. Say you want to know which top performing are at risk of leaving. Just ask rippling AI and get an instant report with supporting data such as comp ratios, recent performance reviews, tenure trends and more. Then it can turn those insights into real action. It might recommend a 10% spot bonus to retain a top performer based on the data. All you have to do is review the recommendation, tap, confirm and the bonus is added to the next payroll run. Rippling AI understands your workforce, systems and workflows, helping you make faster, more informed decisions across your business. Don't settle for AI. That's all talk. Head to Rippling AI Slate and get AI that turns insight into action. That's R I P P L I N G AI Slate. Sign up for exclusive access today.
- [62:12]
A
A lot of AI gets built, not all of it gets run. AWS is where AI goes to production. From your idea to full scale deployment built on the AI that runs Amazon's infrastructure.
- [62:23]
B
Invent faster launch with confidence, scale without limits.
- [62:27]
A
Visit aws.com AI AI that's ready when you are.