Patrick Bet-David vs 20 Anti-Capitalists

Summary

---

Surrounded – Patrick Bet-David vs 20 Anti-Capitalists

Podcast: Surrounded (Jubilee Media)
Date: August 31, 2025

---

Episode Overview

This fiery episode of Surrounded places entrepreneur and media personality Patrick Bet-David (“PBD”) in the hot seat, facing 20 passionate anti-capitalists one after the other. The core theme: Is capitalism the best economic system, or do its foundational principles—such as incentive and market merit—lead to unacceptable inequality, exploitation, and lack of true freedom? Each segment is lively, challenging, and revealing, with PBD and his challengers clashing over incentive, meritocracy, healthcare, wealth distribution, labor, and more. The episode’s tone is combative but punctuated with moments of honesty, mutual respect, and even PBD offering jobs—and medical assistance—to his critics.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Role and Nature of Incentives in Capitalism

Timestamps: 02:11–07:14, 08:03–09:41, 13:42–16:47, 17:24–19:07

• PBD’s Opening Claim:
  “Incentive is the engine of capitalism. Remove it and the system fails.” (02:00)
  He argues that people are driven to work and innovate by financial and status incentives, citing his own immigrant, single-mother upbringing.

• Counterviews from Anti-Capitalists:

  • Intrinsic Motivation Argument: Humans work for meaning, fulfillment, and community good, not just to escape poverty.
  • Alternate Incentives: Socialist societies, they argue, foster incentives like collective wellbeing; examples include volunteering and charity.

• Notable Exchange:

  PBD: “So you think people gonna go just do anything for no incentives?”
  Socialist Advocate: “The incentive is intrinsic, meaning passion, interest…” (17:47–18:00)

• PBD on Survival vs. Merit:
  He emphasizes that not all hard work yields economic reward, but that personal choices and willingness to upskill can change one’s outcome. Critics retort that systemic barriers and cycles of poverty undermine meritocracy claims.

---

2. Is Capitalism Truly Meritocratic?

Timestamps: 05:33–06:42, 91:05–93:32

• PBD’s View:
  Access to success is possible for anyone who adapts and improves their “market value.”

  “People can find ways to use their time to effectively increase their market value. And I don’t think many people do that.” (05:11)

• Critics:
  Point to inherited wealth, structural inequities (race, class, geography), and entrenched privilege, arguing meritocracy is a myth when some “start two inches from the finish line” and others are “a mile back” (91:28).

• Memorable Quote:

  “America has never been a meritocracy.” – Mason, debate moderator (91:24)

---

3. Case Studies: Health Care and the Profit Motive

Timestamps: 10:10–13:33

• Critique of Marketed Healthcare:
  Anti-capitalists attack profit-driven healthcare, citing bankruptcies due to medical debt and inefficiency versus public systems abroad (e.g., Taiwan, 11:00).

• PBD’s Response:
  He suggests innovation arises from incentive, telling stories such as Ken Langone and the development of blood thinners. He also claims people still vote with their feet, choosing to come to America for opportunity and care (13:11).

---

4. Capitalism, Greed, and Work

Timestamps: 13:42–17:17

• Greed as a Core Incentive:
  Critics argue that unchecked capitalism prioritizes amassing personal wealth over community benefit or dignity, pushing people into survival mode (multiple references to “dystopian” realities).

• PBD’s Stand:
  Insists that the freedom to try, fail, and choose is essential, and that chronic multi-job working is a result of poor choices, not solely capitalism’s fault.

---

5. Has Capitalism Lifted People Out of Poverty?

Timestamps: 22:53–29:09

• PBD’s Claim:
  “Capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system.” (22:53)

• Counterpoints:

  • Critics point to China’s 800 million lifted from poverty (via state intervention and planning), not raw capitalism (23:03).
  • US/CIA interference in socialist experiments (Chile, Venezuela) is cited as sabotage, not system failure.

• PBD’s Rebuttal:
  Argues China’s success arose after adopting capitalist reforms inspired by Japan, especially fostering small business and banking competition (25:00).

---

6. Discussion: Wealth Inequality and Taxation

Timestamps: 28:15–33:22, 80:34–83:34

• Tax Burden:
  PBD: Top 1% pay 42% of US income taxes; bottom 50% pay 2%.
  Critics: Bottom quintile cannot pay meaningful taxes—they’re in debt. Wealth concentration and “negative wealth” are highlighted.

• Livable Wage vs. Minimum Wage:
  Debate rages over what constitutes a “livable wage,” the impact of minimum wage hikes on small versus big business (82:00).

---

7. If All Wealth Were Redistributed, Would It Re-Concentrate?

Timestamps: 43:52–46:46, 59:02–62:24

• PBD’s Hypothetical:
  “If all the money in the world were divided equally, it would return to the same pockets within five years.”

  • He credits this to financial skills/habits differences and claims personal transformation is possible for anyone.

• Pushback:
  Critics say habits stem from unequal starting conditions; financial education is lacking, and many are “too selective” out of necessity, not luxury.

---

8. Defining (Anti-)Capitalism, Socialism, & Communism

Timestamps: 65:49–69:59, 75:08–79:28

• Terminology Debate:

  • Anti-capitalists: True socialism = worker ownership of production, not just government programs.
  • PBD: US is “more socialist than capitalist today,” citing ~68% of federal revenue going to entitlements (though critics say this isn’t “socialism”).

• Socialist/Communist Perspective:

  “The idea that any country now is anywhere near socialist, let alone communist, would simply be ridiculous... In theory, socialism is worker ownership.” – Socialist Advocate (65:49)

• PBD:
  Distills the US political economy to tax rates, with >30% considered “socialism,” and claims heavy taxation stifles incentive and dream pursuit.

---

9. Labor Rights, Unions, and Incentive

Timestamps: 71:06–74:16, 94:54–97:00

• Unionization and Power Dynamics:
  Anti-capitalists advocate collective bargaining and profit-sharing to address inherent employer–employee antagonism (96:12).

• PBD’s Counter:
  Prefers voluntary equity grants over forced unionization and sees market “voting with your feet” as the fairest safeguard.

---

10. Examples of Regulation, Exploitation, and Capitalist Failure

Timestamps: 37:27–41:43, 97:00–101:20

• Historical Atrocities:
  Congo atrocities, child labor, and the need for “guardrails” (regulation) are brought up; PBD concedes state action sometimes necessary, but warns against over-regulation stifling innovation (drones, etc).

• Modern Concerns:
  “Monopsonies” (one employer towns) and market concentration (Walmart, Amazon) are described as market-mangling, not “free competition.”

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On Incentive:

“Incentive is the engine of capitalism. Remove it and the system fails.”
— Patrick Bet-David (02:00)

On Meritocracy:

“America has never been a meritocracy.”
— Mason, debate moderator (91:24)

On Healthcare:

“The profit motive in that case is perverse because health care shouldn’t be a market in the same way that other things might be a market.”
— Healthcare Critic (11:45)

On Poverty Lines:

“So if I make $5 a day, I’m not in poverty and pay the rent...? That’s ridiculous.”
— Grace, anti-capitalist participant (33:49)

On Socialism Today:

“The idea that any country now is anywhere near socialist, let alone communist, would simply be ridiculous and wouldn’t reflect theory whatsoever.”
— Socialist/Communist Advocate (65:49)

On Billionaires and Wealth Tax:

“No one should be a billionaire. Anyone over $999 million should pay every year.”
— Anti-capitalist participant (88:16)

On Giving Up American Citizenship for Communism:

“If I were to give you $2,350 to renunciate your citizenship … and $20,000 of spending money, would you give up your citizenship to go to that country? Whichever communist country you want…”
— Patrick Bet-David (09:28) (no one accepts)

Job Offers:
PBD offers real jobs and even specialist medical appointments to various critics, sometimes highlighting hesitation as evidence of “excuse language.” (47:15–47:57, 51:40)

---

Important Timestamps & Segments

• Incentive Debate Begins: 02:11
• Healthcare & Inelastic Demand: 10:10–13:33
• Case Study (China) & Sabotaged Socialism: 22:53–29:09
• Livable vs. Minimum Wage Debate: 80:34–83:58
• Redistribution Hypothetical: 43:52–46:46, revisited at 59:02–62:24
• Socialism/Communism Defined: 65:49–69:59
• Closing Reflection on Polarization: 106:23

---

Tone & Language

• The conversation is combative but often respectful, with both sides standing their ground on tough truths.
• Emotional testimony (“I had no boots to pull up”; “I have put in 477 applications”; “I am disabled in a capitalist country”) contrasts sharply with PBD’s hard-nosed entrepreneurial optimism.
• Frequent interruption, quick back-and-forth, and pointed rebuttals.
• Repeated efforts by PBD to shift from system critique to individual accountability: “If you do this for 30 years, you’re doing something wrong.”
• Anecdotes abound, from poverty and discrimination to business-building and tax statistics.
• Last word often rests with PBD, but critical closing remarks come from both sides.

---

Conclusion

In this feature-length “debate gauntlet,” Surrounded delivers a tour de force on economic systems, revealing the fault lines in contemporary American discourse. While Patrick Bet-David fiercely defends capitalism as the best (if flawed) system and champions individual agency, participants challenge him with lived experience and systemic critique, pushing hard for dignity, equity, and alternative visions.

For listeners, this episode is a crash course in the flashpoints, dreams, and disillusionments that undergird the capitalism/socialism debate—sometimes raw, sometimes repetitive, always relevant.

---

Transcript

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

This is not the United States of Patrick. But David, this is the United States of America.

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I mean, yeah, sure, why not?

[Patrick Bet-David]

But would you also be open to seeing somebody else? I choose as a psychologist that may. No, you're not.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No, no.

[Healthcare Critic]

When you're offering people here jobs, right, you're saying that they would have to pay you money to get that. So in reality you're trying to convince.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Them to pay you money to be part of your company. Be very careful. Defamement when you don't know the fact.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

From Jubilee Media. This is the surrounded podcast. One brave soul faces a room full of disagreers. In the center of today's episode is the American businessman, media personality, author and podcaster. Patrick bet David and he will be debating 20 anti capitalists. Patrick will debate them one on one until they are voted out by their peers and replaced by someone new. Let's get into it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Race the rudders. Race the sails. Raise the sails.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Captain, an unidentified ship is approaching. Over.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Roger, wait. Is that an enterprise sales solution? Reach sales professionals, not professional sailors. With LinkedIn ads, you can target the right people by industry, job title and more. We'll even give you a $100 credit on your next campaign. Get started today at LinkedIn.com results. Terms and conditions apply.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

This episode is brought to you by Nespresso Vertuo coffee machines. Ready to enjoy the bold flavors of barista quality Nespresso iced coffee at home. Simply fill a glass with ice and press the brew button on your Vertuo pop machine to enjoy Rich double espressos roasted to stand up even when chilled. Refreshingly bold iced coffee, refreshingly easy to make at home. Visit nespresso.com to shop now.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm Patrick Bay. David. I'm an entrepreneur and founder of Peabody Podcast. Today I'm surrounded by 20 anti capitalists. My first claim is incentive is the engine of capitalism. Remove it and the system fails.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Hey, great to meet you, Patrick.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What's your name?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

My name is Mason.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Mason, good to meet you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, I'm valuetained. I'm a big fan of the channel.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are you really?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, I do watch it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Very cool.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I just. I do not agree with your claim. I don't think that incentives are only born out of capitalism. Most capitalist defenders say that incentive is because of scarcity and people's ability to get what is necessary pushes them to work harder. I disagree with that. I'd say that some of our hardest workers are single moms working three to four jobs and the resources that they're able to acquire compared to those that utilize their workers in order to build profit for their own companies is not equivocal.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So how would you do it? How would you change it?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, so I think that humans inherently want to be meaningful. They want to contribute to their communities, they want to contribute to society. When you look at depression rates, oftentimes it's people who aren't able to do anything besides laying in their bed and basically barely taking care of themselves. So I think that it's just a human intrinsic value to want to bring value to their community or grander society. So I don't think that it has to be through scarcity alone that scares people into working, if that makes sense.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I worked for scarcity. I think there's levels to it. You have the survival folks who work for survival to pay their bills. Some work for status, some work for freedom, and some work for legacy. The folks that work three or five jobs, you know, to pay their bills and do what they're doing, if the incentive wasn't there, they wouldn't work three to five jobs. Some of the guys that build a bigger business, that solve a lot of.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Problems, the incentive there is either I die or I work. That's not really a system that rewards merit. That's a system that pushes people into insecure positions.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Not necessarily. In many cases, we put ourselves in situations as well. But when we're talking, are you saying.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

That it's an individual failure for these single mothers that are working three to four jobs?

