YT YouTube2Text

YouTube2Text → Transcripts → Economía para mi abuela: La VERDAD sobre el PRECIO de la VIVIENDA | Daniel Lacalle | #40

Economía para mi abuela: La VERDAD sobre el PRECIO de la VIVIENDA | Daniel Lacalle | #40 — Transcript

by Mago More · 16,847 words · 2,600 segments · language en · Watch on YouTube

Open in transcriber Summarize with AI Download SRT/VTT

Full transcript

0:00What we need to understand is that
0:02price is the most important element of
0:04the economy.
0:06>> Many people say, "No, I'm poor because
0:08that guy is rich."
0:09>> What is it that makes all prices rise,
0:12consolidate that rise each year, and
0:14continue rising afterwards? The erosion
0:18, the destruction of the currency's
0:20purchasing power. In other words,
0:22prices aren't rising; the currency you
0:25pay with is losing purchasing power. I
0:28want us to talk about this topic and
0:29the housing issue because people are
0:31fired up. Mago More's stories. Discover
0:38more in his free newsletter at
0:40magomore.com.
0:43>> Welcome once again to the Avante
0:45Auditorium. Welcome to a new episode of
0:47Mago More's stories, the space where we
0:49are passionate about learning, getting
0:51inspired, and above all, bringing in
0:53outstanding people who have a lot to
0:55contribute. Today I have the immense
0:57privilege of welcoming to the program
0:59an authentic benchmark figure, one of
1:01the most brilliant, sharp, and
1:03influential minds in the field of
1:05economy and finance internationally. We
1:07are talking about a doctor of economics
1:09, professor of global economy, and
1:10investment fund manager who has
1:12developed a brilliant career in the
1:13greatest financial temples of the City
1:15of London and the United States. He is
1:18a prolific author, which for those from
1:20the old school curricula means he has
1:22written many books. With several
1:27bestsellers published and translated
1:29all over the world, but if something
1:31defines him, it is his fabulous ability
1:33to communicate, because he has the
1:34talent to take the most complex
1:36macroeconomics and explain it in plain,
1:38direct, and transparent language,
1:39without detours or frills, so that you
1:41truly understand how the world works
1:43and how it affects you in your
1:44day-to-day life, in your pocket, and in
1:46your decisions. It is a real pleasure
1:50to welcome Daniel Lacalle to Mago
1:52More's stories. Thank you very much.
1:57Thank you so much. Welcome, my friend.
2:02Thank you so much, More. I am impressed
2:04by this impressive audience here, and
2:06thank you very much for inviting me and
2:08thank you for that introduction. I am
2:10about to hire myself.
2:12>> Yes, yes, yes.
2:13>> But well, you had already been here at
2:14Avante many times, right?
2:14>> Man, of course. Yes, yes.
2:16>> It's your second home, we could say. No
2:17,
2:17>> man, let's not call it a second home
2:19since in some things they are
2:20competitors, but well, it's fine. They
2:22are charming people. Okay, okay, okay.
2:24But you get along well with each other,
2:26right?
2:26>> We get along wonderfully because the
2:28financial world, contrary to what
2:30people think, uh, the competition is a
2:32healthy competition between people who,
2:35for the most part, respect each other.
2:37>> Well look, I wanted to have called this
2:39podcast, in fact I think I’m going to
2:41call it that, Economics for my Grandma.
2:43>> Why? Because when I called Daniel I
2:46said, "Hey, something is happening
2:47because all we hear from the government
2:49is news that everything is going great,
2:51but then you go to the supermarket and
2:52there’s a guy there offering you a
2:54loan so you can pay for your groceries.
2:55" So I say, I need to understand this,
2:58I need us to explain it like I’m my
2:59grandmother. And before we start, I
3:01want, uh, two things, and correct me if
3:04I’m wrong. We are going to explain to
3:06people two concepts that will be with
3:07us throughout the entire interview. The
3:09first concept is, uh, a sketch that I
3:11once saw on YouTube. You can look up
3:13the sketch if you want to write it down
3:15. It's "teacher fired 2 + 2."
3:18>> Just by typing that it appears. So
3:20suddenly a kid arrives and shows her
3:22the exam and she says, well, you don't
3:25have it right. And she marks it in red.
3:27She doesn't even give him a zero. So
3:28the kid says, "Why?" And she says, "
3:30Well, because I wrote 2 + 2 and you
3:32wrote 22."
3:33>> And the kid says, and she says, "No,
3:35it's that 2 + 2 is four."
3:37>> And then the kid just stands there. He
3:39throws everything down and leaves
3:40really angry. The next day the parents
3:41show up, "We are the parents and such."
3:43And she says, "Well, uh, look, I gave a
3:45math test and 2 + 2, uh, and your son
3:47put 22," and they say, and
3:50>> and she says, "Like, and what do you
3:52mean 2 + 2 is 4?" She says, "Well,
3:53that's your opinion."
3:55>> Exactly.
3:57>> And so in the end the parents stage a
3:59strike saying that she had restricted
4:01the child's freedom and that it wasn't
4:04right. Well, the sketch is very good.
4:07So, the first thing is that math is
4:09what it is.
4:10>> Math is what it is. Period. And this
4:12will be with us throughout the entire
4:13interview. So, when someone has a doubt
4:15, we have to, uh, remind them again
4:17that math is what it is, that 2 + 2 is
4:20four.
4:20>> 2 + 2 is four, but there is a thing
4:23called economic policy in which
4:24politicians—because economic policy
4:27is not economy, it's politics.
4:29Politicians try to convince you that
4:31they are going to make 2 + 2 equal 22,
4:33which is what will lead us to what we
4:35are going to talk about this afternoon.
4:38This is for this time.
4:39>> Okay? The second thing, which I think
4:41is a very important concept in
4:42economics and is one of the first
4:44things you are taught at a very basic
4:46level, is supply and demand.
4:47>> Right.
4:48>> And why prices go up. And I think this
4:50is also important to understand. I mean
4:52, if I have a million chairs and people
4:53come to buy chairs and they come to buy
4:55one or two, well, my chair is worth
4:57very little.
4:59>> But if I have one chair and a million
5:01people come, that chair is worth a lot.
5:03>> Indeed.
5:04>> Why are jewels worth a lot? Because
5:06there are few of them. Well, except in
5:08the homes of certain people where there
5:10are many jewels, but normally jewels
5:12are scarce and therefore they are worth
5:14a lot.
5:15>> Is this the case, or am I mistaken?
5:18>> First, what we have to understand is
5:21that the value of things is not decided
5:24by the government or by me, but is
5:27decided by the last person willing to
5:30buy that good, uh, that great jacket.
5:34It might seem expensive to me, it might
5:37seem cheap to you, you know? But the
5:40idea that the price is dictated by my
5:42perception of what is expensive is
5:44ridiculous. For example, the price of
5:48oil is expensive for those who consume
5:50it and very cheap for those who produce
5:52it, right? So, right? Uh, what we have
5:57to understand is that price is the most
6:00important element of the economy.
6:02Because price, uh, indicates everything
6:06regarding supply, demand, and also
6:09regarding scarcity. So, the moment
6:14someone presents themselves as the one
6:16who is going to change prices, besides
6:19lying, what they are literally doing is
6:22ignoring math, statistics, and
6:24economics. Agreed? Uh, the only way you
6:29can make a price go down is by
6:32eliminating the demand. Agreed? That
6:36chair has a huge price if there is only
6:38one chair and a million people who want
6:41to sit in it. So they say, "Well, let's
6:44get rid of that million people, eh?"
6:45And then the chair is worth nothing.
6:47What also happens? That those people
6:49have no chair. Agreed? The second is
6:53obviously to make many more chairs, and
6:55the moment there are a million and one
6:57chairs, what happens to the price? It
7:00drops automatically. Notice that you
7:03have often heard people talk about
7:05electricity and other cases regarding
7:08the issue of marginal prices. All
7:11prices are marginal; that is, the price
7:14of the chair will continue to be high
7:16until there is the million and first.
7:20The price of the million and first will
7:23be much lower than the first. Agreed?
7:26That is everything in economics. The
7:30thing is, there is always someone who
7:32tells you that they are going to change
7:35reality, and that they will change
7:38reality because they are a ruler,
7:40because they can make a law, right?
7:43They can make a law saying that this
7:45afternoon the temperature won't drop
7:47and it won't rain.
7:49>> Martin used to say that. Do you know
7:51that Mark Twain had a fantastic quote?
7:52He said, "Everybody talks about the
7:53weather, but nobody does anything about
7:55it." That is clear, clear, clear.
7:57Everyone complains about the weather.
8:00>> Then a politician comes along and says,
8:01"Well, I'm going to change the weather.
8:02"
8:02>> Of course, Mark Twain had another great
8:03quote where he said that quitting
8:04smoking was the easiest thing in the
8:06world. He did it every day. Hm. So, why
8:10is this important? This is important
8:14because understanding price formation
8:17is an essential factor so that people
8:20don't fall into the trap of those who
8:23promise security and affordability, but
8:26then give you scarcity and misery.
8:30Agreed? So, the prices of everything
8:34don't go up at the same time by
8:36accident, right? If we have a certain
8:41amount of money—monthly, annual,
8:44whatever—agreed? And the price of oil
8:48goes up a lot because there's a supply
8:52problem and demand is very high, I have
8:56less money to buy other things. That's
9:00why when they tell you, "No, it's just
9:02that prices are rising because of oil,"
9:03no. Oil doesn't cause all prices to
9:07rise, consolidate their rise, and keep
9:09rising, which is what the CPI that we
9:12all see measures, right? So, people say
9:15, "This happened to me the other day,
9:18right? I was in a supermarket and a
9:20lady approaches me and says, 'Why do
9:22you say prices are falling if
9:23everything is more expensive?'" Number
9:26one, you have the wrong person. I have
9:28not said that prices will go down.
9:31>> You have confused me with another
9:32economist.
9:32>> You have confused me with someone else.
9:35Number two, the inflation we see, the
9:38CPI as it is calculated, is the
9:41year-on-year price increase index. That
9:46does not mean that prices go down if
9:49inflation goes down. What happens is
9:51that the rate at which they rise is
9:53slower. Okay? Well, what does this mean
9:56? That if I gain 5 kg one year, 4 kg
9:59the next, and 3 kg the next, I have not
10:02lost weight. In other words, things
10:04continue to be more expensive. But the
10:07only thing that makes everything more
10:10expensive, and continue to be more
10:12expensive later, is not that everyone
10:15is foolish, that all supermarkets are
10:17evil, that all companies are stupid;
10:19why would they have to be foolish and
10:22evil if they decided to always sell
10:24products more expensively to people?
10:27Okay? What is it that makes all prices
10:32rise, consolidate that rise each year,
10:34and continue rising subsequently? The
10:38erosion, the destruction of the
10:40currency's purchasing power. In other
10:42words, prices are not rising; the
10:45currency you pay with is losing
10:47purchasing power. The currency you pay
10:50with is not, uh, the representation of
10:53a country's wealth; it is the
10:55representation of a country's credit,
10:58of how much it can go into debt. When
11:01we talk about money, it is debt, okay?
11:04It is debt. So, when you tell the
11:07government to give you free things,
11:09whatever its political color, the
11:11government will be delighted. Why?
11:15Because you pay for it, because it is
11:18doing so by issuing more currency than
11:20the private sector demands, and
11:22therefore that currency keeps losing
11:25purchasing power, and we call that
11:27inflation, okay? Inflation is the loss
11:30of the currency's purchasing power, not
11:32the rise in prices. The rise in prices
11:35is a consequence of inflation. Okay? So
11:38, what is happening? That is the trick
11:42with money. Look at this table. Hm.
11:45Well, what size would it be?
11:47Approximately
11:48>> one and a half.
11:49>> 1.5. Okay. This, I say to you, this
11:53table is 1.5, uh, in size. And you look
11:56at it and say, well yes, 1.5. Why?
11:59Because the centimeter, the meter does
12:01not change. Hm. However, if I tell you
12:04that this table is worth 1,000 Daniels,
12:07well, you don't know what that means. I
12:10tell you it's worth € 1,000 and you
12:11say, "Wow, that table is expensive,
12:13right?" € 1,000, but those euros
12:15aren't the same and aren't worth the
12:17same as they were x years ago, right?
12:21For example, I'm sure you, and I see
12:23people here in the cheap seats my age,
12:25have heard the following phrase: "My
12:27grandmother bought a 100-square-meter
12:29apartment for € 50,000," what a
12:31financial genius your grandmother was,
12:33right? Agreed, right? Those € 50,000
12:37obviously were worth much more back
12:39then than what they are worth now. That
12:42is inflation, the loss of the
12:44currency's purchasing power. So, when
12:47we talk about prices, you have supply
12:49and demand for the same amount of money
12:52. Supply and demand dictate what the
12:56price of a good will be. 1, chairs, the
12:59last chair will be worth less, much
13:01less than the first one. But mind you,
13:06if the amount of money in the system
13:08keeps increasing, increasing,
13:10increasing, it turns out that you can
13:13have a million chairs and the last one
13:15ends up being worth much more than the
13:18first. Why? Not because it is worth
13:22much more, but because the currency
13:24unit, the money, has lost purchasing
13:27power.
