Tales of Abundance
Tales of Abundance artwork

All episodes

Will Retirement Become Obsolete? Die With Zero, FIRE, and Elon’s AI Abundance

Episode 73 · 13 May 2026 · 1 hr 6 min

Open on Spotify

Show notes

Die With Zero, FIRE and Elon's AI Abundance: Will Retirement Become Obsolete?

Die With Zero says spend on experiences while you can still enjoy them. FIRE says save hard and escape early. Traditional planning says follow the 4% rule. Randy Lorensen, Dr. John Oberg and Anthony Marino put all three side by side. Then they ask what happens if Elon Musk is right and AI makes retirement savings far less important.

Is retirement savings becoming obsolete—or more important than ever?

In this episode of Tales of Abundance, Randy Lorensen, Dr. John Oberg, and Anthony Marino explore one of the biggest financial questions of our time: how much do you really need to retire, and what happens if the old rules no longer apply? The conversation breaks down traditional retirement planning, the 4% rule, Social Security assumptions, longevity risk, and why many Americans may be saving far less than they think they need.

From there, the episode moves into a deeper debate between three competing philosophies: the traditional “save and preserve the principal” model, the Die With Zero mindset of maximizing life experiences while you can still enjoy them, and the FIRE movement’s radical path of extreme saving for early financial independence. The hosts also wrestle with a much bigger possibility: Elon Musk’s prediction that AI, robotics, and exponential technology could make many goods and services so cheap that retirement itself is redefined.

This is not just a money episode. It is a conversation about time, meaning, inheritance, optionality, and how to think clearly in a world where the future may look nothing like the past. If you have ever wondered whether you should build a bigger nest egg, spend more intentionally now, help your kids earlier, or prepare for an AI-driven abundance economy, this episode gives you multiple frameworks to think through.

In the Abundance Briefing, the hosts also discuss Apple’s leadership transition after Tim Cook, whether he was an underrated innovator or simply a world-class operator, and why desalination, energy, and water scarcity may become major abundance stories in the years ahead.

The FIRE Movement, the 4% Rule, and Elon Musk on Retirement Savings

What you'll discover:

  • How much you really need to retire, and why many Americans are far behind
  • The Die With Zero idea: memory dividends, and giving to your kids earlier
  • The FIRE movement's trade-off between extreme saving and your prime years
  • Elon Musk's "money won't matter" prediction and Sam Altman's AI deflation thesis
  • How to plan when you can't know which future arrives: building optionality
  • In the Abundance Briefing: Apple's leadership change after Tim Cook, and desalination and water abundance

Timestamps

  • [00:00] Traditional retirement vs. Die With Zero vs. Elon Musk's "money won't matter"
  • [00:56] The traditional playbook: burn rate, savings rate and a financial finish line
  • [02:44] When saving becomes a false source of security
  • [04:38] The assumptions behind most retirement plans: Social Security, inflation and returns
  • [07:13] 401(k) opt-in rates and who ends up under-saved
  • [08:15] How much do you really need? Checking the retirement-number headlines
  • [09:27] Die With Zero: Bill Perkins and spending on experiences while you can
  • [12:40] Inheritance: give while you're alive, or leave it all?
  • [17:45] Randy's grandmother and the great-uncle who saved everything and enjoyed none of it
  • [19:24] The FIRE movement: extreme saving for early financial independence
  • [24:00] Elon Musk's abundance prediction: retirement savings "quaint and irrelevant"
  • [26:11] The $25 grocery basket: what radical deflation could look like
  • [28:38] Why politicians may keep inflating anyway
  • [31:16] What really happens if everything gets dramatically cheaper?
  • [34:00] A robot in the yard: self-sufficiency, and the haves vs. the have-nots
  • [36:44] 1813–1913: when technology cut the cost of living in half
  • [37:31] DOGE, fraud and the obstacles to an abundance economy
  • [40:06] Sam Altman's deflation predictions for healthcare, education and transportation
  • [41:22] Home solar, subsidies and decades-long payback
  • [44:12] Recap: the options for thinking about retirement (and the Cashflow board game)
  • [46:01] Break — Sponsor: AG1
  • [46:58] Abundance Briefing — Apple's leadership change after Tim Cook
  • [49:13] Did Tim Cook innovate? Apple Watch, wearables and services
  • [51:00] Capital returns, AI spending and the cost of frontier models
  • [53:44] The Jobs vs. Cook debate: vision vs. operations
  • [56:13] Siri, Apple's AI gap and what the new CEO may change
  • [59:47] Abundance Briefing — Desalination: turning ocean water into drinking water
  • [1:01:07] The ecological trade-off and California's water problem
  • [1:02:47] Desalination plants, conflict and water security
  • [1:05:32] Wrap-up

🌿 SPONSORED BY AG1 (Athletic Greens)

Fuel your health and performance from the inside out.

Try AG1: https://shop.drinkag1.com/tales

About the hosts

This is a hosts-only episode with no guest: Randy Lorensen, Dr. John Oberg and Anthony Marino. (Host bios are on the host pages linked below.)

Mentioned in this episode:

  • Die With Zero by Bill Perkins (book)

Find us online:

Hit Subscribe so you never miss an episode of Tales of Abundance. 🔔

Related episodes

Meet the hosts: Randy Lorensen · Dr. John Oberg · Anthony Marino

Transcript

A full transcript is below. It was generated automatically from the episode audio, so expect some spelling errors in names and terms.

[00:02] about traditional retirement versus die with zero versus Elon Musk's money's not going to matter. We're all going to be super wealthy and be able to buy whatever we want. So, if you think about what we're told as Americans, right, we we have this system and we're told to save 1.5 million for retirement. I don't think that's probably enough for the average people, average person, but that's that's kind of traditional advice. 5 million. The average person in America has two K. So, not what they need. And I guess the question we're asking today is, does retirement savings become obsolete in the future? And let's jump right into, you know, you guys have both worked with financial planners for years. What is the advice, traditional advice? Let's let's baseline there that they tell you here's what you should do to save for retirement. So what if what have people you've worked with told you? — Well, for me it was pretty straightforward. You know what is your what is your burn rate for the lifestyle you want to lead?

[01:12] What are the number of income producing assets you have? and using three, five, 7% return on those assets uh every year. Is that enough to sustain the lifestyle that you want? So that's that's the way it way it comes out. Obviously $255,000 um 5% is not going to generate much income uh in today's world. So it's clear that the average person um doesn't have a chance of retirement unless you're pie in the sky Elon Musk uh thing is uh comes true next week. So that that was the traditional approach and and that gets back to something we talked about a lot of episodes ago, setting a financial finish line, you know, accumulating enough assets so that with those various returns, you could sustain a lifestyle, a consistent lifestyle.

