本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
好了，各位。
Alright, everybody.
欢迎回到你们最爱的播客，事实上也是整个宇宙排名第一的播客——《全在播客》，与你们最好的朋友们一起。
Welcome back to your favorite podcast, the number one podcast, in fact, in the entire universe, the all in podcast with your besties.
我们都到齐了。
We're all here.
这是原始的四人组。
It's the original quartet.
每当核心四人组出现时，大家都特别喜欢，今天我们为大家准备了一个‘驴子’。
Everybody loves when the core four are here, and we have a donkey for you today.
伙计们，我们得先聊聊伯尼·桑德斯。
Guys, we gotta start out with Bernie Sanders.
我知道这有点重复了，但AI仍然是话题。
I know this is becoming a bit repetitive, but AI is the topic.
本周我们达到了一个新的愚蠢水平，实在避无可避。
We reached a new level of retardation this week that we cannot avoid.
伯尼·桑德斯提出了一个重大提议：暂停新建AI数据中心。
Bernie Sanders has a major desol pitch, a moratorium on new AI data centers.
这是他的论点。
Here's his argument.
第一，亿万富翁们推动AI是因为他们想要更多的钱和权力。
Number one, the billionaires are pushing AI because they want more money and power.
第二，将会出现大规模失业，他引用了斯凯茨、斯塔里奥和马斯克的说法，认为AI将取代大多数工作。
Number two, there's gonna be massive unemployment, and he cites Skates, Stario, Elon saying that a AI would replace most jobs.
第三，他其实有一个有趣的观点。
Number three, he has an interesting point, actually.
AI对儿童有害，因为它减少了社交互动。
AI is harmful to kids because it decreases social interaction.
实际上，我想我们在这方面基本都同意。
Actually, we kind of agree with that one, I think, across the board.
但这就是他的主张，萨克斯。
But here's his pitch, Sax.
他的观点是：你希望你的孩子使用这些聊天机器人吗？
His pitch is You want your kids using these chatbots?
不。
No.
我跟我的孩子们谈过这件事。
I've I've talked to my kids about it.
哦，好的。
Oh, okay.
我们会
We'll we'll get
深入探讨。
into it.
我们可以深入探讨。
We can get into it.
但我已经跟他们谈过了。
But I've talked to them about it.
你看。
Look.
如果你真的看一下数据，看看孩子们在做什么，他们会发现和朋友在Snap上聊天，或在TikTok上看视频，要互动得多、吸引人得多。
If you actually look at the data, if you look at what kids are doing, it's so much more interactive and engaging for them to talk to their friends on Snap or to watch videos on TikTok.
这些事情非常吸引人。
Those things are super engaging.
通过AI聊天机器人做研究则要无聊得多，这一点在数据中很明显。
Doing research on an AI chatbot is just it's way less engaging and you see this in the data.
所以我不是说那里没有问题。
So I'm not saying there's not an issue there.
你确实需要关注这些技术如何塑造年幼孩子的思维，但我认为人们有点混淆了。
You wanna pay attention to the way that these technologies are shaping the minds of young kids, but I think people get a little bit confused.
他们真正谈论的是社交媒体，然后把社交媒体的所有弊端都归咎于这些新的AI聊天应用，但它们其实有点不同。
What they're really talking about is social media and then they attribute all the ills of social media over to these new AI chat apps and they are a little different.
当我谈话时，我会问我的孩子：你们用这些应用多吗？
Know, when I when talk I ask my kids like how much do you use these things?
它们上瘾吗？
Are they addictive?
他们说，不会。
They said, no.
它们只是非常有用。
They're more just really useful.
就像谷歌一样。
It's like Google.
是的。
It's Yeah.
就像我无法
Like I couldn't
两个我
two I
没有它我根本没法上学。
couldn't do school without it.
是的。
Yeah.
这里有两部分。
There's two pieces here.
第一，使用人工智能来变得更聪明、学习知识和提问，绝对棒极了，非常出色。
One, using AI to be smarter and to learn stuff and ask questions, absolutely fantastic, phenomenal.
我想我们都同意这一点。
I think we'll all agree on that.
还有一点，我不确定他是否真的指的是这个，但确实存在一种角色AI，在大量暧昧聊天中，人们谈论被一击致命以及这种拟社会关系。
There is and I don't know if this is actually what he was referencing, but there's character AI in a in a long tail of spicy chats where people we talked about getting one shotted and these parasocial relationships.
我想他指的就是这个，但也许我理解错了。
That's, I think, what he's referring to, but maybe I'm reading it wrong.
但让我们深入探讨一下。
But let's get into it here.
他的观点是我们需要放慢脚步，让民主跟上步伐，国会应该对新建数据中心实施暂停。
His pitch is that we need to slow down so that, quote, democracy can catch up and that congress should put a moratorium on new data centers.
这就是他的解决方案。
That's his solution.
他因为这个观点在社交媒体上被狠狠嘲讽了。
He got roasted, obviously, on social media for this.
我认为，这是对那些合理关切所提出的最荒谬的解决方案。
It's the most absurd, I think, solution to, you know, what are valid concerns.
我们节目的朋友罗卡纳，代表硅谷，他稍微支持了一下，然后回复我说，他的担忧没那么紧迫，他只是希望确保我们使用可再生能源，这大概是个可以接受的立场，Polymarket 还为此设了一个小市场。
Friend of the pod, Rokana, who represents Silicon Valley, he, I guess, supported a bit, and then he replied to me and says, his concerns are not as acute and that he just wants to make sure we use renewable energy, which I guess is, you know, a fine position to have Polymarket put up a little market here.
2027年前通过AI数据中心暂停令。
AI data center moratorium passed before 2027.
是的。
Yeah.
我们看看这是否会成真。
We'll see if that comes true or not.
但嘿，萨克斯，你可是我们的SGE。
But, hey, Sacks, you are our SGE.
萨克斯，或者SGE，这是你闪耀的时刻。
Sacks or SGE, this is your time to shine.
你将人工智能的辩论定义为我们不能输给中国。
You have framed the AI debate as we can't lose to China.
伯尼则将其定义为不让亿万富翁阶层通过消除美国工作来获取更多权力和财富。
Bernie framed it as not letting the billionaire class get more power and money by eliminating American jobs.
上周在这个节目中，塔克将其定义为：美国人能从中学到什么？
And last week on this very program, Tucker framed it as what are Americans gonna get out of this?
对吧？
Right?
这就是截至2025年12月的表述方式。
That that was the framing, you know, as of December 2025.
所以，萨克斯，这是你的机会。
So here's your chance, Sachs.
为什么那些担心失去工作的美国人要在乎击败中国？
Why should Americans who have some concerns about losing their jobs care about beating China?
他们为什么要关心这个，萨克斯？
Why should they care about that, Sachs?
他们为什么要关心击败中国？
Why should they care about beating China?
因为人工智能是一项深远的技术。
Because AI is a profound technology.
它将带来巨大的经济和国家安全影响。
It's gonna have huge economic and national security implications.
伯尼错在他认为能阻止这种进步。
And the thing that Bernie gets wrong is that he can't stop the progress.
我的意思是，他无法阻止中国取得进展。
I mean, he can't stop China from making progress.
我们或许能阻止美国的进步，但无法阻止中国推进这些技术。
We can stop progress in The US, but it's not gonna stop China from advancing these technologies.
很多东西只是数学问题。
A lot of this is just math.
而且，我们停了并不意味着中国也会停。
And just because we stopped doesn't mean China's gonna stop.
如果我们放弃在人工智能竞赛中的领先地位，直接把它拱手让给中国，那将是历史上最大的乌龙球。
So this would be the biggest own goal ever if we took our leadership in the AI race and just handed it to China.
但说实话，我某种程度上欣赏伯尼的坦诚，因为他确实说出了他真正想要的东西。
But look, I appreciate Bernie's honesty in a way because he is actually telling the truth about what he wants.
我记得就在一周前，特朗普总统签署了一项行政命令，推动国家人工智能框架，当时许多批评者和民主党人声称这是对州权的侵犯，我们应该支持各州监管人工智能。
And I remember just a week ago when president Trump signed an executive order to advance a national AI framework, a lot of critics and a lot of Democrats were saying this was a violation of states' rights and we need to support the states in regulating AI.
而伯尼现在承认，这根本不是关于州权的问题，因为他主张即使各州希望建设，也应暂停新建数据中心。
And here Bernie is acknowledging that this is not about states' rights because he's saying that there needs to be a moratorium on new data centers even if the states want them.
所以他也不支持州权。
So he doesn't support states' rights either.
他只是希望所有进展都停下来。
He just wants all the progress to stop.
我认为这真正揭示了问题的本质：所有关于州权或可负担性的言论，都只是烟幕弹。
And I think this is really the truth of the matter is that all this talk about states' rights or affordability, it's all a red hearing.
真正发生的是，有一群人数众多且不断增长的人，他们只想让所有进展都停下来。
And what's really going on is there's a large and growing contingent of people who just want all the progress to stop.
但再说一遍，我们无法阻止中国取得进展。
But again, we can't stop China from making progress.
所以他们所做的只是将人工智能竞赛的领导权让给中国。
So all they would be doing is ceding leadership at this AI race to China.
像伯尼这样的人真正想要的是，让美国变得像欧洲一样。
What people like Bernie really want is they want The US to become like Europe.
你知道，欧洲在全球GDP中的份额只有三十年前的一半，这是因为它们对创新和技术进步持敌对态度，而伯尼希望我们走的就是欧洲的这条路。
You know, Europe has half the share of global GDP that they had thirty years ago, and that's because of their hostility towards innovation and technological progress, and that's kinda where Bernie wants us to be is he wants us to go down the the path of Europe.
他这么说的原因是，天啊，不能让人发财。
And the reason he says is because, god forbid, someone gets rich.
好吧，看看吧，资本主义有时会导致财富分配不均，但社会主义总是导致贫困和苦难的平等分配。
Well, look, capitalism sometimes results in the unequal distribution of wealth, but socialism always results in the equal distribution of poverty and misery.
如果美国停止发展人工智能，如果我们把这项领导权交给其他国家，美国将会变得更穷，美国人民将会变得更穷，而且我们会丧失全球领导地位。
And if The US stops developing AI, if we hand this leadership to other countries, it'll make The United States poorer, it'll make the American people poorer, and it will seed our leadership globally.
我们再也不会成为世界上的主导力量了。
We will not be the preeminent power in the world anymore.
好的。
Okay.
那我就说到这里。
So I'll stop there.
不。
No.
不。
No.
太棒了。
It's great.
