Is Capitalism The Best We Can Do? | Surrounded Follow-Up

Summary

Surrounded Podcast: Is Capitalism The Best We Can Do? | Surrounded Follow-Up

Jubilee Media | Host: John Rigolato
Date: September 7, 2025

---

Episode Overview

In this follow-up episode, host John Rigolato revisits the “Is Capitalism The Best We Can Do?” debate by interviewing four anti-capitalist guests who sparred with entrepreneur Patrick Bet-David in the main event. The purpose is to understand the motivations and experiences that shaped each guest’s anti-capitalist beliefs, revisit their debates, and probe deeper into the personal and philosophical stakes at play.

Key Guests:

• Mason – Progressive activist, debated core merits and flaws of capitalism.
• Gabby – Democratic socialist, argued for reforms and critiqued billionaire power.
• James – Working-class participant, shared a personal narrative of poverty, labor struggles, and loss.
• Faye (Isabella) – Disabled and mental health advocate, discussed personal challenges and policy flaws in capitalist systems.

Main Themes:

• Does capitalism operate as a true meritocracy?
• Are failures of Social Security solvable?
• Is the US’s global competitiveness threatened by social programs?
• Billionaires, poverty, and the ethics of personal charitable acts.
• Disability, mental health, and the systemic limits of capitalism.

---

Mason: Progressive Critique of Capitalism and the Myth of Meritocracy

Mason’s Political Philosophy (02:01–03:30)

• Identifies as a progressive focused on maximizing “positive freedoms” (e.g., freedom from debt, the right to healthcare).
• “I really want to prioritize people's ability to move through life in the freest way possible. And being bogged down by debt or working for a majority of our waking hours is not the way that we maximize freedom for every individual.” (Mason, 02:26)
• Criticizes the overemphasis on “negative freedoms,” calling for a system ensuring material security.

The Myth of Meritocracy (03:48–04:26)

• Challenges Patrick Bet-David’s view that capitalism rewards merit:
  • “How would you say that this is a meritocracy when we have some people that are born into excessive wealth and some people that are working minimum wage jobs to provide for three or four kids?” (Mason, 03:52)
• Argues that systemic inequalities (birth, wealth, privilege) undermine any claim to a true merit-based system.

On Capitalism’s Track Record and the Need for Progress (05:00–06:00)

• Concedes that capitalism has improved material conditions compared to previous systems, but rejects the “end of history” narrative:
  • “Capitalism is not the end of history. This is not going to be the best that we can ever come about as a society or as an economic system.” (Mason, 05:00)
• “I think even the most strong defenders of capitalism can agree...we haven’t solved every issue. There is a lot that can be done.” (Mason, 05:00)

Populism, Political Power, and Wealth Flight (07:12–11:15)

• Refutes claims that wealth will flee under left-populist policies:
  • “It's not that wealthy people are just going to abandon one of the largest markets in the world simply because, oh, we're starting to prioritize workers' dignity more.” (Mason, 09:45)
• Contends that economic growth is boosted by empowering the working class.

Social Security: Crisis or Scapegoat? (11:21–14:54)

• Responds to Patrick’s argument that Social Security faces collapse:
  • Points to the income cap on taxable wages as the real issue:
  • “Only wages up to around $170,000 are taxed. That means a millionaire stops paying FICA taxes... So lifting or just completely eliminating this gap would completely close all of the funding issues.” (Mason, 13:27)
• Calls the program’s instability a “political problem, not an economic one.”

“Blue State” Governance & Scarcity Myths (15:59–18:59)

• Rebuts the narrative that progressive cities fail due to too much regulation:
  • “When you look at it... California is nowhere near a worker-dominated economy. We have some of the wealthiest technocrats, the wealthiest cities, [and] prioritization of single-family homes...because of NIMBYs...These are the wealthy prioritizations in a place like California that is masked with this veneer of progressivism.” (Mason, 15:59)
• “The real question...is how do we get more access to those goods, whether that’s buybacks or land seizures...in order to make sure we are prioritizing…people, as opposed to the wallets…of private developers or wealthy landlords.” (Mason, 18:59)

Global Competition and the Coming Fork (18:59–21:04)

• On social programs undermining US competitiveness:
  • “We are slowly moving either into economic collectivization or we're moving into a ethnic or cultural form of authoritarian control or...fascism. And I think that really are the only two outcomes because of this affordability crisis.” (Mason, 20:11)
• Argues crisis will force radical change—either toward solidarity or reaction.

---

Gabby: Democratic Socialism, Workers’ Power, and Billionaire Critique

Origins of Belief: Privilege, Organizing & Poverty (25:41–27:44)

• Grew up privileged; exposure to poverty and labor issues in college “burst the bubble.”
• “This isn’t just some abstract political talking point. Like, this is people’s real lives...” (Gabby, 25:41)

Socialism, Historical Atrocities, and Democratic Reform (29:58–31:33)

• “Rosa Luxemburg said socialism without democracy turns into authoritarianism...I call myself a democratic socialist because we need to use reforms as a means to a larger end.” (Gabby, 29:58)
• Defends socialism as historically sabotaged or mischaracterized by critics.

China: Model, Boogeyman, or Neither? (27:44–29:21)

• Recognizes China’s massive poverty reduction but rejects the label of true socialism.
• “People who call [China] socialist or communist are absolutely insane because it's clearly not. It's a very capitalist country at this point and it’s a leading global force.” (Gabby, 28:22)

Elon Musk, Billionaires, and Social Value (32:53–35:23)

• Decries myth of billionaire innovation as inherently good:
  • “I would say that he’s been a net negative for society...He takes advantage of a system that was built for him to hoard wealth.” (Gabby, 33:15)
  • Rips into their use of charitable giving as a PR shield while avoiding fair taxation.
• “I don’t trust someone who has that much money and does so little with it to help society.” (Gabby, 35:23)

Wealth Taxes, Social Programs, and Leaving the City (36:07–39:43)

• Proposes a wealth tax in the FDR tradition to fund social goods.
• “If billionaires are fleeing a city, I think that's a sign of economic fragility. I also think that...investing in public goods with that wealth tax will provide a safety net for people who do lose their jobs.” (Gabby, 38:18)

Socialism, Innovation, and the State (41:27–42:32)

• “We've only grown up in a capitalist society. I've never...even grown up in a country with a social democracy...I think that what we do know is that currently DSA has the most members it's ever had, and it's a very effective movement...He [Zoran] wasn't pitching utopia. He was talking about freezing the rents. And that resonated with working people across New York and across America.” (Gabby, 41:27 and 42:32)

Memorable Moment

• “I've hated Elon Musk consistently throughout my adult life. And I also think that he is someone who has benefited immensely from the government. That’s why I find him [a] hypocrisy and what you're saying.” (Gabby, 31:51)

---

James: Working-Class Anger, Exploitation, and Dignity

Lived Reality: Job Precarity and Systemic Barriers (47:19–49:35)

• “So where exactly am I failing when I am working 80 hours a week? I have put in 477 applications...Not even gotten a call back from once.” (James, 47:19)
• Lacks college degree, lives in rural Texas with limited jobs; juggles multiple low-wage gigs and family caregiving.

On Contentment and Despair (49:35–49:54)

• Contentment with personal life: “a 7”; Everything else: “about a 2 to 3.”
• Hard work and perseverance doesn’t guarantee a dignified life.

Patrick’s Job Offer: Sincerity or Performance? (53:03–54:41)

• Patrick abruptly offers James a job in Fort Lauderdale if he’s willing to move.
• James resists being “tested” and insists on doing due diligence; Patrick seemingly retracts offer upon hearing this.
  • “From my perspective, he saw somebody who he believed to be desperate. He believed to be at their wit's end...so he was going to throw that person a lifeline with the expectation that that person would not ask any questions about it and accept it wholesale.” (James, 54:08)

Trauma, Class, and Anti-Capitalist Roots (57:12–58:28)

• Anti-capitalist views shaped by grandfather’s military trauma and government/VA neglect.
  • “He died...on a waiting list for an appointment at the VA...Why is it that this money isn't being allocated correctly?” (James, 57:16)
• Father died after losing Obamacare—family couldn’t afford hospice:
  • “He ended up dying in hospice care that my family couldn’t afford to pay for.” (James, 59:21)
• Tragedy inspires skepticism of the “American Dream” and a focus on systemic neglect.

Mental Health, Resilience, and Hope (60:59–62:22)

• Admits to expectation of loss and despair but finds some hope after losing everything:
  • “Hitting my absolute lowest point was probably what gave me a much more hopeful mindset.” (James, 60:59)

---

Faye (Isabella): Disability, Medical Margins, and Capitalist Compassion

Becoming Anti-Capitalist—COVID, YouTube, and Marginalization (63:11–63:56)

• Political shift during pandemic after discovering leftist history channels.
• Influenced by online political creators (e.g., Hasan on Twitch).