[02:21] — John, what what what have you been told that you would add to that? I had a really interesting set of conversations in my 30s where I believed save 10 to 20% of your income. Like that was the deal. And so and I I had an environment of people around me who really believed that. And it be it became like a manifesto. And what I realized after going through to therapy for other things that were unrelated that money became to be a thing that I tried to rely on for security that wasn't actually causing the kind of security I wanted. And I learned that like what you save is a preference. Like it's it's not it it's not a rule, it's a preference. And to Anony's point, like getting clear about what you want later in life and then setting yourself up for that. But then there's a lot of variables. And what I find is that people tend to be — not conservative enough and totally hands off, which I find to be problematic for people. Or I find them to be so hyperconservative that they're trying to kick a 2,000yard field goal on a hundred yard field. And it's like it's not even possible. And so what I work with, you know, friends and clients on is like what what's the reality? And with my financial planner, it's like let's use numbers that are not overly conservative or overly liberal. let's use numbers that are real and that means like for my life I believe that social security is going to exist. We can argue about that all you want but so I back that number out of what I need and then we have other numbers and and I look at inflation and what the growth is going to look like and so I think it's just you know I think the 4% number in terms of return on investment is probably a little too conservative in my world for some people is probably the right number. I think, you know, looking for an 8% return in retirement is probably too aggressive in most people's worlds in retirement. And I think people retiring and never earning money ever again, for some people, that's exactly the path they're going to be on. But for lots of people like me, like, I'm not going to stop earning money until way after I'm 70 years old because I enjoy the work that I do to earn money. So, I think all those things matter. And so I think the problem I find is that people get way too conservative or way too aggressive and they don't have someone who's a good sounding board to bounce that stuff off of.

[04:38] — So just to baseline for the audience, what are some of the assumptions that they tend to make? So the yield you're talking about, right? 4% is what you're talking that's that's kind of traditional like the money that you can set aside and circling all the way back to what Anthony said you know the 255 whether it's four five7 is not going to be enough for somebody to survive right so that's one of the assumptions that they make another one is that 30 years retirement is that what they kind of plan for in your experience — I think most people that I talk to plan to live on the interest alone and they plan to die with the entire corpus intact without understanding what that means or they they have the 4% and they don't think about the inflation like those are some of the assumptions that people need to play with and like I'm capable of running all that math inside of my spreadsheet but I find it way easier to hand it to my financial planner who's a competent financial planner and and for them to ask me really smart questions about that stuff and and that way I can get like I can look at different scenarios very easily without having to run that spreadsheet — Yeah. And it Well, where I was going with the 30 years though is is that the same? I think all three of us on this call to varying degrees expect to live longer, right? And so maybe planning for 30 years, maybe it needs to be 40 or 50 or 100. I think I think that's another variable that's thrown into the mix.

[06:10] — It depends when you want to stop working. if you're going to stop working at 65 or 75 or 85 or you know Charlie Munger didn't stop working at 99 you know Buffett's still working into his 90s and you know he's so I think I think it's so it's partly about the money part of it there's a whole different conversation we're not going to have today which is about finding what you love that where you can earn income and so but there are people that work in jobs manual labor in particular that I think they've got to be thoughtful in a different way and and that's okay Yeah, you know, the 255 really is shocking to me. And I don't know where the statistics come from. I don't know if that's a includes a 20-year-old who's just starting out um and and isn't opting into a 401k or any kind of savings savings strategy. Certainly the mistake made by a lot of uh people that are not in um higher higher paying um things. I mean, we we all know and I think these rules have changed, but when there was an optin for 401ks, even at big companies, the percentage of people in the lower income brackets that opted in was excruciatingly low, very frustrating to the point where it used to cause difficulties for higher paying executives in those companies. They had to give money back because there was an imbalance. I think they've changed those rules. someone can fact check me on that. But now you're automatically opted into your 401k at a big company and you can then opt out which I think is a good thing. So that but it is it is kind of frightening to think about you know an Asian population that we have and the average is 255. Let's say you double that or tripled it you know for people in their 50s and beyond. that's still they they're still going to be relying on social security to have probably a lifestyle that they're familiar with, which, you know, it's kind of, you know, it kind of shakes my foundation a little — So, real quick, uh, Nerd Wallet says 313 is the number for retirement savings for Americans aged 45 to 54. I'm interested to know if that's each individual or if that's per household because if that's per h per individual, that's materially different than per household. that person would have $1.25 million uh at age 63 at like eight or nine% return on average inflation, you know, inflation adjusted would would be reasonable. And that puts them at like, you know, 50 $60,000 a year in income plus 30 or $40,000 a year. So that would put someone in a pretty good place that they're smart about it. Maybe a little tight, but not maybe as horrific as it sounds on the face of it.

[09:01] Yeah, it's 70 it's it's two two and a half million at age 72 by the way. — Yeah. So now you're starting to get to a place where you know maybe you can make and it it comes down to do you want to maintain the same lifestyle that you had. You know that that's the other thing you know depending on your health your family situation so forth your desire to travel all those things you know come into play. So keep us going Randy. All right. Well, let's move to the next section. John, you're a big fan of the book Die with Zero, right? Bill Perkins, you want to talk through like your thinking and why that's, you know, why does that speak to you? — Look, I I think it was a really fresh way of looking at retirement and it goes back to that corpus of money you have when you die and how much do you want to have? And so one of the big things that I personally took away from the book was like if you're working for the benefit of money you don't love your work, you don't love what you do, then why work any extra minute for any dollar that you don't want to spend or deliberately leave for whoever you're going to leave money for when you pass away? So, if you accidentally had an extra $100,000 or a million dollars that you didn't wish you'd worked for, then all that time you spent working towards something you didn't enjoy doing, you gave up your time, which is more valuable than money for most people as they age. And so, that really hit me. It's like, okay, well, so that was one concept. The second concept was like, you know, enjoy the things you can enjoy when you're the right age to enjoy them. like, you know, if if I wanted to go uh ice climbing, which I did once in my 20s, uh that would be the right time to do it because ice climbing is, you know, more difficult in your 80s, not impossible, but more difficult in your 80s than it is in your 20s. I happened to try ice climbing once. I didn't enjoy it enough to do it again, but I think it's a great example. So, like there's things I love doing. Scuba diving. Scuba diving easier to do when aging, right?