谢谢，SGE。
Thank you, SGE.
大卫·萨克斯，来自格林伯格。
David Sacks of Greenberg.
似乎有几场对话。
There seems to be a couple of conversations.
不幸的是，我们上周没在这里，但我们的好友塔克来拜访了，我们谈到了这个问题。
Unfortunately, we weren't here last week, but we had a really nice visit from our pal Tucker, and we talked about this.
他似乎认为，在向公众传达这些技术的价值时，存在一些沟通问题。
He seemed to think there was a bit of a communication problem with selling to the public the value of these technologies.
你同意这一点吗？
Do you agree with that?
关于这些交叉对话，你认为这里发生了什么？
And what do you think is going on here in terms of the cross conversations?
有一群人想要减少推广，他们有一些担忧，比如环境问题、工作岗位流失等等。
One group wants to desell, has some concerns, environmental, you know, job displacement, etcetera.
还存在一个问题，即‘中国超越中国’这个说法无法引起美国民众的共鸣？
And then there is there an issue where the China beating China doesn't resonate with the American populace?
你在这档播客上已经连续四年多强调社会主义的崛起了。
You've been harping on about the rise of socialism for four plus years on this very podcast.
那么，从你的角度看，这些同时进行并似乎在2025年达到顶点的多重对话之间，真正的脱节在哪里？
So from where you sit, what's the actual disconnect in these multiple conversations that are going on concurrently and and seemingly coming to a head here at the 2025?
如果你去问那些发表关于‘科技巨头’言论的政治家，试图让他们谈谈AI技术究竟带来了什么、没带来什么，你很快就会碰壁。
Well, if you ask any of the politicians that are making these proclamations about the, quote, tech barons and try and actually talk to them about what is the AI technology delivering, what is it not delivering, you kinda typically hit a wall pretty quickly.
人们很难清晰地阐述究竟发生了什么。
It's very hard for folks to articulate what is actually happening.
大量资本正被投入到基础设施建设中，以提升众多公司、整个经济和整个行业提供AI工具的能力。
There's a tremendous amount of capital being put at risk against infrastructure to build out the capacity for many companies, the entire economy, the entire industry to deliver AI tools.
目前，除了英伟达之外，还没有形成价值创造的聚合效应，而英伟达在过去几年里创造了高达3万亿美元的市值。
There isn't an aggregation at this stage of value creation with the exception of NVIDIA, which has really got this $3,000,000,000,000 market cap creation that's happened in the last couple of years.
彼得·蒂尔对此说得最好。
Peter Thiel said this best.
他说：看看投入AI的巨额资金。
He's like, look at all the money that's going into AI.
实际上，只有一家公司赚到了钱，那就是英伟达。
There's really only one company that's making any money, and that's NVIDIA.
到目前为止，结果尚不明确。
Like, at this point, the jury's still out.
我们甚至还不知道人工智能到底是什么。
We don't even know what AI is.
这有点像互联网兴起的时候。
It's sort of like when the Internet was happening.
当时每个人都以为光纤交换公司会赚大钱。
You know, everyone thought these fiber optic switch companies were gonna make all the money.
结果证明这是错的。
Turns out that was wrong.
真正赚大钱的是终端应用，它们在许多不同的市场中竞争，比如谷歌、亚马逊和优步。
It was the end applications that made all the money, and they competed in many different markets from Google to Amazon to Uber.
你可以列出所有从互联网核心基础设施建设中受益的公司。
You can go down the list of all the beneficiaries of the core infrastructure technology of the Internet that was built out.
那么，到底发生了什么？
So what is really going on?
嗯，人工智能现在成了引发恐惧和分裂的新焦点，最终导致了顺从与控制，而这正是这些政客试图在美国民众和投票环境中推动的方向，目前正是这种情况。
Well, AI is the new lightning rod for fear and for divisiveness that ultimately breeds compliance and control, which is where these politicians are trying to drive the the populace and the voting conditions in The United States, and that's what's going on right now.
很多人对在自己城镇建设数据中心感到恐惧，担心它会带来这样或那样的问题，却根本没有就事实本身展开真正的讨论。
There's a lot of fear about, oh, putting this data center in my town is gonna do x or y or z with no real conversation about the truth of that matter.
很多人担心财富会集中在少数人手中，但正如我们在互联网时代看到的那样，它实际上惠及了大多数人。
There's a lot of fear about wealth creation being aggregated in the hand of a few when, as we saw with the Internet, it benefited the many.
这种制造恐惧的手段，与前几代人所见过的策略非常相似——政策被歪曲，恐惧被利用，随后通过控制投票，让那些渴望权力的人得以掌权。
And that fear mongering is a very similar tactic that we've seen in the prior generations where policies were misstated, fear was used, and then voting control allowed folks to come to power that were looking for power.
所以我认为，目前它只是一个导火索。
So I think it's just the lightning rod at the moment.
好的。
Okay.
沙蒙，你对这个大局怎么看？
Shammoth, what's your take on this big picture?
这里到底发生了什么？
What's going on here?
我认为重要的是要理解，政客们有着极强的自我保护意识。
I think it's important to understand that politicians have an incredible sense of self preservation.
那么问题来了，为什么伯尼·桑德斯会认为，发布那段视频不会显得自己完全愚蠢？
So the question is why would Bernie Sanders think he would not look totally foolish in putting that video out?
这段视频走红的原因并不是因为它听起来太疯狂。
And the reason it went viral is not because it sounded so crazy.
而是因为对某些群体和一部分人来说，它听起来是理性且合理的。
It was that to some faction and percentage of people, it sounded rational and reasonable.
这凸显出我们对人工智能存在巨大的认知问题。
And the problem that highlights is that we have a huge perception issue in AI.
我们只有少数几家公司。
We have a handful of companies.
这些少数公司所发布的所有公关内容，都是一系列循环的利益交换，资本在它们之间相互流动。
All the PR that you see from those handful of companies is a bunch of circular deal making, the bunch of capital that flows from one to the other.
这导致这些公司的股价上涨，而只有少数人从中受益。
It causes these stocks to go up, of which a small percentage of people benefit.
而在其末尾，伴随着另一套完全不同的文章，每个人都阅读这些文章，谈论悬在他们头顶上的达摩克利斯之剑，无论是电价、自己的工作、孩子的就业，还是教育质量。
And at the tail end of it, it's accompanied by a completely different set of articles that everybody also reads about this sort of Damocles that's about to fall on their head, whether it's electricity prices or whether it's their jobs or whether it's the jobs of their children or the quality of their education.
因此，我们面临着巨大的认知问题。
So we have a big perception problem.
那么当前的问题是，我们该如何解决它？
So the question at hand is how do we fix it?
我们如何才能回到那个时代，让一段谈论阻止所有进步的视频显得像它本应那样可笑？
How do we get back to the place where a video talking about stopping all progress would seem as laughable as it should be.
我认为你可以回到镀金时代，提出一个问题：在1880年至1920年工业化浪潮期间，当技术剧变伴随着少数人取得巨大成功时，当时的工业领袖们是如何应对的？
And I think you can go back to the Gilded Age and you can ask the question, how did the industrialist leaders of that era respond through that 1880 to 1920 age of industrialization when you had all of this technological upheaval accompanied by a handful of people with incredible success.
对吧？
Right?
安德鲁·卡内基、约翰·D。
Andrew Carnegie, John D.
洛克菲勒、亨利·福特。
Rockefeller, Henry Ford.
他们做了什么？
What did they do?
我认为我们可以从他们身上学到的教训是，如今我们整个行业必须主动出击。
And I think the lesson we can borrow from them is we now need to be on the forward foot as an industry.
别再搞那些愚蠢的发型、笨拙的手表、丑陋的衣服和炫耀财富的浮夸行为了。
Enough of the stupid haircuts, dumb watches, ugly clothes, ostentatious displays of wealth.
我们都做过这些。
We've all done it.
我也曾深陷其中。
I've been guilty of it.
这种行为必须停止。
It has to stop.
彻底停止。
Absolutely stop.
相反，我们需要开始用这些公司资产负债表中的一部分收益，来惠及尽可能多的美国人。
And instead, we need to start to use a percentage of the balance sheets of these companies in order to benefit as many Americans as possible.
这绝对是最低限度。
That is the absolute minimum.
安德鲁·卡内基建造了2500座图书馆。
Andrew Carnegie built 2,500 libraries.
他的理念是，随着他修建铁路，GDP将得到提升。
The idea was as he built the railroads, you're going to scale GDP.
教育和知识也将得到提升。
You're going to scale education and knowledge.
这些图书馆是见证人们从工业革命中获得回报的实物。
Those libraries are artifacts that allowed people to feel a dividend from that industrial revolution.
约翰·D。
John D.
洛克菲勒将他所有的财富投资于机构和大学。
Rockefeller took all of his wealth and invested in institutions and universities.
亨利·福特特别关注工资。
Henry Ford specifically focused on wages.
我们需要更好地自我组织，更要主动出击。
We need to self organize better, and we need to be more on the forward foot.
我们需要开始做一些能被数千万美国公民切实感受到的、可量化的行动。
We need to start doing things that are practically measurable by tens of millions of American citizens.
这有助于扭转我们目前面临的认知问题，因为萨克斯上周指出，数据并不支持这种误解。
And it starts to beat back the perception problem that we have because Saxe pointed out last week, the data does not support the misperception.
但问题是，正如萨克斯和我上周讨论的，这种误解正在愈演愈烈。
But the problem is, and Saxe and I were talking about this last week, the misperception is gaining steam.
因此，我认为我们需要利用现有的工具，提供一些每个男人、女人和孩子都能切身感受到的实际好处。
And so I think we need to use these tools that we have to provide some more practical benefits that every man, woman, and child can feel.
否则，这种情况会不断加剧，你会看到越来越离谱的伯尼·桑德斯视频版本。
Otherwise, this thing is gonna build, and you'll see crazier and crazier versions of this Bernie Sanders video.
好吧。
Alright.
说得很好。
I think it's well said.
而且，正如我上周所说，我认为击败中国对普通美国人来说并不重要。
And, you know, as I said last week, I think beating China does not matter to the average American.
这在他们看来是无关紧要的，沙莫特，我认为在很多方面都是如此。
It's below their line, Shammoth, I think, in many ways.
他们关心的是工作。
What they care about is jobs.
他们关心自己的孩子能否找到工作。
They care about their kids getting jobs.
是的，他们也关心成本。
And, yeah, they care about costs.
他们关心通货膨胀。
They care about inflation.
他们关心能源价格上涨。
They care about energy costs going up.
