Ray Dalio: Principles, the Economic Machine, AI & the Arc of Life | Lex Fridman Podcast #54
 The following is a conversation with Ray Dalhiel. He's the founder, co-chairman, and co-chief investment officer of Bridgewater Associates, one of the world's largest and most successful investment firms that is famous for the principles of radical truth and transparency that underlies culture. Ray is one of the wealthiest people in the world with ideas that extend far beyond the specifics of how you made that wealth. His ideas that are applicable to everyone are brilliantly summarized in his book, Principles. They're also even further condensed on several other platforms, including YouTube, where, for example, the 30-minute video titled How the Economic Machine Works is one of the best educational videos I personally have ever seen on YouTube. Once again, you may have noticed that the people I've been speaking with are not just computer scientists, but philosophers, mathematicians, writers, psychologists, physicists, economists, investors, and soon much more. To me, AI is much bigger than deep learning, bigger than computing. It is our civilization's journey into understanding the human mind and creating echoes of it in the machine. That journey includes the mechanisms of our economy, of our politics, and the leaders that shape the future of both. This is the Artificial Intelligence Podcast. If you enjoy it, subscribe on YouTube, give it five stars on Apple Podcast, support on Patreon, or simply connect with me on Twitter. Alex Friedman, spelled F-R-I-D-M-A-N. This show is presented by Cash App, the number one finance app in the App Store. I personally use Cash App to send money to friends, but you can also use it to buy, sell, and deposit Bitcoin. Most Bitcoin exchanges take days for a bank transfer to become investable. Through Cash App, it takes seconds. Cash App also has a new investing feature. You can buy fractions of a stock, which to me is a really interesting concept. So you can buy $1 worth, no matter what the stock price is. Brokerage services are provided by Cash App Investing, subsidiary of Square, and member SIPC. I'm excited to be working with Cash App to support one of my favorite organizations that many of you may know and have benefited from called FIRST, best known for their FIRST Robotics and LEGO competitions. They educate and inspire hundreds of thousands of students in over 110 countries, and have a perfect rating on Charity Navigator, which means that donated money is used to maximum effectiveness. When you get Cash App from the App Store or Google Play and use code LEXPODCAST, you'll get $10, and Cash App will also donate $10 to FIRST, which again is an organization that I've personally seen inspire girls and boys to dream of engineering a better world. And now here's my conversation with Ray Dalio. Truth, or more precisely, an accurate understanding of reality is the essential foundation of any good outcome. I believe you've said that. Let me ask an absurd sounding question at the high philosophical level. So what is truth? When you're trying to do something different than everybody else is doing, and perhaps something that has not been done before, how do you accurately analyze the situation? How do you accurately discover the truth, the nature of things? Almost the way you're asking the question implies that truth and newness are almost at odds. And I just want to say that I don't think that that's true, right? So what I mean by truth is, you know, what is the reality? How does the reality work? And so if you're doing something new that has never been done before, which is exciting and I like to do, the way that you would start with that is experimenting on what are the realities and the premises that you're using on that and how to stress test those types of things. I think what you're talking about is instead, the fact of how do you deal with something that's never been done before and deal with the associated probabilities? And so I think in that, don't let something that's never been done before stand in the way of you doing that particular thing. You have a, because almost the only way that you understand what true is, is through experimentation. And so when you go out and experiment, you're going to learn a lot more about what truth is. But the essence of what I'm saying is that when you take a look at that, use truth to find out what the realities are as a foundation. Do the independent thinking, do the experimentation to find out what's true and change and keep going after that. So I think that when you're thinking about it the way you're thinking about it, that almost implies that you're letting people almost say that they're reliant on what's been discovered before to find out what's true. And what's been discovered before is often not true, right? The conventional view of what is true is very often wrong. It'll go in ups and downs and you know, I mean there are fads and okay, this thing it goes this way and that way. And so definitions of truths that are conventional are not the thing to go by. How do you know the thing that has been done before that it might succeed? It's to do whatever homework that you have in order to try to get a foundation. And then to go into worlds of not knowing and you go into the world of not knowing, but not stupidly, not naively, you know, you go into that world of not knowing and then you do experimenting and you learn what truth is and what's possible through that process. I describe it as a five step process. The first step is you go after your goals. The second step is you identify the problems that stand in the way of you getting to your goals. The third step is you diagnose those to get at the root cause of those. Then the fourth step is then now that you know the exact root cause, you design a way to get around those and then you follow through and do the designs you set out to do and it's the experimentation. I think that what happens to people mostly is that they try to decide whether they're gonna be successful or not ahead of doing it. And they don't know how to do the process well because the nature of your questions are along those lines like how do you know? Well, you don't know, but a practical person who is also used to making dreams happen knows how to do that process. I've given personality tests to shapers. So the person, what I mean by a shaper is a person who can take something from visualization. They have an audacious goal and then they go from visualization to actualization, building it out. That includes Elon Musk, I gave him the personality test, I've given it to Bill Gates and I give it to many, many such shapers. And they know that process that I'm talking about. They experience it, which is a process essentially of knowing how to go from an audacious goal, but not in a ridiculous way, not a dream. And then to do that learning along the way that allows them in a very practical way to learn very rapidly as they're moving toward that goal. So the call to adventure, the adventure starts not trying to analyze the probabilities of the situation, but using what instinct? How do you dive in? So let's talk about- It is being a, it's simultaneously being a dreamer and a realist. It's to know how to do that well. The pull comes from a pull to adventure. For whatever reason, I can't tell you how much of it's genetics and how much it's environment, but there's a early on, it's exciting. That notion is exciting. Being creative is exciting. And so one feels that. Then one gets in the habit of doing that. Okay, how do I know? How do I learn very well? And then how do I imagine? And then how do I experiment to go from that imagination? So it's that process that one, and then the more one does it, the better one becomes at it. You mentioned shapers, Elon Musk, Bill Gates. Who are the shapers that you find yourself thinking about when you're constructing these ideas? The ones that define the archetype of a shaper for you? Well, as I say, a shaper for me is somebody who comes up with a great visualization, usually a really unique visualization, and then actually builds it out and makes the world different, changes the world in that kind of a way. So when I look at it, Mark Benioff with Salesforce, Chris Anderson with TED, Mohammed Younis with Social Enterprise and Philanthropy, Jeffrey Canada and Harlem Children's Zone, there are all domains have shapers who have the ability to visualize and make extraordinary things happen. What are the commonalities between some of them? The commonalities are, first of all, the excitement of something new, that culture adventure, and then again, that practicality, the capacity to learn. The capacity then, they're able to be in many ways full rage. That means they're able to go from the big, big picture down to the detail. So let's say, for example, Elon Musk, he describes, he gets a lot of money from selling PayPal, his interest in PayPal. He said, why isn't anybody going to Mars or outer space? What are we gonna do if the planet goes to hell? And how do we gonna get that? Nobody's paying attention to that. He doesn't know much about it. He then reads and learns and so on. Says, I'm gonna take, okay, half of my money and I'm gonna put it in there and I'm gonna do this thing. And he learns and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. And he's got creative, okay, that's one dimension. And so he gave me the keys to his car with his one just early days in Tesla. And he then points out the details. Okay, if you push this button here, it's this, the detail that, so he's signed with Tesla simultaneously talking about the big, the big, big, big picture. Okay, when does humanity going to abandon the planet? But he will then be able to take it down into the detail so he can go, let's call it helicoptering. He can go up, he can go down and see things at those types of perspective. And then you've seen that with the other shapers as well. And that's a common thing that they can do that. Another important difference that they have in mind is how they deal with people. I mean, meaning there's nothing more important than achieving the mission. And so what they have in common is that there's a test that I give these personality tests, because they're very helpful for understanding people. And so I gave it to all these shapers. And one of the things in workplace inventory test is this test and it has a category called concern for others. They're all having concern for others. This includes Mohammed Younis, who invented microfinance social enterprise impact investing as Mohammed Younis received the Nobel Peace Prize for this, Congressional Medal of Honor, one of the fortune determined, one of the 10 greatest entrepreneurs of our time. He's built all sorts of businesses to give back money and social enterprise, a remarkable man. He has nobody that I know practically can have more concern for others. He lives a life of a saint, I mean, very modest lifestyle and he puts all his money into trying to help others. And he tests low on what's called concern for others because what it really, the questions under that are questions about conflict to get at the mission. So they all, Jeffrey Canada, changed Harlem Children's Zone and developed that to take children in Harlem and get them well taken care of, not only just in their education, but their whole lives. How are him also concerned for others? What they mean is that they can see whether those individuals are performing at a level that an extremely high level that's necessary to make those dreams happen. So when you think of, let's say, Steve Jobs was famous for being difficult with people and so on. And I didn't know Steve Jobs, so I can't speak personally to that, but his comments on, do you have A players? And if you have A players, if you put in B players, pretty soon you'll have C players and so on. That is a common element of them, holding people to high standards and not letting anybody stand in the way of the mission. What do you think about that kind of idea? Sorry to pause on that for a second, that the A, B and C players and the importance of, so when you have a mission to really only have A players and be sort of aggressively filtering for that. Yes, but I think that there are all different ways of being A players. And I think, and what a great team, you have to appreciate all the differences in ways of being A players, okay? That's the first thing. And then you always have to be super excellent, in my opinion, you always have to be really excellent with people to help them understand each other, themselves and get in sync with them about what's true about them and their circumstances and how they're doing so that they're having a fabulous personal development experience at the same time as you're dealing with them. So, and when I say that they're all different ways, this is one of the then qualities. You asked me what are the qualities. So one of the third qualities that I would say is to know how to deal well with your not knowing, and to be able to get the best expertise so that you're a great orchestrator of different ways so that the people who are really, really successful, unlike most people believe that they're successful because of what they know, they're even more successful by being able to effectively learn from others and tapping into the skills of people who see things different from them. Brilliant, so how do you, when that personality, being first of all open to the fact that there's other people see things differently than you and at the same time have supreme confidence in your vision. Is there just the psychology of that? Do you see a tension there between the confidence and the open mindedness? No, it's funny because I think we grow up thinking that there's a tension there, right? That there's a confidence and the more confidence that you have, there's a tension with the open mindedness and not being sure, okay? Confident and accurate are almost negatively correlated to many people. They're extremely confident and they're often inaccurate. And so I think one of the greatest tragedies of people is not realizing how those things to go together because instead it's really that by saying I know a lot and how do I know I'm still not wrong and how do I take that, the best thinking available to me and then raise my probability of learning. All these people think for themselves, okay? I mean, meaning they're smart. But they take in like vacuum cleaners, they take in ideas of others, they stress test their ideas with others, they assess what comes back to them in the form of other thinking. And they also know what they're not good at and what other people who are good at the things that they're not good at, they know how to get those people and be successful all around because nobody has enough knowledge in their heads. And that I think is one of the great differences. The reason my company has been successful in terms of this is because of an idea meritocratic decision making, a process by which you can get the best ideas. What's an idea meritocracy? An idea meritocracy is to get the best ideas that are available out there and to work together with other people in the team to achieve that. That's an incredible process that you describe in several places to arrive at the truth. Apologize if I'm romanticizing the notion, but let me linger on it. Just having enough self belief, you don't think there's a self delusion there that's necessary, especially in the beginning you talk about in the journey, maybe the trials or the abyss. Do you think there is value to diluting yourself? I think what you're calling delusion is a bad word for uncertainty. So, I mean, in other words, cause we keep coming back to the question, how would you know and all of those things. No, I think that delusion is not gonna help you, that you have to find out truth, okay, to deal with uncertainty, not saying, listen, I have this dream and I don't know how I'm going to get that dream. I mentioned in my book principles and describe the process in a more complete way than we're gonna be able to go here. But what happens is I say, you form your dreams first and you can't judge whether you're going to achieve those dreams because you haven't learned the things that you're going to learn on the way toward those dreams, okay? So that isn't delusion, I wouldn't use delusion. I think you're overemphasizing the importance of knowing whether you're going to succeed or not. Get rid of that, okay? If you can get rid of that and say, okay, no, I can have that dream, but I'm so realistic in the notion of finding out, I'm curious, I'm a great learner, I'm a great experimenter. Along the way, you'll do those experiments which will teach you more truths and more learning about the reality so that you can get your dreams. Because if you still live in that world of delusion, okay, and you think delusion's helpful, no, the delusion isn't, don't confuse delusion with not knowing. Yes, but nevertheless, so if we look at the abyss, we can look at your own that you described. It's difficult psychologically for people. So many people quit, many people choose a path that is more comfortable. The heartbreak of that breaks people. So if you have the dream and then there's this cycle of learning, setting a goal and so on, what's your value for the psychology of just being broken by these difficult moments? Well, that's classically the defining moment. It's almost like evolution taking care of, okay, now you crash, you're in the abyss, oh my God, that's bad, and then the question is, what do you do? And it sorts people, okay? And that's what, some people get off the field and they say, oh, I don't like this and so on. And some people learn and they have a metamorphosis and it changes their approach to learning. The number one thing it should give them is uncertainty. You should take an audacious, dreamier guy who wants to change the world, crash, okay, and then come out of that crashing and saying, okay, I can be audacious and scared that I'm gonna be wrong at the same time. And then how do I do that, because that's the key. When you don't lose your audaciousness and you keep going after your big goal, and at the same time you say, hey, I'm worried that I'm gonna be wrong, you gain your radical open-mindedness that allows you to take in the things that allows you to go to the next level of being successful. So your own process, I mean, you've talked about it before, but it would be great if you can describe it because our darkest moments are perhaps the most interesting. So your own with the prediction of another depression. Economic depression. Yes, I apologize, economic depression. Can you talk to what you were feeling, thinking, planning, strategizing at those moments? Yeah, that was my biggest moment, okay? Building my little company, this is in 1981, 82. I had calculated that American banks had given a lot more money to, lent a lot more money to Latin American countries than those countries were gonna pay back, and that they would have a debt crisis and that this had sent the economy tumbling. And that was an extremely controversial point of view. Then it started to happen and it happened in Mexico, defaulted in August, 1982. I thought that there was gonna be an economic collapse that was gonna follow because there was a series of the other countries, it was just playing out as I had imagined, and that couldn't have been more wrong. That was the exact bottom in the stock market because central banks, these monetary policy, blah, blah, blah, and I couldn't have been more wrong. And I was very publicly wrong and all of that. And I lost money for me and I lost money for my clients. And I only had a small company then, but these were close people, I had to let them go. I was down to me as the last person. I was so broke I had to borrow $4,000 from my dad to help to pay for my family bills, very painful. And at the same time, I would say it definitely was one of the best things that ever happened to me, maybe the best thing for him happened to me, because it changed my approach to decision making. It's what I'm saying. In other words, I kept saying, okay, how do I know whether I'm right? How do I know I'm not wrong? It gave me that. And