[10:59] My family's taking an adventure trip this year uh to Antarctica and we're doing that because we think the timing is right for the ecology of the world, for the timing of our kids in terms of their ability to get away with us. Like there's a number of things we're doing. We want to we want to do the things in the decades when we can do them physically and mentally and spend the money. Now, another good example is my wife. We're having a 50th birthday party for her. That's, you know, materially expensive in my world for a couple of people and her to do something really special and meaningful. It's just a handful of people, but I can't take it with me. And it's not like not spending the money wouldn't move my needle. And so, I think I felt differently about that in my 20s and 30s because I was building building. But now I'm like, hey, what I want to be very deliberate about how I spend money with my kids, how, you know, I help them get ahead. So that's that's the kind of some some of the, you know, very simplified die with zero concepts. If anyone's interested in a different way of thinking about it, I think Perkins book is a great book to read if for nothing else to see the world in a different point of view. So is a good summary. traditional is what you said earlier that you die with the whole principle left and that goes you know into your people's inheritance and this the concept is you die with nothing I mean first I have a follow-up question that's the concept right is certainly the thing he wants someone to consider so that you maximize your time so you're optimizing for your time not for your money — okay So, how does inheritance, what does he say about inheritance or how do you think about the inheritance thing?

[12:48] — The book talks about using money for the inheritance and pushing it out to the kids when it has the highest value to them, the highest utility. And so, you know, I don't remember the exact, you know, things that happened in the book, but I think about like where did I have the most struggles from, you know, the time I was 18 to to today, 53, and where did where did my mom help me kind of, you know, inject a little bit of capital to make a massive amount of difference. And so, that's how I think about it with my kids now. like where can I inject capital into their lives to to both encourage them to be functional, healthy adults so I'm not enabling bad behavior and also help them catalyze success for them in a way that's healthy. on this. Have they been answered or do you have other questions? you know, it's it's easy to read a book and say that's a great idea, but it conflicts with certainly the but you know, kind of the mindset that we have had all of our lives, which is to be providers, right? To provide a safe haven for people, provide housing and whatnot. So as I sit here today, I envision that that that corpus, if you will, of money that exists in various places. That's really I view it as a security blanket for my kids and my grandkids for the unknowns that could befall them down the road. It would be great to shuffle a couple of hundred,000 here and there to them to go start a business or whatever. And if someone had an idea for a business, I probably would do that.

[14:41] But to I don't I don't know that moving the money over there so that they could save it makes a lot of sense. I don't know what those things would be that you know, a chunk of money sent to them would change. Certainly if someone had a health issue or you know they was someone lost a job and they were in financial straits it'd be a different situation but right now that isn't the case. So for me, building that nest egg so that and having enough to live on in the lifestyle that I'm comfortable with without in my case any real constraints seems like a prudent thing to do, you know, as opposed to blowing the cash, if you will. You know, prival jets and things like that. It'd be great. You know, I'd love to fly private all the time, but um is that really necessary? Anthony, you you do I mean I think you and I share a lot of similarities in this because you believe in experiences for your family and so and you have reasonable like not blow it out you know private jet experiences you know but not to say that's wrong by the way I know people who have that kind of that kind of income and wealth where that makes a lot of sense but for me I'm not there and so I think reasonable kind of appropriate economically you know experiences whether it's a family vacation together or a day out that's One thing I think maybe helping your children have enough money to start having the habit of investing. So like I think you know giving a little bit of money so people can start to watch how different investments work is helpful — I think there's going to be a time where I I'm certainly open to helping the children put a down payment on a house maybe would be something I would consider. And then one thing that I think through is like you know taking a 529 maxing it out and converting it to a Roth IRA is something you can do right now. and they that then gives them a nice head start on retirement savings in their early 20s where they could have you know seven figures put away on top of social security whether you believe that or not. So those are all things that can be done in in the short term that are you know at least worth — beware of the kitty tax by the way when you convert that 529. But anyway, I agree I agree with all that and I I think as I if you look back I think most people look back and would say why did I spend all that money on that thing thing being the boat, the motorcycle, the the whatever. Um you know the old adage of he who dies with the most things wins.

[17:14] It's kind of a fool's errand if you will. And I I certainly suffered from that early on. So yeah, I don't know. I'm not I'm going to think this through a little bit more now that we're having the conversation, but um I'm kind of stuck in the old way of doing things. — Again, that's what we want, right? We want people to take this information. We're going to talk about a few different viewpoints and then decide which is best for them. But you know, in one of the early episodes when we were talking about abundance, I mentioned my grandma. And my grandma, when she was already retired, inherited a fair amount of money from her brother that nobody knew had any money. They all thought he was broke because they went to his house when a window would broke would break. He would board it up instead of fixing the window. But he saved and saved and saved and then the opposite of die was zero. He never enjoyed any of that. His sisters ended up each getting a nice chunk. I mean, it was seven figures back when a million dollars was worth a lot more than it is now. And my grandma gave my mom and each of her brothers and sisters started getting $500 a month. She took most of the money and bought stuff at the church. She bought a new organ. She bought a new stove. She bought stained glass windows. What? Whatever they needed. She, you know, was small town Minnesota. She gave a lot of it away and spent it on some, you know, some other stuff like that. But $500 a month, which, you know, in today's dollars is a thousand dollars a month plus to each of her kids until she died. Well, at the end of her life, she was in a facility that was for Alzheimer's, dementia, etc.

[18:58] they basically took everything she didn't give away. They took all of it. In fact, at her funeral, I got a I got a envelope of cash that had $6 or $800 in it. they'd found the cash and my uncle had to call me back like two months later saying the state wanted somehow they knew about that cash so I actually had to give it we each had to give it back right um so I mean that's just another variable or you know thing to think about but let's move to the third thing for people to consider and I don't think this is for most people but it for and just for John we have an acronym the fire movement which for me who hates It's financial independence retire — By the way, for the listeners, Randy, you put the acronym in here. I had to ask you to remind me. I'd seen it before, but couldn't remember what it was. Had to ask you to remind me what it was. Randy added the acronym. Thanks, — For you. You love acronyms. So, there you go. I hate them. Um, and uh, anyway, I think this started out as Silicon Valley primarily and people that, you know, the concept is that you take your 20s, your 30s and you live like a popper. Like you just you you spend as little money as you can. Um, you know, the savings rate is you save instead of 10 to 20% of your income, you save 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, whatever you can. you put it away, you invest it, and then you retire in your 30s or 40 years old.