When Personal Meets Political: Medical Struggles (64:53–66:03)

• In debate, details challenges living with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome—a genetic connective tissue disorder with scarce medical support.
• “I don’t have access to the medication. I don’t have access to even a result or a solution to my disability...I can’t find a specialist.” (Faye, 65:35)

Patrick's “Gotcha” Charity & Agency (66:03–70:05)

• Patrick offers to pay for specialists and a mental health evaluation by a psychologist of his choosing.
• Faye accepts specialist help (“I would accept the help because like I said, I’m desperate”), but rejects the psychologist offer.
• “He was almost taking advantage of somebody in a very vulnerable position who was in a very vulnerable position.” (Faye, 70:05)

On Systemic Blame: Capitalism and Intersectional Oppression (71:15–72:45)

• Diagnosed with BPD; managed to overcome it only due to resource access few others receive.
• Attributes all US social problems to capitalism, white supremacy, and sexism:
  • “Everything, every problem in specifically the U.S. no matter how personal it is, is the fault of capitalism, white supremacy, or sexism...” (Faye, 72:40)

Boundaries with Help and Dignity (72:57–74:42)

• Rejects idea of being forced to take a therapist “of his [Patrick’s] choosing” as intrusive and potentially traumatizing.

Humanity Over Politics (75:57–76:43)

• Appeals for empathy toward participants:
  • “Just remember I’m a human being and that everybody else here that was debating him are human beings...give people some credit and the bravery that they did take to debate this person...” (Faye, 75:57)

---

Notable Quotes & Timestamps

• Mason (03:52):
  “How would you say that this is a meritocracy when we have some people that are born into excessive wealth and some people that are working minimum wage jobs to provide for three or four kids?”

• Gabby (25:41):
  “This isn’t just some abstract political talking point. Like, this is people’s real lives.”

• Gabby (31:51):
  “I’ve hated Elon Musk consistently throughout my adult life. And I also think that he is someone who has benefited immensely from the government.”

• James (47:19):
  “So where exactly am I failing when I am working 80 hours a week?...Not even gotten a call back from once.”

• Faye (70:05):
  “He was almost taking advantage of somebody in a very vulnerable position...I would accept the help because like I said, I’m desperate. I need to find a specialist.”

---

Key Segments & Timestamps

• Introduction and Mason’s philosophy: 00:00–03:35
• Capitalism as meritocracy debate: 03:36–06:00
• Social Security and generational fairness: 11:21–14:54
• Abundance, blue state policy, and market failures: 15:59–18:59
• Wealth tax and social program funding: 36:07–39:43
• James’ story and the job offer exchange: 47:19–54:41
• Faye’s discussion of disability and charity ‘gotchas’: 64:53–70:05

---

Overall Tone & Takeaways

The discussions are raw, empathetic, and at times combative. Patrick Bet-David, representing the capitalist view, is noted for his civil and confident debating style but is seen by several guests as narrowly focused and occasionally patronizing. The anti-capitalist guests draw their critiques of the system from direct, often painful life experiences as well as political theory and organizing. Charity from billionaires is viewed as an insufficient substitute for systemic solutions, and the persistent lack of agency for the marginalized is a recurring concern.

The episode concludes with a reminder that these deep ideological debates are, at their heart, about real human beings whose lives and dignity are on the line.

---

For Listeners Who Haven’t Tuned In

• Expect vivid stories illustrating how abstract policy and philosophical debates about capitalism vs. alternatives play out on the ground.
• The debate is anchored not just in theory but in the lived reality of poverty, illness, and struggle—and a collective demand for a better way forward.
• Memorable exchanges capture what’s at stake for both social reformers and those defending the status quo.

[End of Summary]

Transcript

[Mason]

There are so many people who recognize that they don't live in a system that prioritizes their growth or their well being and it's really who the problem is that people are trying to identify. Is the problem these lower income or low skilled workers that are coming in from developing nations? Is it the LGBTQ people that live in my neighborhoods or is it wealthy interests who really call the shots and have the most influence in our social, political and economic systems?

[John Rigolato]

For From Jubilee Media, this is the Surrounded Podcast. I'm John Regolato and today I'm going to talk to four anti capitalists who each debated Patrick bet David in last week's episode of Surrounded. They each have their own unique stories and experiences that led them to becoming anti capitalists. So we'll dig into that, but we'll also hear more about the arguments they had with Patrick in the episode. So let's start with Mason, who was chosen by Patrick to come back to the center at the end of the episode. I'm NFL linebacker TJ Watt and this is my personal best. YPB by Abercrombie is the activewear I'm always wearing. That's why I reached out to co design their latest drop. I worked with designers to create high performance activewear that holds up to my toughest workouts. Shop YPB by Abercrombie in store, online.

[Mason]

And in the app because your personal.

[John Rigolato]

Best is greater than anything.

[Faye (Isabella)]

This episode is brought to you by State Farm. Checking off the boxes on your to do list is a great feeling. And when it comes to checking off coverage, a State Farm agent can help.

[Gabby]

You choose an option that's right for you.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Whether you prefer talking in person, on the phone or using the award winning app, it's nice knowing you have help finding coverage that best fits your needs. Like a good neighbor, State Farm is there.

[John Rigolato]

Hey Mason, welcome to the Surrounded follow up. You're a Jubilee veteran though, so welcome back to the Jubilee universe.

[Mason]

Yeah, it's cool to do something new for the channel.

[John Rigolato]

You had some really interesting interactions with Patrick on the show. Of all of the debaters, he seemed to maybe connect with you the most because he asked you to come back at the very end. Mason, how would you describe your philosophy of politics to someone who's never heard of you before or heard you speak?

[Mason]

Yeah, I think the easiest way to communicate to that to folks is I'm a progressive. I think that that's a label that's easily understandable in today's political climate, which means that I am very progressive on Social issues. I think our economy needs a lot of work when it comes to prioritizing working class people. I think for too long we've prioritized those that are the upper echelons of wealth. And it's really important that we maximize our ability to give people positive freedoms. Here in America, we talk a lot about negative freedoms, which, for those that don't know, are external or freedoms from external control. So we think of freedom from the government, freedom to express. Those are all incredibly important. But I also believe in positive freedoms. I think we should have the freedom to not die from sickness, especially when we have the infrastructure to provide that. We have the wealth to provide that in the wealthiest nation that's ever walked the face of the earth. And so for me, I really want to prioritize people's ability to move through life in the freest way possible. And being bogged down by debt or working for a majority of our waking hours is not the way that we maximize freedom for every individual.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah, getting a little Timothy Snyder in there with the negative freedoms. I like it.

[Mason]

Yeah.

[John Rigolato]

Okay, I'm going to pull up the first clip and we'll just kind of hear your reactions to it. And this is in the the context of his first claim. Incentive is the engine of capitalism.

[Mason]

Do you think that capitalism is a system of merit that rewards people that have higher merit?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I do.

[Mason]

Okay, so how would you say that this is a meritocracy when we have some people that are born into excessive wealth and some people that are working minimum wage jobs to provide for three or four kids? How would you say that that's a meritocratic society?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Those are two different things, right?

[Mason]

They are two different things. Very unequal things.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Well, no, not necessarily. The parents get credit for making responsible decisions so they can take care of their kids.

[Mason]

The parents get creditocracy that we're building dynasties of wealth.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Not necessarily. I didn't come from dynasties of wealth.

[John Rigolato]

I know you're not like.

[Mason]

I get that. I get that individual. We're talking about systems. Capitalism is a system. It's not an individual testimony that you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Get to use in your advantage. It's a system that's produced the best results than any other economical system. There's not an economical system that's produced better results than this. I think based on the incentive, his.

[Mason]

I've talked to a lot of different right wingers on this segment, and I think that Pat was one of the more calm folks and I think that just speaks to his business experience working with people that he has to posture as very confident regardless of what's going on. So I think that I kind of came out a little bit more swinging in this just because I think this is one of the most important distinctions between people who are big fans of capitalism and people who have critiques. I don't think that innovation sol fully exists in the current system we have now. There's an important quote that capitalism is not the end of history. This is not going to be the best that we can ever come about as a society or as an economic system. And I think even the most strong defenders of capitalism can agree with that, that we haven't solved every issue. There is a lot that can be done. And that was really my philosophy coming in here is, hey, we have a lot of problems. Like Pat said, capitalism is much better than a lot of the systems that we've had in the past. I would prefer the system we have now to a slave driven society or a feudal society or society under a authoritarian absolute monarch. These are differences that we can agree that we've progressed from. But I do think that there is progression that is left.