我们的行业在解释这如何惠及普通美国人方面做得非常糟糕，而他们看到的都是你提到的那些新闻头条，比如各种跨境交易和股价上涨。
Our industry has done a terrible job of explaining how this benefits the average American, and they're seeing all these headlines about, as you mentioned, all the cross deal booking and all these stocks going up.
有一半的美国人不持有股票，所以他们没有参与其中。
Half the country doesn't own stocks, so they're not participating in it.
他们并非对自动驾驶汽车视而不见，也清楚自己的孩子找工作困难，同时听到人们谈论工作岗位被取代，这确实是一个合理的担忧。
And they're not blind to seeing self driving cars or seeing their kids having a hard time getting a job, and they're hearing everybody talk about job displacement, and that's a valid concern.
人们感到害怕，而我们的行业由于未能贴近他们的现实处境，反而加剧了这种恐惧。
People are scared, and our industry is scaring them, I think, by not meeting where they are.
然后，尊重地超越中国也很重要。
And then beating China respectfully is important.
萨克斯，极其重要。
Sacks, super important.
从理智上讲，我同意你的观点。
I can intellectually agree with you on that.
但如果你失去了
But if you lose
工作，孩子也找不到
your job and kids can't get
失去工作，这是关乎生死的问题。
a job, that's that's that's existential.
是的。
Yes.
这不是我的孩子明年需要一份工作的问题。
It's not my child needs a job next year.
他们毕业时背负着十万美元的债务，我的能源账单在上涨，杂货账单也在上涨，而且从未回落。
They're graduating from school with a $100,000 in debt, and my energy bill is going up, and my grocery bills are going up, and they haven't come down.
这就是美国人正在经历的。
That's what Americans are experiencing.
是的，也许你刚才关于图书馆的观点也很有见地。
And, yeah, maybe giving I think you also made an interesting point there too about the libraries.
与中国的竞争是关乎生死的，因为如果我们能将竞争限定在人工智能、智力和经济实力的领域，我们有很大机会获胜。
The war with China is existential because if we can keep it on the battlefield of AI and intellectual and economic prowess, we have a very good chance of winning.
但如果局势恶化，突然变成另一种形式的对抗，那对每个人都是灾难，尤其是我们的孩子和子孙后代。
If it devolves and all of a sudden becomes a different kind of battle, that's bad for everybody, especially our children and our children's children.
所以我们需要在当前的战场上赢得这场游戏。
So we need to win the current game on the field.
但为了做到这一点，我们需要改变这些误解。
But in order to do that, we need to change these misperceptions.
我们需要开始展示一些实际成果，表明这是一项能惠及每个人的红利，而且我们必须立即开始。
We need to start showing tactical artifacts that show that this is a dividend that can benefit everybody, and we need to start now.
我只是把这个问题提出来。
I'm just putting it out there.
这些公司的资产负债表上拥有大量现金。
We have so much cash on the balance sheets of these companies.
华尔街却将其视为零价值。
Wall Street values it at zero.
如果你查看任何一家公司的企业价值并进行分部加总，根本没人关心那些现金。
If you look at the enterprise value of any of these companies and you do a sum of the parts, nobody cares about that cash.
所以我们需要更有效地利用这些现金。
So we need to start using that cash more effectively.
贾马特，对你来说，这里的图书馆隐喻相当于什么？
What's the equivalent of the library metaphor here for you, Jamat?
你有什么想法吗？
Do you have any ideas?
我不会抢先说出正在推进的内容，但我想说的是，这些公司的领导者已经接收到这个信息了。
I'm not gonna front run what's being worked on except to say that the leaders of these companies have gotten the message.
他们正在研究一系列解决方案。
They are working on a whole host of solutions.
而且，我们仍在与误解作斗争，这是一场复杂的战斗，但它是可以赢的，我认为你将在新年伊始看到一些成果。
And, again, we're fighting misperception, which is a complicated battle, but it's winnable, and I think you're gonna start to see stuff in the New Year.
是的。
Yeah.
我认为教育是其中最重要的。
I would say education's at the top of that list.
萨克斯，我们在结束这个话题前，听听你的想法。
Sax, your thoughts here as we wrap on this first topic.
我不确定是该讨论这些具体的虚假信息，还是该讨论背后更大规模的企图——即试图诋毁人工智能并彻底阻止其发展。
I'm not sure whether to address the particular hoaxes or the fact that there are there's a larger effort here to try and discredit AI and get AI development to stop entirely.
我们来谈谈这些具体的虚假信息吧。
Let's talk about some of these particular hoaxes.
关于失业的说法，我觉得我现在每周都在做这个，但维珍集团最近发布了一项新研究，分析了那些高度暴露于人工智能自动化的职业与所有职业在就业增长和工资增长方面的差异。
So on the job loss claim, I feel like I do this every week now, but there's a new study from Vanguard where they analyze job growth and wage growth in occupations that are highly exposed to AI automation versus all occupations.
他们发现，在受人工智能影响的职业中，就业增长和工资增长都更高，而不是更低。
And they find that both job growth and wage growth is higher, not lower, in the occupations that are exposed to AI.
如果你看受人工智能影响的职业的就业增长，是1.7%，而其他职业仅为0.8%。
So if you look at job growth in occupations exposed to AI, it's 1.7% compared to 0.8% for other.
在工资增长方面，是3.8%，而其他职业仅为0.7%。
For wage growth, it's 3.8% versus 0.7% for other.
所以你在这里看到的是某种可能看似反直觉、但对我来说合乎逻辑的现象：当你让工人更具生产力时，他们劳动的价值反而上升，而不是下降，最终他们会获得更高薪酬，企业也更愿意雇佣更多人。
So what you see here is something maybe it's counterintuitive, but it makes sense to me, which is as you make workers more productive, the value of their labor increases, not decreases, and they end up getting paid more and you want to hire more of them.
这严重违背了主流叙事。
So this is a huge narrative violation.
同样，这来自万得公司。
Again, is coming from Vanguard.
它表明人工智能的生产力对工人有利。
And it's showing that AI productivity is good for workers.
这紧随耶鲁预算实验室的一项研究之后，我在之前的节目中提到过，该研究称，在ChatGPT发布后的33个月数据中，就业市场没有出现明显动荡。
This follows on the heels of that study from Yale Budget Lab, which I talked about in a previous show, that it said there's no discernible disruption to the job market based on thirty three months of data after the launch of ChatGPT.
我理解你可以对未来做出预测，认为这种情况会改变，会出现人工智能导致的失业，但我想说的是，就目前的数据来看，并没有人工智能导致的失业。
Now I understand that you can make predictions as to the future that this state's gonna change, that there will be AI job loss, but what I'm saying is that if you look at the data so far, there is no AI job loss.
恰恰相反，就业增长和就业机会在增加。
Quite the opposite is job growth and job gains.
顺便说一下，目前我们正受益于2%的GDP增长动力，这来自人工智能热潮和由此带来的资本支出热潮。
By the way, we have a 2% tailwind to GDP growth right now that's coming from this AI boom, this CapEx boom that's happening.
因此，我认为这对美国经济是非常有利的。
And so this is, I think, a very good thing for The US economy.
那么，为什么人们想要破坏它呢？
Now why do people wanna sabotage it?
最近《Semaphore》上有一篇非常有趣的文章，描述了AI批评者如何资助了NBC新闻、彭博社、《时代》、《The Verge》、《洛杉矶时报》等主流媒体的新闻奖学金——顺便说一句，我可是一直在关注这些事。
There's a really interesting article in semaphore recently that described how AI critics were funding journalism fellowships at major publications like NBC News, Bloomberg, Time, The Verge, LA Times, which, by the way, I mean, I track these things.
他们对AI持一贯的负面态度。
They're relentlessly negative about AI.
这些奖学金由‘生命未来研究所’资助，这是一个悲观主义组织，认为AI将变得有自我意识并取代人类。
These fellowships were funded by Future of Life Institute, which is a doomer group that thinks that AI is gonna become sentient and replace humans.
而这些资助来自以太坊的维塔利克·布特林的捐赠。
And they were funded by a donation by Vitalik Buterin from Ethereum.
这其实是个很有趣的故事。
It's an interesting story, actually.
他把他的狗狗币捐给了生命未来研究所。
He donated his dog coins to future of life.
这些狗狗币最终价值高达6亿美元。
They ended up being worth $600,000,000.
狗狗币？
Dogecoins?
狗狗币。
Doge.
然后你想起还有那些其他的狗狗币，比如柴犬币。
And then you remember how there was, like, those other dog coins, Shiba Inu.
柴犬币。
Shiba Inu.
哦，柴犬币。
Oh, Shiba Inu.
嗯。
Yeah.
哦，他收藏了一堆狗狗币。
Oh, he had a collection of dog coins.
他收藏了一堆狗狗币。
Got collection of dog coins.
据说人们会把它们作为推广活动空投给他。
Apparently, people, like, airdrop them to him as, like, a promotional thing.
明白了。
Got it.
我觉得他并不想要这些，所以他想，我该怎么处理掉它们呢？
I don't think he wanted them, so he's like, how do I get rid of them?
于是他把它们捐给了生命未来研究所，结果这些币价值高达6亿美元。
So he donates them to future of life, and they end up being worth $600,000,000.
所以通过这个
So by this
天哪。
Oh my god.
几乎像是一个意外，这个末日思想库竟然拥有了6亿美元的战争基金，并且一直在资助这些新闻学奖学金。
Almost like this accident, this Doomer think tank ends up with a $600,000,000 war chest, and they've been funding these journalism fellowships.
他们一直在资助学者研究人工智能。
They've been funding grants for academics to study AI.
显然，这最终会带来非常负面的影响。
Obviously, that's gonna end up being very negative.
他们资助了大量这些反对建设数据中心的邻避组织，因为他们的目标仅仅是阻止这一切。
And they are funding a lot of these NIMBY organizations that are opposing data centers because their goal is just to get it to stop.
这就是他们的目标。
That's their goal.
他们只是想让开发停下来。
They just want the development to stop.
我认为，你无法低估这对公众舆论产生的巨大影响。
And you can't, I don't think, underestimate how much of an impact this had on the public discourse.
但如果你仔细审视他们的实际主张，比如用水量的说法，这完全是骗局。
But if you look at their actual claims, like, for example, the water use claims, it's a total hoax.
我的意思是，这些AI数据中心并不消耗大量
I mean, these AI dancers do not use a lot
水。
of water.
我想深入探讨一下，因为与高尔夫球场相比，它们的用水量其实并不多，或者
I wanted to get into because, yeah, compared to a golf course, they're not using that much or
我认为
I think
追逐加利福尼亚中部的核桃和杏仁。
chasing walnuts and, you know, almonds in Central California.