13:28>> That's why when they say, "We have to
13:29print money," you say, "What stupidity.
13:30" Of course, of course. Just think
13:33about it for a moment. If printing
13:35money were the solution for the economy
13:37, obviously we would have it so that
13:39you at home would have a little machine
13:41that prints money, and you would go
13:43with that. But look at how we laugh,
13:46right? You say, if I have a little
13:48machine at home that prints bills and I
13:50go down to the supermarket, well, I get
13:51arrested. Why? Because I am committing
13:55a crime of counterfeiting. And yet,
14:00when the State issues much more
14:02currency than the private sector
14:04demands, spending much more and getting
14:07much more into debt, we call it
14:09monetary policy. Agreed? Hm.
14:14>> How good is this, huh? And besides, of
14:16course, there is another thing that I
14:19found important in what you said when I
14:21see, for example, this youth pass they
14:23give for free travel.
14:25>> Sure, free travel. You see kids who say
14:26, "No, but I travel for free thanks to
14:28the government." You say, "Let's see,
14:30two things." First, that trip isn't
14:32free, and they’re going to be
14:34charging you for it your whole life
14:36through debt and debt interest. And by
14:38the time you're paying it off, they'll
14:40likely be dead. Exactly.
14:42>> Because there's a concept here—I
14:44don't want to get into one side or the
14:46other, but: the politician is
14:48short-sighted by nature because they
14:50have elections every four years at most
14:52, plus there are European, municipal,
14:54regional, and local ones in between; so
14:56, you aren't going to take a measure
14:58that doesn't benefit you.
15:00>> And if you can go into debt with other
15:02people's money,
15:03>> of course,
15:04>> that’s phenomenal. Now, think about
15:07the politician who isn't short-sighted,
15:09the one in a dictatorship who can spend
15:11their whole life, uh, obviously
15:13repressing people. They do exactly the
15:16same thing. Why? Because what we don't
15:21realize is that the state, the
15:23government, by constantly issuing that
15:26currency, is creating dependency,
15:29because what you are accepting is a
15:31credit unit. I mean, do you remember
15:35when you had a banknote and it said on
15:38the bill, "The Bank of Spain will pay
15:40the bearer 1,000 pesetas"? Meaning, the
15:44bill wasn't 1,000 pesetas itself. The
15:47Bank of Spain was giving you—well,
15:49the bank of whatever country—it was
15:51giving you a payment promise. Hm. Take
15:56out any bill you have in your pocket,
15:58if you even have one, eh? And see what
16:00it says now.
16:01>> Will we give it to you or not?
16:03>> It’s what it says, uh, it says—I
16:06don't think you have many of those
16:08high-denomination bills, but let's say,
16:11if you have a € 20 bill, what does it
16:13say? It says € 20, uh, it doesn't say
16:17"I promise to pay you € 20," it just
16:21says € 20.
16:23>> I mean, it's like Monopoly.
16:24>> It's as if literally the centimeters or
16:27meters with which we have measured this
16:30currency are changing. So, I say at the
16:33beginning of this podcast, this table
16:36is 1.5 meters long, and in a year it
16:39measures 5 meters. What, no. But that
16:44is inflation, okay? And inflation is
16:47not caused by supermarkets. People
16:51blame the person setting the price for
16:53inflation. Why? Because that’s what
16:56you see, right? You say, "Ah,
16:57>> Juan Ross is getting rich.
16:59>> He raised my prices."
17:01>> No, no, it's just that this is
17:02something you say, "Sure, I go to
17:03Mercadona, it's Juan Roig, it's Juan
17:05Roig's fault, because the guy just sets
17:06the prices,
17:08>> sets the prices,
17:09>> add, add 30 cents more."
17:11>> Set the prices. But let's explain to
17:13people why that fallacy is a lie. All
17:16right? Imagine for a moment, uh, that
17:18you have the privilege, because it
17:19would be a privilege, of being Juan
17:21Roig. Hm. And that, unlike Juan Roig,
17:24you are a businessman who is two things
17:26—you have to be both, it can't just
17:28be one. You have to be foolish and evil
17:31, okay? Hm. That you are a foolish and
17:33evil businessman. And since you are an
17:36evil businessman who owns a supermarket
17:38, who has many supermarkets around the
17:40country, then you decide to set prices
17:43that are completely
17:45>> exorbitant,
17:45>> exorbitant, unjustified, and
17:47furthermore, that they harm the
17:50consumers. Okay? Two things would
17:52happen. You are foolish and evil. As
17:55for foolish, the first thing that would
17:57happen is that all the surrounding
17:58supermarkets would immediately say, "
17:59This guy is a fool.""Uh, let's set
18:03prices that are more appropriate for
18:05our consumers." All right? Hm. And
18:08another thing would happen.
18:09Additionally, all the shops around, you
18:11would look for any other option, you
18:13could buy at another price. But the
18:16most important thing is that this
18:18foolish and evil businessman who
18:20consciously decides to set unjustified
18:22prices, uh, would go bankrupt. That's
18:25why he's a fool. And why would he go
18:27bankrupt? Because there is one thing
18:30people don't understand, that
18:32supermarkets don't wake up in the
18:34morning and products appear, uh, prices
18:36are set, you buy them, and at night the
18:38products disappear; rather, keeping
18:40them in the supermarket costs money,
18:43and it costs a lot of money. It costs,
18:46uh, the warehouse. Uh, if you have a
18:48small business and you have a warehouse
18:51, tell me why your small business
18:53disappears. Because of the cost of the
18:55warehouse, okay? So, if the businessman
18:58is foolish and evil, he would lose
19:00market share, others would buy the
19:02products, and furthermore, he would go
19:05bankrupt because the amount of unsold
19:07product, hm, would make him lose his
19:09business. All right? Good. But then,
19:13what is it that this populism, uh, that
19:16invades us every day tells you? "No,
19:18but they are oligopolies." Okay, let's
19:21form an oligopoly, you and I, huh?
19:23Imagine, More and I are an oligopoly,
19:26we have joined together and we are both
19:29foolish and evil and we have 100%market
19:31share of a product. Of a product, okay?
19:35So, the two of us decide to screw you
19:37all over. Hm. Very well.
19:39>> I like it.
19:40>> You like it? Eh, eh, now we decide to
19:43screw you all over and three things
19:46happen, all three at the same time.
19:49Number one, eh, number one, that you
19:52have less money left eh to buy the rest
19:56of things, right? No, so he and I, even
20:00if we were an oligopoly that held 100%
20:03of the market, we wouldn't raise all
20:05prices at once, we would make the rest
20:07go down. Okay? Do you understand? Okay,
20:11two, something else would happen.
20:13Immediately any one of you would see,
20:15there are two dumb and bad businessmen
20:18who have an oligopoly and therefore I
20:20am going to enter and I am going to
20:22sell things the same, better, higher
20:24quality and cheaper. So,
20:27>> we would both go bankrupt for being
20:28dumb and bad. And three, the most
20:30important thing. And three, the most
20:32important thing, inflation would also
20:34go down. See?
20:36>> Why?
20:36>> Because of that, why? Because the
20:39amount of Because what we previously
20:42had an amount to buy eh goods and
20:44services, now a third operator has
20:46appeared that offers the same product
20:48as you and me, but cheaper or better
20:51quality, who is smart and good
20:54>> and makes a fortune.
20:55>> And makes a fortune. And when he makes
20:56a fortune you'll say, "What a jerk!
20:58>> What a jerk! And when he makes a
20:59fortune you'll say," What a jerk! "This
21:01guy eh arrived at a place where there
21:03were two dumb and bad businessmen and
21:05instead of me doing it and setting up a
21:07business that took the market away from
21:10them, eh he took it away. Eh, look at
21:13it from another angle,
21:14>> that envy of the businessman is very
21:16funny to me when they say," It's just
21:18that the businessman makes a fortune. "
21:20I always say," You do it. "
21:21>> Of course,
21:22>> if it's so easy, you do it. No, because
21:24no, I'm saying you do it.
21:26>> Of course.
21:26>> Look, look at the following.
21:28>> It's like the thing with YouTubers.
21:29It's very funny to me, right? Suddenly
21:30they arrive and say," Look at the money
21:32that guy makes and such. "And I say,"
21:34You do it, start doing it. "" You know
21:35the typical girl who comes out and says
21:37, "Oh, she's an influencer." And they
21:38say it with disdain, too. I say, "Look,
21:40you wouldn't last a single day as an
21:42influencer, waking up at the hour they
21:43wake up, putting on makeup, making the
21:45videos, enduring it; I mean, you can't
21:47imagine the huge amount of work it is."
21:49I mean, do you think they just opened
21:50an Instagram account and 10 million
21:52followers just appeared like that?
21:55>> Because people adopt the narrative of
21:58envy and hatred once the wealth has
22:01already been created. You know?
22:05>> Totally. It's very easy to say, "Oh,
22:07Juan Roig is so bad." And why? When?
22:10Only when he has already created a
22:12chain of supermarkets that sell what
22:15you want at convenient prices and
22:17offers you the best possible products
22:19at the best possible price. Once he has
22:22already done it,
22:22>> yes. When they start, nobody says
22:24anything. When Mr. Amancio Ortega
22:26started in that shop he had with his
22:28wife, he was just one of the people.
22:31Once he was successful, he's a villain,
22:33he's an evil oppressor. Look how
22:35curious, it's the same person; he was
22:37one of the people and now he's the evil
22:39oppressor. Sure, it's very easy and
22:43that is what envy feeds on, right?
22:47Saying, "Wow, look how easy it is,
22:48wealth. Hm, let's distribute it." Of
22:52course, the thing is that wealth is
22:53either created or destroyed. Wealth is
22:55not a cake that we can just arrive and
22:58divide up.
22:58>> Look, one day I wrote an email to my
23:00newsletter, which many of you here are
23:02on. By the way, if you are listening to
23:03this, magomore.com, newsletter. I write
23:05some emails that are very good, even if
23:06it's wrong for me to say so. So, I
23:08wrote the following; I was very angry
23:10that day because I go to weigh myself
23:12and suddenly
23:13>> I weigh 3 kg more
23:15>> and I automatically think, "This is
23:17some son of a in another part of
23:19the world who has lost 3 kg." Sure. I
23:21mean, hey, it made me so angry. I said,
23:26"This is some disgusting person out
23:28there who is losing weight and I'm
23:30taking it all on."
23:31>> Right.
23:32>> Well, this example, which is absolutely
23:34stupid, I wrote it like that because
23:36what I wanted to demonstrate is that
23:38the economy is not a zero-sum game. I
23:40mean,
23:40>> it never has been.
23:41>> Exactly. A lot of people say, "No, I am
23:43poor because that guy is rich." But
23:45let's see, what are you saying?
23:46>> Right,
23:47>> I mean,
23:48>> but let's do it, what do you think?
23:49Let's do the exercise. Come on,
23:51>> let's go, let's, uh, steal his wealth
23:55from Juan Roig. Hm. The moment you
23:59decide to expropriate his supermarket
24:02from Juan Roig and from all the
24:04partners and shareholders of Mercadona,
24:07etc., how much is Mercadona worth?
24:11Nothing. This is very important. People
24:13think that. Uh, one person is rich, I
24:16am poor because someone else is rich.
24:19If Elon Musk, uh, today you take away
24:21his Tesla shares, which is 100, 95%of
24:23his wealth, uh, how much are those
24:25Tesla shares worth? They aren't worth
24:28anything. This is the important part,
24:31uh, because of course, uh, this
24:33populism comes from selling you that
24:36wealth is created via the labor factor,
24:39which isn't true, right? Because if
24:42wealth were created by the labor factor
24:44, then a gigantic warehouse with tons
24:47of employees that loses money would
24:49create more wealth than that YouTuber,
24:51and it's the other way around, you know
24:54? So, what we have to realize is that
24:57wealth either is created or it is
25:00destroyed. That is to say, you don't
25:02have the capacity to say, "We have
25:04reached this much wealth, and now let's
25:06distribute it." The moment you are
25:08there, you start to destroy it, uh, you
25:10start to destroy it, and it's very
25:12evident. Go expropriate Mr. Roig's
25:15supermarket. Hahaha, that's really
25:17going to work. I'm hearing now with all
25:20this housing issue that we'll get into
25:22now,
25:23>> that we have to take apartments away
25:24from apartment owners. And the other
25:26day I called YouTube, very pissed off,
25:29>> very pissed off, and I got Mr. YouTube,
25:31he picked up the phone, let's say, look
25:34Mr. YouTube, I'm starting a podcast, I
25:37don't hit 100,000, it takes a lot of
25:39effort, and this bastard Jordi Wild has
25:42six-something million.
25:44>> Right,
25:44>> let's expropriate Jordi Wild's
25:46followers. I'm already
25:47>> because it seems very wrong to me that
25:49there are a ton of little YouTubers and
25:51that this guy has all those followers.