[John Rigolato]

I'm glad you acknowledged that because that's what I was going to ask you was if you agreed with him that up to this point capitalism has yielded the best results of any economic system. Something you brought up in your discussion with Patrick was fdr. And you know, there's something about Trump that reminds me a little bit of Roosevelt energy. Not FDR as much as Theodore Roosevelt, but he uses the bully pulpit and I think a way that reminds me a lot of Theodore Roosevelt. But even with fdr, it was, I mean, he's the only president who's had more than two terms. I think his administration, I think was a period of time where there was a lot of power accumulated in the presidency in the executive. And he used that in ways that a lot of us see as beneficial. You brought up Social Security, but do you feel like that kind of, you know, a strong leader with an uncomfortable amount of power is necessary to make bold moves for society?

[Mason]

I wouldn't compare FDR and Trump as using the, the federal government. I see what you're saying with the similarities of the executive branch getting more power, but I wouldn't say that they're, they're utilizing it in the same way. FDR's biggest criticism is expanding the courts. But at the same time he was not violating federal judges orders. He was not saying that. Let's see them enforce it. As Trump has said, with many of his unconstitutional acts and to see a president who is yielding his power in a way that is completely disregarding any of those channels or checks and balances is something that should be alarming to both Democrat and Republican. But I don't necessarily think it needs to be from a specific individual. I think like Zwanm, Donnie is a good example of this. There's a lot of fear mongering from the right that Zoran is coming in as a, an authoritarian leader who praises Cuba, praises North Korea, this, that and the other. And if you look at Zoron's campaign and you pay attention to any of the rhetoric or the policies that he's proposing, it is all based around the collective support of New Yorkers in the city. He will not be able to achieve a lot of his policies without New Yorkers also holding accountable politicians that are in the state assembly, that are in the state executive government, like Kathy Hochel. He just doesn't have the power to do that. And that's a common criticism that's thrown at him is he does not have the power to unilaterally do rent freezes or to unilaterally create, you know, nonprofit grocery stores. He needs the support of the state Assembly. And Zoron admits this. He says, I'm not going to come in here and just disregard our channels, but I'm championing these policies because I know that these are the solutions that a lot of New Yorkers need. And if we are going to do this, we have to do it together.

[John Rigolato]

A populist figurehead to some degree, or a left wing brand of populism which we have yet to see happen since maybe. Bernie, a question I have for you about Zoran, because this came from Patrick a few times during the episode, is he thinks that, you know, Zoran getting elected is a good thing because people are going to see those ideas fail. They're going to see wealth vacate the city. Wealthy people go somewhere where they're not going to be taxed or targeted. What would you say to that argument? And do you think if he gets elected, do you think we're going to see a successful Zoran rather than a kind of like shame on socialism Zoran?

[Mason]

I think that that is a common talking point that's brought up is the wealthy people are all going to leave. If we prioritize working people's dignity, if we give people unionization, companies are just going to completely close and fire everybody. And time after time again, those types of lies and propaganda are proven false. So it's not that wealthy people are Just going to abandon one of the largest markets in the world simply because, oh, we're starting to prioritize workers dignity more. This is an adaptation that these types of owners are going to have to live with. And part of what I'm always told by defenders of capitalism is, hey, the cards aren't thrown your way all the time. Life isn't fair. Things are going to change. You have to learn to adapt. I'm here saying, okay, these people with vast amounts of wealth, they're going to learn to adapt. With people being able to provide more for their families and being able to spend more in the economy, One of the largest indicators of economic growth is giving working class people more buying power when it comes to participating in the economy. If these owners who are running a lot of these industries need consumers, you can't have consumers if people don't have the buying power to have luxury spending. And with Zoro Mamdani, I think, regardless of what happens, I think that it's hard to make stark predictions one way or the other of how these types of administrations play out because there are so many forces that want to see him fail. I think it'll be interesting to see what his success rate is and how he's able to energize New Yorkers who have a clear passion for what the principles that he proposes are.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah, we're all eagerly watching. I'm going to pull up the second clip.

[Patrick Bet-David]

A lot of time when you come up with a noble idea to try to fix something today ends up getting bigger and you never expected it. When Social Security first came out in 1935, the first benefits were paid in 37 and it was paid in a lump sum. At that time, we had 128 million people living in America. Do you know how many people got Social Security?

[Mason]

Tell me.

[Patrick Bet-David]

54,000. Do you know when benefits started?

[Mason]

Tell me.

[Patrick Bet-David]

65 years old. So let me say this again to you. Life expectancy was 61. Social Security benefits started at 65.

[Mason]

Right. And you're saying because we've increased life, people need to work longer. Right.

[Patrick Bet-David]

04.

[Mason]

So grandma should be working at the middle.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And you can say anything you want to say.

[Mason]

Well, I'm saying you said, as life expects, people should be working longer. Let me tell you, you want to extend the retirement age.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you bring that to today and you bring the math, exact same formula as the great FDR came up with.

[Mason]

Patrick, here's the difference between our worldviews. You're saying that because 340 million people.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Let me Say the point and then I'll let you speak as long as you want to speak.

[Mason]

Great.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So that went from math again for you. 54,000 out of 128 million people,.04% life expectancy, 61 benefits start 65. Today it's 74 million out of 340 million. That's 21%. When life expectancy is 60, 78, benefits start at 65. Do you know who's going to pay the price on Social Security? Not my generation.

[Mason]

Yours keep doing cuts, Correct? If we keep doing cuts?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, because you're going to run out of money. You're going to run out of money.

[Mason]

That's not how it works. So the difference between our worldview, Patrick, is you're saying not only should people work longer into life because life expectancy has increased, but they should work longer into life without guarantees for health care, without preventative care. And that's not only going to increase to the deterioration of people's living conditions, it's also going to lead to a worse economy because let me tell you, 70 year olds not going to be the most productive members of our economy. They should be spending time with their families. They should be easing into their passing away. We shouldn't be forcing grandma to go to the mill.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's going to be on your back. You'll be paying for this in 30 years.

[Mason]

Appreciate you.

[John Rigolato]

What comes to mind hearing that last exchange.

[Mason]

Yeah, I mean, Patrick, the thing that I'll credit him is he knows his conservative talking points to a T. So I'm glad that he's able to just regurgitate this like I've heard so many times. But it really is like the affordability problem for Social Security has always been a political problem. It's not an economic one. The program only faces shortfalls. There's like expectations from 20, 30 of running out of money for it, not because it's unaffordable, but because Congress intentionally capped taxable income. So right now, for those listening, if you look this up, only wages up to around $170,000 are taxed. And that means that a millionaire stops paying FICA taxes, which contributes to Social Security by like February, where middle class workers are paying all year round. And so while yes, some, most of the time these wealthy people are paying more when it comes to total sum, they are not paying proportional percentages when it comes to the amount of money that they're accumulating all year. So lifting or just completely eliminating this gap would completely close all of the funding issues that we're seeing without cutting any Social Security benefits. So it really is like a question of fairness. Should the rich contribute more because they have the ability to contribute more or no, should we allow middle class and lower income people to continue to pay more of their salary in the name of creating more sustainability or more economic productivity for them?

[John Rigolato]

I appreciate you breaking that down and I'm going to look that up because that was one of my questions which was how do, how does, how can you save Social Security when you look at the math, the way Patrick presented it. Another question I have though is, and I'm sure you're familiar with this, Ezra Klein's book Abundance has sort of sparked this discussion on whether blue states and blue cities specifically mismanaged governance or mishandled it and created bloat. Whether that be regulations that slowed down the development of housing, which caused housing crisis, which grew homeless populations in those cities which sparked violence. There's a conversation that when Democrats have the power and they have good intentions, like Patrick was saying, it sometimes blows up into a system that is either bloating or preventing common sense. What do you think?

[Mason]

Yeah, I think that the abundance debate is. It's really just a repackaged version of neoliberalism which is prioritizing market control or private development or private enterprise over non profit and public understanding of what our specific demands are. So I think that things like inelastic goods which are goods that are going to be purchased by consumers regardless of price inflation, these are things like housing, these are things like education, health care, pharmaceuticals, anything that people rely on. You know, if I'm a diabetic and insulin costs $1,000 or it costs $10, I'm going to buy it regardless. And these types of goods cannot be properly managed by market rule or by profit seeking motives. And I think that a lot of times the, the abundance debate is, is a criticism or a condemnation over corporate democrat attempts to appease people who want nonprofit production when it comes to these inelastic goods. And I think that the problem that we're seeing in a lot of blue cities is there there's this sense that, you know, these blue cities are so progressive and they're so woke. California is commifornia baby. And when you look at it, when you look at the prioritization in our market, this is nowhere near a worker dominated economy. We have some of the wealthiest technocrats, we have some of the wealthiest cities in the prioritization of single family homes like in San Francisco, where there is no, is no housing development. That's being allowed. There's no public housing because of NIMBYs and people who say, I don't want to see that as I'm going about the street because there are a bunch of poor people that are living in those homes and it's taken away from the character of my neighborhood. These are the wealthy prioritizations in a place like California that is masked with this veneer of progressivism. And so I think that that really where the abundance argument falls flat is saying that, oh, we just need more prioritization of private development or profit seeking motives when we've seen that fail in so many of the cities who already have that. You have to make the distinction of what, what is being labeled as progressive? Is it the social issues? Is it the ways that they handle law enforcement? Is it the housing that they provide for? Folks like these are the real questions on, on what makes a city, quote unquote progressive or what makes it prioritizing capital interests? And so that really begs the question of where is the prioritization on access to this abundance that we already have, this false scarcity that continues to be propagated by wealthy elites? This really should be the question that we're focusing on is how do we get more access to those goods, Whether that's buybacks or whether that's land seizures or whatever the case, in order to make sure that we are properly prioritizing the health and security and the well being of people that live in the country, as opposed to the wallets or the investments or the returns on investments of people who are private developers or wealthy landlords?