it didn't give up my audaciousness because I was in a position, what am I gonna do? Am I gonna go down back, put on a tie, go to Wall Street and just do those things? No, I can't bring myself to do that. So I'm at a juncture. How do I deal with my risk and how do I deal with that? And it told me how to deal with my uncertainties. And that taught me, for example, number of techniques. First, to find the smartest people I could find who disagreed with me and to have quality disagreement. I learned the art of thoughtful disagreement. I learned how to produce diversification. I learned how to do a number of things. That is what led me to create an idea meritocracy. In other words, person by person, I hired them, and I wanted the smartest people who would be independent thinkers, who would disagree with each other and me well, so that we could be independent thinkers to go off to produce those audacious dreams, because you have to be an independent thinker to do that. And to do that not independently of the consensus, independently of each other, and then work ourselves through that, because who know whether you're gonna have the right answer. And by doing that, then that was the key to our success. And the things that I wanna pass along to people, the reason I'm doing this podcast with you is, I'm 70 years old and that is a magical way of achieving success. If you can create an idea meritocracy, it's so much better in terms of achieving success and also quality relationships with people. But that's what that experience gave me. So if we can linger on a little bit longer, the idea of an idea meritocracy, it's fascinating, but especially because it seems to be rare, not just in companies, but in society. So there is a lot of people on Twitter, and public discourse, and politics, and so on, that are really stuck in certain sets of ideas, whatever they are. So when you're confronted with an idea that's different than your own about a particular topic, what kind of process do you go through mentally? Are you arguing through the idea with the person? Sort of present as almost like a debate? Or do you sit on it and consider the world sort of empathetically, if this is true, then what does that world look like? Does that world make sense and so on? So what's the process of considering those conflicting ideas for you? I'm gonna answer that question, but after saying first, almost implicit in your question, is it's not common, okay? What's common produces only common results, okay? So don't judge anything that is good based on whether it's common, because it's only gonna give you common results. If you want unique, you have a unique approach, okay? And so that art of thoughtful disagreement is the capacity to hold two things in your mind at the same time. The, gee, I think this makes sense, and then saying, I'm not sure it makes sense, and then try to say, why does it make sense? And then to triangulate with others. So if I'm having a discussion like that and I work myself through, and I'm not sure, then I have to do that in a good way. So I always give attention, for example, let's start off, what does the other person know relative to what I know? So if a person has a higher expertise or things, I'm much more inclined to ask questions. I'm always asking questions. If you wanna learn, you're asking questions, you're not arguing, okay? You're taking in, you're assessing when it comes into you. Does that make sense? Are you learning something? Are you getting epiphanies and so on? And I try to then do that. If the conversation, as we're trying to decide what is true, and we're trying to do that together, and we see truth different, then I might even call in another really smart, capable person and try to say, what is true and how do we explore that together? And you go through that same thing. So I would, I said, I describe it as having open-mindedness and assertiveness at the same time. That you can simultaneously be open-minded and take in with that curiosity and then also be assertive and say, but that doesn't make sense, why would this be the case? And you do that back and forth. And when you're doing that kind of back and forth on a topic like the economy, which you have, to me, perhaps I'm naive, but it seems both incredible and incredibly complex, the economy, the trading, the transactions, that these transactions between two individuals somehow add up to this giant mechanism. You've put out a 30-minute video. You have a lot of incredible videos online that people should definitely watch on YouTube, but you've put out this 30-minute video titled How the Economic Machine Works. That is probably one of the best, if not the best, video I've seen on the internet in terms of educational videos. So people should definitely watch it, especially because it's not that the individual components of the video are somehow revolutionary, but the simplicity and the clarity of the different components just makes you, there's a few light bulb moments there about how the economy works as a machine. So as you described, there's three main forces that drive the economy, productivity growth, short-term debt cycle, long-term debt cycle. The former, productivity growth, is how valuable things, how much value people create, valuable things people create. The latter is people borrowing from their future selves to hopefully create those valuable things faster. So this is an incredible system to me. Maybe we can linger on it a little bit, but you've also said what most people think about as money is actually credit. Total amount of credit in the US is $50 trillion. Total amount of money is $3 trillion. That's just crazy to me. Maybe I'm silly, maybe you can educate me, but that seems crazy. It gives me just pause, that the human civilization has been able to create a system that has so much credit. So that's a long way to ask, do you think credit is good or bad for society? That system that's so fundamentally based on credit. I think credit is great, even though people often overdo it. The credit is that somebody has earned money, and what happens is they lend it to somebody else who's got better ideas and they cut a deal and then that person with the better ideas is gonna pay it back and if it works well, it helps resource allocations go well, providing people like the entrepreneurs and all of those, they need capital, they don't have capital themselves, and so somebody's gonna give them capital and they'll give them credit along those lines. Then what happens is it's not managed well in a variety of ways. So I did another book on principles, principles of big debt crisis that go into that, and it's free by the way, I put it free online as a PDF. So if you go online and you look principles for big debt crisis is under my name, you can download it in a PDF where you can buy a print book of it, and it goes through that particular process. And so you always have it overdone in always the same way. Everything by the way, almost everything happens over and over again for the same reasons. Okay, so these debt crisis is all happened over and over again for the same reasons. They get it overdone, in the book it explains how you identify whether it's overdone or not. They get it overdone and then you go through the process of making the adjustments according that and then it explains how they can use the levers and so on. If you didn't have credit, then you would be sort of, everybody sort of be stuck. So credit is a good thing, but it can easily be overdone. So now we get into the question, what is money? What is credit? Okay, you get into money and credit. So if you're holding credit and you think that's worthwhile, keep in mind that the central bank, let's say it can print the money. What does that prompt? You have an IOU and the IOU says you're gonna get a certain number of dollars, let's say or yen or euros. And that is what the IOU is. And so the question is, will you get that money and what will it be worth? And then also you have a government, which is a participant in that process because they are on the hook, they owe money and then will they print the money to make it easy for everybody to pay? So you have to pay attention to those two. I would suggest like you recommend to other people, just take that 30 minutes and it comes across pretty clearly but my conclusion is that of course you want it and even if you understand it and the cycles well, you can benefit from those cycles rather than to be hurt by those cycles because I don't know the way the cycle works is somebody gets over indebted, they have to sell an asset. Okay, then I don't know, that's when assets become cheaper. How do you acquire the assets? It's a whole process. So again, maybe another dumb question but. There are no such things as dumb questions. There you go. But what is money? So you've mentioned credit and money. Another thing that if I just zoom out from an alien perspective and look at human civilization, it's incredible that we've created a thing that only works because currency, because we all agree it has value. So I guess my question is how do you think about money as this emergent phenomenon and what do you think is the future of money? You've commented on Bitcoin, other forms. What do you think is its history and future? How do you think about money? There are two things that money is for. It's a medium of exchange and it's a storehold of wealth. So money, so you could say something's a medium of exchange and then you could say is it a storehold of wealth? And money is that vehicle that is those things and can be used to pay off your debt. So when you have a debt and you provide it, it pays off your debt. So that's that process. And it's, I apologize to interrupt, but it only can be a medium of exchange or store of wealth when everybody recognizes it to be of value. That's right. And so you see in the history around the world and you go to places. I was in an island in the Pacific in which they had as money these big stones. And literally they were taking a boat, this big carved stone, and they were taking it from one of the islands to the other and it sank. The piece of this big stone, piece of money that they had. And it went to the bottom and they still perceived it as having value. So that it was even though it was in the bottom and it's this big hunk of rock, the fact that somebody owned it, they would say, oh, I'll own it for this and that. I've seen beads in different places, shells converted to this and mediums of exchange. And when we look at what we've got, you're exactly right. It is the notion that if I give it to you, I can then take it and I can buy something with it. And that's, so it's a matter of perception. Okay. And then we go through then the history of money and the vulnerabilities of money. And what we have is, through history, there's been two types of money. Those that are claims on something of value, like the connection to gold or something. That's right. That would be. Or they just are money without any connection, and then we have a system now, which is a fiat monetary system. So that's what money is. Then it will last as long as it's kept a value and it works that way. So let's say central banks, when they get in the position of like, they owe a lot of money, like we have in the case, it's increasingly the case. And they also in our bind and they have the printing press to print the money and get out of that. And you have a lot of people might be in that position. Then you can print it and then it could be devalued in there. And so history has shown, forget about today, history has shown that no currency has, every currency has either ended as being a currency or devalued as a currency over periods of time, long periods of time. So it evolves and it changes, but everybody needs that medium of exchange and everybody needs that storehold of wealth. So it keeps changing what is money over a period of time. But so much is being digitized today. And there's this ideas that are based on the blockchain of Bitcoin and so on. So if all currencies, like all empires come to an end, what do you think, do you think something like Bitcoin might emerge as a common store of value, store of wealth and a medium of exchange? The problem with Bitcoin is that it's not an effective medium of exchange. Like it's not easy for me to go in there and buy things with it. And then it's not an effective storehold of value because it has a volatility that's based on speculation and the like. So it's not a very effective saving. That's very different from Facebook's of a stable value currency, which would be effective as both a medium of exchange and a storehold of wealth. Because if you were to hold it and the way it's linked to, number of things that it's linked to, would mean that it could be a very effective storehold of wealth. Then you have a digital currency that could be a very effective medium exchange and storehold of wealth. So in my opinion, some digital currencies are likely to succeed more or less based on that ability to do it. Then the question is what happens? Okay, what happens is do central banks allow that to happen? I really do believe it's possible to get a better form of money that central banks don't control. Okay, a better force of money that central banks don't control. But then that's not yet happened. And we also have to, and so they've got to go through that evolutionary process. In order to go through that evolutionary process, first of all, governments have got to allow that to happen, which is to some extent a threat to them in terms of their power, and that's an issue. And then you have to also build the confidence in all of the components of it to say, okay, that's going to be effective because I won't have problems owning it. So I think that digital currencies have some element of potential, but there's a lot of hurdles that are going to have to be gotten over. I think that it'll be a very long time, possibly never, but anyway, a very long time before we have that, let's say, get into a position that would be in an effective means relative to gold, let's say, if you were to think of that, because gold has a track record of thousands of years. It's in all across countries. It has its mobility. It has the ability to put it down. It has certain abilities. It's got disadvantages relative to digital currencies, but central banks will hold it. Like there's central banks that worry about others, other countries, central banks might worry about whether the US dollar is going to print that, and so the thing they're going to go to is not going to be the digital currency. The thing they're going to go to is gold or something else, some other currency, they got to pick it, and so I think it's a long way to go. But you think it's possible that one day we don't even have a central bank because of a currency that cannot be controlled by the central bank is the primary currency? Or does that seem very unlikely? It would be very remote possibility or very long in the future. Got it. Again, maybe a dumb question, but a romanticized one. When you sit back and you look, you describe these transactions between individuals somehow creating short-term debt cycles, long-term debt cycles, this productivity growth. Does it amaze you that this whole thing works? That there's however many million, hundreds of millions of people in the United States, globally over 7 billion people, that this thing between individual transactions, it just, it works. Yeah, it amazes me. Like I go back and forth between being in it and then I think, like, how did a credit card, how is that really possible? I'm still used, like look, a credit card, I put it on, the guy doesn't know me. Yeah, it's all strangers. Okay, we're making the digital injuries. Is that really secure enough and that kind of thing? And then it goes back and it goes this and it clears and it all happens. And what I marvel at that and those types of things is because of the capacity of the human mind to create abstractions that are true. It's imagination and then the ability to go from one level and then if these things are true, then you go to the next level and if those things are true, then you go to the next level. And all those miracles that we almost become common, it's like when I'm flying in a plane or when I'm looking at all of the things that happen. When I get communications in the middle of, I don't know, Africa or Antarctica and we're communicating in the ways where I see the face on my iPad of somebody, my grandkid in some place else and I look at this and I say, wow, yes, it all amazes me. So while being amazing, do you have a sense, the principality you described, that the whole thing is stable somehow also? Or is this, are we just lucky? So the principles that you described, are those describing a system that is stable, robust and will remain so or is it a lucky accident of our early history? My area of expertise is economics and markets so I get down to like a real nitty gritty. I can't tell you whether the plane is gonna fall out of the sky because of its particular fundamentals. I don't know enough about that but it happens over and over again and so on it gives me faith, okay, so without me knowing it. In the markets and the economy, I know those things well enough in a sense to say that by and large that structure is right, what we're seeing is right. Now, whether there are disruptions and it has effects that can come, not because that structure is right, and I believe it's right, but whether it can be hurt by let's say connectivity or journal entries. They could take all the money away from you through your digital entries. There's all sorts of things that can happen in various ways that means that that money is worthless or the system falls, but from what I see in terms of its basic structure and those complexities that still take my breath away, I would say knowing enough about the mechanics of them, that doesn't worry me. Have you seen disruptions in your lifetime that really surprised you? Major disruption. All the time. This is one of the great lessons of my life is that many times I've seen things that I was very surprised about and that I realized almost all of those I was surprised about because they were just the first time it happened to me. They didn't happen in my lifetime before, but when I researched them, they happened in other places or other people's lifetimes. So for example, I remember 1971, the dollar, there was no such thing as a devaluation of a currency. It didn't experience it. And the dollar was connected to gold and I was watching events happen and then you get on and that definition of money all of a sudden went out the window because it was not tied to gold and then you have this devaluation. And so, and then, or the first oil shock or the second oil shock or so many of these things. And when I, but almost always I realized that they, when I looked in history, they happened before. They just happened in other people's lifetimes, which led me to realize that I needed to study history and what happened in other people's lifetimes and what happened in other countries and places so that I would have timeless and universal principles for dealing with that thing. So I, oh yeah, I've been, you know, the implausible happening, but it's like a one in a hundred year storm. Right. Okay. Or it's, or. They've happened before. Yeah, they've happened. Just not to you. Let me talk about, if we could, about AI a little bit. So we've Bridgewater Associates manage about $160 billion in assets. And artificial intelligence systems algorithms are pretty good with data. What role in the future do you see AI play in analysis and decision-making in this kind of data-rich and impactful area of investment? I'm going to answer that not only in investment, but I give them more all encompassing rule for AI. As I think, you know, for the last 25 years, we have taken our thinking and put them in algorithms. And so we make decisions. The computer takes those criteria algorithms and they put them and they're in there and it takes data. And they operate as an independent decision-maker in parallel with our decision-making. So for me, it's like, there's a chess game playing and I'm a person with my chess game. And I'm saying