25:53We should distribute those followers
25:55among all the little ones. Doesn't what
25:57I just said seem stupid to you?
25:58>> Well, why do we think the same thing
26:00when talking about the economy?
26:01>> I'm going to tell you why. Because they
26:02start with the, with the concept. They
26:04tell you, "No, Daniel, what you are
26:06saying are exaggerations, you and More,
26:09because housing is a right and rights
26:13are paid for." Okay. Fine. First, just
26:17because you have a right to housing
26:19doesn't mean you have a right to
26:20someone else's housing. Hm. It's
26:24important to understand that having a
26:27right to housing doesn't mean you have
26:29the right to own a home, without any
26:32responsibility, and by taking it from
26:34others. Furthermore, just because you
26:40have a right to housing doesn't mean
26:42that other people's homes are things
26:45for the State to decide what to do with
26:48. Why? For a simple reason. Anyone can
26:51understand it. When you decide, "Come
26:56on, let's expropriate houses from
26:57people who have them," have you noticed
27:00? Have you noticed why politicians say
27:03let's expropriate houses from those who
27:05have more than three apartments? Hm.
27:08Have you looked at the average number
27:10of properties that politicians have?
27:12Three. Wow, what a coincidence, eh?
27:16Have you seen it? You know? This is
27:18like
27:18>> It's the communist joke.
27:19>> It's the communist joke. Don't you know
27:21the communist joke? Communist. If you
27:23had two boats, what would you do? He
27:25says, "Well, one for the party." And if
27:26you had two houses? He says, "One for
27:28the party.""And if you had two
27:29motorcycles," One for the party. And if
27:31you had two bikes, he says, "Oh, no,
27:33not bikes." And he says, "Well, I
27:34actually have two bikes." Sure, sure,
27:36it's very easy, it's—but think about
27:38it for a moment. Where is the catch?
27:41Okay, the catch is the following. They
27:43tell you, "Man, no, Daniel, we're only
27:45going to expropriate from those who
27:46have more than three houses, okay?"
27:48Agreed? Number one, he who divides the
27:51spoils gets the best part. That doesn't
27:53mean you have more access to housing;
27:56it just means the political circle that
27:59introduces repression and theft
28:02benefits from that theft, nothing more.
28:05Uh, anyone can understand it, look at
28:07the Soviet Union. They would
28:08expropriate these things, and those in
28:10the party would keep them. Uh, that
28:12concept of equality does not exist.
28:15Number two. Hm. What happens when you
28:19want to buy a house or you want to find
28:22an opportunity for that, well, that
28:24opportunity disappears as well? Why?
28:28Because the moment you legitimize
28:30stealing from a person because they
28:33have wealth acquired after many years,
28:35much saving, and a lot of effort, you
28:38are legitimizing them stealing from you
28:40. Sure, they tell you, "Man, no, Daniel
28:45, man, no.""We are only going to rob
28:48the multi-property owners and the very
28:50rich." With that, you are literally
28:55opening the door for them to rob you,
28:57and furthermore, it is to rob you. This
28:59is the key. You have to understand that
29:02the objective of that political power
29:04is not for you to have greater access
29:06to housing or anything else, but rather
29:08what it seeks is control. What it seeks
29:11is for you to have no possibility of
29:13accessing housing unless you ask them
29:16for it on your knees. All right? So, if
29:20we fall into the trap of saying: "Let's
29:22take his wealth from Mr."-sorry to Mr.
29:24R, whom we are using as an example all
29:26the time, but it is very visual, among
29:28other things, because, since there
29:30aren't many rich people in Spain,
29:32populists always talk about three
29:34people, right? About Amancio Ortega,
29:37about Mr. Roig, and another one. Fine,
29:39but the moment you expropriate that
29:41supermarket from him, what happens to
29:44the rest of the supermarkets?
29:46>> That they totally pass, of course.
29:48>> Why should I open if they are going to
29:49expropriate me?
29:50>> Exactly.
29:51>> And you say, "Why should I invest? Why
29:54should I carry out an action to
29:55maintain fresh, good quality products
29:57at the best possible price when they
29:59are going to expropriate me?" It
30:01doesn't even occur to me to invest, and
30:03as soon as I can, I'm leaving. "All
30:05right? Hm. And what happens to small
30:08businesses? What happens to small
30:11businesses is that they immediately see
30:13how all access to the distribution
30:15chain that allowed them to access
30:18relatively affordable goods disappears
30:20because the supermarkets that managed
30:22that entire distribution chain have
30:25disappeared. Therefore, it also harms
30:28small businesses. And then they tell
30:32you," Well, let all businesses be
30:34public. "Public sectors do not belong
30:37to the public, they do not belong to
30:40the people, they belong to the
30:41politicians. It is incredible that a
30:46society that correctly blames
30:47politicians for managing poorly, hm,
30:52has the nerve to think that the same
30:56politicians who manage poorly are going
31:00to manage well what are, uh, sectors,
31:03products, and relatively scarce goods.
31:07I mean, it's absolutely, well, that's
31:10madness,
31:11>> it's an entelechy. No, no, it's not an
31:13entelechy. An entelechy is something
31:16that is a utopia, that is an
31:19unrealizable idea. No, no, no, no. This
31:22is a very concrete reality. It is a
31:25very concrete reality that we Spaniards
31:28know. That we Spaniards know. What was
31:30happening in Spain back when there were
31:33state-run supermarkets? Hm. There were
31:36these state-run supermarkets. I lived
31:37through that. I’m of a certain age,
31:39even if it doesn't look like it. Hm. Eh
31:40, there were public supermarkets that
31:43belonged to the INI, uh, to the INI.
31:45Have you noticed? On the other hand,
31:48this new socialism copies everything
31:49from right-wing dictatorships, right?
31:52Okay. Well, from Francoism, everything.
31:54Okay. Well, public supermarket, cheaper
31:58prices. Number one, who were the ones
32:00that had access to that public
32:02supermarket? The inner circle of the
32:06politicians. Hm. Okay. Number two, what
32:10was the inflation like back then? Hm.
32:13Inflation back then was 14, 20 percent.
32:16Who’s around my age here? A few of
32:18you. They gave me my first mortgage at
32:2013.8 percent.
32:23>> At 17, right? What inflation did we
32:25have, ma'am? 19. That’s why they gave
32:28it to you at 17, and you look like you
32:30have the financial capacity. Therefore,
32:33uh, they gave it to you. Sure, that’s
32:35why they gave it at 17. Otherwise, they
32:37would’ve given it at 25 like so many
32:39others, or you wouldn’t get credit at
32:40all. That’s another thing people
32:42don’t understand, you know? So, the
32:45moment you introduce hatred and envy
32:48toward existing wealth, what you are
32:51doing immediately is triggering a chain
32:55reaction of destruction of future
32:58wealth. Not just by expropriating. Also
33:01, the math just doesn't work; we were
33:03saying 2 + 2 doesn’t equal 22. In
33:06Spain, there’s a housing shortage of
33:08750,000 homes.
33:09>> Right, I wanted to ask you about
33:11everything going on with this woman who
33:13was expropriated.
33:14>> First of all, this woman wasn't
33:15expropriated.
33:16>> Right,
33:16>> right. This is important, eh?
33:18>> Right. I want us to talk about this
33:20topic and the housing issue because
33:22people are fired up. Right now, as
33:23we’re recording this, there are
33:25people camped out in Sol.
33:26>> Yes. The privileged ones, because none
33:28of them work. Clearly, right?
33:38>> So,
33:38>> have you noticed that when they
33:40interview them, they all sound like
33:43they’re talking to Zapatero?
33:46>> So, what exactly happened with that
33:49woman? Why is housing so expensive? Why
33:52, when Sánchez came to government 8
33:54years ago, did he say he would fix it,
33:56and it has risen by an enormous
33:57percentage in both sales and rent? I
34:00mean, let's break that down a little
34:01bit, and this is where I want you to
34:03step in.
34:04>> Because I have a friend who has been
34:05renting an apartment. I want you to
34:07tell us about this too.
34:08>> Okay,
34:09>> let's start, let's start by
34:11understanding several factors.
34:14>> Uh, one thing is empathy for an elderly
34:16person because they are in an
34:18apparently vulnerable situation. Hmm.
34:22>> Absolutely. And another thing is
34:24defending a privilege and an injustice.
34:28Hmm. Right. This, uh, lady inherited a
34:33rental contract under an old rent
34:36system from the Franco era that, uh,
34:39was granted where she lived. It was
34:44only received by high-ranking officials
34:46of the Franco regime. In the Retiro
34:50area, if you had an old rent contract,
34:52you weren't a poor worker, you were a
34:55high-ranking official of the regime.
34:58>> And they forced the owner of that
34:59apartment to rent it at that rate,
35:00>> and so the old rent system was put into
35:02place. Anyone who has lived in any
35:05Spanish city knows what happened to all
35:08the old rent buildings during the 50s,
35:1160s, 70s, and 80s. What happened? They
35:15were completely abandoned. One
35:18remembers when walking through the
35:21center, through Chueca, in Madrid, or
35:24whole neighborhoods in Barcelona that
35:27were…Of course, the owners couldn't,
35:30uh, offset the risk of maintaining the
35:32buildings and apartments, nor the
35:35monetary inflation, because, of course,
35:38it's easy to keep an apartment at €
35:41500 while inflation, uh, is rising by
35:4427%, because neither property tax nor
35:48other taxes are being lowered, but
35:50quite the opposite, and so on. So, the
35:54first thing is to understand that we
35:57are not talking about an unprotected
35:59person, but a privileged person who had
36:01a privileged contract, which she
36:03inherited from her parents and which,
36:06furthermore, had already expired.
36:09Therefore, A, it is not her house, B,
36:12it wasn't her contract either, because
36:15her contract had ended and it had been
36:18recognized as expired by the National
36:21Court and the Supreme Court. Hmm.
36:25Therefore, what has happened is a very
36:27surprising thing. If Ms. Marie Carmen
36:32had gone on vacation and squatters had
36:35occupied her house during the summer,
36:38today those at Puerta del Sol would be
36:41clamoring in favor of those who
36:43occupied her house instead of in her
36:46favor. What are you doing? What you are
36:50doing is, for one, defending the entry
36:53of systems of privilege based on
36:56political affiliation, the old rent
36:59contract. Two, the inheritance makes it
37:03impossible for that contract to be
37:06adjusted in a way that is in line with
37:09market prices. Third, you are creating
37:13an idea among people that the problem
37:16of what has happened to this poor lady
37:19is a problem of the evil market, when
37:22it is a problem of evil statism, the
37:25evidence of a privilege through
37:27political affiliation. Okay. So, once
37:32we understand that, you understand why
37:34those in the Puerta del Sol, who work
37:37less than the Three Wise Men, who work
37:39once a year and that's a lie, you know?
37:42Uh, I say that because it seems we have
37:54ruined someone's Christmas surprise. Uh
37:58, but the important thing is to
38:00understand that what is happening is
38:03that with none of the things they claim
38:06to defend does the situation improve
38:09for the tens of thousands of
38:11Maricarmens throughout Spain who are in
38:14a truly vulnerable situation.
38:18>> That is what I want to get to.
38:19>> Why? Because if I, in order to defend
38:23your privilege, introduce legal
38:25insecurity, introduce political
38:28randomness in the decision of who is in
38:31an apartment and at what price, etc.,
38:33what do I do immediately? Also, what I
38:38do is that if you are a person today,
38:40today while we are speaking, a
38:42vulnerable person, a person with
38:44difficulties, a person with children,
38:47they try to rent an apartment and they
38:49cannot rent it.
38:51>> And why can't they rent it?
38:52>> Come here, come here, let us tell you
38:54about this.
38:54>> Ah, we have an example.
38:58>> Let's go.
38:58>> Let's see, Daniel. Uh, I didn't really
39:01consider myself a vulnerable person, I
39:03mean, I'm a worker, I'm still working.
39:05I come from a family, by the way, with
39:07quite a lot of money. I myself, at a
39:10specific moment like this, now that I
39:11have divorced, had money and a healthy
39:13child. I would never have considered
39:15myself vulnerable. However, with my
39:18divorce, I suddenly had to face the
39:20reality of life. Of course, I thought,
39:23I'll get divorced, I have money, I have
39:25a job, life is going well for me, I
39:27have family, how great, I'll rent a
39:29house. I'll move forward. Well, the
39:32first house I went to see, I already
39:33saw that it was a casting call; I'll
39:35tell you that I worked at Netflix and
39:37it was less difficult to get a role on
39:39Netflix than a house in my town. And I
39:42started to see that it was impossible,
39:43and I asked," But what is the problem?
39:45"Why, why don't they pick me? I mean,
39:47it's like I'm auditioning all over
39:48again. And it turns out that I'm a
39:50woman,
39:52>> that's bad today, I have a minor child,
39:54that's also very bad, and on top of
39:56that, I'm self-employed. Meaning, if
39:58you are currently someone who wants to
40:00fight, wants to work, and wanted to get
40:02a divorce because you believe in a
40:03better life
40:04>> and you have a human cub, go under a
40:07bridge.