[John Rigolato]

Something I've heard recently is, you know, you mentioned taxation, wealth redistribution, social services. I've, I kind of have picked up a sentiment that those kinds of things could make the US less competitive with other world powers. And do you worry that at a time when there's kind of this AI arms race ramping up between, you know, China and the us, do you worry that if the US falls behind, it won't have technological supremacy and that could lead to, to a world where a less preferred form of government or a less preferred world superpower is calling the shots?

[Mason]

Just the first part of your question was, do you think the overemphasis on social programs that you said can get rid of our competitive edge?

[John Rigolato]

Yeah. Would that slow the US down or possibly move talent and capital out of the US and to our competitors in a way that would, you know, jeopardize the US's position as, as the world power? Yeah, I think that matters.

[Mason]

Yeah. I think that we're. I mean, you mentioned it would lead to a less democratic or less desirable political system, and I think that that's going to happen regardless. I think that we are slowly moving either into economic collectivization or we're moving into a ethnic or cultural form of authoritarian control or what a lot of people are calling fascism. And I think that that really are the only two outcomes because of this affordability crisis. There are so many people who recognize that they don't live in a system that prioritizes their growth or their well being. And it's really who the problem is that people are trying to identify. Is the problem these lower income or low skilled workers that are coming in from developing nations? Is it the LGBTQ people that live in my neighborhoods or is it wealthy interests who really call the shots and have the most influence in our social, political and economic systems?

[John Rigolato]

All right, well, Mason, thank you so much. This won't be the last time we speak and hopefully we see each other again on a set.

[Mason]

Yeah, thanks, Sean. I really appreciate this and I appreciate talking with you.

[John Rigolato]

Prime delivery is fast.

[Gabby]

How fast are we talking?

[John Rigolato]

We're talking puzzle toys and lit pad.

[Gabby]

Delivered so fast you can get this puppy under control fast.

[John Rigolato]

We're talking chew toys at your door without really waiting. Fast. Pads, cooling peg, timer, fast and fast.

[Gabby]

And those training T R E a.

[Mason]

T s faster than you can say sit fast.

[John Rigolato]

And now we can all relax and order these matching hoodies to get cozy and cute. Fast, fast. Free delivery.

[Gabby]

It's on Prime.

[John Rigolato]

I'm Scott Hanson, host of NFL Red Zone. Lowe's knows Sundays hit different when you earn them.

[Patrick Bet-David]

We've got you covered with outdoor power equipment from Cobalt and everything you need to weatherproof your deck with Trex decking.

[John Rigolato]

Plus with lawn care from Scotts and.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Of course, pit boss grills and accessories.

[John Rigolato]

You can get a home field advantage all season long. So get to Lowe's, get it done, and earn your Sunday.

[Mason]

Lowe's official partner of the NFL.

[John Rigolato]

I also spoke to Gabby, who debated Patrick twice in the center. And what was interesting about Gabby was she seemed to be very comfortable aggressively coming at Patrick. And there were multiple times where it really seemed like they were debating almost as equals. And I thought it was interesting how well she held her ground. And I thought she pushed Patrick to some interesting places, and he also pushed her to some interesting places. So I wanted to learn more about her guiding philosophy that has led her to identifying as a democratic socialist and. Hey, Gabby.

[Gabby]

Awesome. Hi.

[John Rigolato]

How's it going? How Are you doing?

[Gabby]

I'm doing great. Yeah. Thanks so much for having me. I appreciate it.

[John Rigolato]

So you went toe to toe with Patrick, bet David, and of all people in the episode, you really caught my attention as somebody who really could confidently spar with him.

[Gabby]

That means a lot. Thank you. I was very, very nervous. I was practically shitting myself the entire time. So I'm glad that that wasn't seen by people who were watching the episode.

[John Rigolato]

That it was just a close up most of the time. So we. We did not see. Yeah, let's watch the first clip.

[Gabby]

Okay. I'm a democratic socialist. I think that we need to build forward towards that with reforms, and I think we need to work with the government. I don't think that we should abandon the state. I also don't think that we should give state elites the complete control over society. I do think that we should work with the state to instill these reforms and then eventually erode capitalism.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But unfortunately, socialism has had hundreds of.

[Gabby]

Years, but you're thinking in terms of.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Competition to produce results, and it hasn't worked. Do you know why it doesn't work, though?

[Gabby]

It's been sabotaged.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's been sabotaged or is because it forces people to do something they don't want to do?

[Gabby]

Does capitalism not do the same?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No. Capitalism.

[Gabby]

There's 7 million people in this country. You have to work multiple jobs just to get.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I have to work multiple jobs.

[Gabby]

They're forced to do that because either they do that or they starve. So if the options are to work or to starve, that's not freedom. That's economic coercion.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Respectfully, if you do that for a period of your life, I understand it. If you're doing that for 30 years, you're doing something wrong. You shouldn't be working multiple jobs for the rest of your life.

[John Rigolato]

All right, so after seeing that first clip, what's your reaction? Just to. To seeing it and reliving it?

[Gabby]

Yeah. Patrick, he was very civil, and I will give him that. I've seen previous Jubilee episodes, and the people in his seat tend to be quite combative. And I found him to be one of the more polite and cordial ones. So I'll start with that positive about him. I do think that he has a tendency to be very scattered. He sort of throws out these very loosely connected points, and it's really hard to debate with someone like that because you can't fully unpack their line of reasoning. And so I would love to sit down with him for longer if he would have me on his valuetainment podcast because I'd love to unpack that further. I think it was heading in an interesting direction, but unfortunately he has a very narrow view of the world. He only thinks of society through capitalist terms and through competition, and he can't envision a society without market mechanisms.

[John Rigolato]

Something you kind of open up with at the beginning is identifying as a democratic socialist. How have you been exposed to that idea and eventually kind of become an advocate for it?

[Gabby]

Yeah, I think it started when I was young. Obviously, I haven't always identified this way. I didn't have the language when I was younger, but I think that it's rooted in sort of childhood. I grew up in a fairly conservative suburb in Orange county, and I was surrounded by a lot of wealth. I grew up with a lot of privilege, and it was kind of all I was used to. It was definitely a bubble of sorts. You know, everyone around me had really, really nice houses and cars and would go on fancy vacations. And I kind of grew up with this idea that that's how the world worked. And then when I eventually went to college in Oregon, that bubble sort of burst a little bit, and I was sort of exposed to just different political realities and sort of had to re examine mine and realize that I had taken it for granted for most of my life. In college, I got involved with Planned Parenthood. I got involved with labor unions. I did a lot of organizing work, and that included canvassing to a lot of different voters around Oregon. And I had conversations with people who were losing their health care benefits at work or didn't have union representation, weren't getting paid a fair wage, couldn't pay their rent. So that really did open my eyes to, okay, this isn't just some abstract political talking point. Like, this is people's real lives. It's not right. I mean, we live in the wealthiest country in the world. Why are 40 million people living in poverty? Like, doesn't make sense. Something wasn't adding up. And I also sort of experienced my own form of downward mobility economically. I started struggling with, like, having to stretch paychecks and making rent and deciding between bills. So, you know, my own sort of lived experience in that way. But mostly hearing from people across the state, people in rural areas and urban areas who were just struggling to deal with the costs of living. And that really just, I guess, kind of radicalized me in a way.

[John Rigolato]

You mentioned, you know, hey, I'm a democratic socialist right now, but the end goal could be, you know, a more. A more complete or holistic form of socialism. Do you think China figured something out? And I mean, I think this is really taboo to say in the US right now, especially if we're talking to older generations, but I'm hearing it more and more online. Do you think China has figured something out that's really appealing to people in the US in a way that maybe it hasn't before? Do you think there are ideas there that the US has looked past?

[Gabby]

You know, I think, I think there's a lot of moral panic around China, mostly propagated by the right. And I think it's unfortunate because I think China has done a lot of things well. I think I mentioned this in the video, but they had the most significant poverty reduction in human history. They pulled 800 million people out of poverty and they did that using stellar enterprises. And so I think, you know, it's a country that has its faults like any other and it's very far from a socialist or communist country. People who call it that are absolutely insane because it's clearly not. It's a very capitalist country at this point and it's, you know, a leading global force. But I do think like we dismissed China's accomplishments and China's successes because of this sort of like red scare McCarthyism point of view.