[Patrick Bet-David]

For some of them it is interesting. Some of them it is.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'm glad you bite that bullet because most people are not going to say that it's a moral failure of people that are born into poverty that continue to.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Let me explain to you, for somebody like me, I came from the single mother system. My mother was a single mother. You know, we had, you know, my parents got a divorce twice. They married each other, they divorced, they remarried each other divorced again. I came up. We didn't have a lot of choices. I joined the army. I got out of that system. Kind of wanted to see what I was going to do for myself. Do I stay in the army? Do I get out of the Army? I started working in sales and then the incentive of working harder. Eventually I build a good life for myself.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Again, you're totally dismissing the hard work that a lot of these people are putting into for just basic services, revival. I'd say that mechanics and plumbers and most people working blue collar jobs that are probably watching this video are working tirelessly day after day. I don't think they still feel insecure positions to where they don't even know if they're going to be able to afford rent in the next six months.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So let me ask you, if most.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Americans have a 400 to $500 emergency, they can't even afford that with the basic savings that they have. So this is not something that we should celebrate as promises of a system that gives you more if you work harder. We should say that this is something that rewards few. And I'm glad that you're an outlier that's been able to build a lot of success for yourself. I know that you're a multimillionaire. That's fantastic that you have those resources for everybody in society. It's possible for each individual to do it, but not everybody can be a millionaire. That's guaranteed.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't think not everybody can be a billionaire or a millionaire. But I do think people can find ways to use their time to effectively increase their market value. And I don't think many people do that. When I talk to people and they tell me, I've watched this show, I've watched every one of these shows. I've watched every one of these Netflix shows, you can use that time to increase your market value instead of kind of, you know, focus on what's going on with the stories and shows that are.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Let's move away from Netflix and TV shows and talk specifically about. Do you think that capitalism is a system of merit that rewards people that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are of higher merit? I do.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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. When you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Right. 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. The parents get credit.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Carcasses that we're building dynasties of wealth.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Not necessarily. I didn't come from dynasties of wealth. I know you're an ally.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

History is a march of progress, right? So there are going to be advancements that we make or there going to be solutions that we make to previous ailments. I'm not saying that capitalism hasn't brought in better things than systems like feudalism or monarchy. But that does not mean that we're at the end of history. Do you think that capitalism is the final solution and this is what we're.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Going to the best economical system because it gives an incentive for you to decide how big of a life you want to build. And by the way, the best way to judge it. The best way to. Let me just say this to you, the best way to judge it is in a very simple way. Take all the countries around the world. There's many different economical systems. What has the longest line of people wanting to get in there? It's America. Why is that? 15 million people came here illegally. Millions came here illegally just the last four years.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

A lot of that is because of economic scarcity in other countries. Well, one of them we could talk about. One is American exceptionalism, which is continuing. Good to meet you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Thank you. How are you? What's your name?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Hi, I'm Alana. It's nice to meet you. Okay, so I think the issue is the framing of incentive here. Incentive doesn't disappear in a socialist or a communist society. It just changes and evolves. So we see in capitalism the incentive is obviously monetary gain, maybe even collecting capital itself through land ownership. In a communist or a socialist country, you would see incentive would just evolve into. I know it's a vague term, but the common good. You have an incentive to do your chores right in your house because you don't want to live in a filthy house. Right. That makes sense. It doesn't have to be just monetary.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So you don't think monetary incentive drives people or you're saying that people should be excited to do their job whether they're getting incentivized for it or not. That's what you're saying.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

People.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

People will be incentivized to do.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Give me a case study. Give me a case study of that that worked.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Give me one case study. We don't even need to look at case studies. We can just look at charity work.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Well, why don't we actually look at a case study? You got two countries, North Korea, South Korea. One is communism and one is capitalism. North Korea's GDP last year was $23 billion.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Are we. There are many countries values based on.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That'S because that's freedom of speech. You can't. Like if you lived in North Korea, you wouldn't be able to do what you're doing right now. You wouldn't have a voice in South Korea. I'm going to give you stats in South Korea. Their GDP is 1.7.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

South Korea is also owned by like five companies in total. The entire 70 times better. You think that's something? If you are employed by the top five countries, you are practically unemployed.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you like to be free?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm not going to be free in a country like South Korea where I'm only employed.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you like to be free to call somebody, unlike me? Do you like to be free where you can have a strong opinion? Do you like to be free to have.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I like to be free. But that's why I'm anti capitalist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Well, maybe you are.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

That is why I'm anti capitalist. Because capitalism removes that choice. There is no real incentive of capitalism because the incentive is survival. If I were to get into communism, the incentive is for the common.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I love that. I got an offer for you before we move on. If I were to give you your $2350 which is the cost to renunciate your citizenship and I paid you your first class flight to whatever communist country and $20,000 of spending money, would you give up your citizenship to go to that country? Whichever communist country you want to go to. Cuba, we can give you. Venezuela, we give you North K. Any one of those you want to go to. Choose any one of them. I'll give you a one way ticket and I'll fund it for you if you want to. Thank you. Yes? Hi. What's your name?

[Healthcare Critic]

My name's Hunter. Hunter, to be honest, I've never seen your videos before. Even though there is some real value to free enterprise, the profit motive often creates a perverse incentive and worse outcomes in certain situations. For example, health care. How much would you pay for a life saving treatment for yourself or one of your family members?

[Patrick Bet-David]

How much would I pay for it?

[Healthcare Critic]

Say you have cancer and you have an 80% survival rate with chemotherapy and less than 10% without it. How much would you pay? Whatever it takes, right?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Sure.

[Healthcare Critic]

That's a situation of inelastic demand when the amount that you're willing to pay is not based on the value of the service because your life does not have a finite value. In the US 66.5% of all bankruptcies are because of medical debt. In most other developed nations that number is way lower, if not zero. And at the same time, the US does not have one of the best health care systems in the world. We pay over 13,000 per capita. Meanwhile, Taiwan, which by most metrics has the best health care system and a national health care service only pays about 2,500 per capita per year.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So what does that tell you? That tells you that's wasted expenditure.

[Healthcare Critic]

Yes, that is a massively wasted expenditure.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So that tells you the government doesn't know how to spend our money. No. They keep raising taxes, we're spending money and they don't know how to spend the money. No.

[Healthcare Critic]

Most of that money is coming from private insurance. In fact, 77% of the people who went bankrupt from medical debt had insurance and then lost it because they couldn't pay.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So, so we can address that. The fact that 60 something percent of bankruptcies are due to health, which is. You're right, we've done many content on that piece. I want you to come back to incentive. Address the issue with incentive right now with capitalism.

[Healthcare Critic]

The reason why the medical debt is so high, that is because of the profit motive. If people will pay whatever it takes. Profit to not die. The profit motive in that case is perverse because health care shouldn't be a market in the same way that other things might be a market.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So you don't think the motive to have profit to come out with a solution is a good thing for the marketplace?

[Healthcare Critic]

I think it depends on which market you're talking about. It's way different. We're talking about video games or cell phones or TVs or other goods that aren't as necessary as you're searching to healthcare. Yes, I'm talking specifically about healthcare in certain other markets.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You ever heard of Home Depot? Yes, I'm aware. So one of the guys who's the founders of Home Depot, investors of Home Depot, is Ken Langone. His father died at 62 years old. Ken Langone today is roughly 90 years old, give or take. When he died at 62 years old. He tells the story that if there was a simple thing as blood thinners, his father would have lived to be 90 years old, just like he is today. That came because of innovation, which he's been on for many years. My dad's been on blood thinners for the last 40 years.

[Healthcare Critic]

So I think you're conflating two things right now. Not innovation is a result of the market because many health care developments are created by research grants from health care funding, whether it's in the United States or other countries. In most other first world countries, the result of medical research developments which are massively outpacing that in the US now because of our inefficiency, because we have a market based system for health care. A very basic question is because of market based systems.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Basic question for you. If that's the case, it keeps going back to the same thing. If it's better in other places than it is here, why are Americans and others not going there? Why are people coming here? It's very basic.

[Healthcare Critic]

How much does a plane ticket cost?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, they have the money to go to different places. They don't because they know America is the greatest country in the world. They know it. Appreciate you.

[Healthcare Critic]

Nice to meet you, by the way.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Hey, I'm Luke.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Luke, yes, like the hat. Good to meet you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Oh, thank you very much. Good to meet you too. So I think incentives are exactly the.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Fundamental problem with capitalism that you say.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Incentives are what make it work. And I think that's the whole issue, is that the primary incentives are the greed.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

A mass of as much personal wealth.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

As you possibly can.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You think that's the problem? It's greed.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, exactly.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And, and you're not greedy at all.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And then like you said, survival.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, right. The person you know working five jobs, you know that they're, they're doing that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

They wouldn't have to, they wouldn't want.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

To do that if they didn't need to survive.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But that's such a horrible dystopian world to live in. If someone has to work five jobs.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Just to survive, how do they get there? How much of that is on their decision making? How much of that is on their doing? How much of that is on the market where they're not finding ways to improve themselves?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

It doesn't matter how much onus is on the individual. We want to create a.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Of course it is.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

No, no, no, no. See, we want to create a world.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Which people don't have to earn their right to exist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And we live, we live in a country where majority of the world wants to come here. The most important citizenship country is America.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Right.

[Patrick Bet-David]

People give up their lives to come here. Have you ever lived in another country before? No. Not lived, no. Why do you think so many want to come here?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I think the people coming here are coming from gang ridden, corruption ridden, violence ridden.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You think that's just all it is? You think I came from a gang ridden in Iran, I lived there 11 years.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I think the majority of certainly coming.

[Patrick Bet-David]

From South America, most people come here because what you're doing to me, you're sitting across from me right now, right? Millions of people are gonna watch this in America. You can call me out, you can say whatever you want. Nothing's gonna happen. Right. You're free and safe here, right? Sure.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Freedom of speech is nothing.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You can't do that in Iran. Of course it is. There's a lot of elements with America. You're talking incentive. The amount of benefits America offers against other countries, it's so much higher where somebody with big dreams incentives, they're willing to come and say I want to come to America, please let me in. And some come in, take advantage of it. But to say the individual that's working three to five jobs, if you do that for a season, if you do that for two years, if you do that for five years, fine. If you do that for 20, 30 years, you're doing something wrong.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But the point is life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, right?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Those are the inalienable rights.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

We shouldn't have to earn.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Earn those rights. We shouldn't have to earn the right.

[Patrick Bet-David]

To help you earn the right.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No, because these are.

[Patrick Bet-David]

This is just.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

We just want to live, just exist.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We can't work our blood, sweat and tears just to.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Just to survive. That's a horrible dystopian world that we live in right now.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Then what do you think we're here for? To just sit around and play video games? What do you think we're here for? To sit around and watch TV shows? We're here to sit around and watch cat videos. What do you think we're put here to?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

We are here to create a prosperous community. To lift.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How do you create a prosperous community? How do you create a prosperous community? Matter of fact for you, how have you positively impacted a community?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I guess volunteering food banks.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Volunteering food banks. I appreciate you for doing that. Have you created jobs for others?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Created jobs? No, I wouldn't say so.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why have you not?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I haven't had the ability to do so.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you think it's easier, do you think it's hard to create jobs?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

It's probably hard, yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, so the people that create jobs, you think they should have a little bit of incentive for having risked their life savings spend time away their families to create jobs so somebody like you can work for that company.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Sure, but that, but that is the.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Incentive and bravo for them.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But that does not give them to.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Right to pay themselves 2 million dollar bonuses when their workers are keeping high.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Of $10 an hour. You don't get to choose how much money I choose to make. That's not your business. That's My business. If you have four girlfriends and I have one, is it my business to tell you you can't have four girlfriends? I think if you play seven hours of, you know, Fortnite every day.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Right.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And I don't play Fortnite at all. Should I tell you shouldn't be able to play seven hours of Fortnite a.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Day, in my view.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Hey, appreciate you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Absolutely.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How are you? What's your name?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Zena.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Zena, awesome.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So this claim about incentive is one that we see often promoted by capitalism enjoyers. Right? And it's this idea that, you know, profit incentives is the only thing that can make humans do things, get up out of bed every day, which has never been the case Historically, it's not the case psychologically.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Historically, it's never been the case.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

No.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What has been the case? So we've seen what's been the incentive.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

The incentive is intrinsic motivation.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Intrinsic motivation, of course.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Have you ever heard of intrinsic motivation?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Of course I have. So you think people gonna go just do anything for no incentives?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

The incentive is intrinsic, meaning passion, interest.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And honing your skills whether you get paid or not.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Well, the problem is that we're forcing people to, you know, need to, you know, work to survive.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So what's the alternative? So give me another solution, another economic.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

May I finish the talking point?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Actually, I'm curious.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So, yeah, the psychological theory of self determination is widely accepted in psychology. It basically explains that intrinsic motivation and passion is actually what predicts incentive. You're arguing that incentive is integral to profit driven motivation. That's not true. Extrinsic motivation, all times at every single case is going to predict less creativity, less motivation, less skill, et cetera. Intrinsic motivation is what causes things like technological development. Some of the greatest breakthroughs have been from people who are devoted in honing their skill.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So should they get paid for it?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

I think that we shouldn't live in a system that privately own, like owns the means, production and forces people in this position.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What college did you go to?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Usc.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You went to usc. What did you major in?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Sociology.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Sociology. Who's your hero as a professor? Who's the professor you look up?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

This doesn't seem like a topic that's related to college.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The reason why I ask this question is because somebody convinced you of that. I don't think it's going to convince you that that is so.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Psychology and studies convinced me of this fact about the human mind.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Unfortunately, to your claim, results show that the greatest economic show that intrinsic motivation.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Predicts more creativity, that allows more to.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Go above and beyond anything. Like every single issue out there, an entrepreneur who gets up, who says, what.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Was your claim again? Mr.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm going to. Incentive. What about incentive has an incentive to go out there and build their lives. And you.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So I'm saying that this incentive that you're talking about.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Yeah.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

What predicts the most? The best incentive, the best drive and the best creativity.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think about psychology, about Elon Musk?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Can we respond to my claim?