[20:28] You know, that's another thing. I'm very aware of this in the Bitcoin community. This is very common with Bitcoiners that, you know, I know Bitcoiners that they won't buy socks, they won't buy furniture, they sleep on the floor. I mean, literally, — I I will hear some, you know, I I had a friend who I think has a lot of Bitcoin and I don't know the price something happened and he goes, "I guess I can buy a chair now for my apartment. Right. Because it it's saving to be able to retire early. Not for everybody, but what are you guys thoughts on this? — I think it's great if you're in a position to sacrifice, right? So, if you're single, um, you know, this is a this is a could be a conscious decision. you know, it probably came out of Silicon Valley because those guys and gals are working 90 hours a week. They're already sleeping on floors. That was that's kind of the expectation of that group of uh so sure it makes sense. They can, you know, bunk up together. They can sleep under their desks like Elon does and what have you. And it's certainly not a bad way to build a foundation. That's for sure. Now, if you got family, you got kids, um I don't think you want them sleeping on the floor or, you know, being unhoused in any way or being transient. So, I think it's it's really one of those seasons of life kind of thing. But uh yeah, I mean I think you know get getting a getting a nest egg which is an old school term you know can can relax you and when you're given a an opportunity that may be a little risky you might be inclined to take that opportunity you know as opposed to the safety and security of a paycheck and the okay and all that stuff. So yeah, I I mean I can see where this would fit someone's lifestyle for — I think it depends if you're making $100,000 a year or $36,000 a year too, right? Like I think there's what opportunities you have, where you're coming from, what you have to do to to get future opportunities. And then my guess is that people in the fire movement, they retire in the sense they don't have to work for money, but there doesn't mean they're never going to earn money again is is my and I think there's a lot of like, you know, you know, gig work or starting businesses or side hustles or my guess is there's a lot of that that goes on.

[22:56] Um, but I think to Anony's point, like if you I think there are people this is really cool for. — Yeah. I think 20 stats say 20 to 40% of them work return to work anyway, right? Like I can't imagine I would have to have something to do, right? But some people do it because they want to go live in the woods. I I have a friend, he didn't make a ton of money, but he worked as a poker dealer. He saved. He saved. He saved. He went and bought this little hundred-year-old cabin on the western slope of Colorado. And, you know, didn't cost much. doesn't he he kind of lives real cheap and him and his dog and I don't know he's married now since then like I can't imagine getting a woman to move into that cabin he lives in but uh but he uh you know that would that works for him so you know to each their own and by the way this could go nicely into the die with zero right you work for a short period of time and then have longer to enjoy it if that's right right for the person well let's talk about something that's made a lot of headlines Elon Musk and his abundance bomb, right? He made a statement a while back at the abundance sum summit that retirement savings would be quaint and irrelevant. And he went on just to say that money is going to lose its value and that basically everybody will have high income. What I think he didn't make clear is what he means. He doesn't mean UBI. He means that everything because of abundance is going to become so cheap to produce that it will be you'll just be able to get what you want and you and work will become optional, right? Uh he's really saying AI and robots are going to do everything. And his timeline where he's thought this out, he thinks artificial general intelligence is going to be somewhere in the next couple of years.

[24:53] — Some people argue we're already there. He then thinks in by 2030 2027 to 2030 we will hit artificial super intelligence which is way you know I think that's where an AI is smarter than all the humans on on earth combined or something and then that will create full abundance by the year 2030 and I know Elon's got a history he's tends to be very optimistic sometimes overly optimistic this but you know I Guess the question we're ask you know we're asking is what if he's right you know we probably should ask what he's what is what if he's wrong too I think is not considered but John I know you had some push back on this — Anthony you want to jump in for I I just I think it's really — interesting I mean you know if if I I think of this as you know a basket of goods you know supermarket goods you know that the traditional kind of way the um you kind of measure you know, inflation in some ways, you know, so a basket of groceries today for the average family is, you know, $300 a week and, you know, in most world it becomes $25 a week. Okay? So, let's just use that as an as an example. robots are producing stuff and you don't need we we solve a fertilizer problem and we got all kinds of vertical farming going on and so now everything is $25 a week for that same same thing.

[26:31] What what what's the uh network effects of that? Do wages drop because they you don't need it. So, you know, you your universal high income is now a universal medium income or something. What What does it actually mean? What's the out what? I don't get it. I just It doesn't I can't put the pieces together. So, as I said earlier, help me help me put the puzzle pieces together here because I — Look, I have a tremendous amount of respect for Elon Musk in a lot of ways and a lot of things that he's done and I think highly, but I also want to just like talk about facts for a second. in 2016 he said we'll have manned missions to Mars by 2024. Like that's what he said. Uh you know he said uh he was highly confident uh in 2020 that we'd be landing humans on Mars by 2026 like like so so I think he's an optimist. He's an entrepreneur and that and that's what wires entrepreneurs. So I'm not taking that away from him. But I think that when he gives these dates, we have to take that with the data about his predictions in the past. You know, with those he said he was going to cut trillions of dollars and it didn't happen. So I think I think there's a level of optimism that just by the way he's also trying to sell lots of things with Tesla, sell lots of things with SpaceX and he's basically saying don't worry about saving money now, spend it with me today. So it is self- serving in a way that really helps him potentially.

[28:00] So, I have a little bit of a little bit of just uh skepticism is too strong a word. I I just have a little bit of realism that sneaks into my brain about what he's saying. Yeah. And so, — move away from let's assume he's right. I want to assume he's right. What is it? What does it actually mean? That's what that's the puzzle piece I can't get. I get that he's you know, he missed the Mars thing and he changed his mind out. It's it's the moon, not Mars. I get all that. But what does it mean if in fact the price of everything drops to near, you know, the bottom? What else changes in our societ? — I just don't think he look, I just don't think that politicians can allow that to happen from a GDP as a measurement of their success perspective. And so they'll continue to inflate things in a way that looks different. So, I just I just think that we're not going to have the powers that be and I'm not trying to be like, you know, a conspiracy theory. I just think that people are going to find ways to inflate and raise prices in other ways. I do think they're going to be cheaper in terms of the real cost of things. So, if you were to kind of normalize everything for, you know, fiat currency and do all the normalizations that Ry's, you know, much more interested in than I am, I think I think there's probably some truth to that. But if you look back at people even like the the patent office in the late 1800s saying that nothing else would ever be invented and you look at you know the the cost of air travel and you just walk through all these things. I I don't know. I I don't think there's going to be this radical deflation in terms of people are going to have there's always be more to be consumed. I — Anthony, I don't know exactly what it's going to look like, but go back to I don't care if it's JD Rockefeller or it's Cleopatra, like people that were unbelievably wealthy, right?