[John Rigolato]

When someone, you know, Patrick, kind of tried to hint at this, I don't think it ever fully entered the conversation. But you know, you say, hey, we haven't tried socialism, we haven't given it a fair shot here in the US But I think a lot of times people say, well in history it certainly has had a fair shot. And they'll point to atrocities done by Stalin or in China's past and they use those as cases to say, look, this is the result of this philosophy of government. What would your response be to that?

[Gabby]

Yeah, it's a great point and I understand the concern. I think that when we look at certain examples, like for instance, you said Stalin, the ussr, it's hard to call that socialism. And I think, you know, there are, there are some people that I know that would consider themselves to be Stalinists. And I, and I have mixed sort of feelings about that. But I do think it's, I, I definitely have my own feelings about that part of history. But I think that we can look at, when we look at those periods, we can sort of remind ourselves that like these are examples of top down authoritarianism. And that's something Rosa Luxembourg said is like socialism without democracy will inevitably turn into authoritarianism. And so we have to have Some sort of democratic system in place, which is why I call myself a democratic socialist. I'm not huge about labels, but I do like to call myself that because I think that we need to use reforms as a means to a larger end. And I don't think that investing in one leader is good for the movement. It's supposed to come from the masses, it's supposed to come from the working majority. It's not supposed to come from a power hungry dictator. And so I think that we need a bottom up form of socialism. We need worker co ops, we need participatory budgeting, we need people deciding how our economic system works. And that can only be done if we have a fair election system in place.

[John Rigolato]

Let's watch the second clip.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Because when you say what you say about, say the Democratic side on the climate change side, the guy that's worked towards that the most, you guys loved him until he supported Trump. Elon was your favorite eight years ago until he supported Trump the moment he went into Trump. This guy's a horrible guy. This guy's a terrible guy.

[Gabby]

To be fair, I've hated Elon Musk consistently throughout my adult life. And I also think that he is someone who has benefited immensely from the government. That's why I find him hypocrisy and what you're saying.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't disagree on that side.

[Gabby]

He's benefited immensely from the exploitation of labor overseas. He's benefited immensely from his extremely aggressive union tactics, union busting tactics, tactics. So I'm saying, like, why is he.

[Patrick Bet-David]

A net positive to you for society?

[Gabby]

Is he a net positive for me personally?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Is he a net positive for society? Not for you?

[Gabby]

I wouldn't say so.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You don't think he is?

[Gabby]

No, I wouldn't say so.

[Patrick Bet-David]

He was a net positive to society. Bernie Sanders.

[Gabby]

I would, I mean, Bernie Sanders is, I would say he's a compromise, compromise.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Candidate, but I would say that he's a compromise candidate.

[Gabby]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Aoc, A net positive to society?

[Gabby]

I would say net positive, yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

More than Musk is.

[Gabby]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Really? Tell me why.

[Gabby]

Because AOC wants to introduce a green New Deal. And I think that the New Deal is the closest.

[Patrick Bet-David]

$30 trillion.

[Gabby]

Okay. Trump literally just added $3.4 trillion to our deficit.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So I really don't want to hear 30 trillion.

[Gabby]

Okay?

[Patrick Bet-David]

So I'm saying trillion.

[Gabby]

Oh, gosh, it's so fun.

[John Rigolato]

So, yeah, we got to get into the Elon of it all. Just because he's the perfect ror. What do you think's the problem with Someone, a figure like Elon, because I think it's undeniable that he has contributed to the fields of science and industry. But the conversation doesn't stop there. What do you think's the issue with someone like Elon?

[Gabby]

I think that Elon, I mean, beyond his political beliefs and his political stunts with Trump in the past few years, he. I would say that he's been a net negative for society to go by PPD's terms. I think that he takes advantage of a system that was built for him to hoard wealth. And so on one hand, he's a symptom. He's not an anomaly. There's plenty of people like Elon. There's plenty of Bezos and Zuckerbergs in this world. Maybe a little less wealthy, but there's plenty of 1 percenters who have taken advantage of our tax loopholes, our lack of regulations. And there have been multiple reports that he's participated in union vesting tactics. You know, he gets billions of dollars from our government, and then the government neglects to actually pour that money into things like health care, education, things that we actually need and want and have requested. And I think that someone with that amount of money, someone who's the richest person in the world, has the power to fix the. The things that plague our society. And I know that's maybe a simplistic way of looking at it, but he has the power and he has neglected. He's neglected that power. And I think that's a deliberate choice. I think that. But something Patrick bet David did really well in his debate is he really did this rhetorical questioning of, okay, if you're an anti capitalist, then why won't you accept this job for me? And I think that that exemplifies what billionaires do on a regular basis. They don't pay their taxes, but then they pour millions of dollars into the charity of their choice, and then they get away with this sort of performative optics thing. It's very calculated. And I don't trust someone who has that much money and does so little with it to help society.

[John Rigolato]

At the end there, Patrick tried to steer it towards aoc. And you kind of referred to AOC as just maybe somebody who's a net positive for society. And you brought up the Green New Deal. And then there was some numbers kind of getting thrown around, like 30 trillion versus 3 trillion. And so this is another critique that comes up a lot is, hey, these ideas that socialism advocates for cost too much money. And that money will, you know, that will unravel the government and the stability of our society. What would you say to that argument?

[Gabby]

I would say implement a wealth tax that could easily pay for it. If we look back at FDR's new deal, he basically helped pull this country out of the Great Depression by implementing a 70 to, I think, 94% marginal tax rate on the ultra rich, not on middle class people, not on poor people, on the ultra rich in society. And he was able to give people job training, education, health care, all of these things. And unemployment vastly dropped after the Great Depression because of this program that he had in place. And so I think people can argue different types of tax rates if it's more of a progressive or gradual tax rate. But I think that a wealth tax is ultimately what we need to start with. And I think that I was trying to ask Patrick why he doesn't support a wealth tax on billionaires. And I was trying to ask him if someone could reasonably live off of just $999 million. And he refused to answer that question because he knows how absurd that is. You know, no one needs that much money. And yeah, it's a great question, like, why should we be paying so much for these public goods? I think that we should, because we see in Scandinavia and Nordic countries that when people have their material needs met, they do better. It's shockingly, you know, they're not burnt out and they have time to invest in what they'd like to do, and they can pursue their passions and their dreams because they're not saddled with things like student debt. You know, they don't have to worry about rent next month.

[John Rigolato]

And then I think what I heard him say is like, I can't wait for Zoran to win and for all of the billionaires to leave New York. What do we do if, you know, do you think it's true that in a scenario where we implement a wealth tax in the country or in a specific city that the wealth will just vacate? They'll find a loophole, they'll find a way to get their wealth out of that city or out of that country.

[Gabby]

I mean, that's what's very challenging about this at this point. It's challenging to. Billionaires have plenty of offshore bank accounts and things that we. Plenty of assets that we don't know about. It's not just like tangible money in a bank account per se. So it's difficult to sort of navigate that. But I think that to that point, if billionaires are fleeing a city, I think that's a sign of economic fragility. I mean, if they can't afford to live there anymore because of a wealth tax, I think that says more about their economic state. And I also think that if his fear is that we're going to lose jobs, these people provide jobs, they create jobs, that's his argument, then investing in the public good with that wealth tax will provide a safety net for people who do lose their jobs. And so I think that I don't really have a huge issue with billionaires being driven out of a city, but I understand the concern. I do think that this world would be better off without billionaires. And I don't just say that as like a tacky Instagram slogan. I say that truly we do not need these people hoarding this much wealth from us because that's theft that they're taking away from the rest of us. They're taking away from the working majority.

[John Rigolato]

My spitball gut feeling is like, if you move in a socialist direction, you need a really strong centralized government, and that incentivizes innovative, ambitious people to accumulate in that state, and power can accumulate there. And that's where the innovation happens. And maybe that's what's happening in China. They're doing incredible things, building incredible things. And I think that's because the brightest people operate closer to the state. But there's also concerns that pop up and, you know, surveillance and essentially, you know, control being too centralized. And then there's the opposite. Here we have in the U.S. you know, we're really the Wild west. And we want people to be able to go as big as they like. And that creates the Elon Musk's and the Mark Zuckerbergs and the Bezos. And they innovate. You know, we all were probably using three or four things that a billionaire created at this very moment, but we have to deal with their midlife crises in the process. And that's what I would probably describe Elon's behavior as. It's like, yes, the man's achieved things, but we all are kind of very much a part of his life, more than I think we would like. And so I found myself listening to you and Patrick because you were both sparring so well, and it was a really great conversation. I found myself being able to kind of see the outcomes of both sides in a certain way and not really knowing where I stood.