[Patrick Bet-David]

This is about incentive.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Awesome. So you're arguing that incentive is intrinsic and tied to extrinsic motivation. What we find is that the best incentive comes from intrinsic motivation.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So a person that's passionate about solving an issue is going to build something bigger than somebody else. That's not.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yes. So someone who has a true passion for this.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Yeah, so, Exactly.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So profit motivation is not the thing that's driving innovation. Right. Psychology.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Of course it is.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So psychology proves that that's not the case.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If there's not that profit is not.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

The reason that we have the greatest inventions that we do today.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't know if I disagree with the fact that there's a passion behind it. Are you saying people with passion, even if there wasn't the incentive to make as much money as they would make, people would still pursue it even with or without money?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

That's what psychology says.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Well, your claims are wrong because that's not true. Whoever your psychology professor is, if you look at data and you find out how America that's only been around for 249 years, schooled all the other countries that have been around for hundreds, thousands of years more, they did better than others because the incentives they accumulated profit.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

To 1% of the population, continue to produce on that basis.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Right.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

We have this. Okay.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's not necessarily do we want to.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

We want to respond because you can.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Say that you've been interrupting the entire time. So if you're, if you're saying about the 1% are the problem and they're the only ones that make money. A lot of people make money. You said profit goes to the 1%.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

You're explaining how it is that America has become the dominant power that it is now. Right. What we see is that because we have this engine, right, this desire to accumulate profit, you know, we morally justify things like going to other countries, imperializing them, colonizing them and extracting their resources. Right. To funnel our country. Right. Social democracies in the Nordic countries don't do this. So yeah, they might not be that the wealthiest power, but they you know, have higher rates of education, literacy, human satisfaction, et cetera. Right. So it depends on what we actually value.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Aside human behavior, do we value well being or do we value Validates your point. If that's the case, people would move to those states. They don't. When you judge a great restaurant by the amount of people that come in, you can say the food sucks here, you can say the sounds of people.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

That lived in the city.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But everybody's lined up to want to come here. They're not lined up to go into those countries. They're just used by professors as theories.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

There are millions of people that also lived in Germany in the 1920s.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I lived in Germany before as well. For two years I was deep in.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

It, gaming on Samsung Galaxy Z Fold 7. Unfolding the screen made it twice as big and so immersive I kind of lost myself. Might have trolled a little too close to the sun.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Someone in the chat told me to touch grass.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So I took my Z Fold seven outside side and kept playing. Still one got a tan and a nice little reset.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Powerful processor, realistic graphics. You stay locked in, Streak stays alive. Can your phone do that?

[Patrick Bet-David]

The new Galaxy Z Fold 7 get.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

[e-mail] introducing the perfect companion to your morning listening routine. AG1's clinically backed formula is now flavor.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Packed with three new delicious flavors.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Tropical berry and citrus. Start the day on a high note.

[Patrick Bet-David]

With probiotics that taste like the tropics.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Mix it up with micronutrients that taste like berry or citrus, and take it all the way back with the classic AG1 original with notes of pineapple and vanilla.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do your health a flavor or four.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

With AG1 NextGen, the daily health drink. Learn [e-mail].

[Patrick Bet-David]

My next claim is capitalism has lifted more people out of poverty than any other system. Hey Patrick, how are you?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm Gabby.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Gabby, yeah. Good to meet you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So I would argue that governments have actually lifted the most people out of poverty. If you look historically we look at China for instance, had the most significant poverty reduction in all of human history. They poured eight. They pulled 800 million people out of poverty using state owned enterprises and state centralized planning. They did work with the capitalist system, but they did it. Most of it was done through state funded infrastructure, education and contributing to strong literacy programs. Redistributing the wealth. I think that my other argument would be that there hasn't been an opportunity for alternative systems like socialism to pull enough people out of poverty. So we look at examples. There hasn't been, there hasn't been enough opportunities for them to succeed. And so when we say that is, I think that is because partly because of the US and I think because capital forces and global market insecurities have sabotaged these attempts to do socialism. So we look at an example in Chile in the 1960s, they elected a democratic socialist and he proposed literacy reform, wealth redistribution, land reform. And all of that was a threat obviously to the United States because McCarthyism was on the rise at the time. And so instead of allowing to have a chance with that, the US orchestrated a CIA backed coup to take over and to have a military dictatorship that led the country instead of Allende, who actually was having a lot of success in reducing the poverty rates before the US interfered. And so I think we look at other parts of Latin America, like Venezuela, for instance, and we see the same thing. We see that the US has interfered several times. You know, with Chavez in Venezuela, he was able to reduce the, the poverty reduction in half in the first decade of him being in office. And he was sabotaged ultimately by the US and by a military dictatorship so that the people that replaced them were actually.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So may I respond? It's a lot of different cases here, so thank you for that. So let's go China first. Okay, so when you say China was able to recover and because they use state funded, you know, nationalized Systems. So in 1978, Xiao Ping, the leader of China was, went to Japan. He saw what was going on with Japan for two decades. Every year their GDP was growing by 15%. The economy was doubling pretty much every four years. They go over there, they say, we got to find a way to compete with Japan. How do they have fewer people, but they're beating us. They sit down with their leaders after a few drinks, eventually they say, how did you fix your economy to be growing the way that it is? A capitalistic society that they had in Japan. They asked the question from Xiaoping. The prime minister for Kuda asked a question. How many banks do you guys have in China? He says, we have one bank. He said, it's a nationalized bank. He says, yeah, that's it. Yeah. How many loan officers do you have? Not many. You want to compete with one bank? Yes. He says, if you want to compete with us or others, here's what you have to do. You need 5,000 banks with 35 branches, with 30 loan officers. That's a total of 5.25 million loan officers, a population of 600 million people that are living there. You do that every week. You take 10 applications with these loan officers for small business owners. And you allow the small business owner to compete. They did that. China started competing, by the way, in America in the 1920s. We had around 30,000 banks. When we were really, you know, competing in a Marketplace. In the 80s, we ended up having around 14,000. Today we only have 4,100 banks in America. That concept of allowing just one bank to compete, it's not going to work. China takes on the idea from Japan.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

If I start growing, I mean, I.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Think that they start growing with certain.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Capitalistic philosophy about this in very capitalist terms, which makes sense. You're a capitalist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But because it works, that's the idea. Because it's produced the results about these.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Scenarios in a situation where market mechanisms are in place. And this is the problem that I have with so many capitalists is they can't exit their worldview and try to see a world where socialism could be in place because they don't understand the untapped potential of socialism. And 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 years.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But you're thinking in terms of competition.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Results, and it hasn't worked. Do you know why it doesn't work, though?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

It's been sabotaged.

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Does capitalism not do the same? No, capitalism, 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.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So first of all, I'm not going to argue with this moral argument. I think that people who live in poverty, especially when we look at how many people live in poverty in this country, and also it depends on how you define the poverty line. But there's 40 million Americans who live below the poverty line in this country. There's three guys in this country that own 40% of the wealth. How does that work in a country that is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You really want to go there? You want to go there? Okay, so let's talk about it. So when we talk about the rich people at the top, okay, and you say, well, the rich don't pay enough taxes, do you know what the bottom 50% of taxpayers in America pay towards the revenue that the government gets in taxes? Do you know what the bottom 50% pays? 2% of taxes. Do you know what the top 1% pays?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

There's been several years.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you know what the top 1% do you have? No, hang on a second. This is from the irs. I'm not writing a blog from Huffington Post. This is not Daily Beast. I'm telling you the story. The top 1% pays 42%.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'll say this is about to pay a lot less in taxes because of the provision that actually went into trust.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Revenue to the government.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

That's a beautiful bill.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Yeah, thank you so much. Thank you so much. That was fast.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm annoying.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Good to meet you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Nice to meet you. So I do want to address part of the claim about poverty, but I also want to address what you brought up about, like, paying taxes. You said the top 1% pays a large amount of taxes. The problem is, is that the bottom two quintiles can't pay taxes because they quite literally have no wealth. Do you understand that, like, the. The bottom quintile of the United States doesn't have any wealth. In fact, they're in debt, so they have literally, like, negative wealth.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why do you think that is?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I think that's for a lot of reasons. I think that's because workers have been exploited. I think that they haven't had the opportunity to gain social mobility.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why do you think that is?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Because. Because of exploitation.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You think they're being exploited?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So people are being forced to work at companies. They don't have a choice.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

I didn't say that.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

They work.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So people are being.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

They are being forced. If the other option is starve or die.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What job do you have right now? What do you do for a living?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I do work from home stuff.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, so you chose to do that, Right? That's your choice. Great. If somebody works at Starbucks for as a barista, it's their choice. If somebody has a job that they're working, it's their choice. If somebody is not utilizing their time properly and accordingly, of course, the market's not Going to pay.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You think that like they brought up single mothers earlier. Do you think that single mothers are sitting around playing fortnight 15 hours a day?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Unfortunately, single mothers were manipulated on what happened.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Is that a yes or no?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Single mothers were manipulated by what? Lyndon Johnson came out where they changed the benefits on the giving single mothers the incentive to have kids on all the welfare program that changed our system in a major way. The feminist movement got single mothers to believe they don't need men and they're going to do everything by themselves and they don't need a man to help them out. This division that's happened between us caused many people to be in the situation that they're at.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Households are 50, 50. They're closer to 50, 50. It has nothing to do with feminism.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Not necessarily.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Feminism didn't just like convince women because they're too stupid.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Feminism was one of the worst things that happened in America because it pinned men against women.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you think that women are so stupid that they've been brainwashed? Okay, so you don't think that they've just fallen to this feminist propaganda? You don't think that they're idiots?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, I don't think that. But I do think people can be.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Manipulated and brainwashed enough to do that. Because the majority of people are splitting.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Narratives to a philosophy that stole decades away from their lives, decades away from their lives because they bought into an idea that didn't produce the results.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

What are you talking about? The.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm talking about capitalism is the best economical system that provides the best results for people.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But we can't just jump back and forth between claim to claim to claim. So the claim about feminism brainwashing people into being single mothers have idea?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, I didn't. I said feminists originally brainwashed women to believe men are the enemy. That led to where we are today. Last week they were single mothers. Yes, in many cases because they don't need men.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you have evidence for that? You really think a single mother wants to be a single mother?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Absolutely. We have evidence of that.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you think the single mother making minimum wage down the road, like working for some grocery store, having to take care of all her children. I just don't need a man. I just want to be independent. I live in abject poverty to be independent.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What percentage of the US Revenue that we get in you think we use for entitlement programs? What percentage?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't remember the exact percentage.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think the number is? So we bring in $4.9 trillion. We do in private spending we bring $4.9 trillion in. Okay. The US revenue comes in. What percentage do you think goes to entitlement programs?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't know.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think is a reasonable number?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

What you're calling entitlement programs. I'm actually not sure what you mean by that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm talking about Social Security. I'm talking about. I'm talking about any of these.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

It's much less than other OECD countries.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What percentage you think?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't remember the exact percentage, but much less than other OECD countries.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You think it's 10% behind 20%, 30%? What do you think the number is?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No, but it's relatively low compared to.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Other ways it is. Can you guess them?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't remember the number off the.

[Healthcare Critic]

Top of my head.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I've already said 8%. How much more entitled percent?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Can we fact check that?

[Patrick Bet-David]

You can fact check that. Please do so.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Please.

[Patrick Bet-David]

68% goes to entitlement.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Of our federal budget.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, of the revenue that comes in. 68% GDP, not GDP. You're confusing the two different things here. Actual tax revenue that we get.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So tax revenue.

[Patrick Bet-David]

68% of the specific towards entitlement programs. 68%. Thank you. Hi, how are you?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Good.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Grace.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes. Grace.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Good to meet you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Hi. I want to say that I think it's pretty comical that an elite such as yourself has the gall to tell us average Americans who's in poverty and who's not. A lot of people.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I was an average American. I was a guy that was in poverty.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You're not anymore. And you can also choose you very.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You can also change.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Anyways, do you believe a lot of times that the market for poverty is actually very low? So a lot of times like $2 a day is the line for how they measure poverty?

[Patrick Bet-David]

215. Yeah.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And that's ridiculous. So if I make $5 a day, I'm not in poverty and pay the rent.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Sure.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But we're talking about this country, right? We're not talking about around the world. I've noticed that you like to do that. You like to like skirt from America and talk about other countries.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I've been saying multiple times, make it.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Look like we're better, but we're America's.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The greatest country in the world. The world.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Anyways. Oh, it's the greatest country ever. The highest that we've ever been with homelessness since we started collecting.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why is that? Ask your. Are you from California?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

We haven't had a pay race since California, 2009.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you live here.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Minimum wage nationally, $7.25.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And you wonder why we have the highest poverty rate. You think that capitalism is winning. Can. Can you survive? Would you like to live off$7.25?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I used to work for 425 at Haagen Dazs.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Right. Then I went and that was a very different time.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Burger king for 475.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And how much do you make now?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Then I went to. I make millions today.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Then I want to make capitalism because we're not all making.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But the difference is.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But the difference between critiquing the people in poverty.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The difference. My hope.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Harder. You should. You should work my whole.