it made that move and I'm making the move. And how do I compare those two moves? So we've done a lot, but let me give you a rule. If the future can be different from the past and you don't have deep understanding, you should not rely on AI. Okay? Those two things. Deep understanding of? The cause of fact relationships that are leading you to place that bet in anything, okay? Anything important. Let's say if it was due surgeries, and you would say, how do I do surgeries? I think it's totally fine. I think it's totally fine to watch all the doctors do the surgeries you can put it on. Take a digital camera and do that. Convert that into AI algorithms that go to robots and have them do surgeries and I'd be comfortable with that. Because if it keeps doing the same thing over and over again and you have enough of that, that would be fine. Even though you may not understand the algorithms because if the thing's happening over and over again and you're not asking, the future would be the same. That appendicitis or whatever it is will be handled the same way the surgery, that's fine. However, what happens with AI is for the most part is it takes a lot of data with a high enough sample size and then it puts together its own algorithms. Okay, there are two ways you can come up with algorithms. You can either take your thinking and express them in algorithms or you can say, put the data in and say, what is the algorithm? That's machine learning. And when you have machine learning, it'll give you equations which quite often are not understandable. If you would try to say, okay, now describe what it's telling you, it's very difficult to describe and so they can escape understanding. And so it's very good for doing those things that could be done over and over again if you're watching and you're not taking that. But if the future is different from the past and you have that then, if the future is different from the past and you don't have deep understanding, you're gonna get in trouble. And so that's the main thing. As far as AI is concerned, AI and let's say, computer replications of thinking in various ways, I think it's particularly good for processing. But the notion of what you want to do is better most of the time determined by the human mind. What are the principles? Like, okay, how should I raise my children? It's gonna be a long time before AI, you're going to say it has a good enough judgment to do that, who should I marry? All of those things. Maybe you can get the computer to help you but if you just took data and do machine learning, it's not gonna find it. If you were to then take one of my criteria for any of those questions and then say put them into an algorithm and you'd be a lot better off than if you took AI to do it. But by and large, the mind should be used for inventing and those creative things. And then the computer should be used for processing because it could process a lot more information, a lot faster, a lot more accurately and a lot less emotionally. So any notion of thinking in the form of processing type thinking should be done by a computer and anything that is in the notion of doing that, other type of thinking should be operating with the brain, operating in a way where you can say, ah, that makes sense. The process of reducing your understanding down to principles is kind of like the process, the first one you mentioned type of AI algorithm where you're encoding your expertise. You're trying to program, write a program. The human is trying to write a program. How do you think that's attainable? The process of reducing principles to a computer program or when you say, when you write about, when you think about principles, is there still a human element that's not reducible to an algorithm? My experience has been that almost all things, including those things that I thought were pretty much impossible to express, I've been able to express in algorithms, but that doesn't constitute all things. So you can, you can, you can express far more than you can imagine you'll be able to express. So I use the example of, okay, it's not, how do you raise your children? Okay, you will be able to take it one piece by piece. Okay, how, at what age, what school? And the way to do that, that was my experience, is to take that and when you're in the moment of making a decision or just past making a decision to take the time and to write down your criteria for making that decision in words, okay? That way you'll get your principles down on paper. I created an app online called, it's right now just on the iPhone, it'll be on Android. I tried getting it on Android, come on now. It'll be, it'll be, in a few months it'll be on Android. Awesome. But it has an app in there that helps people write down their own principles. Because this is very powerful. So when you're in that moment where you've just, you're thinking about it and you're thinking your criteria for choosing the school for your child or whatever that might be and you write down your criteria or whatever they are, those principles, you write down and you, that will at that moment make you articulate your principles in a very valuable way. And if you have the way that we operate, that you have easy access, so when the next time that comes along, you can go to that or you can show those principles to others to see if they're the right principles. You will get a clarity of that principle that's really invaluable in words and that'll help you a lot. But then you start to think, how do I express that in data? And it'll shock you about how you can do that. You'll form an equation that will show the relationship between these particular parts and then the, essentially the variables that are going to go into that particular equation and you will be able to do that and you take that little piece and you put it into the computer. And then take the next little piece and you put that into the computer. And before you know it, you will have a decision making system that's of the sort that I'm describing. So you're almost making an argument against an earlier statement you've made. You're convincing me. At first you said, there's no way a computer could raise a child, essentially. But now you've described and making me think of it. If you have that kind of idea, meritocracy, you have this rigorous approach that Bridgewater takes on investment and apply it to raising a child. It feels like, through the process you just described, we could, as a society, arrive at a set of principles for raising a child and encode it into a computer. That originality will not come from machine learning. The first time you do, so the original, yes. That's what I'm referring to. But eventually, as we together develop it and then we can automate it. That's why I'm saying the processing can be done by the computer. So we're saying the same thing. We're not inconsistent. We're saying the same thing. That the processing of that information and those algorithms can be done by the computer in a very, very effective way. You don't need to sit there and process and try to weigh all those things in your equation and all those things. But that notion of, okay, how do I get at that principle? And you're saying you'd be surprised Yes, you can do that. how much you can express. That's right. You can do that. So this is where I think you're going to see the future. And right now, we go to our devices and we get information to a large extent. And then we get some guidance. We have our GPS and the like. In my opinion, principles, principles, principles, principles, I wanna emphasize that. You write them down. You've got those principles. They will be converted into algorithms for decision making. And they're gonna also have the benefit of collective decision making. Because right now, individuals, based on what's stuck in their heads, are making their decisions in very ignorant ways. They're not the best decision makers. They're not the best criteria. And they're operating. When those principles are written down and converted into algorithms, it's almost like you'll look at that and follow the instructions and it'll give you better results. Medicine will be much more like this. You can go to your local doctor and you could ask his point of view and whatever. And he's rushed and he may not be the best doctor around. And you're gonna go to this thing and get that same information or just automatically have it input in that. And it's gonna tell you, okay, here's what you should go do. And it's gonna be much better than your local doctor. And that, the converting of information into intelligence, okay, intelligence is the thing. We're coming out with, again, I'm 70 and I wanna pass all these things along. So all these tools that I've found need to develop all over these periods of time, all those things, I wanna make them available. And what's gonna happen as they're going to see this, they're going to see these tools operating much more that way. The idea of converting data into intelligence. Intelligence, for example, on what they are like or what are your strengths and weaknesses. Intelligence on who do I work well with under what circumstance. The personalized, it's the big way. We're gonna go from what are called systems of record, which are a lot of, okay, information organized in the right way to intelligence. And we're gonna, that'll be the next big move, in my opinion, and so you will get intelligence back. And that intelligence comes from reducing things down to principles into. That's how it happens. So what's your intuition if we look at future societies? Do you think we'll be able to reduce a lot of the, the details of our lives down to principles that would be further and further automated? I think the real question hinges on people's emotional, emotions and irrational behaviors. I think that there's subliminal things that we want, okay? And then there's cerebral, you know, conscious logic. And the two often are at odds. So there's almost like two U's in you, right? And so let's say, what do you want? And your mind will answer one thing, your emotions will answer something else. So when I think about it, I think emotions are, I want inspiration, I want love is a good thing, being able to have a good impact, but it is in the reconciliation of your subliminal wants and your intellectual wants, so that you really say they're aligned. And so to do that in a way to get what you want. So irrationality is a bad thing, if it means that it doesn't make sense in getting you what you want, but you better decide which you you're satisfying. Is it the lower level you emotional subliminal one, or is it the other? But if you can align them. So what I find is that by going from my, you experience the decision, do this thing subliminally. And that's the thing I want. It comes to the surface. I find that if I can align that with what my logical me wants and do the double check between them, and I get the same sort of thing, that that helps me a lot. I find, for example, meditation is one of the things that helps to achieve that alignment. It's fantastic for achieving that alignment. And often then I also wanna not just do it in my head. I wanna say, does that make sense? Help you, and so I do it with other people. And I say, okay, well, let's say I want this thing and whatever, does that make sense? And when you do that kind of triangulation, your two yous, and you do that with also the other way, then you certainly wanna be rational, right? But rationality has to be defined by those things. And then you discover sort of new ideas that drive your future. So it's always, you're always at the edge of the set of principles you've developed. You're doing new things always. That's where the intellect is needed. Well, and the inspiration. The inspiration is needed to do that, right? Like what are you doing it for? So what is that thing? It's the excitement. What is that thing? The adventure, the curiosity, the hunger. What's, if you can be Freud for a second, what's in that subconscious? What's the thing that drives us? I think you can't generalize of us. I think different people are driven by different things. There's not a common one, right? So like if you would take the shapers, I think it is a combination of subliminally, it's a combination of excitement, curiosity. Is there a dark element there? Is there demons? Is there fears? Is there, in your sense, something dark that drives them? Most of the ones that I'm dealing with, I have not seen that. I see the, what I really see is, whoo, if I can do that, that would be the most dream. And then the act of creativity. And you say, ooh, so excitement is one of the things. Curiosity is a big pull, okay? And then tenacity, okay, to do those things. But definitely, emotions are entering into it. Then there's an intellectual component of it too, okay? It may be empathy. Can I have an impact? Can I have an impact? The desire to have an impact. That's an emotional thrill, but it also has empathy. And then you start to see spirituality. By spirituality, I mean the connectedness to the whole. You start to see people operate those things. Those tend to be the things that you see the most of. And I think you're gonna shut down this idea completely, but there's a notion that some of these shapers really walk the line between sort of madness and genius. Do you think madness has a role in any of this? Or do you still see Steve Jobs and Elon Musk as fundamentally rational? Yeah, there's a continuum there. And what comes to my mind is that genius is that, often at the edge, in some cases, imaginary genius, is at the edge of insanity. And it's almost like a radio that I think, okay, if I can tune it just right, it's playing right. But if I go a little bit too far, it goes off, okay? And so you can see this. K. Jameson was studying bipolar. What it shows is that that's definitely the case, because when you're going out there, that imagination, whatever, is at the, can be near the edge sometimes. Doesn't have to always be. So let me ask you about automation that's been a part of public discourse recently. What's your view on the impact of automation, of whether we're talking about AI and more basic forms of automation on the economy in the short term and the long term? Do you have concerns about it, as some do, or do you think it's overblown? It's not overblown. I mean, it's a giant thing. It'll come at us in a very big way in the future. We're right at the edge of even really accelerating it. It's had a big impact, and it will have a big impact. And it's a two-edged sword, because it'll have tremendous benefits. And at the same time, it has profound benefits in employment and distributions of wealth, because the way I think about it is there are certain things human beings can do, and over time, we've evolved to go to almost higher and higher levels. And now we're almost like we're at this level. It used to be your labor, and you would then do your labor, and okay, we can get past the labor. We got tractors and things, and you go up, up, up, up, up, and we're up over here, and up to the point in our minds where, okay, anything related to mental processing, the computer can probably do better, and we can find that. And so other than almost inventing, you're at a point where the machines and the automation will probably do it better. And that's accelerating, and that's a force, and that's a force for the good. And at the same time, what it does is it displaces people in terms of employment and changes, and it produces wealth gaps and all of that. So I think the real issue is that that has to be viewed as a national emergency. In other words, I think the wealth gap, the income gap, the opportunity gap, all of those things, that force is creating the problems that we're having today, a lot of the problems, the great polarity, the disenfranchised, not equal, not anything approaching equality of education, all of these problems, a lot of problems are coming as a result of that. And so it needs to be viewed really as an emergency situation in which there's a good work, good plan worked out for how to deal with that effectively so that it's dealt with effectively. So because it's good for the average, it's good for the impact, but it's not good for everyone and it creates that polarity, so it's gotta be dealt with. Yeah, and you've talked about the American dream and that that's something that all people should have an opportunity for, and then we need to reform capitalism to give that opportunity for everyone. Let me ask on one of the ideas in terms of safety nets that support that kind of opportunity, there's been a lot of discussion of universal basic income amongst people. So there's Andrew Yang who's running on that, he's a political candidate running for president on the idea of universal basic income. What do you think about that, giving $1,000 or some amount of money to everybody as a way to give them the padding, the freedom to sort of take leaps, to take the call for adventure, to take the crazy pursuits? Before I get right into my thoughts on universal basic income, I wanna start with the notion that opportunity, education, development, creating equality so that people say there's equal opportunity is the most important thing. And then to find out what is the amount, how are you going to provide that? How do you get the money into a public school system? How do you get the teaching? The fleshing out that plan to create equal opportunity in all of its various forms is the most pressing thing to do and so that is that. The opportunity, the most important one you're kind of implying is the earlier the better. Sort of like education, so in the early development of a human being is when you should have the equal opportunities, that's the most important. Right, in the first phase of your life, which goes from birth until you're on your own and you're an adult and you're now out there, and you deal with early childhood development, okay, and you take the brain and you say what's important. The childcare, okay, it makes a world of difference, for example, if you have good parents who are trying to think about instilling the stability in a non-traumatic environment to provide them, so I would say the good guidance that normally comes from parents and the good education that they're receiving are the most important things in that person's development. The ability to be able to be prepared to go out there and then to go into a market that's an equal opportunity job market, to be able to then go into that kind of market is a system that creates not only fairness, anything else is not fair, and then in addition to that, it also is a more effective economic system because the consequences of not doing that to a society are devastating. If you look at what the difference in outcomes for somebody who completes high school or doesn't complete high school, or does each one of those state changes, and you look at what that means in terms of their costs to society, not only themselves, but their cost and incarceration costs and crimes and all of those things, it's economically better for the society and it's fairer if they can get those particular things. Once they have those things, then you move on to other things, but yes, from birth all the way through that process, anything less than that is bad, is a tragedy and so on. So that's what I'm, yeah, those are the things that I'm estimating. So what I would want above all else is to provide that. So with that in mind, now we'll talk about universal basic income. Start with that, now we can talk about UBI. Right, because you have to have that. Now the question is what's the best way to provide that. So when I look at UBI, I really think is, what is going to happen with that $1,000? And will that $1,000 come from another program? Does that come from an early childhood developmental program? Who are you giving the $1,000 to and what will they do for that $1,000? I mean, like my reaction would be, I think it's a great thing that everybody should have almost $1,000 in their bank and so on, but when do they get to make decisions or who's the parent? A lot of pit times you can give $1,000 to somebody and it could have a negative result. It can have, they can use that money detrimentally, not