40:08>> Right. So, literally, well, luckily, my
40:11aunt took me in because I became
40:13vulnerable, I mean, I had no house, she
40:15took me in, she was wonderful, and now
40:17I've managed to rent in good faith
40:19because a lady whose husband is
40:21self-employed and who has a minor child
40:23,
40:25>> I, I mean, through a chat I found that
40:27person, she never put the house in an
40:30agency, and I had to provide a
40:32guarantee
40:33>> of a lot of money. Of course,
40:36>> even so, I sent her screenshots of my
40:38bank account, which believe me, right
40:39now is far from being poor. Look, I
40:42have everything. I mean, what more do
40:43you want from me? I mean, what do you
40:44need? To be at ease. because you could
40:47become an untouchable.
40:50>> Consider the profound injustice of this
40:52so-called social justice in an open
40:54market environment as it existed before
40:57this housing law, because it wasn't a
40:59completely open market either, but at
41:02least it was somewhat more, let's say,
41:04dynamic. Anyone with your profile would
41:08say," This is the person I want to rent
41:10my apartment to. "Why do I want to rent
41:12my apartment to her? Why? Because she
41:15is a person of the comfortable middle
41:17class, with a good salary, who is also
41:18a mother, therefore a responsible
41:20person, who is also a woman, therefore
41:22a person who will take care of my house
41:23quite well, and so on. You would be the
41:26ideal person. However, the legislation
41:31makes you a vulnerable person and also
41:34a risk for the one who wants to rent to
41:37you. Because the legislation has
41:42established that if tomorrow you
41:44decided to demolish the apartment and
41:47also not pay, well, you have no
41:49responsibility. The moment you have
41:54eliminated the factors that made you
41:56the ideal candidate to rent a house,
41:59what they immediately do is take those
42:01they pretend to protect and expel them
42:04from the market. The case you're
42:08telling me about, I've lived it with a
42:10lot of people who tell me," Hey, this
42:12person who works in our house is a
42:14responsible person, they have a salary,
42:16they're registered, and so on and so
42:18forth, yeah. "But the law has decided
42:23that we're going to turn all drivers
42:27into potential, preventive criminals.
42:33Just imagine you make a traffic law
42:36where you do the following, okay? Hm.
42:41To the person who gets into a huge
42:44crash because they're drunk and because
42:47they destroy public property, etcetera,
42:51and this and that, you don't give them
42:54any kind of fine or any kind of problem
42:57. Okay? What happens immediately after
43:00that legislative decision with your car
43:03insurance?
43:04>> Well, it goes,
43:05>> it skyrockets. Exactly.
43:06>> That is what they have done. I mean,
43:09these people say they care about the
43:11poor, the disadvantaged, and the
43:13vulnerable, but it's false. What they
43:17want is to create poor, disadvantaged,
43:19and vulnerable people to present
43:21themselves as the solution. Hm. They,
43:23we, look, this is very important for
43:25everyone watching us. None of those
43:28proposing these laws are stupid, and
43:30none of them are incompetent. What they
43:33are are people who know perfectly well
43:36that by doing that, the ones who will
43:38never have a problem renting an
43:40apartment are them. Why? Because they
43:42are politicians. Okay? Man, if I have
43:44an apartment and I have to rent it out
43:46and someone comes to me and says," No,
43:47I'm a senator or a congressman. "No way
43:50, I'm not renting it to you. Look how
43:54curious that is. That's the first thing
43:56; they don't suffer the consequences of
43:58their actions. Two, they are all
44:01property owners or multi-property
44:03owners and they're introducing measures
44:06they know are bad for owners, but they
44:08know they have the power of violence.
44:12They can, from political power, if
44:14their house is occupied, all the
44:16security forces show up immediately and
44:19kick the squatter out. If your house is
44:22occupied, no.
44:23>> Do you want me to tell you one? Stick
44:25to the occupation part.
44:26>> I know Dani Desocupa,
44:28>> and he tells me the following story.
44:30One day, they call him from a
44:31neighborhood in Barcelona and they say,
44:33" Come clear out a house and so on. "
44:35And then he says," Hey, listen, there
44:37are a lot of CUP demonstrations in that
44:39neighborhood. "And the guy tells him,
44:41he called him and said," Don't worry,
44:42I'm a COP deputy. "I mean, they had
44:44occupied his property.
44:45>> Right.
44:45>> And so Dani naturally told him no, that
44:47he wouldn't evict him under any
44:49circumstances.
44:49>> Exactly. Think for a moment about the
44:52huge villa of Irene Montero and Pablo
44:54Iglesias.
44:55>> My neighbor.
44:56>> Did they buy a villa?
44:57>> No.
44:58>> Parque Lagos. Very, I mean, very nice.
45:00>> But they didn't live in Vallecas,
45:01>> did they? Yes, they did. Of course,
45:05it's more pleasant when you have kids,
45:07instead of having them in an apartment,
45:09to have a villa with its pool, its
45:11guest house, its police officers at the
45:13little door, for them...
45:15>> But think, think for a moment.
45:17>> Going to the Navata school to ask for
45:19specific changes that benefit them
45:20because we're going to use public
45:21services to look good, but they're
45:23going to do what we say in the public
45:24sector. This is very important to
45:27understand. Notice how quickly, when
45:30some people showed up—not even to
45:33occupy their house, but just to disturb
45:35the peace of their villa—eh, the full
45:38power of the law immediately appeared
45:41to eliminate it, but not for you, or
45:43for me, or for those people we see
45:45every day on television who, eh, in
45:48good faith, thought that this housing
45:50law and these housing laws were going
45:53to help them. Look, if I am a
45:57politician, I can make a law saying
46:00whatever I want. I can make a law
46:02saying that today it should stop, that
46:03it shouldn't rain today. Hm. Okay. So,
46:08when that law obviously fails, eh, who
46:10do I blame? I blame the market. It's
46:13because of the market that it rained.
46:15So, I have to make another law that
46:17says, and besides, what is it that we
46:20have to understand? There are no fools
46:23here. Hm. The goal of these people is
46:27not to improve access to housing. The
46:30goal of these people is for scarce and
46:32expensive housing to be the norm. What
46:35for? To create a dependent and
46:38submissive society that also gives them
46:41privilege through political loyalty.
46:44This is the key. The key. But I don't
46:47want to be submissive or dependent.
46:49>> Very well. And of course, you don't
46:50want that. Notice that, uh, in this
46:53country, the most important factor in
46:55the creation of the middle class in
46:58Spain has been the fact that our
47:00grandparents, our parents, our...bought
47:03a house, uh, with a great deal of
47:05effort they paid a mortgage, uh, they
47:08paid an absolutely disproportionate
47:10amount of taxes and, and even so, they
47:13saved and then transferred it to their
47:15children. And that is how the social
47:18ladder has been generated in Spain.
47:21They are not interested in that. Why?
47:23Because a property owner is a person
47:25who is critical because they have
47:27economic freedom. What they want are
47:30dependent and submissive people. And
47:32you will tell me," But, why? I can't
47:34understand it. "I'm going to explain it
47:37to you clearly, because their ultimate
47:40goal, which is control of all means of
47:42production, okay? is above any anecdote
47:46or impact that happens in the short
47:49term. I'm going to give you the example
47:52of Stalin, the Russian dictator. Hm.
47:54Stalin, the Russian dictator, finds
47:57that there is a real aberration in the
48:00Russian economy of the Soviet Union.
48:02Why? Because the economy is planned and
48:06private property is abolished, except
48:09for farmers. It turns out that farmers
48:13own their fields and manage them and
48:16earn money and sell those products and
48:19all that. Stalin says," No, no, no, no,
48:21no. The absolute goal is for private
48:24property not to exist. Therefore, I am
48:26going to collectivize, I am going to
48:28collectivize agriculture. "Uh, that is
48:30to say, all that production and all
48:32those lands belong to the state, that
48:34is to say, to me, not to the not to the
48:37people, but to the politician, and I am
48:39going to redistribute them. Okay?
48:42Millions of people died of hunger.
48:46Millions of people died of hunger in
48:48one of the richest lands in the world.
48:50Millions of people. Did he decide to
48:54change the law or change his way? No.
48:57Why? Because the ultimate goal is
48:59private property, it cannot exist. You
49:04will think, how exaggerated Daniel
49:06Lacalle is, equating what Stalin, a
49:09murderous communist dictator, did with
49:11what these gentlemen are doing? It is
49:15exactly the same thing, but little by
49:17little, which is the nationalization
49:20and expropriation of private property,
49:22uh, without you realizing it. On one
49:25hand, via taxes. You pay more and more
49:28taxes, you pay property tax, you pay
49:29this, you pay that, the other, so and
49:31so, I don't know how much. Taxes, more
49:33and more taxes on taxes, on taxes, on
49:35taxes. Bam, bam, bam.
49:36>> How many taxes have they raised since
49:37they've been in office?
49:39>> More than 100 counted. More than 100
49:42tax hikes, including labor taxes, and
49:44especially the raises that are coming
49:46—I don't know if you know—uh, they
49:49tell you," This government, this is
49:51great. "" This government has raised
49:53the minimum wage. "" We are very
49:55generous. "Hm." Has raised the minimum
49:58wage. "The minimum wage is the cheapest
50:01trick in history to raise taxes on all
50:04of you. Since I raise the minimum wage,
50:08which affects a very small percentage
50:10of workers, it raises the minimum
50:12contribution bases for all of you, you
50:15understand? And so you pay much more in
50:18taxes and they present themselves as
50:20the good guys. All right.
50:22>> You're giving me such a good vibe with
50:24this annoyance because it's just that
50:26>> now, what is it that you have?
50:28>> You're putting me in a bad mood.
50:29>> A person like you.
50:31>> Don't buy Daniel Lacalle's book.
50:34>> But how can you live happily knowing
50:36everything? Because I, in my ignorance,
50:38but how can you live here and not want
50:40to burn down Congress, for example?
50:42>> The reason, right? First, I don't want
50:44to burn down Congress because a
50:46percentage, in fact, the majority, if
50:48it weren't for the backroom deals, the
50:50majority of Congress doesn't think like
50:52those who want to expropriate
50:53everything from you and want to, uh,
50:55steal for later; because these people,
50:57who say they are against private
50:59property, aren't against private
51:01property—they are in favor of their
51:02own and want yours, you know? It's like
51:06my grandmother, they had a separation
51:07of assets. What my grandmother
51:08inherited, she kept for herself, and
51:09what my grandfather had was for both of
51:10them. Socialism is always" what's yours
51:14is everyone's, and what's mine is mine.
51:16"Uh, but the important thing, in any
51:18case, is to understand why
51:20>> a socialist is someone who has little,
51:23>> huh? Who has little and opens the box
51:27and says," Wow, look what it produced.
51:30"" Uh,
51:32>> let's keep going, let's keep going. I
51:33was thinking about the squatting issue.
51:36For example, if you know that they can
51:38squat in your house and, furthermore,
51:40once they squat in your house—I tell
51:41this to my foreign friends and they
51:43just can't believe it. I mean, nobody
51:45understands how a civilized country can
51:47have a squatting issue,
51:48>> and nobody understands why they haven't
51:49gotten rid of it, and what they freak
51:51out about most is that if they squat in
51:52your place, you have to pay the
51:53electricity and water. That is
51:54>> this is really mind-blowing,
51:56>> much more mind-blowing.
51:57>> So, obviously, uh, they pass this
51:58housing law that does nothing about
52:00squatters, so you have an apartment
52:01you're going to rent out. Uh, I think,
52:04correct me if I'm wrong, that 8%is in
52:06the hands of the famous vulture funds.
52:09These are facts about no vulture funds,
52:10no. The only thing here is the vulture
52:12government. Let's see if that's not it,
52:13eh.
52:15>> Let's see, this, do you think about
52:24what we were saying before regarding
52:27the silly and evil businessman, right?
52:30Uh, what they try to sell you is an
52:31image of an investment fund that is
52:33silly and evil, right? Uh, on one hand
52:35they're silly because they want to buy
52:37high and two they don't want to sell
52:39nor do they want to rent. This is the
52:41final straw, right? But the most
52:43important thing about all of that is
52:45that what they call vulture funds are
52:48the savings of pensioners, of, of
52:50minority investors, et cetera, et
52:52cetera. They aren't funds, and besides,
52:55those that they call vulture funds are
52:58later the ones they cheer for because
53:00they are the ones who buy our debt. Hm.
53:04The debt that, if those funds didn't
53:06buy it, this country would be bankrupt.
53:08Agreed? Good. That. So, the first thing
53:11they had to do is recognize that the
53:13only vulture we have here is a
53:15government that has eaten, in taxes and
53:18inflation, all the salary increases of
53:20Spaniards since the year 2018; that, by
53:23implementing measures that go against
53:25supply, what they have done is that,
53:27besides importing poor people from
53:29abroad to dope the GDP, what they have
53:32done is make a much bigger problem, uh,
53:34because of course, we were talking
53:36again: two plus two don't add up to 22.