[Patrick Bet-David]

My hope is that you believe you can change and improve, that you believe you can upgrade yourself. That's my goal.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

It's very. You know what? That's what rich people like you want to keep telling us.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But you can be just like me.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you want to be like me? If you work hard enough.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm not saying that. I don't. I don't. It's actually. You wouldn't be able to be like me because you wouldn't work that hard. Would you work that hard?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You don't. I'm not going to tell you. I don't have to answer that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If. If you don't.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't have to measure my. Like. I don't have to measure my work ethic to be worthy.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You don't have to. Then you can't be upset for others who do. So you can't be upset for people who are struggling because they work harder than you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Capitalism because.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Go back to the homelessness so hard. Do you live in the state of California?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I do.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay. You said homelessness.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think about your Governor Newsom? What do you think about.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't like him. I'm a progressive. He doesn't do enough for the people.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you know when he was.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

He takes corporate money.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Fantastic. Money from people like when he was. I've never given him money. But do you know when he first became a governor, I would never give him money. But when he became a governor first. When he became a governor first. From then till today, he's raised the amount of homelessness in this state by 36,000 people.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You know, I don't like 24 billion people like you are billionaires like you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Taxpayers gave him 24 billion. Taxpayers, I believe it gave him $24 billion. And he didn't do nothing with you. Vote him out. You have him. It's not that.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

That's What I'm saying I have. You're not much different than him. That's all I'm saying. You're in the same class.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're sitting here blaming a person who's changed their lives for the better and it's their fault. My dad was.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

This is not the United States, Patrick. Bud.

[Patrick Bet-David]

David.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

It's the United States of America.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I know. And I'm so grateful to be here. Here. I'm so grateful to be here. I'm so grateful to be here.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Are you willing to pay more taxes?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I am so grateful to be here. My dad. My dad. My dad was a cashier in inglewood at a 99 cent store. We had nothing. No, no. I don't tell you that's great. We had nothing. I'm the guy that had. No, no. I'm the guy that had a.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Propaganda that you don't.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But what you don't want to hear is that because it's the truth. Can I ask you a question?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Like it?

[Patrick Bet-David]

When's the last time you read a business book? When's the last time you read a self help book?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't need to answer that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

When's the last time you read a self help book?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I wrote a self help book. I'm a writer. I'm a creator.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me what self help book you read.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm not going to give you one.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Give me one you read. Are you willing to take one recommendation?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're not?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Not from.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Then I can't help you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

That's okay. I don't need your help. I didn't come here then.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Great. You've been flagged out.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Good.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Awesome. How's it going man? What's your name? Armin.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

When you said capitalism is the best form of economic organization the world has ever seen, it made me think of a very particular picture from history. So I don't know if you know, this is a little history lesson. In 1900, King Leopold II of Belgium. Belgium determined that the entire land of the Democratic Republic of the Congo was his personal property. And within 10 years, capitalists came out. They exploited all the land, extracted trillions.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Of dollars of resources.

[Patrick Bet-David]

15 million Congolese died. For reference, the Holocaust killed 6 million people. And the most famous picture from that time in history is a rubber worker staring at the disembodied hands of his eight year old daughter because he didn't hit his rubber quota. I'm willing to bet that man worked harder to hit that rubber quota than anything you've ever worked for in your entire life. And I think when you say this is the best system that's ever been created, to me that's the result. That's what happens when there's no rules. It's devastating. When you hear stories like that, I don't disagree with you. They had it hard, they worked very hard and they had risk on the line. Many times it was their lives that was on the line. And you see that in many different places when you go back and study history. That's why today in America that can't happen. In America, you have a choice to do what you want to do with your life. When we go back and look at those stories, we can go to see what communism did. How many lives were killed because of communism control. You don't need to go through that number. The number is between 60, 200 million. We can go that route. But if you're talking about which provided the best economical system today, you judge it by how many want to go live somewhere that gives you that opportunity, and that is America. Do you know why kids can't work in America? Why kids can't work in America? Why there's child labor laws? Yeah, because of child labor laws. It was labor unions. They were getting shot at by police officers to fight for the weekend, to fight for the 40 hour work week. Another good example is the 1908 mill children strike. It was thousands of kids who are working 80 hour work weeks striking so they would only have to work 50 a week. That's what happens when there's no rules. Right? And then the government had to come in and say, you can't employ children. So I think capitalism, we don't disagree here with that. I don't think we're sitting here talking about child labor. Are you hearing me talking about capitalism is the best system because it provides child labor in America? No, I'm not saying that capitalism, there's no guardrails inherently, the government has to come in. People have to go and organize. And I think what you seen for the past 50 years under neoliberal politics is that slowly being chipped away. All the good things of the New Deal like Social Security, the 40 hour law and order. I do think you need law and order, but also at times, you know, the amount of rules you put in place can prevent incentives. Right now if you think about drones, warfare is changing, okay? And 70 to 80% of all drones that are being built today are being built by a company called DJI in China. Ukraine was building a thousand drones a day at 500 bucks and going and hitting $5 million equipment of Russia destroying them. 68% of their attacks was from drones. When you come to America, look at us, we're at 1 to 2% at the top. Let me explain my point to you here. Part of it is over regulation. Over regulation. FAA laws, this, laws that law. So 500 startups that got into the drone business, they walked away because it's all over regulation. Many cases when you say, I want to put this rule in place, great. Another person, no, I want to go this much. No, no, I want to go this much. No, no, I want to go this much. It eventually gets to the point that it chokes the innovator. And that's also not good. I would disagree. I think regulation is the reason why there's no lead in our gas. You were talking about incentives. The only incentive that really matters to a good capitalist is profit. It is profitable to put lead in the gas and doesn't matter if it lowers the IQs of kids living nearby by convinced points. You someone's. Unfortunately, someone's convinced you at a young age that these capitalists are bad people, that they're terrible human beings. Why are they fighting against taking lead out of their gas? Think about it this way. You know, the main thing, I don't know if you know Michael Burry. Has you ever seen a movie, Big Short, you know, at the end of the movie where it says Michael Burry now is focused on water because he thinks water is the future gold or whatever he calls it. Right. Okay, go to the company, that's Coca Cola, that sells Coke. And how much criticism have you had over the years with Coke? Right. I think Nestle's had a lot of criticism because they don't think water is a human right.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

For the.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's a. That's a different conversation. If I may finish the point. One thing with Coca Cola is the following. Do you know even Coke got to a point that they realized in order for Coca Cola to be around 50 years from now, 100 years from now, they went and invested billions of dollars to fix the water issue. Around the world, they're trying to get cleaner water capitalists eventually get forced to take care of the person because having lead in the water is just not a good policy.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Long subtle results still you but with fewer lines.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Botox cosmetic out of Botulinum toxinae is a prescription medicine used to temporarily make.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Moderate to severe frown lines, crow's feet and forehead lines look better in adults.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Effects of Botox cosmetic may spread hours.

[Patrick Bet-David]

To weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. Alert your doctor right away as they Difficulties swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life threatening condition. Patients with these conditions before injection are at highest risk. Don't receive Botox cosmetic if you have a skin infection.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Side effects may include allergic reactions, injection.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Site pain, headache, eyebrow and eyelid, drooping and eyelid swelling. Allergic reactions can include rash, welts, asthma symptoms and dizziness. Tell your doctor about medical history, muscle or nerve conditions including ALS or Lou Gehrig's disease, Myasthenia gravis or Lambert Eden syndrome and medications including botulinum toxins as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. For full safety information, visit botoxcosmetic.com or call 877-351-0300.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

See for [e-mail] this is one of.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The most spectacular venues with all kinds of character and hospitality scenery. These people in this Gitas Valley, they love when you come to see what they have to offer. I'm J.J. harrison, Ellensburg Road Clown and I want to invite you to the rodeo. Come hang out with us in Ellensburg. Great rodeo, great time. Two performances on Saturday. One is the Extreme Bulls of the Year event. Do not miss the Ellensburg Rodeo August 29th through September 1st. We'll see you there. Term okay, my next claim is if all the money in the world were divided equally, it would return to the same pockets within five years. What's your name?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Caleb.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Caleb.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So you just said that you are.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Proposing if we divided all the wealth.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Equally in like five years, how would.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You propose we divide the wealth in that way in this thought experiment?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Again, if we're going to give it.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

A serious right look, I want to understand how would you propose that happen?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I hope you realize this is just a question we're asking everybody, right? But if you take all the wealth, which is around $500 trillion, okay, give or take, you divided by 8 billion people, okay, it would be around $62,500 each. Within five years, the people that don't know how to handle money themselves, they would lose it all. And within five years the same wealthy would get the same amount of money.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

As someone who certainly doesn't make that much money, I'm willing to take that as a gamble. Just for fun, I'll be honest. But at the same time like, okay, so you're just now claiming that people who don't have wealth don't know how to manage it. And that's fair because a lot of them have never had it before so what do we do to basically ensure that people like myself who are currently. Thank you to the United States, thank you to the state of California for giving me medical insurance to get blood work, for giving me food stamps so I can have food. I've applied to, I don't know how many hundreds of jobs. I can show you the receipts, I can show you the email confirmations. Like, I am trying my best to use my values with the freedom that we have.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So if I give you a job, you would work 40 hours a week.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

If the job is in alignment with something that's noble and good, I think I could. The issue is, and again, you may say that this is a personal weakness, but like right now, substitute teaching, tutoring, trying to help in that way is making it so that I'm able to scratch by. But without the supplemental income and the help from the society of people who make more money, I'm going to not have enough money.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I want to address something which you made a point that I agree with on why don't some people create wealth? In my family, when I was growing up and I was telling this young lady over here, when my dad was a cashier at a 99 cent store, we've never owned an insurance policy before. My parents, we've never owned a house before. I've never lived in an apartment with a swimming pool before. We've never had a 401k situation, stock, mutual fund, none of that stuff. I had no clue how money worked. So for me, when I got out of the army with a 1.8 GPA out of high school, I went straight to the army because I didn't know how money works. If you look at our system today in high school, we learn about a lot of different things. They don't teach us about taxes, finances, mutual funds, stocks, bonds, Colleges don't even teach a lot of that right now. So you come out of high school. Did I work in a high school?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

How do you have experience like me, someone who's essentially on those front lines working?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I've, I've worked with many high school teachers and the directors of psychology to talk to the youth. Yes.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Right now I'm in a position where I have options. Like you said, I do have some options, but they seem to be somewhat destructive and exploitative of me, of my peers. So I'm trying.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I think you're too selective for jobs right now. You don't, you don't have the ability to be selective at this stage.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Well, but the thing is I do.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Because I'M instilled with a freedom that is maybe God universe given. And I don't actually have to because of the system. Like you said, I don't have to play along with some corrupt game. So I gave up.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I think California is perfect for someone like you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Well, thankfully California agrees. But you mentioned earlier in a previous discussion that we have free speech, we can say what we want, Right? But the thing is, have you been punched on the train for how you look and how you. How you share your ideas?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do I look like an American to you? Do you see this nose?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No, I'm just asking.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm Middle Eastern. You know what's happened to this guy? You know what's happened to me when I was discriminated all over the place?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No, I don't feel like that's free speech.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you're being punished by people who are, I don't mind it because I understand there is risk that you may be disrespected like here. I've been disrespected here many times. I've been offended here many times. A lot of you are coming here, finding a way to attack me, tell different stories. I'm okay with that.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't want to attack you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I. You're being very respectful. I'm not talking about you, but what I'm saying to you is when you say, have you ever been punched in the face on a bus? You don't want to hear about what things has happened to me because of the way I look. But I don't want to use that.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You've been through a lot of trauma.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

In your life, but what I.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And now you're kind of clinging to things.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm not. What? I don't want to do that. I have. My son is sitting right here. My 13 year old son, my four year. I have four kids. I bring him everywhere. I want them to see that it's okay. People gonna disagree with you. You have to be comfortable with this all the time. You are with 13 year olds all the time.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Because of my job, because I'm a substitute teacher and a tutor. The thing is you can apply many different things and that is your right. But what I'm saying is right now I care deeply about having a good experience. The incentive that I feel is for peace and prosperity.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I respect it.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And again, I'm using my freedom now. But the issue is you're saying we have all these options, but whenever I tour the globe, I see franchises that have monopolized pretty much everywhere.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So when you talk about options.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

It's really. There's these selections. Few people who have this infrastructure that's really benefiting them more than others. And without some sort of conscious, spiritual, moral awakening, what can we do except for beg and appeal and.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Well, no, you can't be too selective. At the beginning. When I worked at Haagen Daz, I couldn't select it for a job.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I can't. Whenever I can, it's a choice.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Thank you so much. Appreciate you for being respectful.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'm glad y' all tripped over each other. Cause I did too.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How's it going, James? What's your name? James.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So one of the things that you have stated is that we have options.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So just to give you a little bit of my background, I come from a divorced family and we lived below the poverty level from the time that I was born until now, frankly. So I'm one of those people that you're talking about that isn't pulling themselves up by their bootstraps enough, which, like, I didn't have boots to begin with and like, I don't know if you've ever had boots, but like legs or.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Low bearing structures, I relate.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

And like, you can't really pull up a boot when you're wearing it, you know. 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 once.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why do you think you tell me 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 callback on 477?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Because a lot of people do not have a degree.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Because I do not have a degree.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Because I could not afford one. Okay.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

Where do you live?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I live in rural Texas.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So in that, like in the town that I grew up in, for instance, there are eight jobs, period.