[Gabby]

Yeah, yeah, I understand that. And I think it's such a nuanced issue. I think this particular topic is really tough because it's all we know. We've Only grown up in a capitalist society. I've never grown up in a socialist country. I've never even grown up in a country with a social democracy. I didn't grow up in Scandinavia. So I think that it's hard to know how these things would look like. But I think that what we do know is that currently DSA has the most members that it's ever had, and it's a very effective movement. That's how Zoran got elected in the first place. And I think it says something that this guy with virtually no name recognition and like all of New York's real estate money against him was able to like, shake up the whole country and was able to win his election. You know, like, he clearly, he wasn't pitching utopia. He was talking about freezing the rents. And that resonated with working people across New York and across America.

[John Rigolato]

What's stopping you from running for office? Why don't you go find a district and try and get into Congress?

[Gabby]

Oh, gosh. You know, funny enough, like, I. The Jubilee thing was really scary for me and I get really freaked out by public speaking if any of my fellow grad cohort members end up listening to this. Like, they know, like, I hate giving presentations. Like, I don't really like to be like, the front face of things.

[John Rigolato]

One of the more exciting things about Jubilee is I would like to see people go on the show and then become thought leaders or honestly even run for office after seeing that they have a skill for being a thought leader. We need more strong communicators in the marketplace of ideas. And you also need people who are hesitant to be leaders. Sometimes those are the best, best folks for the job.

[Gabby]

I appreciate that and I think I completely. I'm very, very grateful for Jubilee as a platform. I think I have my qualms with, like, yes, it can be clickbaity and it can be hard to have a full length conversation, but at the end of the day, I think something that's really nice about it is that it brings people together at this sort of like, intersection of the Internet that we wouldn't normally meet at. Like, you have like, PBD's, like, Manosphere Grindset Bros, and then you have these sort of like queer socialists, like leftists. Like, it's like they're never gonna watch the same things until there's a Jubilee video like that. And I think that's really introducing the.

[John Rigolato]

Perfect companion to your morning listening routine. AG1's clinically backed formula is now flavor packed with three new delicious flavors. Tropical berry and citrus. Start the day on a high note with probiotics that taste like the tropics. Mix it up with micronutrients that taste.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Like berry or citrus, and take it.

[John Rigolato]

All the way back with the classic AG1 original with notes of pineapple and vanilla. Do your health a flavor or four with AG1 NextGen, the daily health drink.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Learn more at drink ag1.com hey, it's.

[John Rigolato]

Ryan Reynolds here for Mint Mobile. Now. I was looking for fun ways to tell you that Mint's offer of unlimited Premium Wireless for $15 a month is back. So I thought it would be fun if we made $15 bills, but it turns out that's very illegal. So there goes my big idea for the commercial. Give it a [e-mail] switch upfront payment.

[Mason]

Of $45 for a 3 month plan equivalent to $15 per month required new.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Customer offer for first 3 months only.

[Mason]

Speed slow after 35 gigabytes of networks.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Busy taxes and fees extra see mintmobile.com cool.

[John Rigolato]

Something unique about this episode with Patrick was there were some really bold offers made to some of the debaters in the center. One example is James, who after sharing some tragic details of his own personal story, was actually offered a job by Patrick if he was willing to relocate to Fort Lauderdale. The interaction ended in a kind of unclear place, but I wanted to hear more about what James thought of the offer as well as just learn more about his backstory. So here's James. James, welcome to the Surrounded follow up.

[James]

Thanks.

[John Rigolato]

Thanks.

[James]

It's good to be here.

[John Rigolato]

I'm just curious, you know, without seeing any of the footage and just kind of having your own memory of it, how do you feel about the experience now that it's been a couple weeks?

[James]

I think it was good. It felt like he was not coming in to have a back and forth discussion, but rather to get one over on the anti cap or something like that. He pulled what most capitalists do that I've seen. Well, maybe not capitalists, but like people with a fair amount of money do, whenever they find out that they're either somebody is getting one over on them or their point isn't being made the right way, they just start throwing money at the problem. I think that he offered to pay like three different people in certain, in other, in various other ways. One person, he offered to pay for their mental health support and he offered me a job which was completely out of nowhere.

[John Rigolato]

It was interesting that you kind of see that as throwing money at the problem because he, I noticed that as well There was. He came in, I think, with some unique ideas of how to engage with people, and he wasn't afraid to make, I think, some bold offers. It kind of reminded me of Shark Tank a little bit, but, yeah, I could see that. Yeah. Okay, so I'm going to show you the first clip because this is just you kind of meeting him, sitting down, and then giving him some of your context.

[James]

So where exactly am I failing when I am working 80 hours a week? I am taking the only jobs that will hire me. I have put in 477 applications over the last two and a half years. Not even gotten a call back from once.

[John Rigolato]

Why do you think you tell me you're.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're a job creator, but I don't know your resume? You know your life better than I do. Why do you think you have not gotten a call back on 477?

[James]

Because I do not have a degree.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[James]

Because I do not have a degree because I could not afford one.

[Mason]

Okay.

[James]

I live in an area where the physical job market is very limiting.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Where do you live?

[James]

I live in rural Texas.

[John Rigolato]

Okay.

[James]

So in that. Like, in the town that I grew.

[John Rigolato]

Up in, for instance, there are. Are eight jobs, period.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Does all. Does your family live their mom that. Everybody's in that same city.

[James]

Everybody was at one point.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[John Rigolato]

Most of them are dead now.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay. Sorry to hear.

[James]

Nah, it is what it is. It's poverty. You know, we're kind of used to.

[Mason]

That on this side.

[John Rigolato]

What do you. What comes to mind when you see that.

[Gabby]

One?

[James]

I had forgotten that I had gotten that contentious at the very beginning.

[John Rigolato]

What. What. What do you do for work? Where are you right now, if you don't mind me asking?

[James]

Well, yeah, so currently I am working for Amazon doing package delivery. I am working for the place that I am at here, which is a metaphysical shop that a friend of mine owns. They actually gave me an opportunity to work for them at what they could pay me for, and then I do Uber whenever I can in between taking care of my partner who has a couple of autoimmune things and some medical issues.

[John Rigolato]

Sorry to hear that. So, yeah, you're racking up 80 hours a week is what you said. And. And, I mean, that's a lot of time.

[James]

Yeah.

[John Rigolato]

You broke down.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Yeah.

[John Rigolato]

Do you. In that con, in the context of your life, which sounds like, you know, as you described it, it's poverty. It sounds stressful or at least tiring, because that's a lot of different tasks, a lot of different jobs, not a ton of income. What's your level of contentment, happiness in your context?

[James]

I would say if I had to put a number on it, between 1 and 10. My contentment with my personal life is about a 7 and everything else is about a 2 to 3.

[John Rigolato]

Oh, wow. Yeah, that's. Those are some low numbers after, after the seven.

[James]

So.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah, I mean, did you feel like maybe some of those struggles, some of the. Just your reality, it's kind of like ricocheting inside you when you sat down across from Patrick?

[James]

Yeah, 100%. It was, it was one of those things. And I'll, and I'll readily admit it, whenever I got up there, I, I walked up very, very like confident in what I was going to say. And then as I kind of started getting into it, I don't know if people noticed this, but I definitely did that. My voice kind of starts wavering a little bit and I did. I got fairly emotional in that instance because. And I don't know if the camera's gonna show this, but I'm a very big energy person and just like the reactions and I know it's gonna sound woo, woo. The vibe or whatever that I got off of this guy was very much a. Like I was giving a sob story to somebody who could care less and that I could. That is kind of what kind of got me heated a little bit.

[John Rigolato]

What do you think people don't understand, you know, someone like Patrick or just anybody who lives a wealthier life in terms of financial means? What do you think they don't understand about poverty or what's a misconception you think they have about poverty?

[James]

So I can't say this with any type of certainty, but I do know that in the times in my life, whenever I was making what would be considered a livable wage, I do know that in general, my life felt lighter. I lost my job due to personal issues with my management. God, how long ago was that now? Four years at this point, I think where I was making $65,000 a year. And that to me felt like a king's wage.

[John Rigolato]

You know, in that first clip with Patrick, you Described sending out 477, something like that have 400 plus, give or take. What do you think is the reason for this search for, for a job? Why is it, why is it taking so much from you and why do you think it's so hard?

[James]

I don't have a degree. I don't have a bachelor's. I don't have any. I've got a certificate, I've got an osha certification from a long time ago, but other than. Oh, and I'm forklift certified.

[John Rigolato]

Hey, that's. That's important. A lot of forklifts.

[James]

Every job that I have interviewed with, I have gotten it, and I have. I interview very well, I believe. I feel like I'm a fairly personable person.

[John Rigolato]

Well, as you were talking to Patrick, it seemed like he maybe was recognizing some sort of spark in you, some sort of work ethic in you, because the conversation kind of took an unexpected turn towards this opportunity and sort of, kind of out of the blue offer he made.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you have on your resume? Skill set. What do you offer?