所以我觉得也许值得拆解一下。
So I think it is worth maybe just unpacking.
把很多东西扔到墙上看看能不能粘住。
Throwing a lot of spaghetti at the wall.
听好了。
Look.
你得记住伊达·塔贝尔是谁，因为在这个背景下这很有趣。
You have to remember who was who was Ida Tarbell because it's quite interesting in the context of this.
伊达·塔贝尔是美国一位作家，同样生活在镀金时代。
Ida Tarbell was this American writer, again, in the Gilded Age.
她是调查记者团体‘扒粪者’的一员，该团体对工业革命时期的滥用行为、劳工剥削等进行调查，而她针对的是标准石油公司。
She was part of the Muckwreckers, which was a group of journalists that were doing investigative research around the abuses of the Industrial Revolution, labor abuses and the like, and she took on Sanadol.
没错。
Exactly.
如果你看看这个例子，我敢肯定，当今拥有塔贝尔奖学金的人们，他们所践行的正是这种揭示剥削、不公与不当行为的故事欲望。
If you look at that example, I'm sure that the people in this current generation who have a Tarbell fellowship, what they're living out is this desire to tell a story about exploitation and wrong and misdoing.
问题是，这些说法在事实上站不住脚，但不幸的是，它们加剧了我们已有的认知问题，而这个问题一直在恶化。
The problem is that these things don't factually hold together, but unfortunately, it adds to the perception problem that we have, and that has been growing.
正如萨克斯所说，这么多这类说法已经被揭穿了，但这就像打地鼠一样，杰森，因为他们会抛出水的问题。
As Saks said, like, so many of these things have been debunked, but it's playing whack a mole, Jason, because they'll throw the water thing out.
它会被揭穿。
It'll get debunked.
下周可能会出现关于液冷以及所有PFAS和永久性化学物质的说法。
Next week will probably something about liquid cooling and all the PFAS and forever chemicals.
我们又得去揭穿它。
We'll have to debunk that.
然后我们又会转向空气冷却，以及它如何成为一个问题。
Then we'll go to, like, air cooling and how that's a problem.
然后我们会转向其他事情。
Then we'll go to something else.
最终，他们会说上高地松鸡，但他们不会停止。
Eventually, it'll be the upper land grouse, but they are not gonna stop.
萨克斯，你有什么计划来向美国公众重新诠释这个问题吗？
Sachs, how do you do you have a plan to reframe this to the American public?
你正在解释这些坏事是如何发生的，以及背后所有邪恶势力的作用。
You're explaining how these bad things are happening and all the evil forces at work behind the scene.
嗯，不是邪恶势力，但我不认为人们意识到，少数反人工智能科技亿万富翁对舆论造成了多大的影响。
Well, not the evil forces, but I don't think people understand the extent to which the discourse has been impacted by a few anti AI tech billionaires.
你提到了这一点。
Brought it up.
你每周都会提到它。
You brought it up every week
还有在你的短信里。
and on your text
在录音里。
on tape.
我提过这事，等等。
Brought it up hold on.
我在本节目里提过，早在去年十一月我就在推特上讨论过。
I brought it up on this show, and I tweeted about it way back in November.
是的。
Yeah.
我还转发了一位名叫尼拉特·韦斯普拉特的作家，她分析了整个末日工业复合体。
And I linked to a writer named Nirat Weisplat who has analyzed this whole Doomer industrial complex.
她指出，有数百个这样的前台组织，而它们实际上都由少数几位科技亿万富翁资助。
And she has shown that there are hundreds of these front organizations, and they're all really just funded by a few big tech billionaires.
是达斯汀·莫斯科维茨、扬·塔伦和维塔利克·布特林。
It's Dustin Moskowitz, Jan Talen, and Vitalik Buterin.
当我第一次描述这件事时，人们觉得这听起来有点疯狂，像是阴谋论。
Well, when I first described this, people thought that this sounds kinda crazy like conspiracy theory.
果然，Semaphore 发表了一篇文章，解释说所有这些新闻工作都是由未来生命研究所资助的，而该机构的资金主要来自维塔利克·布特林的大额捐赠。
And then sure enough, Semaphore comes out with the article explaining that all these journalism jobs are being funded by Future of Life, which was the big donation by Vitalik Buterin.
所以我的观点是，你绝对不能低估那些向这一事业捐赠了超过十亿美元的少数亿万富翁对公众辩论造成的扭曲影响。
So my point is just you can't underestimate the extent to which a few billionaires who've donated over a billion dollars to this cause have distorted the public debate.
你实际上可以在美国和中国对人工智能的相对接受度上看到这一点。
And you really see this actually in the relative popularity of AI in The United States versus China.
最近有一项调查，名为‘人工智能乐观主义’，询问人们是否认为人工智能的好处会超过其危害。
So there's recently a poll on they call it AI optimism where they ask people, do you believe that the benefits of AI will outweigh the harms?
83% 的中国人认为人工智能的好处会超过其危害，他们对人工智能持乐观态度。
83% of people in China believe the benefits will outweigh the harms, they're AI optimistic.
而在美国，这一比例仅为 39%。
In The US, it's only 39%.
因此，这种讨论确实受到了这些少数人的极大影响。
So again, the discourse has really been affected by a few of these Okay.
所以这些机构。
So institutions.
让我们假设这一切都是真的。
Let's let's say that's all true.
是的。
Yeah.
我的问题是，你有什么计划来扭转这种局面，向美国人民解释他们为什么应该对这件事保持乐观？
My question to you is, what's your plan to turn this around and explain to the American people why they should be optimistic about this?
你的计划是什么，大卫·萨克斯？
What's your plan, David Saxe?
好吧，你看。
Well, look.
你说得对，我们必须扭转这种叙事，而且我认为科技公司在这方面解释好处的工作做得非常糟糕。
I mean, you're right that we have to flip the narrative around, and I I do think that the tech companies have done a really bad job explaining the benefits.
我们和塔克讨论过这个问题。
We talked about this with Tucker.
我认为他提出了一些非常好的观点。
I think he brought up some really good points.
你说得对。
And you're right.
比如，AI公司过于依赖裁员叙事来解释它们的价值主张。
Like, the the AI companies lean way too much into the whole job loss narrative as as a way to explain their value prop.
我认为这要么像贾玛塔说的那样，是为了下一轮融资，要么就是一种懒惰，因为描述裁员或岗位替代比描述生产力提升要容易得多。
And I think it's just either what Jamatha said, which is this is about their next fundraising round, or it's a form of laziness because it's easier to describe job loss or job replacement than it is productivity.
对吧？
Right?
比如，多因素生产率是个很难解释的概念。
Like multifactor productivity is a difficult concept to explain.
所以我认为他们确实迎合了这种叙事。
So I do think that they've played into this narrative.
但我认为我们在这里必须做的是驳斥这些叙事。
But I think that what we have to do here is just debunk these narratives.
再说一遍，目前还没有任何裁员的证据。
Again, no evidence of job loss yet.
没有证据表明存在水资源问题。
No evidence of the the water problems.
我认为数据中心的电力问题是可以解决的。
I think the electricity issues with data centers are addressable.
你应该让人工智能公司自行建设电力设施。
You have to let the AI companies build their own power.
他们不必接入电网。
They don't have to connect to the grid.
事实上，特朗普总统过去六个月一直呼吁允许人工智能公司自建电力系统，以免消耗电网资源。
In fact, that's what president Trump has called for for the last six months is to let the AI companies build their own power so they're not drawing on the grid.
因此，这个问题也容易解决。
So that problem is easily addressed as well.
谈到成本问题。
Talking about the affordability problem.
但你说得对。
But you're right.
展开剩余字幕（还有 480 条）
我们必须传达这一技术将如何惠及美国人民的信息。
We have to get the message out how this technology will benefit Americans.
总而言之，我一直说我是技术现实主义者，而不是技术加速主义者，因为最终，我们别无选择。
And the bottom line is, look, I've always said I'm a techno realist, not a techno accelerationist, because at the end of the day, we don't have a choice.
我的意思是，没错。
I mean Yeah.
如果我们不开发这项技术，中国也会开发。
China's gonna develop the technology if we don't.
好的。
Okay.
所以我们其实别无选择。
So we don't really have a choice.
正如我上周所说，我认为最紧迫的三个问题是教育、住房和医疗保健。
I you know, I as I said last week, I think the three most pressing issues, education, housing, and health care.
而我们的行业有能力利用人工智能影响这三个领域。
And our industry is in a unique position to use AI to impact all three of those.
那么，为什么我们整个行业不一起说明一下那里正在发生的诸多美好事情呢？
So why don't we, as an industry, collectively explain all the great things going on there?
我提到了丹尼尔·埃克，不是Pre Novo，而是Novo。
I gave a shout out to Daniel Ek, Pre Novo Pre Novo rather.
所有这些优秀公司都在分析我们的血液。
All these great companies analyzing our blood.
医疗领域正在发生太多事情，这些都能大幅降低成本，改善人们的生活。
There's so much going on in health care that could massively lower the cost, make people's lives better.
显然，在建筑领域可以取得巨大进步，教育领域也是如此，但我们还没有解释过这三件事。
Obviously, in construction, you could have incredible advances and certainly in education, but we haven't explained those three things.
你的观点是什么？
What's your point?
你还能想到其他需要加入这个清单的内容吗？
Is there anything you can think of to add to that list?
我们必须理解。
We have to understand.
总统和萨克斯负责引导美国的GDP。
The president and Sacks, they're responsible for shepherding the GDP of America.
正如萨克斯所说，未来几年美国GDP的一半预计将来自用于提升我们人工智能能力的全部资本投入。
And as Sachs said, half of American GDP over the next few years is forecasted to come from all of the capital that goes in to build out our capabilities in AI.
我们必须实现这一点。
We need this to happen.
这背后有存在主义的原因，也有基本的经济原因。
There's the existential reason why, but there's also a basic economic reason why.
所以，杰森，当私营公司开始更认真地对待这种认知问题时，社会许可就会随之而来。
So, Jason, the social license comes when off to the side, the private companies start to take this perception problem more seriously.
所以，根据你的观点，他们在住房方面能做些什么吗？
So to your point, are there things that they can do around housing?
能。
Yes.
而且，再次强调，我不打算提前透露，他们目前正在积极开发一些我认为具有变革性的东西。
And, again, not to front run, they're actively working on something that I think could be transformational.
另外，他们能在医疗保健方面做些什么吗？
Separately, could they do something on health care?