53:40Why have you had to do a casting like
53:42on Netflix to rent an apartment? If in
53:46a country you are building new finished
53:50housing, it doesn't reach 130,000 a
53:53year and the number of households
53:56increases by 250,000, the strange thing
53:59is that it hasn't been even worse. For
54:04example, all these people tell you, "No
54:06, but this was done in Berlin." In
54:08Berlin, as soon as they implemented
54:11rent control, the rental supply dropped
54:14by 60%. There's even a German horror
54:17movie, uh, that isn't really a horror
54:20movie because it's based on a true
54:22event, uh, of a person who tries to
54:24rent an apartment and sees the lines
54:26and lines and lines and lines of people
54:29trying to rent that apartment. Agreed?
54:34The moment you show up—we were
54:35talking earlier about when they show up
54:37—the politician who thinks they are
54:38going to control prices is treated like
54:40a god. What you are doing immediately
54:43is harming the very people you claim to
54:45protect. It turns out that you, who are
54:49the ideal candidate to rent an
54:50apartment, become the most difficult
54:52person to rent to, when it should be
54:54the opposite. It turns out that those
54:59they say they will protect, they don't
55:01protect at all because they don't even
55:03have access to housing, and on top of
55:06that, you pass laws that make it
55:08practically impossible to build. If you
55:12do get a construction permit, this very
55:15afternoon the director of a media
55:18company told me it took them 20 years
55:20to get the permit. So, you stifle
55:24supply; there are fewer and fewer
55:26chairs available. Hm,
55:28>> I mean, 300,000 new people come in
55:29every year, more or less, right?
55:31>> More or less.
55:32>> And new houses are built each year,
55:34>> about 130,000, right? They arrive,
55:36>> 130,000; meaning there are fewer houses
55:37each time.
55:37>> Besides, of those 130,000, many of them
55:40aren't even directly habitable or
55:43aren't in the places where there is
55:45demand, right? Because, what do these
55:47people do? These people live on the
55:49illusion of the fallacy of
55:50redistribution. They say to you, "Oh,
55:53Daniel, please. What Mr. Lacalle is
55:54saying is lies because in Spain there
55:56are a million empty houses and what
55:58needs to be done is to expropriate them
56:00." But where are those houses, you
56:02absolute fool? Uh, that million houses
56:05they say are empty, they aren't in
56:07Madrid, they aren't in Barcelona; in
56:09fact, they aren't even houses, they are
56:12uninhabitable properties in godforsaken
56:14towns, you know? So, of course, they
56:18make you think that the problem is
56:20something that you—also, and the
56:22reason it doesn't work—is that the
56:24problem is something you don't see
56:26anywhere; the problem is that around
56:28your mother's and father's house there
56:30are a bunch of stupid and mean people
56:32who don't want to rent you a house, and
56:35that is not true. And that is not true.
56:37What they are doing, what they are
56:39doing with policies wrongly called "
56:41good-hearted," because they are
56:42actually mean-spirited, eh? And the
56:44road to hell is paved with good
56:45intentions. What they are doing, and
56:48they know it too—this is the most
56:50important part—is choking off supply
56:52and turning what was a concern in 2018,
56:54but not a problem, into a crisis, which
56:57is what they have done.
57:00>> But then, um, the four of these, uh,
57:02have you seen—have you seen the song?
57:06It’s great, isn’t it? We’ve all
57:08come together. You haven't seen that,
57:11you haven't.
57:12>> Well, I have seen children's animations
57:15made by kids with cognitive
57:17difficulties,
57:18>> uh,
57:19>> possibly with more talent.
57:20>> Man, no, what do you mean, possibly?
57:23>> Very embarrassing. A lady repeating
57:25some absurd phrases like a prayer, "
57:27they are robbing us." And everyone
57:30repeating it as if it were truly a
57:31madhouse.
57:32>> Very sad, truly.
57:34>> But look at how in that song, or, well,
57:37to call it something, in that
57:39aberration of notes joined in unison,
57:42it says they want to take our houses
57:45away,
57:47>> that they want to steal them, it says.
57:48They want to steal them. Let’s see.
57:50Ah, it’s not your house. They don't
57:51want to steal anything from you. The
57:52one who wants to steal is you. What you
57:54want to do is establish theft by
57:56political adhesion. But the important
58:00thing in any case is that all of us who
58:04truly want you to have more access to
58:07housing, for housing prices to, uh,
58:10improve, okay? The only way to do that
58:13when you have a country where the
58:14population increases by 250,000 is to
58:16build more houses and for those houses
58:18to be built more cheaply, faster, and
58:20more efficiently. And then they tell
58:23you, "No, because we already had a real
58:25estate bubble." But wait a minute, I
58:29don’t get it. So, you don’t want
58:31house prices to go down, eh? I mean,
58:34does it bother you that house prices
58:35would go down? Because as far as I know
58:38, a lot of people from my generation
58:39bought a house in 2009 precisely
58:41because they started to drop. And so
58:43what? You know? I mean, it’s that
58:46they want prices not to fall. Hm.
58:50Because they want inflation to rise to
58:52continue disguising the gross domestic
58:54product, disguising debt ratios,
58:55disguising data, uh, regarding GDP,
58:57because I don’t know if you know,
58:59okay? But the data given, uh, that is
59:03given officially as debt-to-GDP, right?
59:06Agreed. Well, debt increases and the
59:09denominator increases by raising public
59:11spending and inflation. And therefore,
59:14they are robbing you through the
59:15numerator and the denominator. What do
59:17you make of all this?
59:17>> It’s all so upsetting, Daniel. So,
59:20why am I an optimist? Why am I an
59:22optimist? Because the vast majority of
59:26Spaniards don't think like the
59:27privileged few at the Puerta del Sol,
59:30because the vast majority of Spaniards
59:32don't believe the propaganda and
59:34demagoguery of these multi-property
59:36owners and trust-fund communists who
59:38gather because it gives them, uh, a
59:41sense of moral superiority, for no
59:43other reason. Agreed? It’s very
59:45comfortable. It’s very comfortable.
59:46You, you and I know them. It’s very
59:49comfortable when you’re a
59:50multi-millionaire and you defend those
59:52policies. Why? A, because they don’t
59:55affect you, B, because they give you a
59:56sense of moral superiority. Hm. And you
1:00:00can forget Marie Carmen’s name and
1:00:01get it wrong and you still come out
1:00:03looking fine. What is what’s
1:00:06important? The vast majority of people
1:00:08don’t think like that. Winston
1:00:10Churchill used to say that in a
1:00:12wonderful field of cows, the ones
1:00:14making noise are the crickets. What we
1:00:17need to stop doing in Spain in
1:00:19particular, but in Europe in general,
1:00:21is stop paying attention to the
1:00:22crickets, who are the ones ruining
1:00:24everything. They make a lot of noise,
1:00:27they are very annoying, uh h uh and
1:00:29they present themselves with magical
1:00:32solutions and all that. And what you
1:00:34have to do is make sure the majority
1:00:37regains control of their lives. And
1:00:39that can be done, and that is why we
1:00:41have a solution. Agreed? The reason we
1:00:44have a solution is because even though
1:00:46these lowlifes spend all day insulting
1:00:49others,
1:00:49>> you start getting worked up little by
1:00:50little in the
1:00:52>> They’re going.
1:00:53>> I see, you all see that you came in
1:00:55very reserved.
1:00:55>> Getting a bit warm in here, huh? But
1:01:01look at why it’s important.
1:01:04>> But I see them, I mean, let’s see,
1:01:05yesterday Yolanda Díaz came out spea,
1:01:07>> Man, that’s great.
1:01:09>> And she finished, she basically
1:01:10finished by saying, and I understood it
1:01:12quite well because I analyzed it, that
1:01:14when they get into government, they are
1:01:15going to solve the problem of hou.
1:01:17>> That’s it. In fact, Yolanda Díaz
1:01:18said something, she said something that
1:01:19,
1:01:20>> I mean, she went on strike against
1:01:21herself, which is something quite
1:01:22shocking,
1:01:22>> right? No, she said something wonderful
1:01:24, which is if you have to fight against
1:01:26the government, you will fight against
1:01:27the government, the vice president of
1:01:29the government. Eh, you know? You can
1:01:33imagine, right? But why is this?
1:01:37>> But the thing is that lady, you’ll
1:01:38have to forgive me, I’ve worked in
1:01:39personnel selection for many years,
1:01:40many. And never, ever could a person
1:01:43without English, for example, here at
1:01:45Avante, work at reception because there
1:01:47are American investors. So, for a
1:01:50person to apply for a job that requires
1:01:52English proficiency without knowing
1:01:54English, but having the nerve knowing
1:01:56that through their connections—this
1:01:59is just pure personnel selection, plain
1:02:01and simple. I mean, a 23-year-old girl
1:02:04who doesn't know English cannot earn
1:02:06€ 1,200 because she doesn't know
1:02:08English. And for a woman to just
1:02:10>> because she got there by some miracle
1:02:12she may have performed, apply and have
1:02:14the nerve to apply for a position that
1:02:17is in English without understanding
1:02:18anything. International Labour
1:02:20Organization.
1:02:20>> But isn't that just a really pathetic
1:02:22thing? Yeah.
1:02:23>> No, it doesn't seem pathetic to me
1:02:24because when you see what the
1:02:25International Labour Organization is,
1:02:26it doesn't surprise you. Of course.
1:02:28Clear English. I mean, it's fine if
1:02:29it's a mess,
1:02:30>> right? But it’s better that they
1:02:31don't understand each other, because
1:02:32that's—sure, it's better that they
1:02:33don't understand each other. Of course,
1:02:34you have to think about what the
1:02:35International Labour Organization is.
1:02:37The International Labour Organization
1:02:40is an entity that claims to defend the
1:02:43interests of workers, and when you have
1:02:46governments that enslave workers to
1:02:49make their leaders rich, like Cuba, and
1:02:52brutally impoverish their citizens by
1:02:55destroying the currency's purchasing
1:02:58power, they say nothing. You understand
1:03:03? Therefore, well, that's just great,
1:03:05right? But, but the most important
1:03:07thing isn't that. The most—I mean,
1:03:10the most important thing isn't the
1:03:13inconsistency of Yolanda Díaz or any
1:03:17politician of that type. Uh, the most
1:03:20important thing is to understand that
1:03:23none of them are stupid, because people
1:03:26really think that, oh, it's just that
1:03:29they don't know, right? It happens to
1:03:31me with many people. The other day I
1:03:35was with a group of businessmen from a
1:03:36sector and they said, "We had a very
1:03:38constructive meeting with Yolanda Díaz
1:03:40and I think she understood our proposal
1:03:42.""Are you stupid?" No, no, but not
1:03:46because she didn't understand it, not
1:03:47because she is stupid, which she isn't,
1:03:49even if she seems so—and the truth is
1:03:50she fights to make sure she doesn't.
1:03:55But because her goal is not progress,
1:03:58but control. And it has never been
1:04:02progress. That is why they are against
1:04:06business growth, that is why they are
1:04:08against technology, that is why they
1:04:11are against open and free trade. That
1:04:15is why they are against the
1:04:18democratization of credit, because this
1:04:20person here and I, when we were granted
1:04:23our first mortgage—me a little later,
1:04:26and him a bit later—the vast majority
1:04:29of Spaniards had no access to credit at
1:04:32all. Of course, they come along when a
1:04:37system is already in place where
1:04:39Spaniards happen to have access to a
1:04:41credit card, or in fact, access to a
1:04:43phone that is a credit card in itself,
1:04:45you know? Uh, et cetera. They, they
1:04:49don't think; they try to convince you
1:04:51of the following two things. One, that
1:04:54from the level you are at now, whether
1:04:56you are happy or unhappy with it, you
1:04:58won't get worse; they've already
1:05:00deceived you. Hm. Agreed? As we have
1:05:03seen with housing, with the "Solo sí
1:05:05es sí" law, and with all those laws
1:05:06supposedly meant as a social shield.
1:05:09Just look, just look. Furthermore, even
1:05:11if only based on management experience,
1:05:15as you just said, if you have spent
1:05:17over half a trillion euros on
1:05:20increasing debt, increasing public
1:05:23spending, and social policies, and
1:05:25Spain's population at risk of poverty
1:05:28was at 26%and is now at 25.7%—that is
1:05:32to say, the same. You are a total
1:05:35failure. The only thing missing was to
1:05:37give you control of companies or
1:05:39control of strategic sectors.
1:05:41>> But I think, forgive me for correcting
1:05:43you Daniel, but I think you are
1:05:45mistaken because all that debt has gone
1:05:47to public services. Trains right now
1:05:49are running without delays, healthcare
1:05:51has no lines,
1:05:52>> uh, the borders are super well-defended
1:05:54.
1:05:55>> Schools are doing great in the PISA
1:05:57report. I mean,
1:05:58>> the PISA report is just doing, well.