just productively. And if that money's coming away from some of those other things that are gonna produce the things I want and you're shifted to, let's say, to come in and give a check, doesn't mean its outcomes are going to be good in providing those things that I think are so fundamental important. If it was just everybody can have $1,000 and use it so when the time comes. Use it well. And use it well, that would be really, really good because it's almost like everybody you'd wish everybody could have $1,000 worth of wiggle room in their lives, okay? And I think that would be great. I love that. But I wanna make sure that these other things that are taken care of, so if it comes out of that budget and I don't want it to come out of that budget, that's gonna be doing those things. And so you have to figure it out. And you have a certain skepticism that human nature will use may not always, in fact, frequently may not use that $1,000 for the optimal, to support the optimal trajectory. Some will and some won't. One of the big advantages of universal basic income is that if you put it in the hands, let's say, parents who know how to do the right things and make the right choices for their children because they're responsible and you say, I'm gonna give them $1,000 wiggle room to use for the benefit of their children. Wow, that sounds great. If you put it in the hands of, let's say, an alcoholic or drug addicted parent who is not making those choices well for their children and what they do is they take that $1,000 and they don't use it well, then that's gonna produce more harm than good. Well put. You're, if I may say so, one of the richest people in the world. So you're a good person to ask, does money buy happiness? No, it's been shown that between, once you get over a basic level of income so that you can take care of the pain, you know, you can, health and whatever, there's no correlation between the level of happiness that one has and the level of money that one has. That thing that has the highest correlation is quality relationships with others, community. If you look at surveys of these things across all surveys and all societies, it's a sense of community and interpersonal relationships. That is not in any way correlated with money. You can go down to native tribes in very poor places or you can go in all different communities. And so they have the opportunity to have that. I'm very lucky in that I started with nothing, so I have the full range. I can tell you, I'm not having money, but, and then having quite a lot of money, and I did that in the right order. So you started from nothing in Long Island. Yeah, and my dad was a jazz musician, but I had all really that I needed because I had two parents who loved me and took good care of me, and I went to a public school that was a good public school, and basically, you don't need much more than that in order to, that's the equal opportunity part. Anyway, what I'm saying is I experienced the range, and there are many studies on the answer to your question. No money does not bring happiness. Money gives you an ability to make choices. Does it get in the way in any way of forming those deep, meaningful relationships? It can. There are lots of ways that it makes negative. That's one of them. It could stand in the way of that. Yes, okay, but I could almost list the ways that it could stand, it could be a problem. What does it buy? So if you can elaborate, you mentioned a bit of freedom. At the most fundamental level, it doesn't take a whole lot, but it takes enough that you can take care of yourself and your family to be able to learn, do the basics, have the relationships, have healthcare, the basics of those types of things. You can cover the patients, and then to have maybe enough security, but maybe not too much security. That's right, yeah. That you essentially are okay. Okay, that's really good. And you don't, that's what money will get you. And everything else could go either way. There's no correlation with it. No, there's more. There's more. Okay, then beyond that, what it then starts to do, that's the most important thing. But beyond that, what it starts to do is to help to make your dreams happen in various ways. Okay, so for example, like in my case, those dreams might not be just my own dreams. They're impact on others' dreams, okay? So my own dreams might be, I don't know, I can pass along these, at my stage in life, I can pass along these principles to you, and I can give those things, or I can do whatever, I can go on an adventure, I can start a business, I can do those other things. I can self-actualize in ways that might be not possible otherwise. That's my own belief. And then I can also help others. I mean, this is, to the extent when you get older and with time and whatever, you start to feel connected, spirituality, that's what I'm referring to, you can start to have an effect on others that's beneficial and so on, gives you the ability. I could tell you that people who are very wealthy who have that feel that they don't have enough money. Bill Gates will feel almost broke because relative to the things he'd like to accomplish, through the Gates Foundation and things like that, oh my God, he doesn't have enough money to accomplish the things he wishes for. But those things are not, they're not the most fundamental things. So I think that people sometimes think money has value. Money doesn't have value. Money is, like you say, just a medium of exchange at a store all the while. And so what you have to say is what is it that you're going to buy? Now there are other people who get their gratification in ways that are different from me, but I think in many cases, let's say somebody who used money to have a status symbol. What would I say, or that's probably unhealthy, but then I don't know, somebody who says, I love a great, gorgeous painting, and it's gonna cost lots of money. In my priorities, I can't get there. But that doesn't mean, who am I to judge others in terms of, let's say, their element of the freedom to do those things? So it's a little bit complicated, but by and large, that's my view on money. And wealth. So let me ask you in terms of the idea of, so much of your passions in life has been through something you might be able to call work. Alan Watts has this quote. He said that the real key to life, secret to life, is to be completely engaged with what you're doing in the here and now, and instead of calling it work, realize it is play. So, I think that's the key to life. So, I'd like to ask, what is the role of work in your life's journey, or in a life's journey? And what do you think about this modern idea of kind of separating work and work-life balance? I have a principle that I believe in, is make your work and your passion the same thing. Okay. Okay. So that's similar. In other words, if you can make your work and your passion, it's just gonna work out great. And then, of course, people have different purposes of work. And I don't wanna be theoretical about that. People have to take care of their family. So, money, at a certain point, is an important component of that work. So, you look beyond that. What is the money gonna get you, and what are you trying to achieve? But the most important thing, I agree, is meaningful work and meaningful relationships. Like, if you can get into the thing that you're at, your mission that you're on, and you are excited about that mission that you're on, and then you can do that with people who you have the meaningful relationships with. You have meaningful work and meaningful relationships. I mean, that is fabulous for most people. And it seems that many people struggle to get there, not out of, not necessarily because they're constrained by the fact that they have the financial constraints of having to provide for their family and so on. But it's, I mean, this idea's out there, that there needs to be a work-life balance, which means that most people, we're gonna return to the same thing as most, doesn't mean optimal, but most people seem to not be doing their life's passion, not unifying work and passion. Why do you think that is? Well, the work-life balance, there's a life arc that you go through. Starts at zero and ends somewhere in the vicinity of 80, and there is a phase, and there's a, and you could look at the different degrees of happiness that happen in those phases. I can go through that if that was interesting, but we don't have time probably for it. But you get in the part of the life, that part of the life which has the lowest level of happiness is age 45 to 55. And because as you move into this second phase of your life, now the first phase of your life is when you're learning dependent on others. Second phase of your life is when you're working and others are dependent on you and you're trying to be successful. And in that phase of one's life, you encounter the work-life balance challenge because you're trying to be successful at work and successful at parenting and successful and successful in all those things that take your demand. And they get into that, and I understand that problem in the work-life balance. The issue is primarily to know how to approach that, okay? So I understand it's stressful, it produces stress, and it produces bad results, and it produces the lowest level of happiness in one's life. It's interesting, as you get later in life, the levels of happiness rise and the highest level of happiness is between ages 70 and 80, which is interesting for other reasons, but in that spot. And the key to work-life balance is to realize and to learn how to get more out of an hour of life, okay, because an hour of work, what people are thinking is that they have to make a choice between one thing and another, and of course they do, but they don't realize that if they develop the skill to get a lot more out of an hour, it's the equivalent of having many more hours in your life. And so that's why in the book, Principles, I try to go into, okay, now, how can you get a lot more out of an hour? That allows you to get more life into your life and it reduces the work-life balance. And that's the primary struggle in that 35 to 45. If you could linger on that, so what are the ups and downs of life in terms of happiness in general, and perhaps in your own life, when you look back at the moments, the peaks? It's pretty much same pattern. Early in one's life tends to be a very happy period, all the way up, and 16 is like a really great happy, I think like myself, you start to get elements of freedom, you get your driver's license, whatever, but 16 is there. Junior year in high school quite often could be a stressful period to try to think about the high school. You go into college, tends to be very hot, happiness, generally speaking. Freedom. And then freedom, friendships, all of that, freedom is a big thing. And then 23 is a peak point in happiness, that freedom. Then sequentially, one has a great time, they date, they go out, and so on, and you find the love of your life, you begin to develop a family. And then with that, as time happens, you have more of your work-life balance challenges that come and your responsibilities. And then as you get there in that mid part of your life, that is the biggest struggle. Chances are you will crash in that period of time. You'll have your series of failures, that's that. That's when you go into the abyss, you learn, you hopefully learn from those mistakes, you have the metamorphosis, you come out, you change, you hopefully become better, and you take more responsibilities and so on. And then when you get to the later part, as you are starting to approach the transition in that late part of the second phase of your life, before you go into the third phase of your life, second phase is you're working trying to be successful. Third phase of your life is you want people to be successful without you, okay? Yes. You want your kids to be successful without you because when you're at that phase, they're at making their transition from the first phase to the second phase and they're trying to be successful and you want them to be successful without you. And you have, and your parents are gone, and then you have freedom. And then you have freedom again. And that with that freedom, and then you have these history is shown with this, you have friendships, you have perspective on life, you have different things. And that's one of the reasons that that later part of the life can be real. On average, actually, it's the highest. Very interesting thing. If there are surveys and say, how good do you look and how good do you feel? And that's the highest survey. Now, they're not looking the best and they're not feeling the best, right? Maybe it's 35 that they're actually looking the best and feeling the best. But they rank the highest at that point, survey results of being the highest in that 70 to 80 period of time because it has to do with an attitude on life. Then you start to have grandkids. Oh, grandkids are great. And you start to experience that transition well. So that's what the arc of life pretty much looks like. And I'm experiencing it. You've learned that when you meditate, we're all human, we're all mortal. When you meditate on your own mortality, having achieved a lot of success on whatever dimension, what do you think is the meaning of it all? The meaning of our short existence on earth as human beings. I think that evolution is the greatest force of the universe. And that we're all tiny bits of an evolutionary type of process where it's just matter and machines that go through time. And that we all have a deeply embedded inclination to evolve and contribute to evolution. So I think it's to personally evolve and contribute to evolution. I could have predicted you would answer that way. It's brilliant and exactly right. And I think we've said it before, but I'll say it again. You have a lot of incredible videos out there that people should definitely watch. I don't say this often. I mean, it's literally the best spend of time. And in terms of reading, principles and reading basically anything you write on LinkedIn and so on is a really good use of time. It's a lot of light bulb moments, a lot of transformative ideas in there. So Ray, thank you so much. It's been an honor. I really appreciate it. It's been a pleasure for me too. I'm happy to hear it's used to you and others. Thanks for listening to this conversation with Ray Dalio. And thank you to our presenting sponsor, Cash App. Download it, use code Lexpodcast.com, use code Lexpodcast. You'll get $10 and $10 will go to First, a STEM education nonprofit that inspires hundreds of thousands of young minds to learn and to dream of engineering our future. If you enjoy this podcast, subscribe on YouTube, get five stars on Apple Podcast, support on Patreon, or connect with me on Twitter. Finally, closing words of advice from Ray Dalio. Pain plus reflection equals progress. Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.
 The following is a conversation with Ray Dalhiel.
 He's the founder, co-chairman,
 and co-chief investment officer of Bridgewater Associates,
 one of the world's largest
 and most successful investment firms that is famous
 for the principles of radical truth and transparency
 that underlies culture.
 Ray is one of the wealthiest people in the world
 with ideas that extend far beyond the specifics
 of how you made that wealth.
 His ideas that are applicable to everyone
 are brilliantly summarized in his book, Principles.
 They're also even further condensed
 on several other platforms, including YouTube,
 where, for example, the 30-minute video titled
 How the Economic Machine Works
 is one of the best educational videos
 I personally have ever seen on YouTube.
 Once again, you may have noticed
 that the people I've been speaking with
 are not just computer scientists,
 but philosophers, mathematicians, writers, psychologists,
 physicists, economists, investors, and soon much more.
 To me, AI is much bigger than deep learning,
 bigger than computing.
 It is our civilization's journey
 into understanding the human mind
 and creating echoes of it in the machine.
 That journey includes the mechanisms of our economy,
 of our politics, and the leaders
 that shape the future of both.
 This is the Artificial Intelligence Podcast.
 If you enjoy it, subscribe on YouTube,
 give it five stars on Apple Podcast,
 support on Patreon, or simply connect with me on Twitter.
 Alex Friedman, spelled F-R-I-D-M-A-N.
 This show is presented by Cash App,
 the number one finance app in the App Store.
 I personally use Cash App to send money to friends,
 but you can also use it to buy, sell, and deposit Bitcoin.
 Most Bitcoin exchanges take days
 for a bank transfer to become investable.
 Through Cash App, it takes seconds.
 Cash App also has a new investing feature.
 You can buy fractions of a stock,
 which to me is a really interesting concept.
 So you can buy $1 worth, no matter what the stock price is.
 Brokerage services are provided by Cash App Investing,
 subsidiary of Square, and member SIPC.
 I'm excited to be working with Cash App
 to support one of my favorite organizations
 that many of you may know and have benefited from
 called FIRST, best known for their FIRST Robotics
 and LEGO competitions.
 They educate and inspire hundreds of thousands of students
 in over 110 countries,
 and have a perfect rating on Charity Navigator,
 which means that donated money
 is used to maximum effectiveness.
 When you get Cash App from the App Store or Google Play
 and use code LEXPODCAST, you'll get $10,
 and Cash App will also donate $10 to FIRST,
 which again is an organization
 that I've personally seen inspire girls and boys
 to dream of engineering a better world.
 And now here's my conversation with Ray Dalio.
 Truth, or more precisely,
 an accurate understanding of reality
 is the essential foundation of any good outcome.
 I believe you've said that.
 Let me ask an absurd sounding question
 at the high philosophical level.
 So what is truth?
 When you're trying to do something different
 than everybody else is doing,
 and perhaps something that has not been done before,
 how do you accurately analyze the situation?
 How do you accurately discover the truth,
 the nature of things?
 Almost the way you're asking the question implies
 that truth and newness are almost at odds.
 And I just want to say that
 I don't think that that's true, right?
 So what I mean by truth is,
 you know, what is the reality?
 How does the reality work?
 And so if you're doing something new
 that has never been done before,
 which is exciting and I like to do,
 the way that you would start with that
 is experimenting on what are the realities
 and the premises that you're using on that
 and how to stress test those types of things.
 I think what you're talking about is instead,
 the fact of how do you deal with something
 that's never been done before
 and deal with the associated probabilities?
 And so I think in that,
 don't let something that's never been done before
 stand in the way of you doing that particular thing.
 You have a, because almost the only way
 that you understand what true is,
 is through experimentation.
 And so when you go out and experiment,
 you're going to learn a lot more about what truth is.
 But the essence of what I'm saying
 is that when you take a look at that,
 use truth to find out what the realities are as a foundation.
 Do the independent thinking,
 do the experimentation to find out what's true
 and change and keep going after that.
 So I think that when you're thinking about it
 the way you're thinking about it,
 that almost implies that you're letting people
 almost say that they're reliant
 on what's been discovered before to find out what's true.
 And what's been discovered before is often not true, right?
 The conventional view of what is true is very often wrong.
 It'll go in ups and downs and you know,
 I mean there are fads and okay,
 this thing it goes this way and that way.
 And so definitions of truths that are conventional
 are not the thing to go by.
 How do you know the thing that has been done before
 that it might succeed?
 It's to do whatever homework that you have
 in order to try to get a foundation.