尚未确定，但我们应该关注一下。
TBD, but we should look at it.
你们能在教育方面做点什么吗？
Can you do something in education?
尚未确定，但我们应该关注一下。
TBD, but we should look at it.
但关键是，如果那些走在前沿、为我们构建这场革命的公司，能够意识到我们需要让更多人参与进来，拿出一部分资产负债表上的资本，投资于创造这种社会许可，我们就能彻底扭转这种认知。
But the point is if you can have the same companies that are on the forward foot building this revolution for us, recognize that we need to bring some more folks along, take some of their balance sheet capital, and invest it to create this social license to operate, we will flip this perception on its head.
是的。
Yeah.
我觉得说得很好。
I think it's well said.
而且，你们一定记得，那些AT&T的广告。
And, you know, there was a really interesting you guys must remember this, the AT and T commercials.
你会吗？
You will?
你还记得那些吗？
Do you remember those?
顺便说一下，抱歉。
By the way, sorry.
这是另一个很好的例子，杰森。
That's another great example, Jason.
AT&T在世纪之交做了什么？
AT and T, at the turn of the century, what did they do?
他们拿自己的资本创建了贝尔实验室。
They took their capital, and they created Bell Labs.
贝尔实验室做了什么？
What did Bell Labs do?
贝尔实验室推动了整个现代信息理论的发展。
Bell Labs drove all of modern information theory.
它是互联网的前身。
It was the precursor to the Internet.
他们进行了大量的基础研究。
They did so much fundamental research.
我想说清楚。
I wanna be clear.
我不认为这是五级警报。
I don't think that this is a five alarm fire.
现在这个问题完全可以解决。
This is very fixable right now.
坦率地说，关键的检验标准是三、四、五、六个月后，杰森，当你看到进展的苗头时，如果我们能组织起来，你的看法会改变吗？
And the litmus test, quite honestly, is in three, four, five, six months, Jason, when you see the trickle of progress, if we can get organized, does your perception change?
而你过去六个月所使用的语言和语气，哦，我
And does the language that you use and the tone that you've used over these last six months Oh, I
意思是说我？
mean me?
不。
No.
不。
No.
不。
No.
我其实觉得你很好地预警了部分美国人所持的观点。
I'm actually thinking that you've actually been quite a good early warning system for what a certain percentage of Americans think.
所以
And so
这完全预测准了。
in that predicted it perfectly.
是的。
Yes.
嗯。
Yeah.
这非常有用。
It's been extremely useful.
但现在我们必须采取行动，你得改变你的想法。
But now we gotta act on it, and you have to change your mind.
哦，不。
Oh, no.
不。
No.
我的想法一直非常清晰。
My my mind has been very crystal clear.
我不会让你告诉我，你知道的，我说的是我的观点是工作岗位将被取代。
I won't let you, you know, tell me what I'm saying is my opinion has been job displacements coming
杰森，让我说明白。
Jason, let me be clear.
我们有
We have
为了让你在这档节目中公开改变你的想法。
to earn you changing your mind publicly on this show.
如果我们这么做，我们就又能回到一个良好的状态。
If we do that, we're back in a good place.
嗯。
Yeah.
不。
No.
我觉得你以一种非常居高临下的方式在说这句话。
I think that you're saying that in a very condescending way.
我提过，我提过，好吧。
I have brought up I have brought up okay.
无心的。
Unintentionally.
在这里。
Here.
让我试试这个，抱歉。
Let me try this Sorry.
让我再试一次。
Let me try this again.
我们有
We have
你说话的语气好像我误导了。
You're saying as if I'm misguided.
不。
No.
不。
No.
不。
No.
有一种看法。
Have a perception.
哪个
Which
你觉得我的看法是什么？
is what do think my perception is?
总的来说，人工智能是会对所有人带来极大好处，还是只对一小部分人非常有利，这就像抛硬币一样难以预测。
That on the balance, it's a coin flip about whether AI is going to be all good for all people or very good for a small subset of people.
这大致就是我的总结。
That's what I would roughly summarize.
我觉得这很准确。
I would say that's accurate.
工作岗位流失。
Job displacement.
所以让我们说完。
So let finish.
关于工作岗位，所以让我如果我们可以执行这个计划，再次说明，也就是把我们在前瞻性投资中做的一切结合起来，是的。
About job So So let me if we can execute this plan, again, meaning marry all the stuff we're doing on the forward foot within in investing Yeah.
我们需要做一些事情，以让更广泛的美国民众共同参与进来
With some of the stuff that we also need to do to bring a broader swath of the American population along
是的。
Yeah.
如果我们成功了，你的看法会有所不同。
You will have a different perception if we are successful.
我想说的是，你目前持有这种看法，而我们的目标是改变你和像你这样的人。
And what I'm saying is you've had this one perception, and our goal would be to shift you and people like you.
好的。
Okay.
我我我，这样公平吗？
I I I Is that fair?
我觉得这完全公平。
I think it's completely fair.
是的。
Yeah.
我一直试图指出，作为整个行业，我们没有正视人们对工作岗位流失的合理担忧。
I have been trying to bring up that as an industry, we have not recognized people's valid concerns about job displacement.
这正是我在本节目中一直提到的内容。
That's all I've brought up on this program.
我并不是说这会带来灾难性后果，或者我们无法应对，但我认为，如果我们一直谈论‘在人工智能领域超越中国’，这对普通人来说太抽象了。
I'm not saying I think it's gonna be cataclysmic or we can't handle it, but I think if we constantly talk about, hey.
如果我们否认机器人出租车和人形机器人即将到来的事实，而像埃隆这样的聪明人和其他领导者也承认：是的，
Winning the AI race in China, that's abstract for people.
我们正计划取代这些工作岗位，那我们就在沟通上做得非常糟糕。
And if we deny the fact that robotaxis and human robotics are coming and intelligent people like Elon or other leaders are saying, yeah.
我认为这其中一部分是沟通问题，另一部分是，
We're we're planning on replacing those jobs.
我们正在做一件糟糕的沟通工作。
We're doing a terrible job communicating this.
而且我认为，这其中有沟通的原因，也有其他原因，比如：
And I do think part of this is communication, and part of it is, hey.
这些是合理的担忧。
These are valid concerns.
所以我认为这是很好的解决方式。
So I think great resolution.
是的。
Yeah.
当然。
Sure.
我会成为试金石。
I'll be the litmus test.
你们知道什么是“茅草屋与堡垒”谬误吗？
Do you guys know what the Motte And Bailey fallacy is?
不知道。
No.
给观众解释一下。
Explain it to the audience.
我的意思是，我好像听说过这个说法，
I mean, I think I've heard of it,
但“莫特和贝利城堡”是一种早期中世纪的防御工事，其中有一个非常安全的区域，即主堡或莫特，而贝利则是一个相对松散、难以防守的区域。
but The Motte And Bailey Castle is an early medieval fortification where there's like a very protected area, the keep or the motte, and then the bailey is kind of this looser area that's hard to defend.
对吧？
Right?
所以当他们需要撤退时，就会退到莫特里。
So what happens is if they need to retreat, they'll go into the motte.
好的。
Okay.
嗯。
Yeah.
《指环王》。
Lord of the Rings.
对。
Right.
对。
Right.
因此，这已经成为一种辩论技巧或谬误：人们会提出一个极其夸张的主张，本质上就是跑到城寨的外堡。
So this has become known as a debating trick or fallacy where people will make a really outrageous claim, which is they'll they'll basically run to the Bailey.
然后当你证明这是错误的，他们会退回到高塔，说一些无可争议的话。
And then when you prove that it's false, they'll run back into the Mott and say something very unobjectionable.
所以，在人工智能导致失业这一谬误的语境中，外堡就是人们会说：这导致了大规模的失业和剧烈的冲击。
So in the context of, like, the AI job loss fallacy, the Bailey is people will say, this is causing massive job loss, massive disruption.
这已经发生了。
It's already here.
你能看到。
You can see it.
而当我指出：实际上，如果你看耶鲁预算实验室的研究，或者现在维珍集团的研究，根本没有失业，他们就会退回到高塔。
And then when I point out, well, actually, if you look at the Yale Budget Lab study or you look now at the Vanguard study, there is no job loss, then they'll retreat into the mott.
他们会说：不。
And they'll say, no.
不。
No.
不。
No.
不。
No.
我谈的是未来会发生什么，这是一个根本上无法反驳的立场。
I'm talking about what's gonna happen in the future, which is a position that's fundamentally irrefutable.
当我指出这一点时，他们会说：等等。
And then when I point that out, well, wait.
你完全改变了你说的话。
You just totally changed what you're saying.
你就像说：不。
You're like, no.
不。
No.
不。
No.
我刚才只谈到了未来。
I was only talking about the future.
而一旦我们似乎达成了共识，莫特那边的人就会冲到贝利那边，说：看看优步司机那边发生了什么，等等。
And then as soon as we sort of seem to have agreement, then the people in the Mott will race out to the Bailey and basically saying, well, look at what's happening with Uber drivers or what have you.
所以在就业流失这个问题上，莫特和贝利之间的这种对立一直在持续。
So there is this Mot and Bailey thing happening all the time on this job loss question.
我只是希望人们能坦率、诚实一点：如果你的论点是这将在未来导致失业，那是对的。
And I just want people to be straight about it or honest about it, which is, look, if your claim is that this will cause job loss in the future, it's true.
我无法反驳这一点，因为我们谁都无法证明未来会发生什么。
I can't refute that because none of us can prove what's gonna happen in the future.
但请诚实面对当下正在发生的事。
But be honest about what's happening today.
在AI聊天机器人推出后的头三年里，劳动力市场没有出现明显的动荡，早期的研究和数据表明工资上涨，就业岗位实际上也在增加，而且由于建筑热潮，蓝领岗位的增加尤为明显。
And in the first three years after the launch of AI chatbots, there's been no discernible disruption to the labor market, and the early studies and data are showing wage increases and actually job increases, and there's definitely job increases in blue collars because of the construction boom.
这是我们第一个辩论角。
This has been our first debate club corner.
每周我们都会在这里教你如何更好地辩论。
Every week, we're gonna teach you how to debate better here.
不。
No.
你知道的，我真的很感激这一点。
It's you know, it I I appreciate that.
我真的想在这里说明，我根本不是悲观主义者。
I I have really tried to say here, like, I'm not a doomerist at all.
你知道，我所看的统计数据，我跟达尓交流过。
You know, the statistics I look at, you know, I talk to Dhar.
我真的，诚心诚意地这么做了。
I have, actually, sincerely.