1:05:59>> I believe all of that has gone to, to
1:06:01services. The other thing we have to
1:06:04realize when
1:06:05>> that is not, I mean,
1:06:07>> when we hear this about these people
1:06:08who present themselves as defenders of
1:06:10the public, they aren't defenders of
1:06:12the public; they are defenders of the
1:06:13political, which is very different.
1:06:16>> But Sánchez's daughters go to a
1:06:18private university, private,
1:06:20>> not just private, but super-private.
1:06:22Come on. Uh, uh, no, come on,
1:06:24>> but he has attacked private
1:06:26universities,
1:06:26>> man. Of course,
1:06:27>> except his own. Man, of course, but you
1:06:30, this, this, uh there was a
1:06:33>> But since this is so obvious, does it
1:06:34really need to be explained?
1:06:36>> Well yes, it does need to be explained.
1:06:38Why? Because of what we were talking
1:06:39about earlier regarding the cows and
1:06:41the crickets, right? Nowadays, in media
1:06:44debates, without realizing it, you are
1:06:47constantly receiving input from the
1:06:50most radical side of the left that
1:06:53wasn't even considered before. I mean,
1:06:57people on the left in the 80s see the
1:07:00crazy things these gentlemen are saying
1:07:02, including their stance on immigration
1:07:05. I remember when union leaders wrote
1:07:09articles saying that illegal
1:07:11immigration is a ploy by the elites to
1:07:13impoverish workers and lower wages, and
1:07:16now there's illegal immigration
1:07:18everywhere. My late father used to say
1:07:22that, and he was absolutely right. The
1:07:26global left stopped defending the
1:07:29interests of the working class,
1:07:32laborers, farmers, ranchers, and those
1:07:35in industry a long time ago. The global
1:07:40left has long been dedicated
1:07:42exclusively to defending the interests
1:07:46of billionaires—not just the wealthy,
1:07:49not Mr. R., with all due respect to his
1:07:52vast fortune, but those who, from their
1:07:55moral superiority, know exactly what
1:07:58the world needs, like Stalin with
1:08:01agriculture; they know exactly what the
1:08:06world needs and use you as a useful
1:08:09idiot to control the means of
1:08:11production. Do you know why? Because A,
1:08:15they don't suffer from it, and B, they
1:08:19have a project for a radical change in
1:08:22the structure of the economy and of the
1:08:25citizens. And of course, you might tell
1:08:29me, well, Elon Musk is a billionaire
1:08:31and he does the opposite. Sure, sure.
1:08:34Musk, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg,
1:08:36maybe one or two others you could name,
1:08:38they think differently, but we aren't
1:08:40talking about them. We're talking about
1:08:43those who have a direct hand in
1:08:45European politics or those who have a
1:08:47direct hand in politics; look at those
1:08:49who spend all day criticizing the
1:08:50ultra-rich, yet the first or second
1:08:52meeting Pedro Sánchez had upon coming
1:08:54to power was with one of those
1:08:56billionaires. Hm. You know?
1:08:58>> Those forums, those forums,
1:09:01>> right? At Moncloa. And then, and then
1:09:04we have to understand that in reality,
1:09:09if what we want is progress and better
1:09:12access to housing, for things to be
1:09:15more affordable, what we need is
1:09:17exactly what they want to destroy. We
1:09:21need more companies that are much
1:09:23larger. We need more people who are
1:09:27wealthy precisely because they are the
1:09:29ones who will have the capacity to
1:09:31repay public services, because public
1:09:33services are not paid for by illegal
1:09:36immigrants, they never have been. Uh,
1:09:40if bringing in illegal immigration,
1:09:42skyrocketing taxes, and having a
1:09:44gigantic state were the solution for
1:09:46public services, for growth, and for
1:09:49debt, France would be the global
1:09:51example. And yet, France has been in
1:09:54stagnation for three decades. It has
1:09:57completely unpayable debt, a brutal
1:09:59deficit problem, and gigantic social
1:10:02unrest. And what we have to understand
1:10:05is that, uh, that is not by chance, but
1:10:07due to disincentives, because France is
1:10:10a country full of wonderful,
1:10:12intelligent people, human capital,
1:10:14business capital. But if you are
1:10:17constantly telling the one who takes
1:10:19risks, when you take a risk I will
1:10:21crush you with taxes and when you
1:10:22succeed I will steal it from you,
1:10:24obviously people say, well, I’m not
1:10:26going to do it. Not only do they not do
1:10:30it, but the public sector doesn't do it
1:10:33either. Because many people say, "And
1:10:35why can't the public sector do it by
1:10:37choosing the best?" But you don't
1:10:41understand, please, that when you don't
1:10:44have incentives and disincentives, risk
1:10:46, taking risks, you will never make a
1:10:48decision. That is to say, the public
1:10:51sector has a function, which is to
1:10:54provide a series of services, um, that
1:10:57we pay them for so they do it as
1:10:59efficiently as possible; but it doesn't
1:11:02have the capacity to pick winners, nor
1:11:04to pick losers, nor...and I’ll
1:11:07explain it to you very simply: think
1:11:09for a moment about the following.
1:11:12>> Uh, you're right now, you're seeing
1:11:13yourself down there, I'm understanding
1:11:14everything, but with great sorrow. But
1:11:16think for a moment about the following.
1:11:18Look,
1:11:19>> imagine that the U.S. economy were
1:11:25controlled by the public sector. Agreed
1:11:29. The largest employer in the United
1:11:32States is a, uh, warehouse, a, a large,
1:11:34a very large retail store called
1:11:37Walmart. Like, uh, Carrefour here or
1:11:39things like that, right? Fine. Walmart,
1:11:42the largest private employer, and a
1:11:45disruptive innovation appears like
1:11:48Amazon. Uh, of course, what would the
1:11:51public sector do managing Walmart if
1:11:54Amazon appeared? Number one, subsidize
1:11:57and spend much more on Walmart. Number
1:12:00two, penalize fiscally and regulatorily
1:12:03so that the, quote-unquote, threat of
1:12:06Amazon disappears. Number three, you
1:12:08have neither Walmart nor Amazon. If we
1:12:12don't realize that the public sector
1:12:14has a very important, but not magical,
1:12:17function, and that it doesn't have
1:12:19better or more information than the
1:12:21private sector on where and how to
1:12:23invest, because the public sector also
1:12:26has a unified decision-making center
1:12:28whose goal is to remain in power, while
1:12:31the private sector is made up of tens
1:12:33of thousands of companies competing
1:12:36with different ideas. You know? If we
1:12:38don't realize that, we will never
1:12:41improve progress, right? That's why
1:12:43there is a gigantic difference, a truly
1:12:45gigantic one, because people say, "
1:12:47Dictatorships, hey, there are left-wing
1:12:48dictatorships and there are right-wing
1:12:50dictatorships.""What is the difference
1:12:52between left-wing and right-wing
1:12:53dictatorships?" Right-wing
1:12:55dictatorships eventually end, while you
1:12:59can't get rid of left-wing
1:13:00dictatorships for anything. Why?
1:13:03Because left-wing dictatorships, even
1:13:05if the country goes to hell
1:13:06economically, impoverishes everyone,
1:13:08and enters absolute misery,
1:13:11>> they remain eternally because they
1:13:14thrive on having poor people constantly
1:13:17, whereas right-wing dictatorships
1:13:19perish, mature, and decline in the face
1:13:22of the evidence that by defending
1:13:25private property and maintaining
1:13:27private enterprise, the system itself
1:13:30implodes and transcends into a
1:13:33democracy. Look at that difference, how
1:13:36difficult everything is, huh? And what
1:13:39do we do,
1:13:40>> I mean, what do you do with life?
1:13:42>> I'm young and pretty, I mean, I don't
1:13:45>> I can't face it.
1:13:47>> Well, since you are young, what you
1:13:49have to do are three things, right? The
1:13:52first is to fight the cultural battle
1:13:53by constantly reminding your children
1:13:55that no politician will give you
1:13:57anything that they haven't previously
1:13:58taken from you, regardless of their
1:14:00party, right? Therefore, you should
1:14:03vote for the politicians who offer you
1:14:06fewer free things and who tell you, "We
1:14:08are going to do more so that you can do
1:14:10better." Hm. Number two, what you have
1:14:14to tell people is that wealth is hard
1:14:17to earn. What does it cost? It costs
1:14:20hard work. That for every Juan Roig,
1:14:23there are a lot of people who have had
1:14:26failures, but it is worth it, right? It
1:14:29is worth being an entrepreneur. It's
1:14:31just that
1:14:31>> I insist a lot that people haven't read
1:14:32the fable of the ant and the
1:14:33grasshopper and so they don't know
1:14:35>> no. The bad thing is that they read it
1:14:37wrong, like Bardem in the movie.
1:14:39>> Right,
1:14:40>> sure. They read it wrong.
1:14:41>> So in the end, people want the wealth
1:14:43of the ant directly, but they want to
1:14:45just lounge around like the grasshopper
1:14:47.
1:14:47>> Sure. The thing is, two things are
1:14:49happening. Hm. The wealth of the
1:14:52current economy
1:14:55>> isn't the—because look, the
1:14:56grasshopper's incentive still has at
1:14:59least an immediate marginal
1:15:00satisfaction, right? It's, I have some
1:15:04things here and I can eat in the short
1:15:07term, but when you realize that the
1:15:10wealth we have in the global economy
1:15:13isn't a warehouse full of food, but is
1:15:17credit, then it turns out that the
1:15:21grasshopper, besides being an idiot, uh
1:15:23, doesn't eat. You know? That's the key
1:15:26. I mean, the key is understanding that
1:15:28when they talk about wealth, they're
1:15:30trying to make you think about material
1:15:33things. The vast majority of wealth is
1:15:36credit and financing. And the moment
1:15:38you destroy, you attack the banks,
1:15:41people get poorer because they have
1:15:43less access to credit, less access to
1:15:46debt, et cetera.
1:15:47>> Of course, I mean, let's see, if you
1:15:49attack a bank and say, "Banks are bad
1:15:50and the banks have to pay for all these
1:15:52clauses." What do the banks do? They
1:15:54automatically raise the price of money
1:15:55for you. If you take a tenant and tell
1:15:57them, "No, uh, now squatters can occupy
1:16:00, and you can't complain." What do you
1:16:02do? You take out anti-squatter
1:16:03insurance. Who do you pass the cost of
1:16:04the anti-squatter insurance onto? To
1:16:06the tenant. So, all those measures that
1:16:08are made to protect, in reality, what
1:16:10they do is make everything more
1:16:11expensive.
1:16:12>> They always, uh, harm, but also, uh,
1:16:14there are many people who say, "Well,
1:16:17if the banks were public and if the
1:16:19landlords were public, then you'd say,
1:16:21better yet, how is healthcare going and
1:16:23how is education going?" You understand
1:16:26? It's the idea that the public sector
1:16:29is going to give you better credit,
1:16:31cheaper and easier, than the private
1:16:34sector; it's a fallacy of such
1:16:35magnitude that you only have to
1:16:37remember what I was telling you before:
1:16:40those public supermarkets, not only was
1:16:42the inflation outrageous, but those
1:16:45public supermarkets were also
1:16:46restricted to political privileged
1:16:49classes.
1:16:50>> Then I want to bring up another little
1:16:52topic, since we're fired up here. I'm
1:16:53leaving, maybe, right? Sure. Thank you
1:16:56very much for the pleasure.
1:16:59>> And a round of applause.
1:17:04>> You are a Spaniard with a normal salary
1:17:06, okay? Uh, you pay your taxes like a
1:17:09champion, more and more taxes like a
1:17:11champion, okay? Uh, among others,
1:17:13gasoline, where 50%is taxes,
1:17:14electricity, which is about the same,
1:17:17et cetera. Okay, so suddenly you're
1:17:19going to take your child to school or
1:17:21daycare.
1:17:21>> Yes. But it turns out that since you
1:17:24have a salary, your wife has a salary,
1:17:26uh, you are negatively discriminated
1:17:28against. Why? Because there is a thing
1:17:29called positive discrimination. Of
1:17:31course.
1:17:31>> And then it turns out they give away
1:17:33your spot,
1:17:34>> which you are paying for, this isn't an
1:17:36opinion, it's a fact. Sure.
1:17:37>> To a person who just arrived, who has
1:17:39children, who is vulnerable, who isn't
1:17:41paying the taxes you've paid—and I'm
1:17:43not saying we shouldn't help, mind you,
1:17:45>> I'm saying we should help, but every
1:17:47instance of positive discrimination
1:17:48becomes a form of negative
1:17:50discrimination. Therefore, you, as a
1:17:52taxpayer, end up getting private health
1:17:54insurance because when you get to the
1:17:56public system, there's a crazy line, uh
1:17:58, you end up having to take your child
1:18:00to a private daycare or a private
1:18:02school because you literally don't have
1:18:04a spot,
1:18:05>> and that spot is taken by people who
1:18:07haven't paid taxes,
1:18:09>> and those healthcare lines are because
1:18:10of people who haven't paid taxes. I
1:18:12mean, I see the situation in Ceuta.