 And then to go into worlds of not knowing
 and you go into the world of not knowing,
 but not stupidly, not naively, you know,
 you go into that world of not knowing
 and then you do experimenting
 and you learn what truth is and what's possible
 through that process.
 I describe it as a five step process.
 The first step is you go after your goals.
 The second step is you identify the problems
 that stand in the way of you getting to your goals.
 The third step is you diagnose those
 to get at the root cause of those.
 Then the fourth step is then now that you know
 the exact root cause, you design a way to get around those
 and then you follow through and do the designs
 you set out to do and it's the experimentation.
 I think that what happens to people mostly
 is that they try to decide whether they're gonna be
 successful or not ahead of doing it.
 And they don't know how to do the process well
 because the nature of your questions are along those lines
 like how do you know?
 Well, you don't know, but a practical person
 who is also used to making dreams happen
 knows how to do that process.
 I've given personality tests to shapers.
 So the person, what I mean by a shaper is a person
 who can take something from visualization.
 They have an audacious goal and then they go
 from visualization to actualization, building it out.
 That includes Elon Musk, I gave him the personality test,
 I've given it to Bill Gates and I give it to many,
 many such shapers.
 And they know that process that I'm talking about.
 They experience it, which is a process essentially
 of knowing how to go from an audacious goal,
 but not in a ridiculous way, not a dream.
 And then to do that learning along the way
 that allows them in a very practical way
 to learn very rapidly as they're moving toward that goal.
 So the call to adventure, the adventure starts
 not trying to analyze the probabilities of the situation,
 but using what instinct?
 How do you dive in?
 So let's talk about-
 It is being a, it's simultaneously being a dreamer
 and a realist.
 It's to know how to do that well.
 The pull comes from a pull to adventure.
 For whatever reason, I can't tell you how much
 of it's genetics and how much it's environment,
 but there's a early on, it's exciting.
 That notion is exciting.
 Being creative is exciting.
 And so one feels that.
 Then one gets in the habit of doing that.
 Okay, how do I know?
 How do I learn very well?
 And then how do I imagine?
 And then how do I experiment to go from that imagination?
 So it's that process that one,
 and then the more one does it,
 the better one becomes at it.
 You mentioned shapers, Elon Musk, Bill Gates.
 Who are the shapers that you find yourself thinking about
 when you're constructing these ideas?
 The ones that define the archetype of a shaper for you?
 Well, as I say, a shaper for me is somebody who
 comes up with a great visualization,
 usually a really unique visualization,
 and then actually builds it out
 and makes the world different,
 changes the world in that kind of a way.
 So when I look at it, Mark Benioff with Salesforce,
 Chris Anderson with TED,
 Mohammed Younis with Social Enterprise and Philanthropy,
 Jeffrey Canada and Harlem Children's Zone,
 there are all domains have shapers
 who have the ability to visualize
 and make extraordinary things happen.
 What are the commonalities between some of them?
 The commonalities are, first of all,
 the excitement of something new, that culture adventure,
 and then again, that practicality, the capacity to learn.
 The capacity then, they're able to be in many ways full rage.
 That means they're able to go from the big, big picture
 down to the detail.
 So let's say, for example, Elon Musk,
 he describes, he gets a lot of money
 from selling PayPal, his interest in PayPal.
 He said, why isn't anybody going to Mars or outer space?
 What are we gonna do if the planet goes to hell?
 And how do we gonna get that?
 Nobody's paying attention to that.
 He doesn't know much about it.
 He then reads and learns and so on.
 Says, I'm gonna take, okay, half of my money
 and I'm gonna put it in there and I'm gonna do this thing.
 And he learns and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
 And he's got creative, okay, that's one dimension.
 And so he gave me the keys to his car
 with his one just early days in Tesla.
 And he then points out the details.
 Okay, if you push this button here, it's this,
 the detail that, so he's signed with Tesla
 simultaneously talking about the big,
 the big, big, big picture.
 Okay, when does humanity going to abandon the planet?
 But he will then be able to take it down into the detail
 so he can go, let's call it helicoptering.
 He can go up, he can go down and see things
 at those types of perspective.
 And then you've seen that with the other shapers as well.
 And that's a common thing that they can do that.
 Another important difference that they have in mind
 is how they deal with people.
 I mean, meaning there's nothing more important
 than achieving the mission.
 And so what they have in common is that there's a test
 that I give these personality tests,
 because they're very helpful for understanding people.
 And so I gave it to all these shapers.
 And one of the things in workplace inventory test
 is this test and it has a category called
 concern for others.
 They're all having concern for others.
 This includes Mohammed Younis,
 who invented microfinance social enterprise impact investing
 as Mohammed Younis received the Nobel Peace Prize for this,
 Congressional Medal of Honor,
 one of the fortune determined,
 one of the 10 greatest entrepreneurs of our time.
 He's built all sorts of businesses to give back money
 and social enterprise, a remarkable man.
 He has nobody that I know practically
 can have more concern for others.
 He lives a life of a saint, I mean, very modest lifestyle
 and he puts all his money into trying to help others.
 And he tests low on what's called concern for others
 because what it really, the questions under that
 are questions about conflict to get at the mission.
 So they all, Jeffrey Canada,
 changed Harlem Children's Zone
 and developed that to take children in Harlem
 and get them well taken care of,
 not only just in their education, but their whole lives.
 How are him also concerned for others?
 What they mean is that they can see
 whether those individuals are performing at a level
 that an extremely high level
 that's necessary to make those dreams happen.
 So when you think of, let's say, Steve Jobs was famous
 for being difficult with people and so on.
 And I didn't know Steve Jobs,
 so I can't speak personally to that,
 but his comments on, do you have A players?
 And if you have A players, if you put in B players,
 pretty soon you'll have C players and so on.
 That is a common element of them,
 holding people to high standards
 and not letting anybody stand in the way of the mission.
 What do you think about that kind of idea?
 Sorry to pause on that for a second,
 that the A, B and C players
 and the importance of, so when you have a mission
 to really only have A players
 and be sort of aggressively filtering for that.
 Yes, but I think that there are all different ways
 of being A players.
 And I think, and what a great team,
 you have to appreciate all the differences
 in ways of being A players, okay?
 That's the first thing.
 And then you always have to be super excellent,
 in my opinion, you always have to be really excellent
 with people to help them understand each other,
 themselves and get in sync with them about what's true
 about them and their circumstances and how they're doing
 so that they're having a fabulous
 personal development experience
 at the same time as you're dealing with them.
 So, and when I say that they're all different ways,
 this is one of the then qualities.
 You asked me what are the qualities.
 So one of the third qualities that I would say
 is to know how to deal well with your not knowing,
 and to be able to get the best expertise
 so that you're a great orchestrator of different ways
 so that the people who are really, really successful,
 unlike most people believe that they're successful
 because of what they know, they're even more successful
 by being able to effectively learn from others
 and tapping into the skills of people
 who see things different from them.
 Brilliant, so how do you, when that personality,
 being first of all open to the fact that there's
 other people see things differently than you
 and at the same time have supreme confidence in your vision.
 Is there just the psychology of that?
 Do you see a tension there between the confidence
 and the open mindedness?
 No, it's funny because I think we grow up thinking
 that there's a tension there, right?
 That there's a confidence and the more confidence
 that you have, there's a tension with the open mindedness
 and not being sure, okay?
 Confident and accurate are almost negatively correlated
 to many people.
 They're extremely confident and they're often inaccurate.
 And so I think one of the greatest tragedies of people
 is not realizing how those things to go together
 because instead it's really that by saying I know a lot
 and how do I know I'm still not wrong
 and how do I take that, the best thinking available to me
 and then raise my probability of learning.
 All these people think for themselves, okay?
 I mean, meaning they're smart.
 But they take in like vacuum cleaners,
 they take in ideas of others, they stress test their ideas
 with others, they assess what comes back to them
 in the form of other thinking.
 And they also know what they're not good at
 and what other people who are good at the things
 that they're not good at, they know how to get those people
 and be successful all around
 because nobody has enough knowledge in their heads.
 And that I think is one of the great differences.
 The reason my company has been successful in terms of this
 is because of an idea meritocratic decision making,
 a process by which you can get the best ideas.
 What's an idea meritocracy?
 An idea meritocracy is to get the best ideas
 that are available out there and to work together
 with other people in the team to achieve that.
 That's an incredible process that you describe
 in several places to arrive at the truth.
 Apologize if I'm romanticizing the notion,
 but let me linger on it.
 Just having enough self belief,
 you don't think there's a self delusion there
 that's necessary, especially in the beginning
 you talk about in the journey,
 maybe the trials or the abyss.
 Do you think there is value to diluting yourself?
 I think what you're calling delusion
 is a bad word for uncertainty.
 So, I mean, in other words,
 cause we keep coming back to the question,
 how would you know and all of those things.
 No, I think that delusion is not gonna help you,
 that you have to find out truth, okay,
 to deal with uncertainty, not saying,
 listen, I have this dream
 and I don't know how I'm going to get that dream.
 I mentioned in my book principles
 and describe the process in a more complete way
 than we're gonna be able to go here.
 But what happens is I say, you form your dreams first
 and you can't judge whether you're going to achieve
 those dreams because you haven't learned
 the things that you're going to learn
 on the way toward those dreams, okay?
 So that isn't delusion, I wouldn't use delusion.
 I think you're overemphasizing the importance
 of knowing whether you're going to succeed or not.
 Get rid of that, okay?
 If you can get rid of that and say,
 okay, no, I can have that dream,
 but I'm so realistic in the notion of finding out,
 I'm curious, I'm a great learner,
 I'm a great experimenter.
 Along the way, you'll do those experiments
 which will teach you more truths
 and more learning about the reality
 so that you can get your dreams.
 Because if you still live in that world of delusion, okay,
 and you think delusion's helpful,
 no, the delusion isn't,
 don't confuse delusion with not knowing.
 Yes, but nevertheless, so if we look at the abyss,
 we can look at your own that you described.
 It's difficult psychologically for people.
 So many people quit, many people choose a path
 that is more comfortable.
 The heartbreak of that breaks people.
 So if you have the dream and then there's this cycle
 of learning, setting a goal and so on,
 what's your value for the psychology of just being broken
 by these difficult moments?
 Well, that's classically the defining moment.
 It's almost like evolution taking care of,
 okay, now you crash, you're in the abyss,
 oh my God, that's bad, and then the question is,
 what do you do?
 And it sorts people, okay?
 And that's what, some people get off the field
 and they say, oh, I don't like this and so on.
 And some people learn and they have a metamorphosis
 and it changes their approach to learning.
 The number one thing it should give them is uncertainty.
 You should take an audacious, dreamier guy
 who wants to change the world, crash, okay,
 and then come out of that crashing and saying,
 okay, I can be audacious and scared
 that I'm gonna be wrong at the same time.
 And then how do I do that, because that's the key.
 When you don't lose your audaciousness
 and you keep going after your big goal,
 and at the same time you say, hey, I'm worried
 that I'm gonna be wrong, you gain your radical open-mindedness
 that allows you to take in the things
 that allows you to go to the next level of being successful.
 So your own process, I mean, you've talked about it before,
 but it would be great if you can describe it
 because our darkest moments are perhaps
 the most interesting.
 So your own with the prediction of another depression.
 Economic depression.
 Yes, I apologize, economic depression.
 Can you talk to what you were feeling, thinking,
 planning, strategizing at those moments?
 Yeah, that was my biggest moment, okay?
 Building my little company, this is in 1981, 82.
 I had calculated that American banks
 had given a lot more money to, lent a lot more money
 to Latin American countries than those countries
 were gonna pay back, and that they would have a debt crisis
 and that this had sent the economy tumbling.
 And that was an extremely controversial point of view.
 Then it started to happen and it happened in Mexico,
 defaulted in August, 1982.
 I thought that there was gonna be an economic collapse
 that was gonna follow because there was a series
 of the other countries, it was just playing out
 as I had imagined, and that couldn't have been more wrong.
 That was the exact bottom in the stock market
 because central banks, these monetary policy,
 blah, blah, blah, and I couldn't have been more wrong.
 And I was very publicly wrong and all of that.
 And I lost money for me and I lost money for my clients.
 And I only had a small company then,
 but these were close people, I had to let them go.
 I was down to me as the last person.
 I was so broke I had to borrow $4,000 from my dad
 to help to pay for my family bills, very painful.
 And at the same time, I would say it definitely was
 one of the best things that ever happened to me,
 maybe the best thing for him happened to me,
 because it changed my approach to decision making.
 It's what I'm saying.
 In other words, I kept saying, okay,
 how do I know whether I'm right?
 How do I know I'm not wrong?
 It gave me that.
 And it didn't give up my audaciousness
 because I was in a position, what am I gonna do?
 Am I gonna go down back, put on a tie,
 go to Wall Street and just do those things?
 No, I can't bring myself to do that.
 So I'm at a juncture.
 How do I deal with my risk and how do I deal with that?
 And it told me how to deal with my uncertainties.
 And that taught me, for example, number of techniques.
 First, to find the smartest people I could find
 who disagreed with me and to have quality disagreement.
 I learned the art of thoughtful disagreement.
 I learned how to produce diversification.
 I learned how to do a number of things.
 That is what led me to create an idea meritocracy.
 In other words, person by person, I hired them,
 and I wanted the smartest people
 who would be independent thinkers,
 who would disagree with each other and me well,
 so that we could be independent thinkers
 to go off to produce those audacious dreams,
 because you have to be an independent thinker to do that.
 And to do that not independently of the consensus,
 independently of each other,
 and then work ourselves through that,
 because who know whether you're gonna have the right answer.
 And by doing that, then that was the key to our success.
 And the things that I wanna pass along to people,
 the reason I'm doing this podcast with you is,
 I'm 70 years old and that is a magical way
 of achieving success.
 If you can create an idea meritocracy,
 it's so much better in terms of achieving success
 and also quality relationships with people.
 But that's what that experience gave me.
 So if we can linger on a little bit longer,
 the idea of an idea meritocracy, it's fascinating,
 but especially because it seems to be rare,
 not just in companies, but in society.
 So there is a lot of people on Twitter,
 and public discourse, and politics, and so on,
 that are really stuck in certain sets of ideas,
 whatever they are.
 So when you're confronted with an idea
 that's different than your own about a particular topic,
 what kind of process do you go through mentally?
 Are you arguing through the idea with the person?
 Sort of present as almost like a debate?
 Or do you sit on it and consider the world
 sort of empathetically, if this is true,
 then what does that world look like?
 Does that world make sense and so on?
 So what's the process of considering
 those conflicting ideas for you?
 I'm gonna answer that question,
 but after saying first, almost implicit in your question,
 is it's not common, okay?
 What's common produces only common results, okay?
 So don't judge anything that is good
 based on whether it's common,
 because it's only gonna give you common results.