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Everybody was at one point.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Most of them are dead now.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay. Sorry to hear.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, it is what it is. It's poverty. You know, we're kind of used to that on this side.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why do you. Why do you feel like you're a victim? Why do you feel like you're a victim? Why do you feel like the way you speak, like, you know, you're the victim? Where all this happened to you because.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I exist and things happen to you. Why do you speak to them and as such, things happen, and that's why I say that they happen to me.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're a good looking guy. Why do you think you're a victim? Why do you think you're somebody that's got into a situation? Because it's not fair what happened to me. Let me give you a couple options. Sure. Are you open to leaving the city you're in?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I've already left it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So what city?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I've left multiple cities.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So if somebody else gave you a job in a different place, you'd be willing to move there?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

100%.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay. On your resume. On your resume. What's that? What do you have on your resume? Skill set. What do you offer?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Transportation expertise, logistics expertise.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You consider yourself a hard worker?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I mean, I feel like 80 hours.

[Patrick Bet-David]

A week, that's a hard worker. Sure. How about we do this? How about I interview and I give you a job? Would you move to Fort Lauderdale?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Ooh, that's Florida.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you move to Fort Lauderdale?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Sure, why not?

[Patrick Bet-David]

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.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Okay, let me.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

But let's see what just happened regardless. Watch what you just did. Sure. You just said you applied to 477 companies who's not gone back to you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I didn't say I look at it. If you let me finish my sentence.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Go ahead, I want to hear it.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

You would like to.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Because I don't know what you guys do. So as far as I'm concerned, I may be wasting my time going, if you guys are a finance company, if you guys are a bank or something like that, I don't have the certifications, I don't have the degrees. So even interviewing me would be, if.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I gave you a job, period, to work 80 hours a week, would you take it and I paid you a reasonable wage.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Are we talking a livable wage or a reasonable wage? And whose version of reasonable are we talking about? Your version of reasonable or my version of reasonable?

[Patrick Bet-David]

But you see. So now for Me, What I'm noticing.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

From you is, is I need specifics.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, no, not necessarily, no. Most of the people I hired need specifics. The difference is I'm trying to hire them. In this instance, you're trying to get a job and you're being selective. It's going to work against you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I mean, I'm not trying to get a job. Originally I was trying to ask you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Where the moral felt. More than four off the table because you're going to be difficult to work.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Okay, sure. But my question was where is my moral failing? Like where is it that you are saying that I am not working hard enough and I am not doing it?

[Patrick Bet-David]

You just experience it right now because the way you just handle this situation. Got it.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So I should accept anything that somebody gives me first blush if it is a guaranteed thing.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, not necessarily.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I agreed today, I agreed to do your interview. I agreed to be interviewed by you and you agreed to consider me for hiring. So therefore I am taking that opportunity. I've chosen to. But because I am asking you for specifics, your immediate reaction is that, oh well, you're trying to be picky. Not when I'm not.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm asking specifics. You could have simple.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I said I need to look up your company.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's all I said, is I'm willing to have the interview.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And I did.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You would have had the interview and I did. No, you said it depends. I said, yeah, sure, let me look.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, sure, I would look into your company. That's all I said.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I appreciate you. Thank you. James.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Hi, what's your name? I'm Faye.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Faye, yeah. Good to meet you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So how would you define socialism? Because I think you're kind of misunderstanding what anti capitalist ideals look like. I think we are just trying to advocate for basic rights for our people in this country and across the world. Of course. But I don't think it's necessarily about equal wealth disparity around the world for most people that are anti capitalist. I think it's more about just standard rights that are provided by the government.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Standard rights that are provided by the government.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, great.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So go a little bit deeper. So for you, when, when the claim here is if the money in the world were divided equally, it would return to the same pockets within five years. Do you disagree?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me why you disagree.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah, so I disagree because I don't even think many people are trying to argue for that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

People are not trying.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So like who are you arguing in this debate?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Yeah, what I'm trying to say there's.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Like a very select amount of people, people that are trying to argue for equal wealth disparity. Most people are at least trying to at least advocate for wealth and at all for people that have. That don't have access to health care right now, that don't have access to a good education right now, that don't have access to their basic needs like food.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you think our system right now allows people to stay in those situations long term?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

They force them to stay in those situations long term.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, so part of me actually agrees with you, but why do you think they forced them to stay in those situations long term?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I think because they are trying to convince the working class that they don't have rights.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I actually don't think that's what it is, although that's fair. To your point here, what's the chances that any of you here voted for Donald Trump in 2024? Exactly right. What is the chances that all of you here can't stand the phrase maga, Donald Trump, any of that stuff? Is that a fair assessment? Fair. Okay.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah. So it's.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So think about it this way. So maybe you're right that the Democratic Party that's been earning your vote for a long time wants to keep you there because they'll have never earned it for the rest of your life.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

They have never earned my vote.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Who did you vote for in 2024?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

In 24, I voted for the socialist candidate.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Who was that?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Claudia de La Cruz, I believe.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Who did you vote for in 2020?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I was actually not able to vote. I was in a hospital.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Oh, I'm so sorry.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Because of results of capitalism.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me more.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah, so I didn't have access to proper health care or even access to a proper job that would sustain me as a disabled person.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are you comfortable being specific on what happened? You don't have to if you're not comfortable.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I mean, I'm also mentally ill, so that was something I had to deal with. But I'm mainly mentally ill because I am disabled in a capitalist country.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me more about mentally ill. Who qualified you as somebody that's mentally ill?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Me and my doctor team.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Who. Who convinced you that you're mentally ill?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Me and my doctor.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What's the specific category of mental illness? Is there one? You know why I asked this question? Let me explain to you why I asked this question.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't even like the psychological industry. I don't really stand for like Sigmund Freudian politics or anything like that. So if you're going to Debate the ethics of psychology.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Where I'm going with this is going back to the same thing with if the money was worth, to divide it equally. It ended up being worked out within five years. My 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, you're poor, you're this, you're that, and we get to choose to buy into that or not. And if you do.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You have?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

In California?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

You can't find a specialist?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I can't find a specialist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Is there anyone in your life that's willing to pay for a specialist?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Well, they could 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?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I mean. Yeah, sure, why not?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm gonna have you go see 2. Do you live in California?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

My mental health looks like.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No. No.

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah. So I think. All right. Thanks for coming.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Thank you so much. Yes, anytime. How you doing, man? What's your name? Seth. Seth. Good to meet you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I think your claim kind of doesn't make any sense because it would not.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Inherently be a capitalist society you're describing.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Because I'm surprised nobody's really addressed this issue. We haven't even defined what socialism is. Capitalism Is a system in which all.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Businesses are funded by millionaires and billionaires investor classes. If this society everybody had had the.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Same amount of money I don't really know how the money would be generated up and down.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't know.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

In this theoretical. It sounds more like an anarchist society.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Which would make more sense. You know, we're using this as a hypothetical. I want to make sure I qualify that we're not. We haven't even described what capitalism. But stay on this point here because you came here. Let me go back to this one. If all the money in the world divided equally it would return to the same pockets within five years. Do you agree or disagree?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Well, I disagree.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me why you disagree. And it system more akin to that kind of system.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I think that a system with people with more wealth and equality.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But do you know why the wealth would go back to the same people and the same people wouldn't. Why do you think it would.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Well, it wouldn't go back to the.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Same thing or places because I don't.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Think that we have an inherent equal starting point in the beginning.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But this is a starting point. What I'm saying to you is if we right now did a case study.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

The same places because we have never.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Even tested some sort of free market.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We've never seen any sort of system akin to. To that a genuine free market. Not one that's distorted by capitalists, by business owners.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Capitalists generally protect their own.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Their own class.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's why people rise to the top. Yes, I don't know about that. I actually think it's a very competitive place to be. No, there is not. Not at all.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

People start at the very bottom.

[Patrick Bet-David]

They have no shots. Do you know why I make the claim of if all the money in the world were divided equally would return to the same pockets within five years.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'm assuming that you think that because.

[Patrick Bet-David]

People work harder or something like that.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

But I would.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I would argue people that work the hardest the people that make the least amount of money the people that work the least work live on their yachts.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Are the ones that are owned in.

[Patrick Bet-David]

All this company never been inside the businesses that they own. I don't know if I agree with that. I was just in Arkansas three days ago. I was just in Arkansas a week ago and I went to a city called Hot Springs, Arkansas. It was a two friends from high school started a windows company. 250 employees. The city loves them. They work their tails off. But I'm talking about. But many big businesses started small. Walmart Was a big day one. Walmart was small when it first got started. Why are they still a monopoly? Because they exist. They're not a monopoly. Amazon taking a big share away from them, oligopoly, whatever. They own a large market share because their ability to use their money. Do you know how many jobs they've created around the world? Walmart, I'm not even referring to 3 million jobs worldwide. The point being is they distort the capitalists distort the market.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So it's unfree. How could it be a free market?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Everybody in the. In the market inherently wants to make an unfree because they want to rise. I'm watching you. Everybody has the incentive to maintain a free market. Then that, that's something that. So let me go back. The reason why I said if all the money in the world were divided equally, it would return to the same pockets within five years. To me it's because of market value. What value you bring to the place, your contacts, your relationship, how hard you're working hard. All of those combines habits that you have in place, habits that you have in place and also habits at the bottom. The habits at the bottom are not long term thinking, it's short term. When I didn't have any money and I was broke, $49,000. If I had $500 to my name, we're driving on the freeway to go to Vegas to party for the weekend and come back. If I had a penny to my name, I'm having a blast until 25 years old. I change my habits financially, then things change. But, but this point here that we're talking about with the wall, some people are so far off from that point, they're so far in debt that small.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Decisions would not help.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's not true. Yes, absolutely it's not true. That's not.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

You're just privileged and you've lived in a certain.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You think I'm privileged? I'm privileged. That's amazing. My mom ran out of money and went back to Iran. You're talking to a guy that would have done 20 years in the army. If one guy. The army is one guy would have killed me. Army is the government funding you. I understand that. And I joined up on life social programs. No, no, I had absolutely. I was not confident on what I could do. But I changed. So can you look at the way you're speaking to me? You can change your work hard, but you know somebody like you, do you know somebody like you that speak speaks this eloquently? If somebody gets a hold of you in real estate, insurance, finance, you can learn how to sell and you can make some real good money. Somebody like you that I'm watching, everybody's born with those abilities. You have to be brother. Somebody who's white, tall, six, four, whatever, Eastern. I'm from Iran. Do you realize that goes against me? Okay, but many people have no choice. But that's an excuse language to be making. That's not a language. You never have the opportunity to compete because you're pre designed. I appreciate you being respectful, truly, you need to know that. So I, and I'll be respectful to everybody. But I appreciate you for being respectful right now. Everybody that's here, me changing your mind, it's not a very high likelihood. Okay. The audience that's watching, 40% of them are going to agree with what you say, what you say, what you say, what you say. And they hate me. 40% of the audience is going to agree with me. 20% of the audience is in the middle saying, I don't know, man, what do you think I should do? Should I feel like a victim or should I not make excuses? Or what is that guy saying? Or should I do this? Or should I sympathize? The 20% that's watching this, that has a fighting chance. I'm hoping they realize they can do something about their life. Lives. We're not going to be able to solve 100% of people's problems, unfortunately. I don't think people should keel over. But that doesn't mean most people have.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

An equal competitive advantage to something.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I think somebody like me is more privileged. I think everybody listening to her present, she could be a lawyer listening to her present. She's got fire in her belly. Everybody here has got a gift. Every single person here has got a gift. Whether they choose to use it in a way to help them advance in life. And that's not my fault.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Not everybody can afford to increase their market value.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You can. No, you can. Well, we respectfully disagree. Thank you again. Appreciate it. Mint is still $15 a month for premium wireless. And if you haven't made the switch yet, here are 15 reasons why you should. One, it's $15 a month. Two, seriously, it's $15 a month. Three, no big contracts.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Four, I use it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Five, my mom uses it. Are you, are you playing me off? That's what's happening, right? Okay, give it a try.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

@Mintmobile.Com Switch upfront payment of $45 for a three month plan. $15 per month equivalent required. New customer offer first three months only. Then full price plan options available, taxes and fees extra.