1:18:14What is going to happen with those
1:18:15thousands of immigrants? Well, I'll
1:18:17tell you what's going to happen:
1:18:18they're going to enter Spain, they'll
1:18:20be distributed throughout Spain, and
1:18:21those thousands of immigrants will end
1:18:22up across Europe. And who is going to
1:18:25pay? For all those people's healthcare,
1:18:27education, etcetera. Well, our taxes.
1:18:29>> Of course.
1:18:30>> Okay. Imagine we're in an ideal world
1:18:33where I say: "Okay, they're coming to
1:18:34work, perfect, let's help them, they're
1:18:36going to integrate," but in the end, I
1:18:38feel treated unfairly because I'm
1:18:39paying for all of that and on top of it
1:18:41, I'm at the back of the line.
1:18:43>> Right? Besides,
1:18:45>> does this story sound familiar to you?
1:18:46Yes.
1:18:47>> Maybe I'm going crazy, maybe I'm making
1:18:49it up.
1:18:49>> No, you're not making it up. Uh, in
1:18:52France, a campaign became very popular
1:18:54called, uh, I don't remember, I think
1:18:56it was "Sebastian pays," right? This is
1:18:59the guy who pays, the last one. Uh, I
1:19:00call it the Starbucks line, right? The
1:19:02last one, uh, pays for the next one. So
1:19:05, what is happening? Let's see, what we
1:19:08wrongly call positive discrimination
1:19:12leads to a, uh, problem of wrong
1:19:15incentives. Hm. Uh, a welfare state
1:19:19system, you can be for it, you can be
1:19:21against it, but let's assume we agree
1:19:24that we have a welfare state. What,
1:19:27what is the most supportive economic
1:19:30entity of all? The family, right? Why?
1:19:33Because one or two people work and then
1:19:35you have, well, you have some people
1:19:37there who are drawing from you, uh,
1:19:39your children, et cetera. Hm.
1:19:42>> How nice, "drawing from," right? That
1:19:44you call your children, who eat
1:19:45everything and only love you for the
1:19:47money you give them, "drawers," right?
1:19:49That they take from you.
1:19:50>> But, why? Why? For two reasons. First,
1:19:54because those people you are supporting
1:19:56, you know that in the future they will
1:19:59contribute and continue generating.
1:20:02That is progress, right? That is
1:20:04progress. Good. So, when you pervert
1:20:07the system, from a system that uses
1:20:10savings to help people get ahead and
1:20:13have those who have more, uh, diffi...
1:20:16difficulties contribute, which is fine,
1:20:20uh, into a system where what it be...
1:20:23what it becomes is a system of perverse
1:20:26incentives whereby it pays to go to a
1:20:29place where others are already paying.
1:20:34Mm. and receive services that others
1:20:37have paid for, then you completely
1:20:40pervert the welfare state system. And
1:20:43three things happen, two, sorry, two
1:20:45things happen. One, you make the
1:20:47welfare state completely unsustainable.
1:20:50It is false that illegal immigration is
1:20:52going to pay our pensions, not at all.
1:20:55And that it will sustain the welfare
1:20:57state, not at all. On the other hand, I
1:21:00don't know if you've noticed, but what
1:21:02more xenophobic, paternalistic, and
1:21:04racist argument could there be than
1:21:06what these people go around saying, "
1:21:08and if not, who will take care of our
1:21:11elderly and who will water our plants?"
1:21:14What. You know? But beyond all that,
1:21:18number one, it makes the system much
1:21:20more unsustainable. There is no study
1:21:23that shows that via illegal immigration
1:21:25—I repeat again, the difference
1:21:28between illegal and legal immigration
1:21:30—uh, uh, illegal immigration has a
1:21:33positive effect on public accounts. Why
1:21:36? Because, furthermore, you are
1:21:38importing, uh, workers, in the best of
1:21:41cases if they even work, uh, who are,
1:21:44uh, at a very low level, who do two
1:21:47things, as the unionists of the 80s
1:21:50rightly said: they lower the wages of
1:21:53people in jobs with lower added value
1:21:56and, additionally, uh, their net
1:21:59contribution to the system is negative,
1:22:02uh.
1:22:02>> because it consumes more than what they
1:22:04contribute. Sure. it's much less than
1:22:06what they receive. Okay? Number one, it
1:22:10makes the system more unsustainable.
1:22:12Number two, it creates a massive
1:22:14economic and social problem. Why? We're
1:22:19seeing it in France, we're seeing it in
1:22:22Germany, we're seeing...it turns out a
1:22:24perverse incentive is created where you
1:22:27have a voter base that will vote for
1:22:30the very destruction of the internal
1:22:32system in exchange for being supported
1:22:35by a handout or a small, as you said,
1:22:37those handouts.
1:22:40>> Let me tell you something. Look, I help
1:22:43out with Rosalía and two friends.
1:22:47We’ve set up an association called
1:22:48Iluminando Caminos.
1:22:49>> Oh, yes, yes, yes, I know it.
1:22:50>> Okay. Why? Because I helped a girl
1:22:53named Jadisha from Cañada Real.
1:22:54>> Well, what an example, right, telling
1:22:56it?
1:22:57>> So I tell you this because no one can
1:22:58accuse me of being Islamophobic,
1:23:00besides the fact that I love Morocco
1:23:02and I love going there, the culture,
1:23:03and I like it a lot. I’ve been there
1:23:05many times. So, I help these families,
1:23:08one is an Algerian family and the other
1:23:10is a Moroccan family. In reality, they
1:23:12are Spanish because they were born here
1:23:14, but their parents are Moroccan or
1:23:15Algerian. So, we got them out of the
1:23:18Cañada through Techo.
1:23:19>> Yes,
1:23:20>> I'll tell that story another day, we
1:23:22have to invite Blanca, okay? From Techo
1:23:25. Meaning, first of all, you can't rent
1:23:27, look for a rental apartment for these
1:23:29families because they come from the
1:23:30Cañada, which makes them vulnerable.
1:23:32>> So, there’s the first injustice right
1:23:34there. Meaning, you have made a housing
1:23:35law for renting to these people that
1:23:37actually harms these people. It has to
1:23:39be through me and through the
1:23:40association and through this
1:23:41association called Techo, that we have
1:23:43been able to get them out already. And
1:23:45so these guys are taxi drivers, they
1:23:47support their families, meaning they
1:23:50pay taxes. I want this type of
1:23:51immigration, of course I want it. First
1:23:53, they were born in Spain, they are
1:23:55Spanish, they pay taxes, phenomenal,
1:23:57okay? They are integrated, absolutely
1:23:58integrated.
1:23:59>> But the most important difference, if
1:24:01you allow me to interrupt, is the last
1:24:03one. Meaning,
1:24:05>> when you will often hear, Spain is a
1:24:07country of immigrants, it's a country
1:24:10of migrants. How can you be against
1:24:12immigration? he says, "Sure, first off,
1:24:15I'm not against immigration, I'm
1:24:17against the, the, uh, permissiveness
1:24:18toward illegal immigration, which is,
1:24:21>> right?" Well, but the most important
1:24:23thing is integration. I mean, as you
1:24:26know, I have been an immigrant, I’ve
1:24:28gone, lived, and worked in many
1:24:30countries; I arrive in a country and I
1:24:32adapt to the culture and I adapt to the
1:24:34customs and I adapt to that country’s
1:24:36system. I don’t arrive in that
1:24:39country to impose my culture, my system
1:24:41, and my customs. Agreed? Right. That
1:24:43has been perverted. Hm. And it turns
1:24:46out what we see is that there is an
1:24:48essential factor, it’s not only that
1:24:51they work, which is important, but
1:24:53there is also a factor of cultural
1:24:55adaptation that is even more important
1:24:58because it includes the impact on
1:25:00institutions. But the important thing
1:25:04to understand, and I’m going to give
1:25:06you some bad news, is that when we look
1:25:09at individual people, those cases are
1:25:12indeed relevant and that’s why it’s
1:25:14so important that you, that you publish
1:25:17them. But if we look at it in the
1:25:22aggregate, if what you’re doing is
1:25:26importing a brutal amount of people who
1:25:30are going to be—let’s be serious,
1:25:33uh—the vast majority, look, European
1:25:37Union data: 20%don’t work, right from
1:25:41the start, uh, and 80%work in, uh, very
1:25:44, very low, uh, low-paying jobs. So, if
1:25:50you are importing people at that salary
1:25:53level and you are pushing out
1:25:55high-earning people, my dear friend,
1:25:58>> we’ve got a real mess on our hands.
1:25:59>> You’re not, you’re not even getting
1:26:00anywhere. It’s not just that you’re
1:26:02not getting anywhere, you’re making
1:26:04things much worse.
1:26:06>> But I’m going to tell you what one of
1:26:08them told me,
1:26:08>> okay?
1:26:09>> That naturally
1:26:10>> they are the first ones who are against
1:26:11illegal immigration. That has to be
1:26:14remembered, it is very important,
1:26:15because when my followers, uh, tell me
1:26:17that, "Hey, I’ve been working in this
1:26:19country for 15 years, just like that, I
1:26:21don't know, I’m the first one who’s
1:26:23against it." That’s why they voted,
1:26:25uh, uh, for the parties that, that are
1:26:27voting for the parties that are against
1:26:29illegal immigration.
1:26:31>> Because he tells me the following, he
1:26:33says there are families, just look, a
1:26:34whole bunch of families, and this is
1:26:36something anyone who deals with these
1:26:37types of groups knows, that he
1:26:39separates from his wife.
1:26:41>> Yes.
1:26:41>> Why? Because then she is left with the
1:26:43children and is more vulnerable.
1:26:44Naturally, the man keeps living with
1:26:46the woman, but since they have
1:26:48separated, they get a handout from one
1:26:50place, another, another, another, and
1:26:52another. So, in the end, I always say
1:26:54the problem isn't the human being, the
1:26:56problem is the system. I mean, if you
1:26:58create a system that incentivizes
1:26:59getting handouts and not working, well
1:27:01hey, call me crazy, but I’d rather
1:27:03not work. Then, there is also a huge
1:27:05pull factor. Why? Because he calls his
1:27:08cousin and says, "Come over here and
1:27:10bring lots of kids." Of course, we get
1:27:13paid.
1:27:13>> Sure, you think,
1:27:14>> this is exactly how I'm telling it, and
1:27:16there is no other way to explain it. So
1:27:18, in the end, this gentleman
1:27:20>> is just angry because he says, "Don't
1:27:22let any more of my friends come." I
1:27:24don't want a single one. Because I'm
1:27:25here, and my paycheck gets smaller and
1:27:28smaller because I'm paying for all
1:27:30these people.
1:27:31>> Again, the example of France is very
1:27:33important. France is a system where a
1:27:36giant state, confiscatory taxes, and
1:27:39very high illegal immigration that has
1:27:43become entrenched not only generates
1:27:46massive discontent among, uh, taxpayers
1:27:49and people born in that country of one
1:27:52generation or another, but it also
1:27:55generates massive discontent among
1:27:58those receiving, because they turn them
1:28:02into a dependent underclass, you know?
1:28:05Sure. And notice that the objective is
1:28:08purely electoral, it's nothing more
1:28:10than changing the census. Look at what
1:28:13I told you before, what my father said
1:28:15two decades ago. The left has stopped
1:28:20defending the interests of farmers,
1:28:22ranchers, workers, industrialists,
1:28:24small business owners, and the
1:28:25self-employed to defend the interests
1:28:27of the multibillionaires. Okay? What is
1:28:31happening? Working people, which is
1:28:35what bothers these far-left populists,
1:28:37vote for right-wing parties. So they
1:28:41say, "Let's change the census, let's
1:28:43change, let's change the people who
1:28:45vote.""We will have truly dependent
1:28:49people, hm, truly poor people and an
1:28:52underclass that has to vote for us,
1:28:55even if the living conditions we
1:28:58relegate them to will be worse." Why?
1:29:02>> I mean, the ones from abroad. Sure,
1:29:04>> sure. So, if a guy is Spanish and they
1:29:06give him a Spanish passport, he’s
1:29:08going to come here and use the
1:29:09healthcare services, as we have already
1:29:11seen a thousand times. And who is going
1:29:13to pay for it?
1:29:13>> You.
1:29:14>> You. Sure. So, it's not just that
1:29:15you're going to pay for it, it's that
1:29:17if
1:29:17>> you're all getting into a bad mood,
1:29:19>> if it were, if it were, if it were only
1:29:22you paying for it, meaning, this is
1:29:25what we spend, this is what we take in,
1:29:27some might even defend it. But you're
1:29:31not the one paying it, your children,
1:29:33your grandchildren, and your
1:29:34great-grandchildren will. Uh, meaning,
1:29:37you're passing the greatest tax burden
1:29:40onto your children, your grandchildren.
1:29:44I mean, it's a profoundly, uh, absolute
1:29:46lack of empathy for our young people,
1:29:49right?