[James]

Transportation expertise, logistics expertise.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You consider yourself a hard worker?

[Gabby]

I mean, I feel like 80 hours a week.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's a hard worker.

[John Rigolato]

Sure.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How about we do this? How about I interview and I give you a job? Would you move to Fort Lauderdale?

[Gabby]

Ooh, that's Florida.

[James]

Why not?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you move to Fort Lauderdale? How about you and I document this after this, you come, I do an interview with you, and I give you a job, and let's see what you do 90 days later.

[Gabby]

Okay, let me.

[James]

And I'll look up your company and all that kind of stuff, and I'll see it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But see what just happened regardless. Watch what you just did.

[John Rigolato]

Sure.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You just said you applied to 477 companies. Who's not gone back to you.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

A business owner who's hiring aggressively just made an offer to you. You sit, you're willing to move. Then you said, I'll look at it. You became selective.

[John Rigolato]

I didn't say I look at it.

[James]

If you let me finish my sentence.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Go ahead, I want to hear it.

[James]

I would like to look into your company to see exactly what you guys do.

[John Rigolato]

All right.

[James]

That was exactly like I thought it was.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah. So what happened there?

[James]

Well, from my perspective, he saw somebody who he believed to be desperate. He believed to be at their wit's end and at the end of their rope. So he was going to throw that person a lifeline with the expectation that that person would not ask any questions about it and accept it wholesale. Not like. No, no, not. Not looking at it. Not making sure that it's safe or anything like that. Or once I said I was going to do my due diligence on him, he said, oh, well, if you're going to look into me, don't worry about it.

[John Rigolato]

I felt like he was testing you for sure, and I felt like you sniffed that out. Maybe that made you feel disrespected because it was kind Of a bit of a stagey moment, maybe. So I can see how. I can see how that could feel like it was maybe demeaning. But I. In Patrick, I sensed kind of a genuine curiosity about, hey, we're here face to face. Why don't you work for me and I'll make sure that we make it happen. Did you feel like there was some goodwill there? I thought that he had some goodwill.

[James]

So I think that in his mind and in his heart, he probably felt that way like this, like a little bit.

[John Rigolato]

Why do you say that?

[James]

I think his demeanor, the way that he interacted with other people and the fact of that when I tell him that I'm going to look into his company, he immediately retracts it.

[John Rigolato]

What do you mean by retracted? You think he was worried that you were going to find something out about the company that was. Was, was not? He didn't want you to know?

[James]

I mean, later on in the episode, somebody called him out for basically being a pyramid scheme. So maybe, yeah, no, I heard that.

[John Rigolato]

I don't want to go down that path because I. I actually don't know.

[James]

Absolutely fair.

[John Rigolato]

I have no knowledge of Patrick's business practices. And honestly, similar to you, I don't even exactly know what he does, but I know he's wealthy. I know he's. He's a successful guy, and. And he's obviously probably got really good lawyers.

[James]

So I'm not gonna say that it's a pyramid scheme. I said somebody else said it don't come for me lawyers. I don't know anything.

[Gabby]

So I believe the technical.

[Patrick Bet-David]

When you make more money from getting.

[Mason]

People to be part of a company.

[John Rigolato]

Than from actually selling a service is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Called a multi level marketing scheme. Do you think that that's a fair.

[Gabby]

Characterization of your company?

[John Rigolato]

Why not?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you know what multi level is?

[John Rigolato]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No.

[John Rigolato]

It's where you make more money from.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's sort of like a definition wherein you make more money from getting people to be part of it and selling them to be part of the company.

[John Rigolato]

Do you feel like you became anti capitalist after you lost your job, or is it something that goes back to a deeper philosophy? And when did you start feeling that way?

[James]

Probably about 13. 12 or 13.

[John Rigolato]

And how come?

[James]

My grandfather was a naval veteran of World War II. He was in Okinawa in Iwo Jima, and he had a lot of ptsd. Well, what I assume is ptsd. I can't speak to what his actual mental health situation was because his way of coping with it was copious amounts of drinking. My grandfather having a heart condition and having addiction issues and having what I assumed to be ptsd, was completely ignored by the people that he gave his entire life to. And he died. Like, he died of his alcoholism, he died of a heart condition, and he died on a waiting list for an appointment at the VA to try and, like, get his heart condition looked at. And. And that just. And I started asking my grandmother, like, why was he. Why was he not approved? Blah, blah, blah. Well, you know, sometimes these things just happen and that click something over where it's just like, well, why is it that this money isn't being allocated correctly?

[Mason]

Like, where.

[James]

Where is all this money that we have? We're the richest country in the world, right? Where's all this stuff going?

[John Rigolato]

Yeah, well, I'm starting to hear about your grandfather. What's interesting, though, is it kind of sounds like, you know, your anger is towards the US Government and how they handled that situation with your grandfather. But I do wonder if, you know, if you had had the opportunity to get to the core of your story with Patrick, I mean, he might have. He might have felt a similar way that you did or that you do about that. But, yeah, I can understand how witnessing something like that take down somebody you love and admire can be not the only one. Yeah, that can be an injury that lasts a lifetime. You had mentioned, you know, when you met him, you know, your parents have died. You know, pretty much a lot of people close to you have suffered similar fates.

[James]

My father died due to medical issues and being thrown off of Obamacare whenever Trump's first presidency came into. Came into office. He ended up dying in hospice care that my family couldn't afford to pay for. And I'm about 90% sure that my grandmother is still sitting on that bill.

[John Rigolato]

I'm sorry, man, that sucks. I would like to think, because it sounds like your life has really had a lot of tragedy in it, and I would like to preserve some shred of hope that maybe this job opportunity with Patrick might not be totally gone. And, yeah, I don't know, Patrick, if you're watching this, I think we should reconsider this situation. But I don't know. What do you think, James?

[James]

I mean, like I say, I am willing to entertain the idea. I'm willing to go to the interview, I'm willing to look at the company and see if he has a place for me.

[John Rigolato]

He's got a force for a due diligence. He's got to have a forklift somewhere in the operation, right?

[James]

I mean, unless it's a finance business. And then like, you know, maybe like a hand truck. Yeah.

[John Rigolato]

One thing I want to ask you, James. Do you ever worry, you know, that all these experiences and, and this loss of loved ones, do you think it's maybe given you too negative of a mindset or a mindset that. That maybe expects things to go wrong more than they necessarily do?

[James]

Yeah, it did for a very, very long time. Ooh, I'm gonna. I'm a little hesitant to say this, but honestly, about five years ago, whenever my wife divorced me, that was part of what got rid of a lot of this, like, a lot of that, like, hopelessness that I had at that point in time. So honestly, that that was hitting my absolute lowest point was probably what gave me a much more hopeful mindset. I don't recommend it. It stuck. And end of the day, if I didn't care enough about myself, I would have done it. But.

[John Rigolato]

Well, I'm going to try and believe that an opportunity is going to find its way to you and Patrick. I think you've got to have a forklift that James needs to operate. But also I heard something in there. James, I'm glad you, you've chose to stick around. I think, I think you're a valuable guy and I valued this conversation and I know the Jubilee team valued you being in that, in that video. So I'm going to send you some, some positive vibes. I know you said you're a vibes guy and I hope some, some brighter days are around the corner for you. Okay.

[James]

I hope so too. You know, I have faith that there.

[John Rigolato]

Will be another surprising interaction that happened in the center with Patrick was with Isabella. She also goes by Faye. After she shared some of her medical history with Patrick, he was so bold to offer to pay for her to meet with a specialist that he recommended both for a condition that she had as well as a mental health condition that she was struggling with. So I spoke to Faye and wanted to know more about what she thought of this offer as well as just learn more about her story. So here's Faye. Faye, AKA Isabella. Welcome to the Surrounded follow up.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Thank you.

[John Rigolato]

When did you first, you know, realize that you were anti capitalist? And do you know what motivated that perspective shift?

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yeah, so I realized I was anti capitalist probably during COVID Actually it was. I started watching some people who had opinions that were a lot more left leaning than the average person, like on YouTube and things like that. Mainly history videos on YouTube and that's when I started.

[John Rigolato]

Any favorite channels?

[Faye (Isabella)]

Hassan Hasan is Always one of my favorite. I. I watch him on Twitch, like, all day because I'm disabled, so I'm struggling to find a job in general, but. So, yeah, But I watch this on, like, a Fox News dad.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah, that's a funny comparison.

[Faye (Isabella)]

So I never really got an actual perspective on socialism and communism until after high school and during COVID when I started realizing that there was more economic possibilities out there.

[John Rigolato]

What was your impression of Patrick when he walked onto set?

[Faye (Isabella)]

I hadn't heard of him before, but when he walked in, I was like, yeah, that looks like a capitalist.