[Patrick Bet-David]

See mintmobile.com Lowe's knows that no matter your paint project, saving is at the top of your list. That's why when you shop today, you can buy one, get one free. Select Valspar and HGTV Home by Sherwin Williams. One coat coverage in 20 interior paints via rebate. Shop these deals in store or online today at Lowe's, we help you save. Selection varies by location while supplies last. Discount taken at time of purchase. See Sales Associate for details. Offer valid 821 through 9 3. You My final claim is the US is more socialist than capitalist today. If you hate the system, you're antisocialist. Hello. You're back at it again.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yep. Yeah. So I think it's super important here for all leftists alike, but for the audience in general to define what these terms are. I think the best way to do it would be to look at the theorists. Right over history, we've seen communism and socialism talked about by governments and by, I guess, programs, but not. We never actually read the actual theory. And what theorists all agree on is that socialism would be a transitionary state between capitalism and communism where the means of production are specifically owned by workers, not privately. The idea that any country now is anywhere near socialist, let alone communist, would simply be ridiculous and just. It wouldn't reflect theory whatsoever.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What is the definition of communism to you?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Stateless, moneyless class of society.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And you prefer that?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yeah. So I think that we should be moving towards communism. Yeah, yeah. Stateless, moneyless class of society.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So you don't think a person like me should exist with the amount of wealth that I have?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yeah, because I think that we're getting to this point where we're creating fake scarcity for people like you to accumulate the wealth that you have on the basis of private ownership.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, so you're not even. You're not even not capitalist. You're definitely not capitalist. You're not socialist. You want to go full communism.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So what do you think that looks like, though, is a thing. Right? So what Marx actually wanted was for us to reach a point where we no longer have the scarcity of resources that has kind of predicted history as it looks like now. It wouldn't happen now. It would happen as we automate at this point in time. We can decommodify housing and food and education for around 5% of the government budget. That's 1/5, a little bit over 1/5 of what we spend on the military already. We don't, because we Were living in the state where it almost seems utopian, that things like food.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Were you the first time you thought you wanted to be a communist? How old were you?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Is that. Is that a response to any of the statistics?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, because the statistics are against you. The statistics never worked. There's so many Cubans that moved to Miami. Politics in Russia, they.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Do you know how much. Do you know how much money?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Because it didn't work. It killed so many.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Almost like it wasn't communist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's almost amateurish.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yes, there was communistic argument. It's almost like you're not replying to any of the statistics that I've seen.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're a dictator.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

I think that's the biggest problem.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're a dictator. Telling me what you're saying.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Dictators would not be allowed under communism.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Dictators end up, of course, running communism, but they weren't. If somebody is taxing 100%, what is a dictatorship?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So again, how much money do you think?

[Patrick Bet-David]

A hundred percent taxes. What is communism?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

How much money do you think?

[Patrick Bet-David]

What is dictatorship?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

How much money do you think would it take to, I don't know, allow everyone food, shelter, water and education in this country?

[Patrick Bet-David]

How much money would it take? Yeah, but going back to your question here, with communism. Stay on that pointer.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

With communism, everything I say is responding.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But I'm trying to find out from you here. You're saying communism is not dictatorship.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

No.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Define dictatorship.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yeah. So when one person or when one small entity is able to enforce its will on the people, when we have a private ownership, when we have a system based on private ownership, that's what happens every single day.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's dictatorship.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So we.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Dictatorship is private ownership.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yeah. So private ownership.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So let me get the straight. Under communism, can I.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

How much.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Under communism, doesn't Elon Musk exist?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, no. So that's dictatorship. Thank you.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

That's completely incorrect. Under capitalism, we don't have, you know, the freedom for people.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You do. You do.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Okay, so under capitalism, right?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We don't.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

We don't see that commodification.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you consider China communism? Right now? Would you consider China communism? Right.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Or water or education with 5% of the budget? Why don't we see that?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you consider China communism?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Why haven't you answered any of my questions?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you consider.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Why haven't you responded to any of my statistics?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Would you consider China?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

It's almost like we're not having a conversation.

[Patrick Bet-David]

We are having a conversation where you have an argument that's been proven that has not worked.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

It's almost like I just gave you a definition of communism for you to critique and you haven't been able.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If it's such a great system, why are other.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

It hasn't happened yet because it's never. We've never been at a point for.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It to happen because we've not found a noble person. That's not.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

If you were to read the plain text of Marx, we would see that he wanted.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I've read Communist Manifesto. I've got.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

I promise you, if you have that capitalism, socialist.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Have you read wealth of Nations?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

So I've read Das Kapital. I've read the Communist Manifesto as well. Angles, Collective Works, etc. What do you think? If you think that. That communism is in any way having wages or us having, you know, a privatized dictatorship, production, you don't know what it is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Choose my dreams. And I refuse to do that.

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Where did you get that from?

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you mean?

[Socialist/Communist Advocate]

Well, haven't I. You know, that was. That was interesting.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Let's go. Justin.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Nice to meet you, Justin. Good to meet you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

How you doing, Patrick?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm doing good. How you doing?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Doing pretty good. So I need to pick your brain a little bit. You're saying us is largely socialist. I want to focus on the word largely. So why do you believe it is largely socialist?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Because 68% or so of the money that we. The money that we take in goes towards entitlement programs.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So I think one of the things that is going to be major to me, it's like Zena was touching on earlier, is going to be the fact that socialism is. A big part of it is going to be workers owning the means of production. When we have President Biden, for example, telling that the railroad, railroad strikers, it's going to be illegal for them to strike. I don't see that as much of a workplace democracy.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Did you want. Did you have a question or you're just saying the fact that you don't agree with President Biden and what he said?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'm just saying a core tenet of socialism is the workers owning the means of production. The workers currently do not own the means of production. So why do you believe it is largely socialist?

[Patrick Bet-David]

So you're saying the workers should own the means of production?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

That is correct.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, so to you, that's the definition of socialism.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

That is a core tenet of it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What else would you define as socialism? I'm curious.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

There's a lot of different things. It's like Zena was touching on as well, moneyless, stateless, Class of society. But I think more important than not workers owning them in production and workplace dominant.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are you more socialist?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

They're the same term, man. Marx used them interchangeably.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The only difference I would put is because where I see in America, I think we are extremely getting close to being a socialistic nation with the amount of taxes that we have in place right now. That's great, but at least under communism I can't survive. I would prefer us staying at the 10% tax rate. I think we're paying way too much taxes.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Why would you not be able to survive?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I wouldn't be able to pursue my dreams that I have in place under communism. My mother's family, My mother's family, they were part of the Two Day Party. The Two Day Party in Iran was a communist party. They had escaped Armenia and Russia and came down to Iran and they pursued communism. I grew up in a family where everything was about the rich are greedy, the rich people are bad. The rich people are this and the rich people are that. My dad's side, they were imperialist. My dad's side, they said poor people are lazy. So one side rich people are greedy, the other side, poor people are lazy. Who's right?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I would say that neither are right. Of course.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I would say both are right and wrong is what I would say.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Both are right and wrong.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Both are right and wrong. Because I do believe there are extremely greedy rich people and I do believe there are extremely lazy poor people. But I also believe there's a lot of hard working poor people that are working but they haven't found a way to get out of it. I agree with that as well.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

That's actually major point right there. They're not able to get out of it.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But you can get out of it. You could actually get out of it.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

They're not able to.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, because they're choosing not to. I just made an offer for a book recommendation here, so I'm not interested. If I sit there and somebody is giving you feedback and saying what about. If you think about finding offer me.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

The book then I'll check it out. Sure, why not? Give you a handful of them, we'll talk about this.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'll give it to you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

After all I'm.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The point I'm trying to make to you is if you can exist under a capitalistic society and I can exist under a capitalistic society, so can she. But you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We can both exist under a socialistic.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Society, not under communistic and under socialism, the incentive would be bad. Think about it this way.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Incentive is high under socialism.

[Patrick Bet-David]

During COVID During COVID Take the two states, California and New York. They lost a trillion dollars of wealth that left. Do you know where they went to?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Where did they go?

[Patrick Bet-David]

They went to Texas, Nevada, Florida, Tennessee. You know why? Because it's a better climate for entrepreneurs today. If you look at New York City, you know Mahdani. You know Mahdani is.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I understand how you know Mahdani is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are you a fan of.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, of course.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Zoran's up there saying he doesn't believe billionaires should exist.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Correct.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I hope he wins. I hope he wins. You know why? Because he says, I don't believe billionaires should exist. And he's going to be the mayor of a city that has the most billionaires in America. 123. I hope he wins. So we can see what happens to New York when the billionaires leave. When they leave, here's who's going to pay the price. The people that are left behind who were taking advantage of the taxes that billionaires were paying. You think the government's going to change.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Their budget and spend when there's a $30 minimum wage?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Middle America is going to take the biggest hit if billionaires leave the state of New York. You'll. Oh, you're back. Hello. How are you? Good to see you.

[Healthcare Critic]

Learn a bit more. Okay, Firstly, I want to start by saying that the US is not largely socialist because that's not what socialism is. Socialism is social or collective ownership by the workers or a community of the means of production. Right. So we're talking about like city run grocery stores, or we're talking about worker cooperatives or even in some cases credit unions where a local community owns the bank that. That they take part in. Right. That's what socialism is. Socialism is not when the government does stuff for you. It's not when they build roads. That happens under capitalist economies. It happens under socialist economies. But I'm also not sure you entirely know what capitalism is. And if it's okay, I'd like to ask a couple questions about your job.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Sure.

[Healthcare Critic]

Because you're offering that. I know that you're valuetainment, Right. You run a YouTube podcast. You also run PHP agency, right?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Yep.

[Healthcare Critic]

Yes. And you sell life insurance policies, right?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Life insurance and annuity.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes.

[Healthcare Critic]

I read an article by the Daily Beast which argued that you make more money from recruitment fees to get people to work for you than you make money from selling those policies. Capitalism is when you provide a service and sell the labor of yourself or the person who works for you in return for money. But you're not really doing that. Right. You're selling being part of the company through recruitment fees. I'm not sure that's capitalism.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How far familiar are you with the insurance industry?

[Healthcare Critic]

Pretty familiar.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are you?

[Healthcare Critic]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You've been in the industry before? No.

[Healthcare Critic]

My grandfather was.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So in the insurance industry when you're in it.

[Healthcare Critic]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You get paid by selling life insurance policies and you get paid by selling annuities.

[Healthcare Critic]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

We built a distribution channel of a company right after I left Morgan Stanley and Transamerica. We started the insurance company, we grew it.

[Healthcare Critic]

Okay.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Helping middle income families who didn't have. Who didn't have another opportunity to create wealth for themselves. I just came back from our event in Vegas. Hold on. I'm not sure this is correct though. It is though.

[Healthcare Critic]

It's not though.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Because what do you make more money? I just came back from. We don't make money from the. We don't make more money from recruiting.

[Healthcare Critic]

I read the Daily Beast article that did that. I also watched Coffeezilla's debate with you where you pulled up the seats that the majority of the employees of your company don't make any money.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Question for you. Here's a question.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Sure.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Bring up Coffeezilla. Yeah. Daily Beast is a different story. Go to coffee.

[Healthcare Critic]

Sure, of course.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you think if I was worried about my business model I would go on Coffeezilla? What do you think?

[Healthcare Critic]

Do you think? I think that it's not really capital.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Hang on a second. Do you think if I was worried about my business model I would go on Coffeezilla? They were actually very strong. When they came back after me, we had a two hour conversation. We finished it, it was good to go. We moved on. Their claims that only 1% or 2% make and nobody makes an insurance. They're right. Most people don't make it in insurance just like most people who move to California don't make it in Hollywood.

[Healthcare Critic]

So I believe when you make more money from getting people to be part of a company than from actually selling a service is called a multi level marketing scheme. Do you think that that's a fair characterization of your company?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why not? Do you know what multi level is? Yes, I know.

[Healthcare Critic]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

Them to be part of the company. A pyramid scheme doesn't have a product. That's criminal. A multi level marketing company is more like an Amway. An Herbalife, a new skin, those companies. But because it pays you.

[Healthcare Critic]

You are making more money from getting.

[Patrick Bet-David]

People to be part of your company.

[Healthcare Critic]

Than you are from making money from actually providing a service.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I would argue my daily beast. By the way, do you know what a quality of earnings is?

[Healthcare Critic]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What's the quality of earnings? Tell everybody what a quality of earnings is. Go ahead.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Fair point.

[Healthcare Critic]

The quality of earnings is. Isn't that like, the value that's produced from when you make the money? Like, how much from the labor that's produced? Or am I right?

[Patrick Bet-David]

What is quality of earnings?

[Healthcare Critic]

I give you what I think the definition is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, so quality of earnings is I sit there. Sure. And I want to sell the business to you.

[Healthcare Critic]

Yeah.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You make an offer of $250 million. Okay. I tell you, this is my business. Here's how much profit we make. You leave and you say, great, let's make a deal. I'll pay $250 million. We shake on it. Then you validate whether it is worth that or not by going and paying a big company a few hundred thousand dollars to check the quality.

[Healthcare Critic]

So same deals, like, have a look at the quality of the gold that you're going to buy.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Twc, and they do a quality of earnings to say, is this company really worth this? They get to make a decision whether the company is truly doing what you or daily beast claims to do.

[Healthcare Critic]

You know what, going on podcasts like that, even when they expose the business you're not selling.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you know what ended up happening? Don't make claims.

[Healthcare Critic]

Do you know what you're selling?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do you know what ended up.

[Healthcare Critic]

You know what you're selling, right?

[Patrick Bet-David]

You know what ended up happening? You know what?