 If you want unique, you have a unique approach, okay?
 And so that art of thoughtful disagreement
 is the capacity to hold two things in your mind
 at the same time.
 The, gee, I think this makes sense,
 and then saying, I'm not sure it makes sense,
 and then try to say, why does it make sense?
 And then to triangulate with others.
 So if I'm having a discussion like that
 and I work myself through, and I'm not sure,
 then I have to do that in a good way.
 So I always give attention, for example,
 let's start off, what does the other person know
 relative to what I know?
 So if a person has a higher expertise or things,
 I'm much more inclined to ask questions.
 I'm always asking questions.
 If you wanna learn, you're asking questions,
 you're not arguing, okay?
 You're taking in, you're assessing when it comes into you.
 Does that make sense?
 Are you learning something?
 Are you getting epiphanies and so on?
 And I try to then do that.
 If the conversation, as we're trying to decide
 what is true, and we're trying to do that together,
 and we see truth different,
 then I might even call in another
 really smart, capable person and try to say,
 what is true and how do we explore that together?
 And you go through that same thing.
 So I would, I said, I describe it as having open-mindedness
 and assertiveness at the same time.
 That you can simultaneously be open-minded
 and take in with that curiosity
 and then also be assertive and say,
 but that doesn't make sense, why would this be the case?
 And you do that back and forth.
 And when you're doing that kind of back and forth
 on a topic like the economy, which you have,
 to me, perhaps I'm naive, but it seems both incredible
 and incredibly complex, the economy, the trading,
 the transactions, that these transactions
 between two individuals somehow add up
 to this giant mechanism.
 You've put out a 30-minute video.
 You have a lot of incredible videos online
 that people should definitely watch on YouTube,
 but you've put out this 30-minute video titled
 How the Economic Machine Works.
 That is probably one of the best, if not the best,
 video I've seen on the internet
 in terms of educational videos.
 So people should definitely watch it,
 especially because it's not that
 the individual components of the video
 are somehow revolutionary, but the simplicity
 and the clarity of the different components
 just makes you, there's a few light bulb moments there
 about how the economy works as a machine.
 So as you described, there's three main forces
 that drive the economy, productivity growth,
 short-term debt cycle, long-term debt cycle.
 The former, productivity growth, is how valuable things,
 how much value people create,
 valuable things people create.
 The latter is people borrowing from their future selves
 to hopefully create those valuable things faster.
 So this is an incredible system to me.
 Maybe we can linger on it a little bit,
 but you've also said what most people think about
 as money is actually credit.
 Total amount of credit in the US is $50 trillion.
 Total amount of money is $3 trillion.
 That's just crazy to me.
 Maybe I'm silly, maybe you can educate me,
 but that seems crazy.
 It gives me just pause, that the human civilization
 has been able to create a system that has so much credit.
 So that's a long way to ask,
 do you think credit is good or bad for society?
 That system that's so fundamentally based on credit.
 I think credit is great,
 even though people often overdo it.
 The credit is that somebody has earned money,
 and what happens is they lend it to somebody else
 who's got better ideas and they cut a deal
 and then that person with the better ideas
 is gonna pay it back and if it works well,
 it helps resource allocations go well,
 providing people like the entrepreneurs and all of those,
 they need capital, they don't have capital themselves,
 and so somebody's gonna give them capital
 and they'll give them credit along those lines.
 Then what happens is it's not managed well
 in a variety of ways.
 So I did another book on principles,
 principles of big debt crisis that go into that,
 and it's free by the way, I put it free online as a PDF.
 So if you go online and you look principles
 for big debt crisis is under my name,
 you can download it in a PDF
 where you can buy a print book of it,
 and it goes through that particular process.
 And so you always have it overdone
 in always the same way.
 Everything by the way, almost everything happens
 over and over again for the same reasons.
 Okay, so these debt crisis is all happened
 over and over again for the same reasons.
 They get it overdone, in the book it explains
 how you identify whether it's overdone or not.
 They get it overdone and then you go through the process
 of making the adjustments according that
 and then it explains how they can use the levers and so on.
 If you didn't have credit, then you would be sort of,
 everybody sort of be stuck.
 So credit is a good thing, but it can easily be overdone.
 So now we get into the question, what is money?
 What is credit?
 Okay, you get into money and credit.
 So if you're holding credit
 and you think that's worthwhile,
 keep in mind that the central bank,
 let's say it can print the money.
 What does that prompt?
 You have an IOU and the IOU says you're gonna get
 a certain number of dollars, let's say or yen or euros.
 And that is what the IOU is.
 And so the question is, will you get that money
 and what will it be worth?
 And then also you have a government,
 which is a participant in that process
 because they are on the hook, they owe money
 and then will they print the money
 to make it easy for everybody to pay?
 So you have to pay attention to those two.
 I would suggest like you recommend to other people,
 just take that 30 minutes and it comes across pretty clearly
 but my conclusion is that of course you want it
 and even if you understand it and the cycles well,
 you can benefit from those cycles
 rather than to be hurt by those cycles
 because I don't know the way the cycle works
 is somebody gets over indebted, they have to sell an asset.
 Okay, then I don't know, that's when assets become cheaper.
 How do you acquire the assets?
 It's a whole process.
 So again, maybe another dumb question but.
 There are no such things as dumb questions.
 There you go.
 But what is money?
 So you've mentioned credit and money.
 Another thing that if I just zoom out
 from an alien perspective and look at human civilization,
 it's incredible that we've created a thing
 that only works because currency,
 because we all agree it has value.
 So I guess my question is how do you think about money
 as this emergent phenomenon
 and what do you think is the future of money?
 You've commented on Bitcoin, other forms.
 What do you think is its history and future?
 How do you think about money?
 There are two things that money is for.
 It's a medium of exchange and it's a storehold of wealth.
 So money, so you could say something's a medium of exchange
 and then you could say is it a storehold of wealth?
 And money is that vehicle that is those things
 and can be used to pay off your debt.
 So when you have a debt and you provide it,
 it pays off your debt.
 So that's that process.
 And it's, I apologize to interrupt,
 but it only can be a medium of exchange or store of wealth
 when everybody recognizes it to be of value.
 That's right.
 And so you see in the history around the world
 and you go to places.
 I was in an island in the Pacific
 in which they had as money these big stones.
 And literally they were taking a boat,
 this big carved stone,
 and they were taking it from one of the islands
 to the other and it sank.
 The piece of this big stone,
 piece of money that they had.
 And it went to the bottom
 and they still perceived it as having value.
 So that it was even though it was in the bottom
 and it's this big hunk of rock,
 the fact that somebody owned it,
 they would say, oh, I'll own it for this and that.
 I've seen beads in different places,
 shells converted to this and mediums of exchange.
 And when we look at what we've got, you're exactly right.
 It is the notion that if I give it to you,
 I can then take it and I can buy something with it.
 And that's, so it's a matter of perception.
 Okay.
 And then we go through then the history of money
 and the vulnerabilities of money.
 And what we have is, through history,
 there's been two types of money.
 Those that are claims on something of value,
 like the connection to gold or something.
 That's right.
 That would be.
 Or they just are money without any connection,
 and then we have a system now,
 which is a fiat monetary system.
 So that's what money is.
 Then it will last as long as it's kept a value
 and it works that way.
 So let's say central banks,
 when they get in the position of like,
 they owe a lot of money,
 like we have in the case, it's increasingly the case.
 And they also in our bind
 and they have the printing press to print the money
 and get out of that.
 And you have a lot of people might be in that position.
 Then you can print it and then it could be devalued
 in there.
 And so history has shown, forget about today,
 history has shown that no currency has,
 every currency has either ended as being a currency
 or devalued as a currency over periods of time,
 long periods of time.
 So it evolves and it changes,
 but everybody needs that medium of exchange
 and everybody needs that storehold of wealth.
 So it keeps changing what is money over a period of time.
 But so much is being digitized today.
 And there's this ideas that are based on the blockchain
 of Bitcoin and so on.
 So if all currencies, like all empires come to an end,
 what do you think,
 do you think something like Bitcoin might emerge
 as a common store of value,
 store of wealth and a medium of exchange?
 The problem with Bitcoin is that it's not
 an effective medium of exchange.
 Like it's not easy for me to go in there
 and buy things with it.
 And then it's not an effective storehold of value
 because it has a volatility that's based on speculation
 and the like.
 So it's not a very effective saving.
 That's very different from Facebook's
 of a stable value currency,
 which would be effective as both a medium of exchange
 and a storehold of wealth.
 Because if you were to hold it and the way it's linked to,
 number of things that it's linked to,
 would mean that it could be a very effective
 storehold of wealth.
 Then you have a digital currency
 that could be a very effective medium exchange
 and storehold of wealth.
 So in my opinion, some digital currencies are likely
 to succeed more or less based on that ability to do it.
 Then the question is what happens?
 Okay, what happens is do central banks
 allow that to happen?
 I really do believe it's possible to get a better form
 of money that central banks don't control.
 Okay, a better force of money that central banks
 don't control.
 But then that's not yet happened.
 And we also have to, and so they've got to go through
 that evolutionary process.
 In order to go through that evolutionary process,
 first of all, governments have got to allow that to happen,
 which is to some extent a threat to them
 in terms of their power, and that's an issue.
 And then you have to also build the confidence
 in all of the components of it to say,
 okay, that's going to be effective
 because I won't have problems owning it.
 So I think that digital currencies
 have some element of potential,
 but there's a lot of hurdles
 that are going to have to be gotten over.
 I think that it'll be a very long time, possibly never,
 but anyway, a very long time before we have that,
 let's say, get into a position that would be
 in an effective means relative to gold, let's say,
 if you were to think of that,
 because gold has a track record of thousands of years.
 It's in all across countries.
 It has its mobility.
 It has the ability to put it down.
 It has certain abilities.
 It's got disadvantages relative to digital currencies,
 but central banks will hold it.
 Like there's central banks that worry about others,
 other countries, central banks might worry
 about whether the US dollar is going to print that,
 and so the thing they're going to go to
 is not going to be the digital currency.
 The thing they're going to go to is gold or something else,
 some other currency, they got to pick it,
 and so I think it's a long way to go.
 But you think it's possible that one day
 we don't even have a central bank
 because of a currency that cannot be controlled
 by the central bank is the primary currency?
 Or does that seem very unlikely?
 It would be very remote possibility
 or very long in the future.
 Got it.
 Again, maybe a dumb question, but a romanticized one.
 When you sit back and you look,
 you describe these transactions between individuals
 somehow creating short-term debt cycles,
 long-term debt cycles, this productivity growth.
 Does it amaze you that this whole thing works?
 That there's however many million,
 hundreds of millions of people in the United States,
 globally over 7 billion people,
 that this thing between individual transactions,
 it just, it works.
 Yeah, it amazes me.
 Like I go back and forth between being in it
 and then I think, like, how did a credit card,
 how is that really possible?
 I'm still used, like look, a credit card, I put it on,
 the guy doesn't know me.
 Yeah, it's all strangers.
 Okay, we're making the digital injuries.
 Is that really secure enough and that kind of thing?
 And then it goes back and it goes this and it clears
 and it all happens.
 And what I marvel at that and those types of things
 is because of the capacity of the human mind
 to create abstractions that are true.
 It's imagination and then the ability to go from one level
 and then if these things are true,
 then you go to the next level and if those things are true,
 then you go to the next level.
 And all those miracles that we almost become common,
 it's like when I'm flying in a plane
 or when I'm looking at all of the things that happen.
 When I get communications in the middle of,
 I don't know, Africa or Antarctica
 and we're communicating in the ways where I see the face
 on my iPad of somebody, my grandkid in some place else
 and I look at this and I say, wow, yes, it all amazes me.
 So while being amazing, do you have a sense,
 the principality you described,
 that the whole thing is stable somehow also?
 Or is this, are we just lucky?
 So the principles that you described,
 are those describing a system that is stable, robust
 and will remain so or is it a lucky accident
 of our early history?
 My area of expertise is economics and markets
 so I get down to like a real nitty gritty.
 I can't tell you whether the plane is gonna fall
 out of the sky because of its particular fundamentals.
 I don't know enough about that
 but it happens over and over again
 and so on it gives me faith, okay,
 so without me knowing it.
 In the markets and the economy,
 I know those things well enough in a sense to say
 that by and large that structure is right,
 what we're seeing is right.
 Now, whether there are disruptions
 and it has effects that can come,
 not because that structure is right,
 and I believe it's right,
 but whether it can be hurt by let's say connectivity
 or journal entries.
 They could take all the money away from you
 through your digital entries.
 There's all sorts of things that can happen in various ways
 that means that that money is worthless
 or the system falls,
 but from what I see in terms of its basic structure
 and those complexities that still take my breath away,
 I would say knowing enough about the mechanics of them,
 that doesn't worry me.
 Have you seen disruptions in your lifetime
 that really surprised you?
 Major disruption. All the time.
 This is one of the great lessons of my life
 is that many times I've seen things
 that I was very surprised about
 and that I realized almost all of those
 I was surprised about because they were just
 the first time it happened to me.
 They didn't happen in my lifetime before,
 but when I researched them,
 they happened in other places or other people's lifetimes.
 So for example, I remember 1971, the dollar,
 there was no such thing as a devaluation of a currency.
 It didn't experience it.
 And the dollar was connected to gold
 and I was watching events happen and then you get on
 and that definition of money all of a sudden
 went out the window because it was not tied to gold
 and then you have this devaluation.
 And so, and then, or the first oil shock
 or the second oil shock or so many of these things.
 And when I, but almost always I realized that they,
 when I looked in history, they happened before.
 They just happened in other people's lifetimes,
 which led me to realize that I needed to study history
 and what happened in other people's lifetimes
 and what happened in other countries and places
 so that I would have timeless and universal principles
 for dealing with that thing.
 So I, oh yeah, I've been, you know,
 the implausible happening,
 but it's like a one in a hundred year storm.
 Right. Okay.
 Or it's, or.
 They've happened before.
 Yeah, they've happened.
 Just not to you.
 Let me talk about, if we could, about AI a little bit.
 So we've Bridgewater Associates manage
 about $160 billion in assets.
 And artificial intelligence systems algorithms
 are pretty good with data.
 What role in the future do you see AI play in analysis
 and decision-making in this kind of data-rich
 and impactful area of investment?
 I'm going to answer that not only in investment,
 but I give them more all encompassing rule for AI.
 As I think, you know, for the last 25 years,
 we have taken our thinking and put them in algorithms.
 And so we make decisions.
 The computer takes those criteria algorithms
 and they put them and they're in there and it takes data.
 And they operate as an independent decision-maker
 in parallel with our decision-making.
 So for me, it's like, there's a chess game playing
 and I'm a person with my chess game.