[29:57] — Would you rather live your life today or JD Rockefeller? Right. And why is that? And so it's it's you have air conditioning, he didn't. You have cars he in. You have computers. You got air. You got flights. You have all of this technology that you have In a lot of ways, you're richer than him. But why is that? Like what's — that to me is the perfect that that's the perfect sentiment, Randy. Like I think that's exactly the right framing. — Say some more about that, John, because I'm not following. I think if if I had to choose to be a Caesar in Rome, I think a Caesar in Rome had a harder life than I have. I can gallivant off to Hawaii in a few hours and I can get over to Europe a few weeks later in a few hours and I can and I've got some jet lag and you know if I want to spend money for business class then I can lay down flat on that jet and so when I go out to eat I mean like a king and I don't worry about kind of waterbornne diseases you know so like I I live better than I think most Caesars in Rome if not all the Caesars in Rome.

[31:13] Good. I get Yeah, I I would agree with all of that, but I still don't understand if Okay, let me try to frame it a different way because I'm and I apologize for being so ignorant that I just can't wrap my head around it. If you know there are going to be many many things that the technology is going to make easier and less expensive to produce. Okay, there whatever those are. A car that costs $25,000 per vehicle to make now is going to be 5,000. And there's going to be if you know farming if if robotics really get delivered to the um if there's water enough for people to uh continue to farm in this country and others you know the cost of groceries and meat and so forth going to drop dramatically. I'm trying to understand if you have all that dollars. I don't need need as many bitcoins to buy those things. What what are the other effects of that?

[32:32] Elon is saying that money won't matter. Everyone will be rich. What does that mean? You know, does it mean that a person that's making $36,000 a year is that's that's all I'm going to if I'm making a million a year, all I'm going to need is $36,000 and the rest is for me to save. What does it what does it actually mean? What what I don't I don't know. I haven't thought this all the way through, but what if it meant that the gap between the halves and the have nots closed and the have nots had. In other words, organic food was affordable for everybody and right. And so you you're just you're lowering like like the number of people in poverty. Like I think that if that's if that's what he's talking about like I'm really excited about that future. — Let's dig into that example, John. Organic food. There's a great example, right? Because a lot of people can't afford good food. Well, the the claim is that you will be able to get your own robot that works with AI. Now, we need the chips, we need the power, we need the raw materials, all this stuff. Um, and you know, we've talked about everything from new power plants to orbital power plants to mining the moon and sending it back with a mass driver and all this stuff that's going on. So, take all those technologies and bind them together. And I know that's really difficult, right? Because it's there's there's those and there's the 10 other technologies that we haven't even thought about that come together. But now you have an a robot Anthony or lots of people have a robot that goes out in your yard, creates raised beds, plants vegetables and fruit, harvests it, washes it, and has it ready for your family to eat. You don't have to go to the grocery store to buy it because you have a robot that for however many pennies of electricity is growing it, producing it for you.

[34:29] That's farical, frankly. That's just I I I just don't get it, you know. So, tell that to someone living on the uh lower east side of New York City in a 30story apartment building. How is that going to work? That's not — hydropon. Put you put you put hydroponics in a corner. Like I I just I I don't think it's I I don't think it's imposs like you mean that's like saying flying cars. Yeah. Some people can become it it would certainly be easier to be self more self-sufficient for again probably the halves versus the have nots but maybe maybe I'm on to something where that quote unquote have nots which is a term I just despise uh but nonetheless it's it's it's the rigor so we'll use it the per the people living in the you know 20 to $80,000 range if that provides s such sufficient resource for um that they can they can buy anything they want. They could travel anywhere they want to go. And essentially, if you make more than $100,000 a year, it's kind of like money I don't really need because I can do it.

[35:35] I can do anything I want to do for $100,000 or less. What's the impact of that? That the impact of that's going to be let's make sure everyone has under $100,000 because that's all they need and you don't need that. So your wages are going to come down. Um the the hang on the the asset values of the companies that produce those things that enable us to invest that additional dollars that's going to come down, right? Because they're worth less. They don't they don't they the their income is going to be smaller. Their growth is going to be smaller. So what becomes of the stock market? what becomes of, you know, may maybe the government will be able to pay off its debt. I don't know. Maybe we — You're referencing conversations we've had. We just had a question about the stock market, the Chimath thing that we debated a couple weeks ago that, you know, he's saying it's overvalued. You can't you can't project earnings 25 years out and in a world of abundance and and going down, right? Um, but you know, Anthony, if we go back to 1813 to 1913, while wages and income rose in America because of technology, the cost of living in America got cut in half with fairly limited technology during that hundred. So the difference, by the way, in 1913 was when the Fed was created or recreated. But that 100 years when we were on a gold standard, [snorts] everything on average got cut in half.

[37:16] Okay? Why? Because we had sound money. And by the way, that's in the middle. We fought a civil war in the middle of that where we did go off gold for a minute and we printed a bunch of money. And so that it would have been even greater without a civil war and all that money printing in the middle. So, if we can get to that. Now, I think that the biggest obstacle here is what John said when he talked about the Doge cuts. It wasn't that Elon didn't find fraud. They found a whole bunch of fraud. They just got very, very minimal quote. He underestimated the bureaucracy of the US government. They just wanted to protect the fraud, not get rid of it because clearly they were benefiting from it. So he still has that problem here to John's point is politicians are going to fight but if AI makes everything and you can solve all these problems I don't think they can keep control I think you know and I do think this is part of what we've talked about the fourth turning I think a lot of things are coming together here — I think for me it's like okay if that's if that's true then it's really easy to frame that problem in a non-abundant way where it's very fearful Or you can look at it and say where does where can I find abundance for those my loved ones and then how can I promote and catalyze abundance for society more broadly like those are the questions that I've and I think it's really easy then because I think I think I could take a step into this conversation and be really fearful and we could fearmonger which we don't do here but that we could do that and so then the question becomes okay how do we help people use a lens of abundance with such it's not going to just we're not going to wake up and 100% of the world's population is going to be in the same place at the same time, right? This has got to be an evolution. So um in any put must you know uh thing aside what's the um other effects of the imbalance that's going to occur as one society versus another society is further along the path of this efficiency. Right? This really what we're talking about is asset efficiency over time. What's the impact of that going to be? And what do people do with that efficiency? Do they use it for good? Do they use it for evil?

