วีดีโอ

Of course! Regardless of how big or small TH-camrs are, we think that replying to comments is super important!

OuR GoAl WaSnT To Be PoLiTIcAl, even though we ended up telling viewers to endorse a political position. 🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

You clearly don’t like us or our videos, I’ve read your comments and it doesn’t get more political than you. You must be refreshing our video every minute or so with all your comments 😂 touch some grass. We said as an initiative you should be in support of DOGE, we never said you should support Trump or the Republicans. You literally proved our point when we said, “why is this being made to be political.” If the Democrats did this we would say the same thing.

We don’t and didn’t. We literally said cutting back on some of the insane spending is a good thing. Even Bernie Sanders offered to help DOGE cut DoD spending. I guess Bernie must support Trump now according to your flawless logic

@@2and20I don’t like your videos, because they are bad 😂. The fact that you think everyone is being political here but you is indicative of how poorly you’ve been educated lol. I’ll stop letting you engagement farm off of me pointing this out to you for fear of more people having to suffer through this this slop but really do restrain for yourself from adding even more crap to the culture please. There’s plenty of it already.

@@viva5208 reading your replies made me brain dead, the dude worked at McKinsey, he's definitely more educated than you haha

Our next video is on how broken US healthcare is. TLDR: It needs a complete overhaul. Crazy greed, lack of care for health outcomes and more :-)

@2and20 looking forward to it!

Thank you means a lot!!!

​​@@2and20it was put in place by Merkels grand coaliton in the late 2000s into the constitution and requires the German government to always run a budget surplus except in cases of emergencies (such as covid) where they were able to run a deficit for 4 yrs. This has resulted in Germany have a debt to GDP ratio of less than 45% the lowest in Europe by a lot although it has often faced push back from the left and occasionally the right as being too rigid and will probably be relaxed by the next administration

Sorry that was my brother who replied! One of the 2&20 is quite familiar with the debt brake and absolutely agree with you. I think a lot of these issues are structural and require a mechanism to prevent it instead of extreme corrections later down the line

Yes we talk about this! It will be very difficult to reach that $2T mark.

We never said that it did! Just speaking to previous examples of this being done.

We aren’t fans, there are a lot of aspects to Musk we don’t like but as an operator you have to respect him. If you don’t, then you know nothing about entrepreneurship or operational execution.

@@2and20 There is much to say about your reply - you moved away from the context of your video and my reply of that video to defend Elon in a different sphere. Wow. We should not hand our future over to the unelected (likely) richest man on Eart... the Apartheid emerald brat, who promises us poors "hardship" as he benefits from billions in government contracts. But fine, Ill play your game: Elon is the George Lucas of business. It turns out their initial success (the original trilogy / the Tesla Roadster) was thanks to those who worked with them, and when they were left to their own devices thanks to their wealth and power, they fall flat on their faces (the prequels / the Cyber Truck & Twitter). You cant deny this. The Cyber Truck is the shiny gaudy proof youre wrong. Elon isnt brilliant, he was just lucky enough to put himself at all the key chokepoints - EV charging station design and EV government subsidy, the largest micro-blogging website and all his propagandist buddies, and now space based internet and the lucrative space launch contracts. And now he will reap the benefits. Elon isnt a brilliant operator. Hes just a lucky bridge troll. And if youre his fan, youre a mindless peasant and you'll get the world you deserve. Just stop using this undeserved platform of yours to poison any more minds.

Haha didn’t know editing style was exclusive to a creator. And a lot of our editing influence actually comes from Johnny Harris and Mapal

What sources were crap? Provide examples of deeply partisan framing. Numerous times we criticize DOGE and have no political horse in this race. This is a non-political take on whether what they say can actually be accomplished and whether it’s feasible. Why are people so political! PS: one wonders why you wasted the time watching and commenting on this.

@@2and20the entire discussion about social security was awful lol, to name a singular example. Claiming that the only way the program can be ‘saved’ from ‘insolvency’ (a term you didnt define for the scare factor one would imagine) by austerity measures is just a complete reproduction of the conservative position. The fact that what you think you are doing is anything other than pure politics is pretty pathetic - and only underlines what slop the entire video is lmao The sourcing problems have been elaborated on up and down the comment section - no need to waste my time here reproducing that. And - seeing what the sheep think is a useful exercise to a point - cheers for helping us see that bud.