 And I'm saying it made that move and I'm making the move.
 And how do I compare those two moves?
 So we've done a lot, but let me give you a rule.
 If the future can be different from the past
 and you don't have deep understanding,
 you should not rely on AI.
 Okay?
 Those two things.
 Deep understanding of?
 The cause of fact relationships that are leading you
 to place that bet in anything, okay?
 Anything important.
 Let's say if it was due surgeries,
 and you would say, how do I do surgeries?
 I think it's totally fine.
 I think it's totally fine to watch all the doctors
 do the surgeries you can put it on.
 Take a digital camera and do that.
 Convert that into AI algorithms that go to robots
 and have them do surgeries and I'd be comfortable with that.
 Because if it keeps doing the same thing over and over again
 and you have enough of that, that would be fine.
 Even though you may not understand the algorithms
 because if the thing's happening over and over again
 and you're not asking, the future would be the same.
 That appendicitis or whatever it is will be handled
 the same way the surgery, that's fine.
 However, what happens with AI is for the most part
 is it takes a lot of data with a high enough sample size
 and then it puts together its own algorithms.
 Okay, there are two ways you can come up with algorithms.
 You can either take your thinking
 and express them in algorithms or you can say,
 put the data in and say, what is the algorithm?
 That's machine learning.
 And when you have machine learning,
 it'll give you equations which quite often
 are not understandable.
 If you would try to say, okay,
 now describe what it's telling you,
 it's very difficult to describe
 and so they can escape understanding.
 And so it's very good for doing those things
 that could be done over and over again
 if you're watching and you're not taking that.
 But if the future is different from the past
 and you have that then,
 if the future is different from the past
 and you don't have deep understanding,
 you're gonna get in trouble.
 And so that's the main thing.
 As far as AI is concerned, AI and let's say,
 computer replications of thinking in various ways,
 I think it's particularly good for processing.
 But the notion of what you want to do
 is better most of the time determined by the human mind.
 What are the principles?
 Like, okay, how should I raise my children?
 It's gonna be a long time before AI,
 you're going to say it has a good enough judgment
 to do that, who should I marry?
 All of those things.
 Maybe you can get the computer to help you
 but if you just took data and do machine learning,
 it's not gonna find it.
 If you were to then take one of my criteria
 for any of those questions
 and then say put them into an algorithm
 and you'd be a lot better off than if you took AI to do it.
 But by and large, the mind should be used
 for inventing and those creative things.
 And then the computer should be used for processing
 because it could process a lot more information,
 a lot faster, a lot more accurately
 and a lot less emotionally.
 So any notion of thinking in the form
 of processing type thinking should be done by a computer
 and anything that is in the notion of doing that,
 other type of thinking should be operating with the brain,
 operating in a way where you can say, ah, that makes sense.
 The process of reducing your understanding
 down to principles is kind of like the process,
 the first one you mentioned type of AI algorithm
 where you're encoding your expertise.
 You're trying to program, write a program.
 The human is trying to write a program.
 How do you think that's attainable?
 The process of reducing principles to a computer program
 or when you say, when you write about,
 when you think about principles,
 is there still a human element that's not reducible
 to an algorithm?
 My experience has been that almost all things,
 including those things that I thought
 were pretty much impossible to express,
 I've been able to express in algorithms,
 but that doesn't constitute all things.
 So you can, you can, you can express far more
 than you can imagine you'll be able to express.
 So I use the example of, okay, it's not,
 how do you raise your children?
 Okay, you will be able to take it one piece by piece.
 Okay, how, at what age, what school?
 And the way to do that, that was my experience,
 is to take that and when you're in the moment
 of making a decision or just past making a decision
 to take the time and to write down your criteria
 for making that decision in words, okay?
 That way you'll get your principles down on paper.
 I created an app online called,
 it's right now just on the iPhone, it'll be on Android.
 I tried getting it on Android, come on now.
 It'll be, it'll be, in a few months it'll be on Android.
 Awesome.
 But it has an app in there that helps people
 write down their own principles.
 Because this is very powerful.
 So when you're in that moment where you've just,
 you're thinking about it and you're thinking your criteria
 for choosing the school for your child
 or whatever that might be and you write down your criteria
 or whatever they are, those principles, you write down
 and you, that will at that moment make you articulate
 your principles in a very valuable way.
 And if you have the way that we operate,
 that you have easy access, so when the next time
 that comes along, you can go to that
 or you can show those principles to others
 to see if they're the right principles.
 You will get a clarity of that principle
 that's really invaluable in words
 and that'll help you a lot.
 But then you start to think, how do I express that in data?
 And it'll shock you about how you can do that.
 You'll form an equation that will show the relationship
 between these particular parts and then the,
 essentially the variables that are going to go
 into that particular equation and you will be able
 to do that and you take that little piece
 and you put it into the computer.
 And then take the next little piece
 and you put that into the computer.
 And before you know it, you will have a decision making
 system that's of the sort that I'm describing.
 So you're almost making an argument against
 an earlier statement you've made.
 You're convincing me.
 At first you said, there's no way a computer
 could raise a child, essentially.
 But now you've described and making me think of it.
 If you have that kind of idea, meritocracy,
 you have this rigorous approach
 that Bridgewater takes on investment
 and apply it to raising a child.
 It feels like, through the process you just described,
 we could, as a society, arrive at a set of principles
 for raising a child and encode it into a computer.
 That originality will not come from machine learning.
 The first time you do, so the original, yes.
 That's what I'm referring to.
 But eventually, as we together develop it
 and then we can automate it.
 That's why I'm saying the processing
 can be done by the computer.
 So we're saying the same thing.
 We're not inconsistent.
 We're saying the same thing.
 That the processing of that information
 and those algorithms can be done by the computer
 in a very, very effective way.
 You don't need to sit there and process
 and try to weigh all those things in your equation
 and all those things.
 But that notion of, okay, how do I get at that principle?
 And you're saying you'd be surprised
 Yes, you can do that.
 how much you can express.
 That's right.
 You can do that.
 So this is where I think you're going to see the future.
 And right now, we go to our devices
 and we get information to a large extent.
 And then we get some guidance.
 We have our GPS and the like.
 In my opinion, principles, principles, principles,
 principles, I wanna emphasize that.
 You write them down.
 You've got those principles.
 They will be converted into algorithms
 for decision making.
 And they're gonna also have the benefit
 of collective decision making.
 Because right now, individuals,
 based on what's stuck in their heads,
 are making their decisions in very ignorant ways.
 They're not the best decision makers.
 They're not the best criteria.
 And they're operating.
 When those principles are written down
 and converted into algorithms,
 it's almost like you'll look at that
 and follow the instructions
 and it'll give you better results.
 Medicine will be much more like this.
 You can go to your local doctor
 and you could ask his point of view and whatever.
 And he's rushed and he may not be the best doctor around.
 And you're gonna go to this thing
 and get that same information
 or just automatically have it input in that.
 And it's gonna tell you, okay,
 here's what you should go do.
 And it's gonna be much better than your local doctor.
 And that, the converting of information into intelligence,
 okay, intelligence is the thing.
 We're coming out with, again, I'm 70
 and I wanna pass all these things along.
 So all these tools that I've found
 need to develop all over these periods of time,
 all those things, I wanna make them available.
 And what's gonna happen as they're going to see this,
 they're going to see these tools
 operating much more that way.
 The idea of converting data into intelligence.
 Intelligence, for example, on what they are like
 or what are your strengths and weaknesses.
 Intelligence on who do I work well with
 under what circumstance.
 The personalized, it's the big way.
 We're gonna go from what are called systems of record,
 which are a lot of, okay, information organized
 in the right way to intelligence.
 And we're gonna, that'll be the next big move,
 in my opinion, and so you will get intelligence back.
 And that intelligence comes from reducing things
 down to principles into.
 That's how it happens.
 So what's your intuition if we look at future societies?
 Do you think we'll be able to reduce a lot of the,
 the details of our lives down to principles
 that would be further and further automated?
 I think the real question hinges on people's emotional,
 emotions and irrational behaviors.
 I think that there's subliminal things that we want, okay?
 And then there's cerebral, you know, conscious logic.
 And the two often are at odds.
 So there's almost like two U's in you, right?
 And so let's say, what do you want?
 And your mind will answer one thing,
 your emotions will answer something else.
 So when I think about it, I think emotions are,
 I want inspiration, I want love is a good thing,
 being able to have a good impact,
 but it is in the reconciliation of your subliminal wants
 and your intellectual wants,
 so that you really say they're aligned.
 And so to do that in a way to get what you want.
 So irrationality is a bad thing,
 if it means that it doesn't make sense
 in getting you what you want,
 but you better decide which you you're satisfying.
 Is it the lower level you emotional subliminal one,
 or is it the other?
 But if you can align them.
 So what I find is that by going from my,
 you experience the decision, do this thing subliminally.
 And that's the thing I want.
 It comes to the surface.
 I find that if I can align that
 with what my logical me wants
 and do the double check between them,
 and I get the same sort of thing,
 that that helps me a lot.
 I find, for example, meditation is one of the things
 that helps to achieve that alignment.
 It's fantastic for achieving that alignment.
 And often then I also wanna not just do it in my head.
 I wanna say, does that make sense?
 Help you, and so I do it with other people.
 And I say, okay, well, let's say I want this thing
 and whatever, does that make sense?
 And when you do that kind of triangulation,
 your two yous, and you do that with also the other way,
 then you certainly wanna be rational, right?
 But rationality has to be defined by those things.
 And then you discover sort of new ideas
 that drive your future.
 So it's always, you're always at the edge
 of the set of principles you've developed.
 You're doing new things always.
 That's where the intellect is needed.
 Well, and the inspiration.
 The inspiration is needed to do that, right?
 Like what are you doing it for?
 So what is that thing? It's the excitement.
 What is that thing? The adventure,
 the curiosity, the hunger.
 What's, if you can be Freud for a second,
 what's in that subconscious?
 What's the thing that drives us?
 I think you can't generalize of us.
 I think different people are driven by different things.
 There's not a common one, right?
 So like if you would take the shapers,
 I think it is a combination of subliminally,
 it's a combination of excitement, curiosity.
 Is there a dark element there?
 Is there demons?
 Is there fears?
 Is there, in your sense, something dark that drives them?
 Most of the ones that I'm dealing with,
 I have not seen that.
 I see the, what I really see is,
 whoo, if I can do that, that would be the most dream.
 And then the act of creativity.
 And you say, ooh, so excitement is one of the things.
 Curiosity is a big pull, okay?
 And then tenacity, okay, to do those things.
 But definitely, emotions are entering into it.
 Then there's an intellectual component of it too, okay?
 It may be empathy.
 Can I have an impact?
 Can I have an impact?
 The desire to have an impact.
 That's an emotional thrill, but it also has empathy.
 And then you start to see spirituality.
 By spirituality, I mean the connectedness to the whole.
 You start to see people operate those things.
 Those tend to be the things that you see the most of.
 And I think you're gonna shut down this idea completely,
 but there's a notion that some of these shapers
 really walk the line between sort of madness and genius.
 Do you think madness has a role in any of this?
 Or do you still see Steve Jobs
 and Elon Musk as fundamentally rational?
 Yeah, there's a continuum there.
 And what comes to my mind is that genius is that,
 often at the edge, in some cases, imaginary genius,
 is at the edge of insanity.
 And it's almost like a radio that I think,
 okay, if I can tune it just right, it's playing right.
 But if I go a little bit too far, it goes off, okay?
 And so you can see this.
 K. Jameson was studying bipolar.
 What it shows is that that's definitely the case,
 because when you're going out there,
 that imagination, whatever, is at the,
 can be near the edge sometimes.
 Doesn't have to always be.
 So let me ask you about automation
 that's been a part of public discourse recently.
 What's your view on the impact of automation,
 of whether we're talking about AI
 and more basic forms of automation on the economy
 in the short term and the long term?
 Do you have concerns about it, as some do,
 or do you think it's overblown?
 It's not overblown.
 I mean, it's a giant thing.
 It'll come at us in a very big way in the future.
 We're right at the edge of even really accelerating it.
 It's had a big impact, and it will have a big impact.
 And it's a two-edged sword,
 because it'll have tremendous benefits.
 And at the same time, it has profound benefits
 in employment and distributions of wealth,
 because the way I think about it is
 there are certain things human beings can do,
 and over time, we've evolved to go
 to almost higher and higher levels.
 And now we're almost like we're at this level.
 It used to be your labor,
 and you would then do your labor,
 and okay, we can get past the labor.
 We got tractors and things, and you go up, up, up, up, up,
 and we're up over here, and up to the point in our minds
 where, okay, anything related to mental processing,
 the computer can probably do better, and we can find that.
 And so other than almost inventing,
 you're at a point where the machines
 and the automation will probably do it better.
 And that's accelerating, and that's a force,
 and that's a force for the good.
 And at the same time, what it does is
 it displaces people in terms of employment
 and changes, and it produces wealth gaps and all of that.
 So I think the real issue is that
 that has to be viewed as a national emergency.
 In other words, I think the wealth gap,
 the income gap, the opportunity gap,
 all of those things, that force is creating the problems
 that we're having today, a lot of the problems,
 the great polarity, the disenfranchised,
 not equal, not anything approaching equality of education,
 all of these problems, a lot of problems
 are coming as a result of that.
 And so it needs to be viewed really
 as an emergency situation in which there's a good work,
 good plan worked out for how to deal with that effectively
 so that it's dealt with effectively.
 So because it's good for the average,
 it's good for the impact, but it's not good for everyone
 and it creates that polarity, so it's gotta be dealt with.
 Yeah, and you've talked about the American dream
 and that that's something that all people
 should have an opportunity for,
 and then we need to reform capitalism
 to give that opportunity for everyone.
 Let me ask on one of the ideas in terms of safety nets
 that support that kind of opportunity,
 there's been a lot of discussion
 of universal basic income amongst people.
 So there's Andrew Yang who's running on that,
 he's a political candidate running for president
 on the idea of universal basic income.
 What do you think about that, giving $1,000
 or some amount of money to everybody
 as a way to give them the padding, the freedom
 to sort of take leaps, to take the call for adventure,
 to take the crazy pursuits?
 Before I get right into my thoughts
 on universal basic income, I wanna start with the notion
 that opportunity, education, development,
 creating equality so that people say
 there's equal opportunity is the most important thing.
 And then to find out what is the amount,
 how are you going to provide that?
 How do you get the money into a public school system?
 How do you get the teaching?
 The fleshing out that plan to create equal opportunity
 in all of its various forms is the most pressing thing to do
 and so that is that.
 The opportunity, the most important one
 you're kind of implying is the earlier the better.
 Sort of like education, so in the early development
 of a human being is when you should have
 the equal opportunities, that's the most important.