[39:42] It's um it's it's it's a question that I'm sure academics are wrestling with uh in think tanks all over the world because there is going to be a severe and some people are going to be left behind. Not everyone's going to reap the benefits of this at the same time. They might eventually, but eventually can span decades. — Well, Sam Alman has, you know, he says massive deflation is coming. A lot of people do. His, this is his prediction is that healthc care is going to drop 45%, education 45%, transportation 30 to 50%. Solar he points out, has in the last 15 years already dropped 90% and will drop more. Um, you know, and there's multiple banks and like, you know, the data I got here is City Bank, but I've heard this from Bank of America, Chase. I think they're all saying that a we have a real risk of having a deflationary spiral. And that's going to be a painful transition because we're already we'll be 40 trillion in debt maybe by the time this publishes.

[40:51] And paying that back with decreasing tax dollars and decreasing revenue because everything gets cheaper is a whole another thing that we won't — Yeah. I think the other thing we be careful of is like, you know, what it costs to deliver may go down, but all those companies want to see that profit for their own balance sheet in the stock market. So, they're going to want to see profitability go up. And so I think I think I just I I I think I'm trying to have a sober view of that so that I don't make bets based on a future that's so optimistic that I'm making careless — Yeah. I don't know, man. You know that that stat that solar has gone down 90%. I know plenty of people, some of some people on this phone call that have recently had solar panels put on their homes and the payback is decades without subsidies. So I'm not I you know production of solar panels has gone down by 90% the cost of it but it didn't it's not reaching it's not reaching my house it you know I'm not going to live long enough to get the payback on a solar panel on a you know 3500 square foot homes. the price has been dropping. The subsidies have been dro have been dropping, right? Like the subsidies used to be really really high. And as the price has dropped, the subsidies have dropped to now just this year they're gone, which you know, I put it on a year ago. There was a 30%, you know, tax credit. I wouldn't have done it without the 30% tax credit. That was a pretty major motiv.

[42:20] — Well, you need cooperation from the grid, too. You you can't sell your uh excess capacity into the grid. If you can, you're not getting a fair market value for that. — So, I don't consider that a subsidy. I mean, if I built a power plant and wanted to feed the grid, I'd get paid. Well, you've got a power plant in your garage and you're not allowed to sell that into the grid, which is baloney as far as I'm concerned. So, anyway, — you can sell you can sell it back to the grid in most places. I think California made it illegal, but I think most places you can. Um, now to your point, I pay about 11.6 or 11.8 cents a kilowatt hour here. I I have a very complex spreadsheet if you want to see it. Uh, figuring this out. So, a year ago, I figured out that it worked financially with the 30% rebate. And that's with really low in like there's there's places in the country where people are paying three and four times that for you know some of the east coast it's 40 50 cents a kilowatt hour now. Uh I happen to be in a place that's like 11.6. However, when I sell it back to the grid they give me six cents. So roughly half. So to your — that's all — you store.

[43:36] — You store it. let's we got off track. The good news is that that uh renewable energy is is still alive and well and um there are lots of reasons to use it whether it's a data center or a car or um any a lot of other a lot of good uses for it. So we're moving in the right direction. — I think we're going to see new shapes and sizes of opportunity too, like brand new opportunity shapes we've never seen before. for. And so that's what I'm on the lookout for for myself, but also to be able to kind of help my children identify that. All right. Well, we got traditional. That's still one of the options people should consider, right? We got traditional retirement. We have I'm going to call it John. I'm not going to give Miller credit. It's going to be there's going to be John's die with zero concept that says — it's not mine. — Live now. And uh just for John again, fire the acronym says escape fast and save and and do that. And then we have the AI abundance that says maybe none of it matters, right? Maybe — going to plug one quick board game here, Randy. The game Cash Flow by Kiasaki is really a super cool way for people to understand and play with these concepts that I I really enjoy playing the game.

[44:56] Love playing with my kids. If you haven't checked out the game Cash Flow as a way of looking at some of these different concepts and how you want to test them out in in an hour, hour and a half long game, super fun game to play with the family. — What age groups does that fly on? — You know, I would start probably uh 12 years old and up. — All the way into into adulthood. think is how much does it take to retire? Has that been redefined? Will it be redefined in the future? Do you want to want to keep that principle so that you can pass it on. Do you want to die with zero? What is the what is the right thing for you? You know, maybe the bigger question that we didn't get into much is how to live meaningfully. I think that's part of the die with zero. But, you know, how do we bring that's the purpose of money, right? To get the things we want, live meaningfully. And so, it's not up to us to tell you what's best for you and your family. But I, you know, I hope we've given people four different options to to think about. So, gentlemen, — good job.

[46:00] — I've enjoyed it. — Let's take a break. fitness is just as important as money or milestones. It's one of our five Fs. For lots of other, taking care of my body while I build my life is one of the more timeconsuming and difficult goals to chase. That's why we're partnering with AG1. It's a daily drinkable habit, less than a minute, that's formulated with 75 plus vitamins and nutrients and designed to support energy, digestion, and immune defense. It even has a few grams of protein uh that we're all chasing these days. If you want to try it with our affiliate link, you'll also receive a free AG1 flavor sampler plus vitamin D3 plus K2 with your welcome kit when you first subscribe. $72 value. Go [clears throat] to shop.d1.com/tails. Let's start out with Apple and they just announced their leadership is changing from Tim Cook to John Teas. As we know, Steve Jobs was a CEO and then gone and then back and Tim Cook has been there for 15 years. Anthony, you wanted to talk about this. What's the question you want to answer? Where do you want to go with this?

[47:17] — Well, the reason I wanted to talk about it is there's a perception that, you know, Tim Cook was well, he wasn't Steve Jobs. No one ever was other than Einstein and Henry Ford and people like that, Edward Lan. um he wasn't Tim Cook. So he he the original leader. He was he was he just was a steward of a big company and and frankly doing my research that's a bunch of bull. What he accomplished in his 15 years is pretty freaking amazing. And just give you some some things you know from a shareholder return perspective. The S&P during his time grew 500%. Apple grew 100%. So a 20x increase in the valuation of the company. And how did he do it? Well, he went to work on the supply chain and operations. That was his strength when he came in. So he did what he had to do in terms of where he was manufacturing, how he was manufacturing, what he was paying for manufacturing. where he was getting his chips, all of that. In 15 years, did anyone have a problem getting an iPhone? Did anyone have a problem getting an Apple product, a laptop or an iPad or whatever? Never. You never once heard them say, "Well, can't seem to get it." Now, today there's a Mac Mini that they have there's so much demand for that they didn't expect. But that's just today.