[John Rigolato]

He sounds like one, too. He's got that. That booming voice, and he had a. He definitely was looking crisp and clean cut in that suit. So you guys had a really interesting discussion that got very personal about your life, your past, and he made a pretty bold offer, which I was surprised by. And you were obviously surprised by. At least that's how I read your reaction in the moment.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Trouble is, in many cases, somebody you and I look up to will say something to us that we choose to believe for the rest of our lives. Unfortunately, it could be something where you have adhd, you're mentally ill, your parents poor, you're this, you're that way. We get to choose to buy into that or not. And if you do.

[Faye (Isabella)]

So you're saying I'm not mentally ill or I'm not the same.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You are or you're not. I would challenge it to go a little bit deeper to see if there's anything you can do about it.

[Faye (Isabella)]

So you're asking me about my health, you're asking me about my disability.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I will say we are in a market where. Stay with me here. There is a market where there's profit to convince you to have. You have issues, to take the medication because they're making money.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yeah, but I don't have access to the medication. I don't have access to even a result or a solution to my disability. As someone with a connective tissue disorder, it's genetic.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Have you been able to go to different doctors and get yourself tested?

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You have?

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

In California.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yes, but not enough. I can't find a specialist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You can't find.

[Faye (Isabella)]

I can't find a specialist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Is there anyone in your life that's.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Willing to find any specialist? Well, they could if. Or they would if they had money.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you be okay if I pay for a specialist for you to go see?

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you take money from a capitalist to help you go see specialists?

[Faye (Isabella)]

I mean, yeah, sure. Why not?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm gonna have you go see two. What do you do? You live in California.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm gonna have you go see two specialists. But would you also be open to seeing somebody else? I choose as a psychologist that may. No, you're not.

[Faye (Isabella)]

No. You choose as a psychologist. You're choosing who gets to determine what.

[John Rigolato]

My mental health looks like.

[Faye (Isabella)]

No. No.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, then. I wish you nothing but the best.

[John Rigolato]

A lot of people are going to weigh in on that situation. But what do you. What do you think? Watching it.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Watching it back, I really didn't remember it too well, but I'm starting to realize how he almost wanted to prove that disabled people can kind of like pull up their bootstraps and get through it and just. Just work hard enough and you'll work through it. But he was forgetting that there's so many disabled people who don't even have that as a choice. And the offer in general to give me a specialist, he hasn't followed up on that with me, so that's something to consider. I haven't gotten any emails or anything, but the offer in itself was kind of weird, but the way he was kind of wording it just reminded me of eugenics and how come my mind didn't go there. Since it's a genetic disorder. We haven't been able to do too much research in my condition, which is Ehlers Danlos syndrome. And as we're starting to research it, we realized that there's a lot more depth to it, and that has kind of been hidden throughout the white supremacist perception of pushing eugenics through our psychiatric and medical system in general.

[John Rigolato]

I think what he maybe was getting at was like, sometimes a doctor might give you a perspective that weighs on you, and we read into it too much. Do you agree with that, or did you read that the same way?

[Faye (Isabella)]

I did? And I think it's kind of a moot point to make is that in the grand scheme of things, I do have a very debilitating disability that he knows nothing about. So I think it was honestly kind of rude for him to tell me that a doctor, or at least imply that a doctor's diagnosis might be inaccurate.

[John Rigolato]

He was being pretty slightly invasive.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Yeah.

[John Rigolato]

And I could understand how you could feel that. But then when he made the suggestion that he, you know, he was like, can anybody pay for it? And you said, of course people would. Would pay for it if they could in my life, when he was so bold to suggest that he paid for it. What was going through your mind?

[Faye (Isabella)]

I think I was thinking mainly, like, I Guess why? I think he was really just think making a point as to like, oh, this victim of a lady will take a capitalist offer even though she's anti capitalist and a socialist. It's like, like he was trying to get a gotcha. And really his only gotcha was that I'm disabled and desperate.

[John Rigolato]

But yeah, and I, I can understand how it felt like that and I can understand how someone watching it could take that away from it. I guess I'm curious if, you know, I don't know if Patrick's going to watch this and that offer was still on the table to get connected with a specialist for whatever treatment is required for your condition. Would you take that money and do you think that would be a net good even if it was kind of offered in a performative context?

[Faye (Isabella)]

I think it's. I think it's kind of like not necessarily neutral intention, but kind of a centrist kind of way of thinking where you're like, oh, well, I'll give you help, but there's not really a good intent behind that. It's kind of just a gotcha. So I would accept the help because like I said, I'm desperate. I need to find a specialist. But that's the thing is that I'm desperate. And he was almost taking advantage of somebody in a situation who was in a very vulnerable position. Even debating in front of millions of people is going to be something that is a very vulnerable position for me. And I was also admitting that I was mentally ill and hospitalized for that and also admitting that I'm disabled to millions of people, which is already a very vulnerable position to be in on its own. So kind of throwing that in there was just. Was kind of disrespectful to me. But hey, I would accept it because I need help.

[John Rigolato]

I was wondering if you could share or elaborate a little bit more on the mental health struggles that you have as well.

[Faye (Isabella)]

I was diagnosed with borderline personality disorder, which is a very demonized disorder. It's compared to narcissism a lot, which is also another very demonized disorder. It's. But I guess with my personal experience with it, I've been able to overcome and even get rid of that diagnosis under my name. But most people don't have the resources to do that and don't have access to, especially with bpd, don't have access to even seeing perspectives where they realize that there's other options for them outside of BPD and outside of depressive thinking. And I think that even, like I was gonna say, because for my. If he was gonna pick me for a debate, my. At the end of the episode, my theory or my hypothesis or debate claim, I guess the claim. Yeah, thank you. Was that everything, every problem in specifically the U.S. no matter how personal it is, is the fault of capitalism. White supremacy or sexism or. Yeah, sexism. So all of these three things like colonialism, white supremacy, and sexism kind of just run our country.

[John Rigolato]

You really feel like every single problem could ladder up to those.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Those issues, Honestly, Yeah, I would be willing to debate that. Even with Patrick again, I would be more than happy to debate him again.

[John Rigolato]

When he made the suggestion of connecting you to also a psychologist, it felt like the offer kind of went sour and you had a big reaction. And I was just curious if you could elaborate more because you ran out of time moments later.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Well, the fact that he said a psychologist of his choosing, I think is a pretty gross thing to do because you're kind of. Because with your therapist, you or your psychiatrist, you get so vulnerable. You tell them, like, all of your problems, essentially, and you realize problems you have with them too. And so him choosing the person for me to be vulnerable to just doesn't even make sense because, like, you kind of have to shop around with therapies or therapists and psychiatrists in the first place. So giving one specific one by a conservative capitalist is not very encouraging for my mental health.

[John Rigolato]

I'm gonna take a little bit of a cheesy centrist stance on this, and I think. I think there's plenty to critique on the capitalist side. But if a capitalist is going to give somebody in need access to health care that they couldn't otherwise afford, I think that's a good thing. And so I would pressure Patrick to connect you and pay for the treatment and give you the option to opt in or out. You know, at least do the consultation with the people he connects you with and then move forward if they. If you feel like it's right for you. Do you agree with that or. Or would you still be resistant partially?

[Faye (Isabella)]

I don't think that even. I think people underestimate what a bad or a bad experience with a therapist or psychiatrist can do for you. I know a lot of people who have been traumatized me personally, from a psychiatrist or therapist telling me or psychologist telling me that my experience are invalid. And I fear that coming from somebody from his network, I obviously don't know his political or their political ideologies, where they would be coming from, but I just. I think it would be taking advantage of somebody who is in a very vulnerable position in the first place.

[John Rigolato]

Right. I agree you are in a vulnerable position. I think my only hope would be that you get better care. And I think there was a part of Patrick that felt that way. But I agree with you. There are other possibilities that could be coloring his motives. What would you want somebody who watches it in the next week or so, what would you want them to understand about you that maybe they might not get from the video?

[Faye (Isabella)]

That's a great question. I think that just to remember that I'm a human being and that everybody else here that was debating him are human beings. I think we look at a screen and we just see a face and we forget that there's a human behind that face and that there's a heart, there's a soul, there's a brain. And sometimes things like fart like your brain like I did. And I think just remembering to give people some credit and the bravery that they did take to debate this person who I didn't know is going to be in the first place. So doing that is a huge step to like, courageousness and confidence.

[John Rigolato]

Yeah, I couldn't agree anymore.

[Faye (Isabella)]

Thank you.

[John Rigolato]

Foreign for more follow up episodes of Surrounded. Be sure to like subscribe. Leave us a comment and a positive review wherever you get your podcasts. If you want to see the video versions of this, we are posting them on YouTube under Jubilee's second channel, Tubely. And if you want to interact with me online, you can find me on x or on YouTube. John Rigolato, thanks so much for listening. Remember, I could be wrong. So could you keep your mind open until next time?