这就是为什么我不用‘替代’这个词，我用的是‘转移’。
That's why I don't use I I use displacement.
你知道吗？
You know?
我真的使用精炼的语言。
I I really use refined language.
我确实如此。
I do.
我确实如此。
I do.
当我与达拉交谈时，他告诉我，在像Waymo这样的自动驾驶出租车出现的地区，他们为解决这个问题所采取的具体措施是，不再试图在洛杉矶和旧金山招聘司机，因为那里已经有太多Waymo车辆了。
And when I talked to Dara, he told me in areas where robo taxis like Waymo are occurring, what they did specifically to deal with this issue was they stopped trying to hire drivers in in Los Angeles and in San Francisco because there are so many Waymos.
他们不希望司机有糟糕的体验。
They don't want them to have a bad experience.
所以，你知道，无论我们讨论的是城堡里的哪个部分，我都没有立场参与其中。
So, you know, you wherever in the castle we're talking about this, I I don't have a a horse in this race.
我不是多斯汀·莫斯科维茨那帮人的成员。
I'm not part of this cabal of, you know, Dustin Moskovitz's people.
我只是通过与Uber、Waymo以及其他这些正在开发软件以消除工作岗位的公司交谈了解到这一点。
I just know from talking to Uber and Waymo and these other companies and, you know, other companies that are building software where they're trying to eliminate jobs.
所以我只是提出这个作为非常有趣的一个例子。
And so I'm just bringing that up as a a really interesting example.
Uber和Waymo与特斯拉的埃隆一样，目前正在制定计划来应对司机的失业问题，并为这些司机开发新的产品和服务。
Uber and Waymo to Elon with Tesla, they are actually making plans right now to deal with this displacement of drivers, and they're coming up with new products and services for those drivers.
所以他们正在做的一件事是在Uber进行数据标注。
So one of the things they're doing is data labeling at Uber.
他们收购了一家数据标注公司，并对司机们说：嘿。
They they bought a data labeling company, and they're taking the drivers and saying, hey.
你们要不要来这边做些数据标注工作？实际上是在为他们创造AI相关的工作岗位。
You wanna do some data labeling over here and actually creating AI jobs for them.
所以，这正是整个行业正在努力应对的问题。
So this is, you know, something that the whole industry is working on.
听好了。
Look.
这会是一个连续谱。
There's gonna be a spectrum.
对吧？
Right?
一些工作将会改变。
Some jobs are gonna change.
一些工作会被淘汰。
Some jobs will be eliminated.
问题是，关于工作岗位的消除，这些损失会被新增的工作岗位所完全抵消吗？
The question is with respect to job eliminations, will that be more than offset by the net new job creations?
如果你看看像Uber司机这样的职业，当我们实现完全自动驾驶时，显然会有一类工作流失。
If you're looking at things like Uber drivers and we go to full self driving, then obviously there's gonna be some category of job loss there.
所以，我并不是声称某些类型的工作不会被消除，但我相信总体而言，我们看到的是，当工人的生产率提高时，他们的工资会上涨，对他们的劳动力需求也会增加，而不是减少。
So I'm not claiming that there's not gonna be any elimination of certain types of jobs, but I believe that on the whole, what we're seeing is that when you improve the productivity of workers, their wages go up and there's more demand for their labor, not less.
到目前为止，数据就是这么显示的，而我认为目前媒体并没有传达这一点，因为他们正在推广这种末日叙事，而很多这种叙事实际上是被一些资金雄厚的组织所操纵的，这些组织得到了少数有效利他主义者的资助。
That's what the data is showing so far and I just don't think you get that from the media right now because they are promoting this doomer narrative and a lot of that is astroturfed by these enormously deep pocketed organizations that have been funded by a few effective altruists.
好吧。
Alright.
第二个话题。
Topic number two.
经济数据出来了。
Economic numbers are out.
好坏参半。
It's a mixed bag.
失业率上升，政府雇员人数下降。
Unemployment rate is up, and government payrolls are down.
通胀率居中。
Inflation's somewhere in between.
我们来看看这些数据，一起来玩玩数字。
Let's get into the numbers here, fun with numbers.
失业率从9月的4.4%和2025年1月特朗普上任时的4%上升至4.6%。
Unemployment rate rose to 4.6% from 4.4% in September and 4% in January 2025 when president Trump took over.
美国经济在11月新增了6.4万个就业岗位。
US economy added 64,000 jobs in new jobs in November.
10月份出现了约10.4万个岗位流失，但其中16.2万个岗位流失来自联邦政府。
October saw about a 104,000 job losses, but a 162,000 of those job losses came from the federal government.
你还记得Doge回购的事吧，这个播客的朋友埃隆·马斯克也参与其中。
You remember the Doge buybacks, a friend of the pod, Elon Musk, involved in.
这些措施在9月生效，因此出现了一笔小小的集中支付。
Those all took effect at the September, so there was a little bit of a balloon payment that occurred.
穆迪的分析师表示：‘这是一个冻结的就业市场。’
An analyst from Moody's says, quote, it's a frozen job market.
招聘活动很少。
There's not much hiring.
裁员也很少发生。
There's not much firing happen.
这与我在实地看到的情况相符。
That tracks with what I'm seeing on the ground.
与此同时，通胀数据好于预期，为2.7%，低于3.1%的预期，但仍远高于美联储2%的目标。
Meanwhile, inflation came in better than expected at 2.7% beating the 3.1% expectation, but still far away from the 2% target for the Fed.
特朗普昨晚发表了一段长达十八分钟、音量很大且极具强调性的全国讲话，内容并非我们正在入侵委内瑞拉。
Trump gave an eighteen minute, very loud, emphatic address to the nation last night, and it was not that we're invading Venezuela.
讲话主要讲的是他在物价和可负担性方面的成就，并略微批评了拜登。
It was mostly him talking about his accomplishments in terms of prices and affordability and a little bit of admonishing Biden.
这里有一段二十秒的片段。
Here's a twenty second clip.
上一届政府及其在国会的盟友掠夺了我们数万亿美元的国库，推高了物价，达到了前所未有的水平。
The last administration and their allies in congress looted our treasury for trillions of dollars, driving up prices and everything at levels never seen before.
我正在迅速降低这些高物价。
I am bringing those high prices down and bringing them down very fast.
萨克斯，你对这些经济数据有什么看法？
Sax, your thoughts on the economic data?
嗯，你把经济数据描绘得好像它是混合的。
Well, you're you're painting it as you're painting the economic data as mix.
我不知道你怎么还能找到比今天这份数据更好的经济报告。
I don't know how you have a economic report that's better than what we just had today.
首先，正如你所说，CPI数据为2.7%，而市场预期是3.1%。
So first of all, we saw that CPI came in at 2.7% like you said, but the expectations were 3.1%.
因此，今天市场大幅上涨。
That's why the market is rallying today in a big way.
核心通胀率已降至2.6%。
Core inflation's down to 2.6%.
这些数据显著超出预期，使美国的核心CPI通胀率降至自2021年3月以来的最低水平，也就是新冠疫情爆发以来的最低点。
These are significant beats, and this puts core CPI inflation in The US at its lowest level since March 2021, so since the whole COVID thing.
如果你听凯文·哈塞特的说法，他说过去三个月，核心通胀率一直维持在1.6%。
And if you listen to Kevin Hassett, he said that over the past three months, core inflation's been running at 1.6%.
所以，趋势还在进一步下行。
So the trend line is going down even further.
在我看来，通胀正在见顶回落，这几乎已经是一个解决的问题了，这对利率意味着非常好的消息，因为它表明利率将下降。
So it looks to me like inflation's rolling over, and that's just about a solved problem, which is really good news for what it implies for interest rates because it implies that interest rates are coming down.
这将降低抵押贷款成本、汽车贷款融资成本以及其他类似支出。
And that's gonna bring down things like mortgage costs and the costs of financing a car payment and things like that.
现在你谈谈失业问题。
Now you talk about unemployment.
我认为失业方面的消息非常好。
I think the unemployment news is very, good.
如果你看一下从9月到11月的数据，总体就业人数减少了4.1万。
So if you look at the data from September to November, the overall employment is down 41,000.
但为什么会这样呢？
But why was that?
私营部门就业增加了12.1万人，但过去两个月政府就业减少了16.2万人。
Private employment was up a 121,000, but government employment in the last two months has declined by a 162,000.
媒体关注的正是这一点，他们试图声称失业率上升了，但实际上，只是政府职位减少了。
So this is what the media was focused on is they're trying to claim unemployment was up, but actually, it's just that the government jobs decreased.
为什么政府职位会减少？
Why did the government jobs decrease?
好吧，你还记得今年年初欧洲央行降息时，他们从10月1日起提供了买断方案。
Well, you remember that when Doge went in and made their cuts at the beginning of the year, they offered people a buyout as of October 1.
现在有些人立即接受了买断，但更多人一直等到最后期限，也就是10月1日。
Now some people took the buyout right away, but a lot more waited until the last possible day, which was October 1.
这就是为什么你看到10月份失业率出现大幅飙升，但这些被削减的都是政府职位。
And that's why you saw this big spike in October unemployment, but those are government jobs that are being cut.
而且，还有不少人自愿选择接受买断方案并接受了这项安排。
And moreover, there are people who voluntarily wanted to take the buyout and they took that deal.
所以，我认为就业形势实际上相当不错。
So again, I think the employment picture is looking actually quite good.
而且，如果你认同我们的观点，你就不希望政府职位过多。
And if you believe what we believe, you don't want an excessive number of government jobs.
特朗普总统任内，我认为实现了数十年来联邦雇员数量的首次下降。
And president Trump has presided over, I think, the first decrease in the federal workforce in decades.
我们在2025年看到了联邦雇员数量下降了10.7%。
We've seen a 10.7% decrease in federal workers in 2025.
基本上，这个数字从240万下降到了215万。
Basically, the number's gone from 2,400,000 to 2,150,000.
我知道这会让弗里德伯格非常高兴。
I know that'll make Friedberg very happy.
但看看拜登执政期间的情况，我们经历了9%的通货膨胀。
But look, what we had during the Biden years is we had 9% inflation.
我们经济非常疲软。
We had a very weak economy.
我们确实经历了一次衰退。
We did have a recession.
那是一次持续两个季度的浅度衰退，媒体甚至试图重新定义衰退的含义，以避免这些头条新闻。
It was that two quarter shallow recession, and the media even tried to start redefining what a recession was to avoid those headlines.
但拜登政府对此的应对措施是疯狂增加政府雇员。
But what the Biden administration did in response to that is they went hog wild with government hiring.