[Healthcare Critic]

You're selling the company. You're selling your personal brand. You're selling the idea. Because when you're offering people here jobs, right, you're saying that they would have to pay you money to get that. So in reality, you're trying to convince them to pay you money.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Be very careful defending. And we know you don't know the facts.

[Healthcare Critic]

You have a recruitment.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, no. Be very careful. Be very careful making that claim. When you said people here have to pay to work at our company.

[Healthcare Critic]

It's recruitment fee.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Be very careful. No, those are two different things.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Hi.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How are you?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Good. How are you? Tatiana.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tatiana.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yeah. Tia. But yes. And your name is Patrick, right?

[Patrick Bet-David]

It is.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And I don't know a lot about you before coming today, but why do you use socialism and capitalism like in this instance? I've noticed a lot of people have defined the vast differences. But you're insisting that we're still like a more socialist like country. Why? Why are you so.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's a fair question. So for me, there's different definitions you can have. Under communism, to me, it's 100% taxes, meaning I can't go create my own property. If I want to build a billion dollar company, I can't do it under communism. Is that a fair assessment?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes, I guess it is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It is. Okay, so capitalism, I would ideally like to see taxes between 10 to 30% max. I like a flat tax, but somewhere between 10 to 30% because I still do think there are certain things that the government needs to do. Military protection, certain things. Socialism to me is 30% and up. Anything above that, that you're taking the money away from me without my choice. Choice to use it for things where we get to 68% of entitlement programs. I'm not a fan of that.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Okay, so let's talk about where we're at. I believe you said reasonable wage and minimum wage. What about a livable wage? And we haven't really talked about livable wages because they can.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think about minimum wage? So what do you think?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So I think we have a long way to go. I'm not really a big fan of these little increment things, especially when it's like. It's not like rent is, you know, stopping and leveling out. It's like it's, you know, far exceeding what most people.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't disagree for sure.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And so I'm just wondering how you still can sit here and say that when you. I know you like to talk about. You came up from Haagen, Dazs and.

[Patrick Bet-David]

All this other stuff in Glendale, Galleria, 20 minutes away from here.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Love that for you. But we're talking about where you are today and where I am. A majority of these people in the room and I have really heard, yes, we can change, but. But I think that there's certain systems.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Are you talking minimum wage? You want to address the minimum wage topic, Minimum wage.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

But I like to say livable wage because I think there are two very different things.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think it should be?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I think that we should go per state because every state is different in.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Terms of where do you live? You live in California.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I live in California.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think it should be based on?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

The MIT Living wage calculator. It's an actual livable wage calculator. It's 2781. Should be the starting and then if you have kids and so forth, the. And you can go up from there, but starting at about $27 hourly.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So let's look at case studies of what happened. California chose to increase the minimum wage for fast food workers to $20 an hour. Restaurant workers. Do you know what happened in the state of California? Mass exodus. People left and went different places. You know what restaurant owners did? Like, I can't compete with these guys if you raise the minimum wage. But the challenge with minimum wage is also the following. So say there's two companies. You have Walmart, okay, In Bakersfield. Pick a city and you have a different supermarket that's been in the same family for 60 years. The governor here says, we're going to raise the minimum wage to $20 an hour. Who do you think can afford it? The market that's been within a family? The small business? Or you think Walmart? Who do you think can afford to go to $20 an hour minimum wage?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So that's, that's why I think we have to factor in other systems other than capitalism. I think you're kind of making the point that's been made a few times today where we talk about.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, it hasn't been made. This hasn't been made. No, this hasn't made. The point I'm making here is any time a Bernie Sanders gets up and says, let's raise the minimum wage for $15, and he was caught in his campaign not paying his own workers $15, $13 an hour. And he had to talk about it and apologize that even a guy that's a socialist wasn't paying a minimum wage. But if you raise it to $15, Amazon celebrates. Walmart celebrates. Do you know why? Because the employers from this supermarket that have been working for this family for the longest time, they can't afford to pay that. So they leave and go to Amazon and Walmart, what happens? The bigger companies keep getting bigger. The small businesses go out of business because of minimum wage.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Okay, so you mentioned Bernie Sanders. I didn't mention him. Cool. For Bernie Sanders, whatever. Do you pay a livable wage or a minimum wage for your employees?

[Patrick Bet-David]

There's not a single soul in our company that I pay 15 bucks an hour or 20 bucks an hour.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Okay, so are you paying them livable wages, though?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Absolutely.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Based on your standards?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Because of my choice. Because of my choice.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So you're determining what people's livable ages are?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, I look at the marketplace and I see what's going on. And I get to pick and choose what percentile of people I want to hire. Do I want to hire? Bottom 10%, 25%, 50%. I'll hire. I'll pay a little bit more. More. Because I want to get somebody that's got a little bit more experience.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Okay. Okay.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tanya.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Titania.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Titania. Thank you.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Hi again, Patrick.

[Patrick Bet-David]

How are you?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Good. How are you doing?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Good.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Can you remind me again why you think this country is largely socialist?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Out of the $4.9 trillion of revenue that we get in. 4.8, 4.9, 68% goes to entitlement programs. That's the reason why I say America's socialism.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you think that we should have a say in where our taxpayer dollars go?

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's why we have elections and you vote for it.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So you agree that we should have a say in where our taxpayer dollars go?

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you're asking me who should have a right to vote, I would change the system in a major way of who would have the right.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm not asking you if people are.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Asking me a question. I'm not asking you who should have.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

The right to vote. I'm asking you, do you think that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The current system, taxpayer dollars, should be.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Dictated by us where the current state.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Election allows you to vote and decide who you want to be your candidate?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Absolutely. Okay. So I would argue that the biggest handouts go to billionaires because we give billions and billions of dollars in subsidies to billionaires every single year. Elon Musk just got a huge raise. Not sure why. He's worth over, like hundreds of billions of dollars.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You don't be specific. You're talking about SpaceX. I'm talking about SpaceX.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm talking about the company that we think fund as taxpayers. So why did we never vote for that?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why did you never vote for the money? Going through some of these, you see.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

An issue with the fact that we as taxpayers didn't have a say. And first of all, electing this tech.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Oliver, once you elect somebody deciding where our taxpayer dollars go, once you elect who you elect, what they do next, you don't have a say during that time. We didn't until the next election. No, I'm talking Congress, Senate. They make a decision on who they give them money to and they approve.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

He's been. He's been getting this amount of subsidies through every administration. I'm not just referring to the Trump administration.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Let's talk about how, how he's done. Okay, so the NASA was shut down many years ago. Okay. Since then, how has NASA done trying to find a way to go to Space. What are SpaceX done? SpaceX. What is NASA able to do?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

What has NASA? NASA gave us one satellite which you use every time you use your phone.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you let me finish. NASA versus SpaceX. Elon Musk, as much as you hate him, Elon Musk was able to go to space for 1/20 of a cost because government organization has the ability to.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Eradicate extreme poverty in this country. And he chooses to send rockets into space and make extremely ugly cars that we never actually funded.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Believe it or not, liberals drive his car so well.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I would say the cybertrucks. It's a poor decision aesthetically, the cybertruck. I'm not discussing the aesthetics of his, of his products.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's so funny 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.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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 hypocrisy in what you're saying.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't disagree on that side.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

A net positive to you for society?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Is he a net positive for me personally?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Is he a net positive for society? Not for you? I wouldn't say so you don't think he is?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

No, I wouldn't say so.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Net positive to society. Bernie Sanders.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

But I would say that he's a compromise candidate.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes, I would say.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You see a net positive to.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

So I would say net positive, yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

More than Musk is.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Yes.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Really? Tell me why.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

Is the closest $30 trillion.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

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

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Okay?

[Patrick Bet-David]

So I'm saying trillion.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm saying that I think that, you know, when we look at the system that we currently have, I think that we need to redistribute the wealth in a significant way and we need to reintroduce something like The New Deal. And I think AOC has been the closest to doing that. I'm not saying I'm the biggest fan of her, but I'm saying that we need a marginal tax rate that is something similar to the new deal. 70 to 90%. Ideally, I would go for a wealth tax. Anyone over $999 million has to pay every year. But I'm saying that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Say that one more time. You would do what anybody.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I would. I would introduce a wealth tax. So I'd say that anyone who makes over $999 million needs to pay. So I think that no one should be a billionaire. I think that we should put the cap.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No one should be a billionaire.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Absolutely not. Do you think that people can survive on $99 million?

[Patrick Bet-David]

This isn't how life works.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you think someone can survive on 999?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm asking, do you think someone would be okay, dictate.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you think someone's life would be impaired if they had only $999 million.

[Healthcare Critic]

Instead of a billion dollars?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

You're not answering the question.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Fortunately, companies that continue to grow.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Why are you avoiding my question?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Created jobs for others.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Do you think someone could reasonably survive on $999 million?

[Patrick Bet-David]

How big a person wants to build their business. That's not. By the way, why don't you elect someone that pursues those policies? Bernie was your hero for many years. He became compromised.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I never said he was my hero.

[Patrick Bet-David]

But how did Bernie become compromised?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I said that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

He said he's a compromised candidate.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

He's a compromised candidate.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Why is he a compromised candidate?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I mean, he was definitely compromised by the Democratic Party who didn't want him elected.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What happened?

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I'm saying he's a compromise candidate in that I would go further than him. But I also know that he's probably the best we have right now. And I would like to see him as president ideally, or someone similar. I think Zahra Mamdani, who you mentioned earlier, I think he's an excellent candidate.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I can't wait for him to win. You know why I can't wait for him to win? Because I can't wait for the data that comes out after he wins. I can't wait to show you all the numbers the next four years after.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Rich people have to flee New York. They will because of his policies. That means that they're too economically fragile.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, because if you don't appreciate people that create jobs, they will go somewhere.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

That they appreciate in.

[Patrick Bet-David]

We have high paying jobs. To look past job creation I pay jobs. Many of the jobs bring value to the market.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

The reality is that Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg and Jeff Bezos. Right, they have huge monopolies over our market and they're able to pay as little wages.

[Patrick Bet-David]

A monopoly. I think the only company that has.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

To literally control the wages and the costs in our economy.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Right.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

If when Amazon has 60% control over E commerce, I am quite literally decide what wages and what costs people can earn and pay.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Your candidate aoc.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I never said she was my candidate.

[Patrick Bet-David]

She's a net positive. Endorsements on my said AOC is a net positive to society. More than Elam.

[Healthcare Critic]

Absolutely perfect.

[Patrick Bet-David]

When AOC was in New York, Amazon wanted to bring 25,000 jobs to New York. These were jobs that were paying. Those jobs look like a year because.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

From what I understand, the people 10 to 15 miles, they have higher interest.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Rates than the industry per year. These were jobs that were paying 150 a year.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I think we've been stopped.

[Patrick Bet-David]

She went against it. They went to a different place. 25,000 jobs they lost in New York.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

And what would those jobs look like?

[Patrick Bet-David]

150K, your minimum.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

Thank you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Thank you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Patrick will now choose someone from the outer circle to debate again, but based on their claim.

[Patrick Bet-David]

10 minutes. I'm gonna go with my friend here. So I chose Mason because he was the only one that came up to me and said, pat, I'd like to have a reasonable conversation with you. You came up. There was three other people I was thinking about. And because you were fair and respectful, I chose you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So my claim is America has never been a meritocracy.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Okay, tell me why.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So I think that when you see wealth disparity and the amount that it gives influences to certain individuals, specifically from a starting point, if we're looking at America like a race and someone is starting two inches from the finish line and somebody starting a mile back, we would not say that this is a judgment of their merit. We'd say that this is a system that allows those with the most influence to continue to be successful.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So is it about some of the people that got generational wealth have an advantage over others that didn't get it?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, I'm not necessarily saying that that's a moral failure. I'm just saying when people claim that capitalism is a meritocracy, that's just factually inaccurate and we shouldn't be allowed to lie here. Like, we should try to be coming to a common consensus.

[Patrick Bet-David]

So capitalism is not a meritocracy? No. So you Mean to tell me nobody here can go out there and win if they wanted to at the highest level?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

No. I think that there's a probability that people can have social mobility or increase their economic conditions. It does not mean that everybody is able to. So while some people could be a.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Billionaire in the circle, not everybody's able to. I fully agree. I can play baseball, but I'm probably not going to play baseball.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I can spend the money on a lottery ticket. Doesn't mean I'm guaranteed to win the lottery.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I agree. So what's your point? I agree with you. You there.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So my point is that America is not meritocracy. You said that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You said there's two things anybody at what levels you can have success. To me, in life, there's three different types of people. You got overachievers. You got achievers. You got underachievers. Let me unpack this for a second. We got 10 minutes.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

You can.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Overachiever, achiever, underachiever. Okay. You can find a guy in school. We all remember the kid in school that was going to. We're like, that kid's going to win in life. And he. He didn't. He was supposed to be an overachiever. He ended up being an underachiever. And there were kids in school that we looked at, we said, that guy's not going to do anything with life. Dude. Stay away from that guy. He ends up winning. He's an overachiever. So it's not about what you're, you know, do end up doing in your life. It's how close you reach to your capacity.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

The winning that you're talking to, quote unquote, is wealth accumulation.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Not necessarily wealth accumulation. That's exactly what you just said. If you end up. I have friends that make $120,000 a year. They have a good life. They're happily married, got two kids, and they chose to go live in a place like Victorville. They chose to go live in a different place. But to me, that is winning. They're contributing to social.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I have a genuine question for you, Patrick, please. Do you think that a nurse or a hedge fund manager offers more social utility?