1:29:51>> Sure, I always, when, I find it funny
1:29:52when they talk about the snowflake
1:29:53generation, the young people, and I say
1:29:55, but we're leaving them a shitty world
1:29:56,
1:29:57>> we are completely abandoning them,
1:29:59>> I mean, we're going to leave them a
1:30:01world that even Jordi Hurtado won't
1:30:02recognize when
1:30:05>> Jordi Hurtado will still have his show.
1:30:06Yes, but everything we are doing is
1:30:08terrible. I, look, I'm looking at Juan
1:30:10here, this kid, and suddenly I see him,
1:30:12and I say, "Just look at the debt he's
1:30:14going to have to pay." And of course,
1:30:17when he, he, his children and his
1:30:19grandchildren, because on top of that,
1:30:21people don't realize that debt isn't
1:30:22just I lent you 100, I pay back 100, no
1:30:24, no, there's interest,
1:30:26>> it's that debt must be paid,
1:30:27>> I mean, debt is terrible.
1:30:29>> Debt is always paid. Now they're
1:30:32appearing again with the same idiocy.
1:30:35Do you remember back in 2012 when they
1:30:37said they were going to cancel the debt
1:30:38, all that nonsense, illegitimate debt,
1:30:40those from Podemos, et cetera, et
1:30:41cetera. This is great, isn't it?
1:30:43Because these are people who say, "
1:30:45We're going to cancel the debt and
1:30:46declare it illegitimate in order to go
1:30:48into much more debt for cheap." This is
1:30:50hilarious. Uh, but the most important
1:30:52thing is that debt is always paid.
1:30:55Always. When they tell you debt doesn't
1:30:57matter, they are deceiving you. Debt is
1:30:58paid every single day and, furthermore,
1:31:00it is always paid. I mean, you pay for
1:31:03it in lower net wages, you pay in fewer
1:31:06opportunities, you pay in less growth,
1:31:08and you pay in higher inflation, in
1:31:11addition to the gigantic amount of
1:31:13taxes you charge people.
1:31:15>> Uh, I was going to bring up the issue
1:31:16of pensions, but I don't know if I'll
1:31:17get even more worked up. I mean, that
1:31:19>> the issue of the courses,
1:31:21>> The important thing is, we're going to
1:31:24say two things to people about pensions
1:31:26, first to reassure them and second to
1:31:29make them angry. Hm. Wouldn't it be
1:31:32better the other way around?
1:31:33>> Let's do it the other way around. First
1:31:34, make them angry. The government isn't
1:31:36raising your pension, it's putting it
1:31:38into debt. The government has tripled
1:31:41the debt of social security. Tripled it
1:31:44in 8 years. Tripled it.
1:31:46>> Tripled it.
1:31:47>> But wasn't there a famous pension fund?
1:31:49>> Yes, I'll tell you about the sack, the
1:31:51pension fund. How does it work? Look,
1:31:53social security doesn't cover its
1:31:57pension expenses until October. From
1:32:00October on, it has to go into debt,
1:32:02okay? So it borrows from a state that
1:32:06is already super indebted, which is us.
1:32:10>> An amount that is higher—this is the
1:32:12best part—an amount higher than what
1:32:14it needs to pay from October to
1:32:16December, right?
1:32:18>> Like when you want one, a loan, and you
1:32:19buy a car.
1:32:20>> This is like when, no, this is like...
1:32:21>> for a house. No, this is like when you
1:32:25take out a loan, and you use that, you
1:32:28use that credit. No, no, no, no, no. I
1:32:31wish. No, no, no. This is like you
1:32:33taking out a loan using another loan,
1:32:37okay? This is a double negative
1:32:39mortgage. Hm. So, what happens? They
1:32:42tell you, "Well, the pension fund has
1:32:43increased." How have you increased the
1:32:45pension fund? By owing much more to the
1:32:47State, and what does the State owe? A
1:32:50brutally higher amount, half a trillion
1:32:52euros more, right? So, it's important
1:32:55that people understand this, huh? To
1:32:57get angry. The government isn't raising
1:32:59your pensions, it's putting them into
1:33:00debt. And second, the government isn't
1:33:04improving the purchasing power of
1:33:05pensioners, yet at the same time it is
1:33:08destroying the purchasing power of
1:33:10young people. As it tells the pensioner
1:33:13, "Don't worry, I'm going to raise your
1:33:15pension with the CPI." But the CPI is
1:33:18not inflation, as we said at the
1:33:19beginning. Okay? So one thing happens.
1:33:23Look, January 1st starts, from January
1:33:281st to December 31st, the prices of the
1:33:30things you pay for are rising, right?
1:33:34And then at the end of the year, the
1:33:36government tells you, "The average
1:33:38annual inflation was X. Imagine it's
1:33:40four percent." How much have the things
1:33:43you've bought gone up during the year?
1:33:45Eight, 7, 6, 10, I don't know how much,
1:33:48uh, but they raise what you're going to
1:33:51earn the following year on December
1:33:5431st. Therefore, you have already lost
1:33:56purchasing power. Furthermore, uh, and
1:33:58this is the key, the government charges
1:34:00you taxes on that pension. Hm.
1:34:04Therefore, in real, net terms, the
1:34:07government hasn't raised pensions for,
1:34:10uh, for retirees, but it has crushed
1:34:13young people with taxes. Hm. And it has
1:34:19crushed young people with taxes, whom
1:34:21they have also told—because it's
1:34:22written and agreed upon with Brussels
1:34:24—that they are going to pay much more
1:34:26and will receive much less, much later.
1:34:31This is wonderful. This is what they
1:34:32call, uh, this is what they call the
1:34:34social contract, which is basically, uh
1:34:36, stealing from your grandchildren.
1:34:38Well, it's not that retirees are
1:34:40stealing from their grandchildren—
1:34:41retirees aren't stealing from anyone—
1:34:43but rather that they are deceiving the
1:34:45retirees and they are deceiving the
1:34:46taxpayers. Now let's provide a positive
1:34:49note. Hm.
1:34:50>> Thank goodness, thank goodness, because
1:34:52you are making me
1:34:53>> Now let's provide a positive note. Hm.
1:34:56If you stop importing the poor and
1:34:58driving away the rich, if you stop
1:35:00constantly increasing the political
1:35:02spending that we spend on things every
1:35:04week, uh, which I recommend you look at
1:35:06—the things where tens of billions
1:35:08are sent, okay? Uh, because, of course,
1:35:11they tell you, "Well, we have to
1:35:13sustain the welfare state, right?" And
1:35:15we go and we pay for the subway for
1:35:17people in Morocco, we pay for some
1:35:19gender thing for people in Peru, we...
1:35:22you know? It's brutal. Well, it doesn't
1:35:24matter. Huge amounts. A country that
1:35:28spends 4.5 billion on economic affairs,
1:35:3010 billion on the agenda, on, on sorry,
1:35:32on, uh, what do they call this?
1:35:35Ecological transition, uh, 4.5 billion
1:35:38on Agenda 2030. Uh, I mean, squandering
1:35:42.
1:35:42>> But are the agendas worth that much
1:35:43money?
1:35:43>> Go figure.
1:35:44>> 4.5 billion.
1:35:45>> 4 billion a year on Agenda 2030. You
1:35:48all take a look at Agenda 2030. Uh, the
1:35:50spending requirements for Agenda 2030
1:35:53are exactly zero, okay? Because all the
1:35:56goals are a bit like a song from
1:35:57Mocedades, right? Oh, you know,
1:36:00Mocedades is charming, uh, nothing bad,
1:36:03you know? Uh, need to spend 4.5 billion
1:36:09. The nerve of some people is just
1:36:11incredible. So, first, stop importing
1:36:14the poor. Two, stop driving away the
1:36:18rich and large companies. Three, stop
1:36:21suffocating those who can have children
1:36:23and save money with taxes. Because
1:36:26obviously, if you suffocate young
1:36:27people with taxes when they could be
1:36:28having children and saving, it turns
1:36:30out they don't have children, they
1:36:31can't save, and then you say you have a
1:36:33demographic problem—you're a genius.
1:36:35Right. And then, uh, start once and for
1:36:38all—this is what's needed—cutting
1:36:41back on absolutely everything that is
1:36:44non-essential. Hm. In a country that
1:36:47spends what the President of the
1:36:49Government spends on the presidency. Uh
1:36:51, businessmen often tell me, "The
1:36:53presidency is like a small business,
1:36:55the presidency is a large corporation."
1:36:58"Spanish small businesses don't have
1:37:00that kind of budget, or that many
1:37:02advisors, or that many expenses." So,
1:37:05let's be serious, let's start cutting
1:37:07everything that isn't essential—and
1:37:09there is so much, we know it—and
1:37:11let's start thinking about the economy
1:37:14in a way that attracts more people and
1:37:16more companies to create more wealth,
1:37:18and then we can pay for the pensions.
1:37:22If not, one thing is certain, and it's
1:37:24something that is already happening and
1:37:27is already agreed upon: you are going
1:37:30to pay more for longer and you are
1:37:32going to receive less in both real and
1:37:35nominal terms.
1:37:36>> Today I saw that Pedro Sánchez made
1:37:38some statements saying he has the
1:37:40pension issue completely under control,
1:37:42and that he is going to make the
1:37:44retirement age coincide with the age of
1:37:46death.
1:37:47>> Right. So you retire today and kick the
1:37:50bucket tomorrow. Problem solved.
1:37:54Problem ended. In fact, I don't know if
1:37:58you know this, but very few people know
1:38:01why the retirement age was set at 65,
1:38:03okay? And it's not—and it's not a
1:38:06joke. The retirement age was set at 65
1:38:10because the vast majority of the
1:38:11population at that time died at 63.
1:38:14Exactly.
1:38:15>> Fool. There was almost no one left.
1:38:16Bismarck said, "Wait a minute.""We need
1:38:19soldiers to die for the country.""No,
1:38:22people, for some reason, don't want to
1:38:23get themselves killed.""For me, uh,
1:38:25let's give them a pension, eh?" And
1:38:28they said to him, "Man, no, we're going
1:38:30to go broke." He said, "Don't worry,
1:38:32we'll give it to them starting at 65
1:38:33because almost no one lives that long."
1:38:35>> Well, that's well thought out. I'm
1:38:36going to We're reaching the end. Look,
1:38:38I always give away one of the courses I
1:38:40create, so I'm going to give you a
1:38:41course, Daniel. Man, I really like that
1:38:44.
1:38:44>> This is a productivity course.
1:38:45>> Oh, that is so important,
1:38:47>> and it's amazing. Okay, we didn't have
1:38:49time to talk about productivity. This
1:38:51is a health course called Extraordinary
1:38:52Health, okay? That I do with Dr. Sariar
1:38:55, they say it's amazing. And this is an
1:38:57artificial intelligence course.
1:38:58>> How great.
1:38:59>> So, you can choose whichever you want.
1:39:01You are completely invited.
1:39:02>> I can choose any one. I'm like the
1:39:04people at Puerta del Sol. I'll take all
1:39:06three. All three. No, just kidding.
1:39:12They're really good, aren't they? You
1:39:16were
1:39:17>> I'm interested. It's just that I'm
1:39:18interested. I'm going to do the
1:39:20opposite of those at Puerta del Sol,
1:39:21the privileged ones at Puerta del Sol,
1:39:23I'm going to do two things, right?
1:39:24Number one,
1:39:25>> I'm going to pay for two of them myself
1:39:28, okay? And
1:39:29>> and I'll gift you the third one.
1:39:30>> And the third one
1:39:30>> creating wealth. Do you see?
1:39:32>> Yes, sir. That is productivity. Sure,
1:39:41look, I had a ton of things here, we've
1:39:43talked about a tenth of them, but I'm
1:39:45happy because that way we can bring you
1:39:47back another day and keep warming us
1:39:49all up a little bit with
1:39:52>> Yes. And well, I have all of Daniel's
1:39:54books currently out. This is the latest
1:39:57one, okay? The New World Economic Order
1:39:59and the truth is they are all very
1:40:00revealing books and you learn economics
1:40:02, really, and follow him on his channel
1:40:04. Thank you so much, Daniel, it's an
1:40:06absolute pleasure to have you here and
1:40:07a round of applause.
1:40:08>> Thank you.

About this transcript

This page contains the full transcript of Economía para mi abuela: La VERDAD sobre el PRECIO de la VIVIENDA | Daniel Lacalle | #40 by Mago More, generated from the public captions YouTube serves with the video. The transcript has 16,847 words across 2,600 segments, with the original timestamps preserved so you can click any line to jump to that moment in the embedded player.

What you can do with it

Use the transcript to take notes, quote the speaker, build a study guide, generate a summary with ChatGPT or Claude via the YouTube Summary tool, or export it as a timed subtitle file with YouTube to SRT. You can also re-open it in the transcriber to choose a caption track available on the video.

Free YouTube transcript tool

YouTube2Text is a free YouTube transcript generator — no signup, no daily limit. Paste any YouTube link and get the full transcript instantly, with timestamps, click-to-jump, caption language selection, AI prompts for ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and exports to TXT, SRT, VTT, or Markdown.