[48:57] Services. you turn the company into a recurring revenue ecosystem. I mean, he's got, you know, Apple TV, he's got the app store, he's got the watch, the health, all that stuff. Um, he created the wearable market. There was no real wearable before took over. Now, maybe that was an idea that Jobs had years ago, but you Jobs wasn't there. And he he blessed it. He gave the okay to go ahead with it. And we're sitting here today. Most of us have some form of an apple on our wrist. Silicon, he created his own supply chain for his own silicon. You know, the phone, the phone, the camera on the original phone versus the camera today. tremendous innovation. criticize him for was, you know, Siri is a slow adult. We all know we wish Siri was a little bit better than she is today. And they they took a stab at, you know, autonomous vehicles that didn't quite work out the way they wanted to.

[50:12] So, no one no one's perfect, but to call, you know, to poo poo his um, it's just is just wrong. So I just wanted to point that out to the listeners that you know as you sit there and say where's the new innovation? Well, you know he he took a foundation and made hay with it. Now what happens We don't know. I mean he hasn't they didn't they didn't spend a lot of capital and they're not spending a lot of capital on AI. In fact year overyear capital expenditures at Apple dropping People investors are saying why aren't you investing? Well, you know, maybe he doesn't want to be on the bleeding edge of that. — Well, hold on. But breaking news, he just he just basically gave his successor a blank check and said, "We are no longer requiring Apple to return capital in the way we did over the last few years so that his successor has a lot more flexibility." So, so all the things you said, yes, I thought you were going to come in this more negative than you. I'm so glad you were happy about him. The other things he did really well, succession planning, we we'll know in five or 10 years if succession planning went well, but I think the early indicators are well done, good and faithful servant. Like like he, you know, he returned huge amounts of cash to the shareholder. Uh now, the one place I think we could really knock him is AI strategy. Apple seems to have fallen behind. Like that's the one place where we really hope the new leader is going to leap forward for Apple's — Well, for our listeners, hang on. I want to I'm glad you brought that up. So, what did he miss? Right. So, you could say he's not he's not he didn't build a frontier language mall, right? He didn't do that. Okay. What did it cost and what is it costing those companies to deliver those malls and the what's the the cash flow impact? We got valuations at 800 billion for Chad GPT on a 30 million $30 billion runway. I don't know that if I was an investor, which I am an investor as he full transparency, a big investor in Apple, that I'd want him doing that, you know, let can if you know, as they used to say, if you can't beat him, eat him. Let the other guys build it out and I'll and I'll just buy it. You know what I mean? and I'll bolt it on to my company and I'll be and I'll be fine. So there's there's a fast follower mentality. You can be an innovator and you can be a fast follower as well. So, you know, we'll see. Like you said, John, 100% five years, we're going to know whether or not whatever strategies they execute are going to pay off. But um when I I don't know what this I don't know what the science says today, but when I got my MBA I I management technology was a concentration and a fast follower beat the first mover ever just slightly more often. So like if you look at all the data over a couple hundred years ending in 2006, which is when I did the last research on that, the fast follower was slightly more successful than the first mover for — Since you're both on the fan club, I'm somewhere in the middle. I'm going to argue the other side. I should make it clear. I think he did a fantastic job in a way. And I think what we're talking about here is a preference of style, right? Jobs was the visionary, the creative genius, the innovator. And so now Cook came in, Cook made everything more efficient, more profitable, but his weakness is that vision and that innovation. And they — just Brandy. He grew revenue eight times. He grew one of the biggest companies in the world. Eight times revenue. How do you say that with a straight face?

[53:59] — Hold on. Hold on. You two spent eight minutes talking about this and now I give one little piece. I haven't even given you a counter yet and you're arguing despite me giving you the floor. — So hit us. Go ahead. Do it. — Do you do you think he's a great visionary like product guy and — Yes. Yes. And let me tell you why a visionary knows what not to do as much as he knows what to do. Okay? So he went down the the vision pro thing when everyone was looking what we want glasses. We want you know um what it's not it's not AI it's a virtual reality our face and there is not a successful virtual reality company other than the people producing the software for it out there. The glasses, Google glasses, everyone remember. Oh, you forgot the Google glasses. — They went nowhere. The the um the meta glasses at the time were Facebook glasses. Got — okay. Okay. Okay.

[55:04] Let Randy finish. I don't want to. But you know, I also don't want to, you know, throw mud at someone that it it just tripping. — You haven't even heard what I've said. So, if you look at their sales, over half of their sales are still the iPhone. something he didn't invent, right? Um, you know, the Mac, all these things like you are talking about wearables. It's 8% of their sales. 8% is what is what that is. The point is this isn't you guys are taking this as an attack, right? I I didn't even get into it, but the Jobs was one type of CEO that I think was necessary to get the company to that point. Cook was a different type of CEO that has taken it to a different level. He raised it in a lot of ways beyond jobs. The the downside to focusing on the infrastructure and all the things that you value, Anthony, right? This this is your CFO hat, your operations guy. You love that stuff, right? You just you're like, "Let's do it. Let's make it more efficient." I get it. He's your guy. But Jobs was better at the innovation. If I don't think if Jobs was there, Siri wouldn't suck as much as it does. Siri sucks. And by the way, they were pretty much first in AI. I mean, I can create a chatbot now with zero coding experience that's better than than Apple's chatbot.

[56:33] Like they are way way they could have just partnered with somebody they could have done. And I think what I'm hearing is that Cook even agrees because the guy he's bringing in, John Teus, is a flip back the other way and it's different styles and they both have their place. There's very few people that are really excellent at both skill sets. So I think Jobs took him to a place, Cook took him to a place. I think they're stagnating a little bit and they're not innovating and he's smart enough and wise enough to understand that and turn it over to a guy that's going to innovate more. Now, we'll see if it's right. But to put this in football terms for you, Anthony, what do you see with teams when they have a real disciplinarian coach, right? and the guy that you know and then they fire that they inevitably replace them with a quote unquote players coach and the rules are a little less and that usually works really well for a while. Then you watch the thing the team gets less they win more at first, they then don't win as much. They they fire that one and they come back with the disciplinarian.