而我们现在看到的是，通胀正在回落，政府雇员人数也降至更合理的水平，私营经济正在弥补这一缺口。
And what we're seeing now is inflation is now coming back down, and we're seeing the number of government workers come down to a more reasonable level, and the private economy is making up for it.
我们仍然保持着相对历史低位的失业率。
We still have a relatively historically low unemployment rate.
所以这些数据看起来不错。
So those numbers look good.
然后你看看赤字问题。
Then you look at the deficit.
我们每年将赤字减少了6000亿美元。
We've reduced the deficit year over year by 600,000,000,000.
这将有助于降低利率。
That will help bring interest rates down.
在物价方面，目前全美汽油价格处于五年来的最低水平，低于每加仑3美元。
And then on prices, you got the lowest gas prices in five years, below $3 nationally.
最后，在工资方面，实际工资平均上涨了1000多美元，工厂工人上涨了1300美元，建筑工人上涨了1800美元。
And then finally on wages, real wages are up by over $1,000 on average, and it's $1,300 for factory workers, 1,800 for construction workers.
同样，这与拜登执政时期形成了巨大反差，当时工人的实际工资平均每年下降了约3000美元。
And again, that's a big change from the buying years where you saw that in real terms, wages went down by about $3,000 on average per worker.
所以你看，在我看来，我们似乎正站在一个黄金时代的门槛上。
So look, I mean, it seems to me like we're on the cusp of a golden age here.
我不明白这些数据还能怎么更好。
I don't see how the numbers could really be better.
此外，还有人工智能这个顺风车，我认为这是巨大的积极因素，而不是负面因素，由于大规模的资本支出投资，每年为GDP增长贡献约2%，到目前为止并未导致任何失业。
Then on top of it, again, you've got this AI tailwind, which I think is a huge positive, not a negative, which is adding roughly 2% GDP growth every year because of huge CapEx investment with so far no job loss associated with that.
所以我只想说，坐下来好好享受这一切吧。
So I would just say sit back and enjoy this.
我认为我们正朝着2026年的爆炸性增长前进。
I think we're headed for a gangbusters 2026.
利率正在下降。
Rates are coming down.
通胀也在下降，而且明年由于那项宏伟的法案，减税政策也将生效。
Inflation's coming down, and you're also getting tax cuts going into effect next year because of the big beautiful bill.
小费不用缴税。
No tax on tips.
加班收入免税。
No tax on overtime.
社会保障收入免税，再加上标准扣除额提高。
No tax on Social Security, plus the standard deductions being beefed up.
所以人们还没感受到这些将在四月生效的减税福利。
So people haven't even felt the benefit of those tax cuts that's coming in in April.
我不觉得情况还能更好了。
I don't see how things could be much better.
好的。
Okay.
弗赖贝格，对于已公布的数据，你有什么看法吗？查马斯？
Freiberg, any thoughts here on the data as it's come in or Chamath?
我随便问你们其中一个。
I'll I'll go to either one of you.
总体来看，我认为这非常积极。
Directionally, think it's really positive.
你希望看到私营部门的就业增长，而公共部门就业的缩减会产生深远影响，不仅关乎预算，还会创造出更合理的监管空间。
You wanna see private sector jobs growing, And the shrinkage of government sector jobs has profound impacts, not just on the budget, but it starts to create obvious air pockets where you get a little bit more rational regulation.
你可以在适当的地方进行放松监管。
You can deregulate in the appropriate places.
你可以将负担和责任转移给私营行业。
You can shift the burden and the responsibility to private industry.
因此，我认为积极的方面不仅仅体现在数据本身。
So it's more than just what's in the numbers that I think is positive.
杰森，我以前跟你说过这个故事，为了实现我想做的某些事情。
I've told you this story before, Jason, to do some of the things that I've wanted to do.
我给你举个例子。
I'll give you an example.
五年前我们刚开始做电池业务时，向能源部提交申请，那些报告长达700页。
When we started a battery business five years ago, when we filed with the DOE, the Department of Energy, these are 700 page reports.
你需要花费数百万美元，雇佣50到100人的团队，但我们的目标究竟是什么？
You spend millions of dollars and you hire teams of 50 and a 100 people, and what are we trying to do?
我们试图在美国建立一家电池企业，以便减少对中国的依赖。
We're trying to build a battery business in The United States so that we can delever from the Chinese.
如果我们能以更简单、更容易的方式做到这一点，因为涉及的人更少，那么负担就转移到了州和地方监管机构，而这些我们本来就必须应对。
To the extent that we could do that a little bit simpler and a little bit easier because there's fewer folks, and so the burden goes to state and local regulators, which we all already have to deal with.
这些对生产力来说普遍是好事。
These are just generally good things for productivity.
这些对GDP来说普遍也是好事。
They're generally good things for GDP.
它让我们能够更积极地投资于有助于美国的领域，整体趋势正朝着正确的方向发展。
It allows us to invest more aggressively in the things that help America, it's trending in the right direction.
顺便说一句，萨克斯没有明确提到这一点，但我来说明一下。
By the way, Sachs didn't mention this explicitly, but I'll say it.
到2026年，还有一系列减税政策将生效。
The other thing in '26 is you get a bunch of tax cuts that kick in.
小费不用缴税。
No tax on tips.
加班收入免税。
No tax on overtime.
汽车贷款等利息支出的可抵扣性。
The deductibility of the cost of interest for things like car loans.
这些是大规模的刺激性折旧措施。
These are big stimulative action depreciation.
加速折旧。
Accelerated depreciation.
美国经济将获得大规模的刺激性举措。
You have big stimulative actions for The United States economy.
是的。
Yeah.
我认为，恕我直言，你们忽略了这一点：特朗普承诺的是完全不同的东西。
I think what you guys are missing, respectfully, is that, you know, Trump promised something completely different.
他说，从第一天起，我们就将终结通胀，让美国再次变得负担得起，降低所有商品的价格。
He said, starting on day one, we will end inflation and make America affordable again to bring down the prices of all goods.
他在竞选时向美国人承诺会降低物价。
And when he was running for election, he promised the Americans that he would reduce prices.
但现在的情况是，物价并没有下降。
Now what's happened is prices have not come down.
反而上涨了2.5%到3.1%。
They've gone up 2.5 to 3.1%.
但真正重要的是，我认为你们做得很好，作为政府的支持者，你们忽略了一点：美国民众并不相信你们。
But what really matters, and I think you guys are doing a great job, you know, pro administration, part of the administration, what you're missing is the American people don't believe you.
美国民众正在经历的是完全不同的情况。
And the American people are experiencing something different.
当你查看民调支持率时，特朗普的支持率已跌至历史最低点，尤其是在通胀问题上，请查看相关的银弹分析和元分析。
And when you look at the approval rating, Trump's approval rating is at its historic lows, and specifically on inflation, pull up the silver bullet and meta analysis there.
这就是脱节之处，也解释了为什么昨晚特朗普说一切都很好时，听起来如此麻木不仁。
This is the disconnect, and this is why it seemed tone deaf last night when Trump was telling everybody it's great.
当你们说这是黄金时代时，美国人并没有感受到这种繁荣。
And when you say it's the golden age, Americans aren't experiencing that.
这根本不是他们所经历的。
That's just not what they experience.
他们看到的是杂货价格持续上涨，失业率也上升了15%。
They are experiencing grocery prices that have continued to go up, and they are experiencing unemployment that's gone up 15%.
无论是联邦雇员，还是私营部门，你们争论数字，或声称因为不征小费税将迎来黄金时代，这些都只是宣传口号。
Whether it's the federal employees, whether it's private sector and you debate the numbers or there's a golden age coming because of no tax on tips, these are all talking points.
美国民众记得的是，特朗普政府曾承诺物价会下降。
What the American people remember is the Trump administration said prices would go down.
物价却上涨了。
Prices have gone up.
他们曾承诺就业和制造业将出现令人惊叹的繁荣。
That jobs and manufacturing, there'll be all these incredible manufacturing things.
显然，这需要多年时间。
Obviously, that's gonna take years.
但这些至今尚未发生。
That has not happened yet.
所以我希望最好。
So I hope for the best.
我希望通胀率降到2%，希望他们能扭转局面。
I hope inflation goes down to two, and I hope they turn this around.
但美国民众不相信特朗普政府，2024年许下承诺和真正兑现之间有着巨大差异。
But the American people don't believe the Trump administration, and it's a big difference between promising stuff in 2024 and delivering it.
我们现在处于第一年，对于那些不持有股票、处于社会底层的人来说，特朗普政府在通胀和经济方面的实际成果并不理想，就是这样。
And here we are in the first year, and the delivery that's come in from the Trump administration on inflation and on the economy is not good if you're in the bottom half of society that doesn't own equities, period.
就此打住。
Full stop.
首先，价格已经下降了。
So first of all, prices have come down.
你看汽油价格。
You look at gas prices.
这是五年来的最低水平。
They're the lowest in five years.
全国价格低于3美元。
They're below $3 nationally.
现在我不知道你希望一个新政府上台后，如何能在第一天就彻底改变一切。
Now I don't know how you want a new administration to come in and literally affect every single change on day one.
你怎么做得到？
How do you do that?
哦，不会吧。
Oh, no.
这正是他所说的。
That's just what he said.
不。
No.
总统说的是
What the president said is
他们会开始工作
they would start working
在可能的方面。
on possible.
他们会开始工作
They would start working
等一下。
on one sec.
我不是说这有可能。
I'm not saying it's possible.
他说了这话。
That's what he said.
不。
No.
他说他会在第一天就开始着手处理，而他也确实这么做了。
He said he'd start working on it on day one, and so he did.
看看结果吧。
And look at the results.
通货膨胀率现已降至2.7%，远低于预期。
Inflation's now down to 2.7%, way below expectations.
我不知道还有什么报告能比这更好了。
I don't know how you wanna better report than this.
失业率非常低。
Unemployment is very low.
我之所以还记得，
The only reason I remember
经济目标是三个三：3%。
the the economic target was three three and three.
3%的GDP增长率，3%的赤字占GDP比重，以及3%的通货膨胀率。
3% GDP growth, 3% deficit to GDP, and 3% inflation.
通胀率低于3%。
They're below 3% inflation.
GDP增长率高于3%，但赤字占GDP比重尚未达到所需水平。
They're above 3% GDP growth, and the deficit to GDP is not where it needs to be.
所以削减仍在前方。
So cutting is still ahead.
但过去几天我查看了内阁几个部门2026年的预算，发现它们确实计划在联邦政府范围内实施大幅削减。
But I looked at the budgets for 2026 for a number of the departments in the cabinet over the last couple days, and they do have big cuts that they're trying to implement across the federal government.