 Right, in the first phase of your life,
 which goes from birth until you're on your own
 and you're an adult and you're now out there,
 and you deal with early childhood development, okay,
 and you take the brain and you say what's important.
 The childcare, okay, it makes a world of difference,
 for example, if you have good parents
 who are trying to think about instilling the stability
 in a non-traumatic environment to provide them,
 so I would say the good guidance
 that normally comes from parents
 and the good education that they're receiving
 are the most important things in that person's development.
 The ability to be able to be prepared to go out there
 and then to go into a market
 that's an equal opportunity job market,
 to be able to then go into that kind of market
 is a system that creates not only fairness,
 anything else is not fair, and then in addition to that,
 it also is a more effective economic system
 because the consequences of not doing that
 to a society are devastating.
 If you look at what the difference in outcomes
 for somebody who completes high school
 or doesn't complete high school,
 or does each one of those state changes,
 and you look at what that means
 in terms of their costs to society, not only themselves,
 but their cost and incarceration costs
 and crimes and all of those things,
 it's economically better for the society
 and it's fairer if they can get those particular things.
 Once they have those things,
 then you move on to other things,
 but yes, from birth all the way through that process,
 anything less than that is bad, is a tragedy and so on.
 So that's what I'm, yeah,
 those are the things that I'm estimating.
 So what I would want above all else is to provide that.
 So with that in mind,
 now we'll talk about universal basic income.
 Start with that, now we can talk about UBI.
 Right, because you have to have that.
 Now the question is what's the best way to provide that.
 So when I look at UBI, I really think is,
 what is going to happen with that $1,000?
 And will that $1,000 come from another program?
 Does that come from an early childhood developmental program?
 Who are you giving the $1,000 to
 and what will they do for that $1,000?
 I mean, like my reaction would be,
 I think it's a great thing that everybody should have
 almost $1,000 in their bank and so on,
 but when do they get to make decisions or who's the parent?
 A lot of pit times you can give $1,000 to somebody
 and it could have a negative result.
 It can have, they can use that money detrimentally,
 not just productively.
 And if that money's coming away from some of those
 other things that are gonna produce the things I want
 and you're shifted to, let's say, to come in
 and give a check, doesn't mean its outcomes
 are going to be good in providing those things
 that I think are so fundamental important.
 If it was just everybody can have $1,000 and use it
 so when the time comes. Use it well.
 And use it well, that would be really, really good
 because it's almost like everybody you'd wish
 everybody could have $1,000 worth of wiggle room
 in their lives, okay?
 And I think that would be great.
 I love that.
 But I wanna make sure that these other things
 that are taken care of, so if it comes out of that budget
 and I don't want it to come out of that budget,
 that's gonna be doing those things.
 And so you have to figure it out.
 And you have a certain skepticism that human nature will use
 may not always, in fact, frequently may not use that $1,000
 for the optimal, to support the optimal trajectory.
 Some will and some won't.
 One of the big advantages of universal basic income
 is that if you put it in the hands, let's say,
 parents who know how to do the right things
 and make the right choices for their children
 because they're responsible and you say,
 I'm gonna give them $1,000 wiggle room
 to use for the benefit of their children.
 Wow, that sounds great.
 If you put it in the hands of, let's say,
 an alcoholic or drug addicted parent
 who is not making those choices well for their children
 and what they do is they take that $1,000
 and they don't use it well,
 then that's gonna produce more harm than good.
 Well put.
 You're, if I may say so,
 one of the richest people in the world.
 So you're a good person to ask, does money buy happiness?
 No, it's been shown that between,
 once you get over a basic level of income
 so that you can take care of the pain,
 you know, you can, health and whatever,
 there's no correlation between the level of happiness
 that one has and the level of money that one has.
 That thing that has the highest correlation
 is quality relationships with others, community.
 If you look at surveys of these things
 across all surveys and all societies,
 it's a sense of community and interpersonal relationships.
 That is not in any way correlated with money.
 You can go down to native tribes in very poor places
 or you can go in all different communities.
 And so they have the opportunity to have that.
 I'm very lucky in that I started with nothing,
 so I have the full range.
 I can tell you, I'm not having money,
 but, and then having quite a lot of money,
 and I did that in the right order.
 So you started from nothing in Long Island.
 Yeah, and my dad was a jazz musician,
 but I had all really that I needed
 because I had two parents who loved me
 and took good care of me, and I went to a public school
 that was a good public school,
 and basically, you don't need much more than that
 in order to, that's the equal opportunity part.
 Anyway, what I'm saying is I experienced the range,
 and there are many studies on the answer to your question.
 No money does not bring happiness.
 Money gives you an ability to make choices.
 Does it get in the way in any way
 of forming those deep, meaningful relationships?
 It can.
 There are lots of ways that it makes negative.
 That's one of them.
 It could stand in the way of that.
 Yes, okay, but I could almost list the ways
 that it could stand, it could be a problem.
 What does it buy?
 So if you can elaborate, you mentioned a bit of freedom.
 At the most fundamental level,
 it doesn't take a whole lot, but it takes enough
 that you can take care of yourself and your family
 to be able to learn, do the basics,
 have the relationships, have healthcare,
 the basics of those types of things.
 You can cover the patients,
 and then to have maybe enough security,
 but maybe not too much security.
 That's right, yeah.
 That you essentially are okay.
 Okay, that's really good.
 And you don't, that's what money will get you.
 And everything else could go either way.
 There's no correlation with it.
 No, there's more.
 There's more.
 Okay, then beyond that, what it then starts to do,
 that's the most important thing.
 But beyond that, what it starts to do
 is to help to make your dreams happen in various ways.
 Okay, so for example, like in my case,
 those dreams might not be just my own dreams.
 They're impact on others' dreams, okay?
 So my own dreams might be, I don't know,
 I can pass along these, at my stage in life,
 I can pass along these principles to you,
 and I can give those things, or I can do whatever,
 I can go on an adventure, I can start a business,
 I can do those other things.
 I can self-actualize in ways that might be
 not possible otherwise.
 That's my own belief.
 And then I can also help others.
 I mean, this is, to the extent when you get older
 and with time and whatever, you start to feel connected,
 spirituality, that's what I'm referring to,
 you can start to have an effect on others
 that's beneficial and so on, gives you the ability.
 I could tell you that people who are very wealthy
 who have that feel that they don't have enough money.
 Bill Gates will feel almost broke because relative
 to the things he'd like to accomplish,
 through the Gates Foundation and things like that,
 oh my God, he doesn't have enough money
 to accomplish the things he wishes for.
 But those things are not, they're not the most
 fundamental things.
 So I think that people sometimes think money has value.
 Money doesn't have value.
 Money is, like you say, just a medium of exchange
 at a store all the while.
 And so what you have to say is what is it
 that you're going to buy?
 Now there are other people who get their gratification
 in ways that are different from me,
 but I think in many cases, let's say somebody
 who used money to have a status symbol.
 What would I say, or that's probably unhealthy,
 but then I don't know, somebody who says,
 I love a great, gorgeous painting,
 and it's gonna cost lots of money.
 In my priorities, I can't get there.
 But that doesn't mean, who am I to judge others
 in terms of, let's say, their element of the freedom
 to do those things?
 So it's a little bit complicated, but by and large,
 that's my view on money.
 And wealth.
 So let me ask you in terms of the idea of,
 so much of your passions in life has been
 through something you might be able to call work.
 Alan Watts has this quote.
 He said that the real key to life, secret to life,
 is to be completely engaged with what you're doing
 in the here and now, and instead of calling it work,
 realize it is play.
 So, I think that's the key to life.
 So, I'd like to ask, what is the role of work
 in your life's journey, or in a life's journey?
 And what do you think about this modern idea
 of kind of separating work and work-life balance?
 I have a principle that I believe in,
 is make your work and your passion the same thing.
 Okay.
 Okay.
 So that's similar.
 In other words, if you can make your work and your passion,
 it's just gonna work out great.
 And then, of course, people have different purposes of work.
 And I don't wanna be theoretical about that.
 People have to take care of their family.
 So, money, at a certain point,
 is an important component of that work.
 So, you look beyond that.
 What is the money gonna get you,
 and what are you trying to achieve?
 But the most important thing, I agree,
 is meaningful work and meaningful relationships.
 Like, if you can get into the thing that you're at,
 your mission that you're on,
 and you are excited about that mission that you're on,
 and then you can do that with people
 who you have the meaningful relationships with.
 You have meaningful work and meaningful relationships.
 I mean, that is fabulous for most people.
 And it seems that many people struggle to get there,
 not out of, not necessarily because they're constrained
 by the fact that they have the financial constraints
 of having to provide for their family and so on.
 But it's, I mean, this idea's out there,
 that there needs to be a work-life balance,
 which means that most people,
 we're gonna return to the same thing as most,
 doesn't mean optimal, but most people seem to
 not be doing their life's passion,
 not unifying work and passion.
 Why do you think that is?
 Well, the work-life balance, there's a life arc
 that you go through.
 Starts at zero and ends somewhere in the vicinity of 80,
 and there is a phase, and there's a,
 and you could look at the different degrees of happiness
 that happen in those phases.
 I can go through that if that was interesting,
 but we don't have time probably for it.
 But you get in the part of the life,
 that part of the life which has the lowest level
 of happiness is age 45 to 55.
 And because as you move into this second phase of your life,
 now the first phase of your life is when
 you're learning dependent on others.
 Second phase of your life is when you're working
 and others are dependent on you
 and you're trying to be successful.
 And in that phase of one's life,
 you encounter the work-life balance challenge
 because you're trying to be successful
 at work and successful at parenting
 and successful and successful in all those things
 that take your demand.
 And they get into that, and I understand that problem
 in the work-life balance.
 The issue is primarily to know how to approach that, okay?
 So I understand it's stressful, it produces stress,
 and it produces bad results,
 and it produces the lowest level of happiness in one's life.
 It's interesting, as you get later in life,
 the levels of happiness rise and the highest level
 of happiness is between ages 70 and 80,
 which is interesting for other reasons, but in that spot.
 And the key to work-life balance is to realize
 and to learn how to get more out of an hour of life,
 okay, because an hour of work,
 what people are thinking is that they have to make a choice
 between one thing and another, and of course they do,
 but they don't realize that if they develop the skill
 to get a lot more out of an hour,
 it's the equivalent of having many more hours in your life.
 And so that's why in the book, Principles,
 I try to go into, okay, now,
 how can you get a lot more out of an hour?
 That allows you to get more life into your life
 and it reduces the work-life balance.
 And that's the primary struggle in that 35 to 45.
 If you could linger on that,
 so what are the ups and downs of life
 in terms of happiness in general,
 and perhaps in your own life,
 when you look back at the moments, the peaks?
 It's pretty much same pattern.
 Early in one's life tends to be a very happy period,
 all the way up, and 16 is like a really great happy,
 I think like myself, you start to get elements of freedom,
 you get your driver's license, whatever, but 16 is there.
 Junior year in high school quite often
 could be a stressful period
 to try to think about the high school.
 You go into college, tends to be very hot,
 happiness, generally speaking.
 Freedom.
 And then freedom, friendships, all of that,
 freedom is a big thing.
 And then 23 is a peak point in happiness, that freedom.
 Then sequentially, one has a great time,
 they date, they go out, and so on,
 and you find the love of your life,
 you begin to develop a family.
 And then with that, as time happens,
 you have more of your work-life balance challenges
 that come and your responsibilities.
 And then as you get there in that mid part of your life,
 that is the biggest struggle.
 Chances are you will crash in that period of time.
 You'll have your series of failures, that's that.
 That's when you go into the abyss,
 you learn, you hopefully learn from those mistakes,
 you have the metamorphosis, you come out, you change,
 you hopefully become better,
 and you take more responsibilities and so on.
 And then when you get to the later part,
 as you are starting to approach the transition
 in that late part of the second phase of your life,
 before you go into the third phase of your life,
 second phase is you're working trying to be successful.
 Third phase of your life is you want people
 to be successful without you, okay?
 Yes.
 You want your kids to be successful without you
 because when you're at that phase,
 they're at making their transition from the first phase
 to the second phase and they're trying to be successful
 and you want them to be successful without you.
 And you have, and your parents are gone,
 and then you have freedom.
 And then you have freedom again.
 And that with that freedom,
 and then you have these history is shown with this,
 you have friendships, you have perspective on life,
 you have different things.
 And that's one of the reasons that that later part
 of the life can be real.
 On average, actually, it's the highest.
 Very interesting thing.
 If there are surveys and say,
 how good do you look and how good do you feel?
 And that's the highest survey.
 Now, they're not looking the best
 and they're not feeling the best, right?
 Maybe it's 35 that they're actually looking the best
 and feeling the best.
 But they rank the highest at that point,
 survey results of being the highest
 in that 70 to 80 period of time
 because it has to do with an attitude on life.
 Then you start to have grandkids.
 Oh, grandkids are great.
 And you start to experience that transition well.
 So that's what the arc of life pretty much looks like.
 And I'm experiencing it.
 You've learned that when you meditate,
 we're all human, we're all mortal.
 When you meditate on your own mortality,
 having achieved a lot of success on whatever dimension,
 what do you think is the meaning of it all?
 The meaning of our short existence on earth
 as human beings.
 I think that evolution is the greatest force
 of the universe.
 And that we're all tiny bits
 of an evolutionary type of process
 where it's just matter and machines that go through time.
 And that we all have a deeply embedded inclination
 to evolve and contribute to evolution.
 So I think it's to personally evolve
 and contribute to evolution.
 I could have predicted you would answer that way.
 It's brilliant and exactly right.
 And I think we've said it before, but I'll say it again.
 You have a lot of incredible videos out there
 that people should definitely watch.
 I don't say this often.
 I mean, it's literally the best spend of time.
 And in terms of reading,
 principles and reading basically anything you write
 on LinkedIn and so on is a really good use of time.
 It's a lot of light bulb moments,
 a lot of transformative ideas in there.
 So Ray, thank you so much.
 It's been an honor.
 I really appreciate it.
 It's been a pleasure for me too.
 I'm happy to hear it's used to you and others.
 Thanks for listening to this conversation with Ray Dalio.
 And thank you to our presenting sponsor, Cash App.
 Download it, use code Lexpodcast.com,
 use code Lexpodcast.
 You'll get $10 and $10 will go to First,
 a STEM education nonprofit that inspires hundreds
 of thousands of young minds to learn
 and to dream of engineering our future.
 If you enjoy this podcast, subscribe on YouTube,
 get five stars on Apple Podcast, support on Patreon,
 or connect with me on Twitter.
 Finally, closing words of advice from Ray Dalio.
 Pain plus reflection equals progress.
 Thank you for listening and hope to see you next time.