[57:44] — Is it possible? Is it Randy? Hold on. Is it is it possible Randy that that it's not that he's not an innovator but that he was an innovator for 15 years and for that 15 years he could see around the corner and now it's somebody else's turn to see around the corner like I think Jobs was an innovator when he was an innovator. I think if you look at innovation like ser going from a hardware company innovating into services he turned Apple services into a Fortune40 company all by itself hundred billion dollars in revenue. So I think he did innovate and I also agree with you that he may have lost the thread on the next set of innovations. So I think that's where I have a difference of opinion. I would say that and maybe it's a distinction without a difference. — Yeah, you're you're you're right, but let's let's — and no one's ever going to um you know step on jobs as innovation, but he did three things. He did the computer slash laptop desktop. He did the um uh uh — music on the uh air, no on the iPod and he did the phone.

[58:47] — That's it. Three things. Now, he iterated each of those things. Not he didn't he did not iterate the phone because he didn't have time to, but he iterated the computer to the desktop to the laptop to the video um the graphic design and so on and so forth. But he didn't produce a new product. And when he did the iPod, you know, he iterated that into more music on a smaller device. And then he then of course he did the iPhone. So, you know, this idea that he innovated, he did a thousand other things. That's not really true, you know. So, anyway, I'll leave it at that. We're going to give you the last saying, Randy. I could agree with you. They would both be wrong. So, I'm gonna just leave it at that. — We I we spent way too much time on this, so I'm going to give you the last word there. We're gonna move. We got We got to move. We got to move to another move. I'm good. I'm good. I was made my — So, water, there's water problems all over the world, right? And even look at the western part of the US, California, and everything else. Well, guess what?

[59:56] California happens to be on an ocean. And oceans have what 70 or 80% of the water something like that in the world. And desalinization is a fairly simple technology. We've had for decades maybe a cent we've had for a long time. — I mean the real super simple method you add electricity to the water and you can take salt water turned into drinking water. That's overly simplified. But there's about two billion people that have a water shortage globally. And by the way, if California fixed that problem, they all take from the Colorado River, it would help Arizona, Nevada, except wherever that thing flows, uh, as well. So, uh, basically, I mean, the story is that, um, oh, by the way, I said 70 97% of the Earth's water is in oceans. And if we have cheap enough energy, this goes back to our solar discussion from earlier. If there's enough cheap energy, whether it's solar, fusion, nuclear, that's making a comeback that it it now becomes fairly cheap to turn that into drinkable water.

[1:01:05] Thoughts, gentlemen? — Yeah, there's a trade-off, and this is this is where California is stubbing its toe. There is a trade-off, and the trade-off is the ecological impact that deserization has to the ocean. you know, the the there is a devastating effect when they return the salt water to the ocean. It's so salty that it creates dead zones. And so, also, when they're pulling the water in, they're taking in fish and they're taking in crabs and have you, that's having an impact on the ecosystem. So that's the trade-off. I would argue that that trade-off is well worth it when you consider how short we are on water. You know, I think it's worldwide. 70% of the water usage is used in agriculture. Arizona are owning, you know, the cost of their water is is very very high. So making that tradeoff is to me well worth it. There are some new technologies in desalinization where they they go underground into the sand and they pull the water out that way.

[1:02:28] There's diffusion technology that diffuses the salt water when it goes back so it doesn't have the same ecological impact. That costs money but if energy costs go down they can invest in those other technologies and we can you know we can u be in a good shape. The Middle East pretty much gets all its water from desalinization. That's one of the big issues with the uh the events that are going on right now. Some of those plants were hit during the uh conflict. So all far makes all the sense in the world. We just this is one we got to figure out cuz we're going to need that water. We are running out. We can't rely on this snowfall to to get it done. It's just not Yeah, I mean I wish I knew more about the topic. I think at the end of the day I have questions like where does assault go and you know there was an old like I would say it's a B flick from the 80s but it's probably a C flick called the Ice Pirates where it's all about like the water conflict. I haven't seen the movie in 40 years. It probably doesn't hold up but you know it's like this has been a thing you know desolization's been around for 5,000 years in some way shape or form and so now it's like how do we how do we hand like what do we do with all the salt you know? I think that's that's going to be a question we've got to but to to Anony's point, I think it's something we have to figure — And by the way, my my first thought is that if I have a desalinization plant and I have all this excess salt that I now have a salt business as well. But maybe there's something I just asked.

[1:04:01] — It's it's an impure they don't they don't um they don't use the salt guys because it's impure. They would have to go through a purification process in order to do that. May not be viable to do it. But California just shut down uh a project in um somewhere near San Francisco or north of San Francisco. They he shut down the salinization plan for exactly the reasons I said. No thought giving to what's the alternative? What's the way around it? Once again, the government get jumping in in the middle of something and destroying abundance. I mean, who needs water more than California for its agriculture? I mean, it's an inc it's a the numbers for various types of trees like uh I think it's almonds consume some ungodly amount of water per pound of product. It's just and make this make this happen because we will have no abundance if we run out of water.

[1:05:10] — So I looked it up while you were talking and it is you can take that salt and use it for to create table salt, but it costs more than it does just to mine it. It's still not it's still not economical at this point. Although it does say that it's actually used a lot for pharmaceuticals and specialty food, which I just didn't do enough research to dig into that. — Anyway, we can put a bow on this thing. I just I just think it's interesting the uh you know, technology is helping us solve problems. As Anthony said, you know, the desalinization technology is getting cheaper and the electricity is getting cheaper. So, this is only going to become more and more viable uh you know, as we grow. So, everyone, thank you. You made it to the end. you like us, download, subscribe, tell your friends. It's that little button. It's a thumbs up or a star or whatever's on your podcast player. Hit that thing. Follow us. It helps the algorithm. Helps everyone. Uh gentlemen, I enjoy it. Even if you both are the biggest Tim Cook fans I've ever seen. I didn't know they existed. So, go get on your Android. Try to text me on your Android.

[1:06:16] — Works just fine. So, it's all right. All right. All right. I'm in the cult of Google, not the cult of Apple. That's that's about it either way. — All right. Thank you, gentlemen. Let's talk soon. Listen and subscribe to the podcast wherever you get your podcasts. Click follow for more content like this or go to talesofabundance.com to join our community and get free tools.