我们明天早上将采访斯科特·贝森特。
We're gonna be interviewing Scott Bessent tomorrow morning.
这段采访将在本集播出后不久发布。
That'll come out shortly after this episode airs.
但这是与斯科特就‘三个三’计划进展情况进行的补谈。
But this is the catch up conversation with Scott on how's the three three three plan going.
但在三个指标中的两个上，杰伊，情况似乎不错。
But on two of the three metrics, Jay Cal, it does appear like things are good.
我并不是想成为特朗普政府的发言人，但如果你仅从原始经济数据和政府目标来看，接下来应该会带来就业增长、可负担性提升、工资增长等其他真正影响普通民众日常生活的经济指标的连锁反应。
I'm not trying to be a spokesperson for the Trump administration, but I'd say if you look at this just from the raw economic data and the the goals of the administration, Following that, there should be a flow through in terms of job growth, the flow through in terms of affordability, in terms of wage growth, all those other sort of economic indicators that actually affect people on Main Street every day.
这一点在叙事中仍有待观察。
That's also TBD in the narrative.
这仍然有待实现，但这些高层次的经济目标正开始逐渐符合他们最初设定的框架，这总体上是好事。
It's still to be written, But those high level economic goals are still, you know, are starting to kinda fall within the the framework of what they set out to do, which is generally good.
对吧？
Right?
是的。
Yeah.
我只是在指出这种脱节。
I'm just pointing out the disconnect.
再说一遍，这是美国民众的脱节。
Again, this is the disconnect of the American
人民。
people.
我的意思是，不。
I mean No.
不。
No.
我正在看第一年。
I'm looking at year one.
就第一年。
Just year one.
我们现在到了年底
We're here at end of year
一。
one.
是时候实施一项议程了。
Time to implement an agenda.
我完全同意。
I totally agree.
我只是告诉你，美国人民现在不相信特朗普政府。
I'm just telling you the American people don't believe the Trump administration right now.
还有更多工作要做。
There's more work to do.
这就是脱节之处。
That's the disconnect.
今天公布的数据显示情况非常乐观。
The data that came out today is looking awesome.
顺便说一下，我之前提到的先锋报告不仅揭露了人工智能导致失业的谎言，还对明年做出了新的经济评估。
By the way, that Vanguard report that I mentioned that also exposes the AI job loss hoax, it also has a new economic assessment for next year.
它预测明年将实现3%的增长，我认为这已经很保守了，并且对2026年的劳动力市场前景持更积极的看法。
It's projecting 3% growth for next year, which I think is conservative, and an improved labor market outlook for 2026.
报告指出，最显著的改善将出现在今年下半年。
And it says the most robust improvement will come in the second half of the year.
因此，先锋公司认为2026年前景非常良好。
So Vanguard is saying that 2026 is looking very good.
顺便说一下，明年国会选举的较量就将在那时展开。
And by the way, that's when the fight for Congress will unfold this next year.
你知道，民调显然只是某个时间点的快照，并不能告诉你六个月后或一年后的情况会是什么样子。
So, you know, the thing about polls is it's obviously just a snapshot in time and it doesn't tell you what things are gonna look like six months from now or a year from now.
我觉得它们会看起来非常好。
I think they're gonna look very good.
是的。
Yeah.
我的意思是，也许他会扭转局面。
I mean, maybe he turns it around.
我觉得已经扭转过来了。
I think it's already been turned around.
只是需要一些时间才能显现出来。
It just takes time to kick in.
是的。
Yeah.
我的意思是，在公众的感知中，情况还没好转，通胀本该下降，但却一直维持着。
I mean, in the the public's perception, it hasn't turned around and inflation was supposed to go down and it stayed
已经好转了。
It has.
不。
No.
它一直保持在，仍然远高于
It stayed at it's it's still way above the
2%的目标。
2% target.
过去三个月都是6%。
Point 6% for the last three months.
不。
No.
并没有。
It has not.
它只显示2.7。
It just says 2.7.
不。
No.
那是那是那是
That's the that's the that's
这一年。
the year.
我认为，问题出在政府及其你负责的部分。
Problem, I think, with the administration and your part of it.
你们总是挑数字，和实际数据对不上。
Like, you guys cherry pick numbers, and it's not matching the numbers on the field.
所以当你挑
So when you cherry
挑最高的数字吗？
pick highest number picking?
这是CPI报告。
This is CPI report.
这个这个这个数字
The the the number
打开《华尔街日报》的封面。
Open the cover of the Wall Street Journal.
2.7，等等。
2.7 per hold on.
2.7%的消费者价格指数。
2.7% CPI.
2.6%的核心指数。
2.6% core.
过去三个月为1.6%。
1.6% for last three months.
好的。
Okay.
这有什么难理解的？
What is hard to understand about this?
不。
No.
不。
No.
显然，最近三个月的数据将告诉你趋势走向。
Obviously, the last three months are gonna tell you what the trajectory is.
好的。
Okay.
事实是
The the fact
你是
is You're
你正在寻找每一个借口来淡化此事。
looking for every excuse you can to basically downplay.
你居然说这是一份出色的报告，再看看今天的股市，因为远低于预期，股市正在暴涨。
What is You An awesome report and just look at the stock market, which is ripping today because this way below expectations.
雅各布，你是唯一一个对这个消息不高兴的人。
You're the only one who's not happy about this news, Jacob.
不。
No.
这个国家对此并不高兴。
The the country is not happy about it.
我在这场博弈中没有立场。
I'm not I don't have a horse in this race.
我状态非常好。
I'm doing fantastic.
我持有股票。
I own equities.
我现在的状况比以往任何时候都好。
I'm doing better than I ever have in my life.
我在谈论美国底层人群如何看待这件事。
I'm talking about how the bottom half of America perceives it.
这是特朗普政府的盲点。
This is the blind spot of the Trump administration.
你通过回避这个问题，恰恰证明了我的观点。
You've proved my point by not addressing it.
我们进入下一步吧。
Let's go to the next step.
不。
No.
你……我没怎么？
You I haven't what?
什么？
What?
不。
No.
不。
No.
我想，这就是你的观点。
It's I guess your point
你们的观点是
is you guys your point is
美国人民原本预期通胀会下降，价格也会下跌。
that the American people expected that inflation would go down and prices would go down.
价格却一直在上涨。
Prices have continued to go up.
美联储有一个
The Fed has a
2%的目标。
2% target.
说你想等下去，这有点不切实际。
It's a little bit unrealistic to say that what you wanna you wanna wait.
你是想让通胀率为负吗？
You wanna have you wanna have a negative inflation rate?
特朗普说价格会下降。
Trump said prices will go down.
它们并没有。
They have not.
这是你的论点。
That's your argument.
美国人民感觉。
The American people feel.
失业率上升了。
Unemployment has gone up.
他们期望它会下降。
They expect it to go down.
因此，我们正处于黄金时代的这种说法，并不符合美国底层民众的现实。
So the this idea that we're in the golden age is not tracking with the bottom half of Americans.
这仅仅是事实，大卫。
That's just facts, David.
这仅仅是事实。
It's just facts.
你还有工作要做。
You have work to do.
特朗普还有工作要做。
Trump has work to do.
你的意思是，在你看来，任何低于通缩的情况
You're you're saying that anything less than deflation anything less than deflation in your view
都很艰难。
is tough.
别这么说。
Not say that.
你总说我说了别的，可我一直在告诉你我所报告的事实。
You keep telling I keep telling you what I'm reporting in terms of facts, then you tell me I said something different.
我没这么说。
I didn't say that.
美国人民对特朗普政府第一年在通胀和经济方面的表现感到非常失望。
The American people are very disappointed in the Trump administration's first year when it comes to inflation and the economy.
我不明白这些数字怎么可能更好。
Don't understand how the numbers could be any better.
我们刚刚大幅超越了预期。
We just blew past expectations here.
2.7%。
2.7%.
美国人民的百分比。
The American people percent.
是的。
Yeah.
我不知道你认为自己摸准了谁的脉搏，但制定这些预期的经济学家们原本预计是3%。
I don't know whose expectations I don't know whose pulse you think you have the finger of, but the the economists who put together these expectations were expecting 3%.
我只是
I'm just
拉高图表
pull I'm up the chart
再给我看一遍。
one more time for me.
帮我调出图表，这样我就能解释这并不是我有偏见。
Just pull up the chart for me so I can just explain that this isn't bias on my part.
只是把事实摆出来。
Just putting the fact on the field.
不。
No.
并不是。
It is not.
这些数字表明，特朗普目前最差的两个领域是经济和通胀。
This is these are numbers that you can look at and see that Trump's two worst categories right now are the economy and inflation.
美国人民认为他
The American people thought he
更好。
was better.
某个时间点的快照，而且明年会完全不同。
Snapshots in time, and they're gonna be completely
明年就会不一样了。
different next year.
从二月开始，时间在下降。
Time from February goes down.
这就是时间快照。
That's the snapshot time.
每个月，你都有十二个月的数据可以查看。
Every month, you have twelve months there to look at this.
让我解释一下。
Let me explain.
我不明白，你提出的这个观点为什么这么具有党派性。
I don't know what's so hard about this is a really partisan point that you're making.
你基本上
You're basically
我说我不是党派性的。
saying I'm not partisan.
美国经济
The US economy
就像一艘巨大的超级油轮。
is like a giant supertanker.
我在这里
I'm here
来说明我不是党派性的。
to take I'm not partisan.
让我把话说完好吗？
Can I finish my point?
当然你可以。
Sure you can.
我的意思是，你一定知道这一点，我觉得你只是装作不知道。
I mean, you must know this, and I think you're pretending not to.
美国经济就像一艘巨大的超级油轮。
The US economy is like a giant supertanker.
转向需要时间。
It takes time to turn around.
实施你的经济议程需要时间。
It takes time to implement your economic agenda.
总统在政府初期花了六个月时间才通过了那项宏伟的法案，也就是他的经济计划，但该计划直到1月1日才生效。
It took the president the first six months of the administration to implement the big beautiful bill, is his economic program, but it doesn't even go into effect until January 1.
因此，减税措施尚未生效。
So the tax cuts have not gone into effect.
降低通胀的措施已经见效。
The inflation reductions have happened.
我们从拜登时期的9%下降到现在的核心通胀2.6%，过去三个月更是降至1.6%。
We've gone from 9% under Biden to now 2.6 core, 1.6% in the last three months.
我不知道你还能期望什么。
I don't know what more you could want.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。