[Patrick Bet-David]

This is documented 14 years ago, I made a video talking about the 10 most honorable professions, and a hedge fund manager wasn't on that list, but a nurse was. I believe what nurses do when my father's at the hospital and I see how they attend to him. You have no idea how much respect I have for nurses.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Right.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's a tough job, however, but I.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Would Say the hierarchy of what our society looks like does not prioritize that there's a difference in the same way.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That you're saying, but there's a difference. There's a difference. Do I think a nurse is more important to the market than a basketball player? Yes. But the market wants to watch a basketball player play. So they pay Steph Curry 60 million.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We both agree that America's failing, right? Your last claim was about how America's socialist. And that's a bad thing. I assume that you're saying because of government intervention.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Absolutely.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So you think capitalism can exist without government intervention?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I think you need law and order because there will be abuse if you don't have it. In our insurance company. When I was running the company, I had to make sure there was a law and order in there. If you don't have certain compliance, abuse will come in. When abuse comes in, if it's a free for all.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Right. Part of those laws, like labor laws.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That can also be abused. No, it's fair question you're asking, but a part of I can also also be abused. A lot of those guys go in with the right intentions, then they become dividers and they pin the employer against the employee. So then that is a. The divide and conquer model is very effective.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I just want to break this down. Do you think that there are not mutually exclusive interests in owners and workers?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Do I. Do I think there's mutual interest with owners and workers?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Do you think that they have a symbiotic relationship and when they're trying to achieve the same goal?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I like to give my employees equity. Because if you own equity in the company, you no longer are an employee. You treat it as if it's your own company. So I prefer to give my employees equity, but it's my choice. I don't want the government forcing me to give them equity. I'll give you a story. Do you remember that story of a guy who said, I pay every single one of my employees $70,000 a year? What was this guy's name? I don't know if you remember this guy. This story went viral. Socialism. What a noble guy. Everybody retweeted at the Bernie's of the World. Phenomenal guy. I invited him on the podcast. He comes on a podcast. I said, so tell me about your noble cause that you pay everybody 70 grand a year. He says, well, I don't think anybody should make over 70 grand a year. You can live off of $70,000 a year. I said, perfect. How many employees do you have? Let Me make the point.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I said, but I don't think that this is conducive to our conversation.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I said, how many employees do you have? He says, 100. I said, how many of those hundred own a single share of your company? None of them do. Who does? I do. You're a socialist claiming everybody should make that much money, but you're not getting equity.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'm not endorsing this particular person. I'd love to look into this and maybe I'll watch. Watch the interview later. There's what I'm trying to say.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Prediction.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

What I'm trying to say.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Socialist. When it comes down to action, there.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Are contradictions in the way that workers are trying to get as much wages as possible. That's just guaranteed. I want to get the maximum amount for the labor that I put into it. A owner wants to do the exact opposite. It's not that they want to pay people what they deserve, they want to pay people what they can get away with. That's just virtually true because what you said.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't think that's the case. I don't think that's the case. No.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

You already agree that coercion exists in the system. You're just saying that socialism. You're saying that socialism is the government mandating others to do it. But you're saying that markets do the exact same thing. You just said that the market price determines.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Don't put words in my mouth. I like you. You're respectful. You're a nice guy. Don't put words in my mind.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Did you not say that markets determine market rates?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I haven't. I'm. What I'm telling you is there will be abuse in business. And if there is a personal.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'm going to ask you the same question as soon as you're done, but continue.

[Patrick Bet-David]

There is abuse in business. Some people will take advantage of that. But the benefit of a free market capitalism is if I don't treat you fairly, you go work for him. If he doesn't treat you fairly, you go work for him. Eventually, if you bring enough value, guess who can't afford to lose you. I can't afford to lose you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

If I can't afford to lose determined.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Market rates, I can't afford to lose you. Guess what I have to do to you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Do you think that markets determine market rates?

[Patrick Bet-David]

You didn't answer my question. If I can't afford to lose you, guess what I do to you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Do you know what a monopsony is?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me about it.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So do you know the Difference between a monopoly and a. I know, monopoly.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Tell me about monopsony.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Okay, so a monopoly is a single seller who has rare competition within the selling of the distribution. That creates like inflated prices and that can hurt consumers. But monopsony is one single buyer. So this is an employer. There are things called company towns. You brought up the example of Walmart out pricing small businesses. I think that's a fantastic example.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The minimum wage side. Right.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Of how there are large businesses that utilize their leverage and their influence and their capital in order to determine what those wages look like in a given particular.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Sure.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So what I want to argue is minimum wages seem to stifle monophonies because they allow people to start at the same floor rate. You're saying that big businesses have an advantage when there's a minimum wage because they can pay more.

[Patrick Bet-David]

They do.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We are also advocating for higher taxation rates and capital gains taxes on these businesses that are supposedly taking advantage of the system. You can invest this in tax breaks for small businesses for people that have less employees. Maybe you say that less than five employees, they have certain tax incentives so they're not taxed at the same rate as these large conglomerates. But that does not mean that a minimum wage is a bad idea. Because like most people here said, you can't survive on less than $7 an hour in most places.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You know what's the great thing about business and numbers and data is every idea is getting exposed during COVID All the policies that came out from the leftist side, they're all getting exposed today.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Name two.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Within time everybody realizes what works on.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Wait, can you name those policies besides saying that they fail?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Chose kids to stay home instead of going to school.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

When is that a socialist policy?

[Patrick Bet-David]

That is a control. Because when a government is ran in a way that they're controlling, that's not socialism. Socialism is a form of.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Socialism is a workers control of their own ultimate control. Socialism is workers control of their own workplace.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Socialism is a form of control. Communism is the ultimate control.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

You're using this rhetorical device as saying that capitalism equals freedom, socialism equals control.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I want to be to you and I've given you a couple questions that you haven't answered yet.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I'll answer any question.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I want to go back to the question.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

The rhetorical strategy that you're using might be beneficial for a large media platform. It's not based in reality.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you bring value to me and you're so effective to my company, if you get to a point that I don't give you a Good salary and I don't give you equity. What's going to happen to you?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Most likely I'm going to try to start a union with my workplace. That way we can collectively bargain on how to raise the floor.

[Patrick Bet-David]

That's one of the options. But guess, typically, what ends up happening, what happens?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

They're busted.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And you go to a different company and they.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Are you saying the owners bust the union? Is that what you're saying?

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, it's not successful. I'm not talking union. You're talking about a different candidate. I think in some places they work. I told you earlier. In many cases, they're divisive.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

We agree. You also mentioned wealth of Nations. You like Adam Smith.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I think a lot of his ideas, yes.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Do you disagree or do you also agree that landlords are parasites?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't agree landlords are parasites.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Adam Smith, even a Wealth of nations author, said that.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I don't.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

He said that rent is.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You're cherry picking. I don't think landlords are parasites. I think in many cases. When. When you think about what's happening with New York right now, this is why I'm telling you guys, I hope all of us reunite in four years and we have a conversation. And I hope Mamdani wins. I am hoping Mamdani wins because that case study is going to get opened up and all of you guys are going to.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Can we both. Can we both agree that corporate Democrats are a stain on this country? Corporate Democrats, like Democrats that utilize their leverage and utilize their influence to maximize their own private wealth is a bad thing that we should discourage.

[Patrick Bet-David]

I think. If it's their choice, I don't think you and I get to tell them what to do and what not to do.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So you think that, like, insider trading should be allowed?

[Patrick Bet-David]

I'm not for insider trading.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

That's what you just said. It's their choice.

[Patrick Bet-David]

No, if you're being.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

You can use your influence.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you're specific with insider trading, that's a different conversation.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I just think that all of these are examples of why capitalism is not a meritocracy. Especially when you're saying that politicians who utilize their influence to maximize their own wealth. When you're talking about landlords who are profiting off of necessity for people, or you're talking about business owners who stifle unions for people that just want to call collectively.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You could be right. If the data was shown. I'll shake your hand. Absolutely. I'm not trying to disrespect you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

No, thank you.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You've Been very respectful. No, no. But for me to tell you this, everything here can be proven based on data. If your policies are so attractive, I'm going to come to you.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Empirical data shows that worker cooperatives are not only more sustainable to market collapses, but they also provide more of an actual attachment to the work that those workers have. The alienation of labor is absolutely making people hate their jobs. Why do you think most people watching probably don't like the workplace that they're in, but still agree that there's some problem in America? Whether they're saying it's immigrants or whether they're saying it's billionaires. What the problem is in America is people don't feel an actual attachment to what they're producing in the world.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think about Social Security? What do you think about what FDR did?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Wait, actually, do you have nothing to say about this worker profit?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Your point's been made. Go back to Social. This has been done with.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Right.

[Patrick Bet-David]

If we have a couple minutes, what do you think about Social Security and how FDR can came up with it?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah, I think FDR from most historians are placed in the top 3 of all presidents. And that's from conservatives and, and Democrats. I think that FDR got a lot of things great. I really like his second Bill of Economic Rights. I think it's very vital that we provide people with housing. We decommodify things that are necessities. Do you know the difference between elastic and inelastic goods?

[Patrick Bet-David]

Stay on Social Security.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So you don't know the difference.

[Patrick Bet-David]

What do you think about Social Security? Stay on that.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Okay, well, Social Security I think was initially had as a social safety net to add a supplemental income to people's pensions. So most people going into like the 1950s, all the way up to the 1980s were given pensions by corporations as a promise to if you work for my firm, I'll make sure that I supplement the exact same salary that you're getting throughout the rest of your life. Now what Ronald Reagan did was he changed the pensions to contribution based retirement, which means I have to put this in the 401k, I have to put it in the stock market. And if the stock market collapses, do.

[Patrick Bet-David]

You think Social Security ended up being that way?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

I think that Social Security is definitely needed as a supplemental income. And right now since we have contribution based retirements, it's absolutely needed. Because if you don't want old people eating cat food, we probably need some sort of sustainable.

[Patrick Bet-David]

When he came up with Social Security, do you think his intention was to have 74 million people use it today. Do you think that's what he thought it was going to happen?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yeah. And I think it's because you're not gutting the program in its entirety. So you can say that Social Security is a failure.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Right.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

If you take the wheels off a car. So car is not going to run when. So continue to buff it up and you make sure that you have good guardrail rails. But it can be a success.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The challenge is 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 / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Tell me.

[Patrick Bet-David]

50, 64,000. Do you know when benefits started?

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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 / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

04.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

So grandma should be working at the.

[Patrick Bet-David]

And you can say anything you want to say.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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

[Patrick Bet-David]

If you bring that to today and you bring the map. Exact same formula as the great FDR came up with.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Patrick, here's the difference between our worldviews. You're saying that because Social Security, 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 / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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 60 today it's 74 million out of 340 million. That's 21%. When life expectancy is 78, benefits start at 65. Do you know who's going to pay the price on Social Security? Not my generation.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Yours keep doing cuts. Correct. And 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 / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

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. 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 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 / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Appreciate you. Yeah, I think that Patrick is a really great salesman. I think that he came in and confidently sold what capitalism is. But I think that the main point of today really showed that capitalism's best product is giving excuses for its own failures.

[Anti-Capitalist Participant]

I don't think that we should be giving these people a large platform to amass a larger following. But I do think that we should expose these people to the light. And I think that even if people have horrendous and repulsive views like he did, I want to hear them because I want to know who those people are.

[Healthcare Critic]

I also don't think that he really listened to a lot of the claims. I also don't think everyone listened to his claims either. So I don't know how productive of a dialogue it was, but maybe we convinced some people at home one way or the other and maybe there's some value to that, maybe not.

[Patrick Bet-David]

My vision for America is if there's anything that's happened after Covid, we used to be here. We disagreed on issues here. This is center, this is libertarian, this is conservative. And then during COVID we went here, here, here, here, here, where we are in a very interesting place that some people don't even want to talk to somebody else that they don't agree with. It's gotten to the point that we are a little bit too divided right now and I'd like to see America be more united than as divided divided as it is.

[Mason / Debate Moderator / Various Participants]

Don't forget to subscribe to Surrounded wherever you get your podcasts so that you don't miss an episode. And if you want to watch the video version of Surrounded, subscribe to Jubilee on YouTube.

[Healthcare Critic]

New season, new chaos in college football.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Big stage, big opportunity.

[Healthcare Critic]

This Labor Day weekend. The wildness lives on ABC, ESPN and.

[Patrick Bet-David]

The all new ESPN app. What a way to start. Featuring top 10 teams like Clemson, Notre.

[Healthcare Critic]

Dame, Alabama and LSU. And Bill Belichick's debut at North Carolina.

[Patrick Bet-David]

It's so special. In these heaps collide, don't miss a.

[Healthcare Critic]

Lineup filled with electric matchups.

[Patrick Bet-David]

Welcome back to College Football Kickoff week presented by Modelo Labor Day weekend on ESPN and abc. Also available to stream on the all new espn Apple.