If you want, I’ll make a bet with you that those programs will be the least impacted. It would be political suicide

​@@2and20 popular public support and decision making is not always directly related, if at all

Not suggesting thatcher and Reagan are liked, I’m giving examples of attempts of reform. Have you spoken with any legit economist with a strong mathematical foundation? I’m shocked you would say such a thing. I’m not a Milton Friedman fan boy and disagree with a lot of what he says (in particular I think he fails to recognize the dangers of unchecked capitalism), but I know tons of folks who absolutely admire him as a thinker (even those who disagree with him). That comment alone makes me think you are not from high finance, entrepreneurship or a top tier economics program. Also, Keynesian economics is part of the reason for high public debt. And it is not the prevailing form of economic thinking. Where are you getting this from? Neoclassical theory is very different from Keynes. Lastly, we aren’t defending Keynes, Friedman, thatcher, Trump or anyone. We are just pointing out that spending is wild and that DOGE is unlikely to hit $2 trillion!!! Why does everyone make things so political?!?!

@2and20 What do you mean? This is a political video... Of course people will talk about politics in it, everything is political and that's why everything is made to be political. Politics is probably one of the most broad disciplines in existence. The prevailing economic theory definitely isn't neoclassical, it's Keynesian. Just look at most of the Nobel laureates in economics over the past decade, they are predominantly Keynesians and mixed market economists who would staunchly disagree with Friedman on his no government involvement ideology. I mean the most recent prize was awarded to those studying government institutions in shaping macroeconomy. Keynesianism is not really the reason for high public debt levels, yes Keynesianism promotes national debt usage to control demand but it's supposed to be paid off during periods of stability, the government lacking to do so isn't the fault of Keynesianism. (Edit) Saying that he was seen as a "radical fool" in his day and nowadays is wrong of me, you're right. More correctly his free market ideology was and is seen as a joke by most influential economists but not his contributions to monetary theory although some of his beliefs in this regard have been disproven but that's to be expected I suppose, nobody is right all the time. Yes many finance bros like Milton Friedman, but I don't really care about that, I care for the opinions of the people with PHD's, not bachelors or masters who went on into investment banking or institutional trading who largely perform worse than a broad market index. Just because "applied economists" like Friedman does not mean that theoretical economists do.

I would fundamentally disagree that they’re kenesians. I think that’s a stretch. Influenced sure, but not prescriptively Keynesian. Again, not saying I agree with Friedman, but you have to be dishonest to claim he isn’t respected to some degree by well regarded economists, especially American economists. I personally think his thinking is very flawed! I’m not sure why you are framing it like we like him! The clip we used was a clip to frame our argument not to support him!

@2and20 Perhaps, most economists nowadays probably don't identify with a binary categorization and the field has expanded into many subfields - Good video anyways

Transparently I haven’t read much about Project 2025, and we mostly just focus on the economic side of policy. But I’ll check it out! Thank you for watching and commenting!

Ya GDP growth is super important, although it wasn’t the focus of our video. Personally, I do believe reducing spending is important too.

All of that will only benefit the rich/corporate. It would do nothing to reduce budget or debt or whatever

I agree partly with the initial part but don’t agree on the tax part. Corporate taxes in the US prior to trumps tax cuts were some of the highest in the OECD, they are currently on par with the OECD average (and depending on the state still higher than places like Canada and France). Income taxes in the US are some of the most progressive on earth. The big difference is that countries like Norway and Sweden have high taxes for everyone. The municipal rate, for example, is flat in Sweden and Norway. If the US adopted their tax regime, there would be revolts on the street. I think increasing income taxes and capital gains on business is wrong. Instead, we should increase taxes on rent seeking / speculation. You want to encourage people to work hard and innovate and discourage people from hoarding land. I would get rid of the 1032 exchange, I would increase capital gains on all real estate excluding densification, and more. I would also introduce a very high inheritance tax which would encourage billionaires to donate their money before passing instead of passing it to kids. Also, the US objectively spends too much. There is no way you could believe that it doesn’t. The US healthcare system, as an example, if it spent as much as its peer group would save $2 trillion! I would rip up the entire US healthcare system and build a new. The department of defence is running around playing war games and spending money unchecked. We could easily help there. Regulations is insane. I’ve had to deal with it first hand and it’s ridiculous. I had to go through 10 people in government for something related to a capital project that cost $20,000! Think about. This project was super simple, and much needed, but I had to file paper work with 10 different bodies and have each review. One rejected me because I didn’t attach the appendix in the same document, even though they had it! I had to wait 4 months for them to review it again. That’s nuts!!! Not saying all of the US government is this way, but this is an anecdote alongside the other data we shared in the video about bloat. All of this to say, you are clearly educated and informed. But I’d challenge you to contemplate the issue being more than just a tax one. And I will also reflect on what you’ve shared because it is valid. Sorry this might have a ton of typos as I’m writing this on a jog hahah :-)

@@2and20 First of all, thank you for replying. I appreciate the opportunity to continue this discussion and share a few clarifications and responses. I completely agree that the existing U.S. healthcare system is massively inefficient-our per capita spending is the highest in the world. However, much of this inefficiency stems from rent-seeking behaviors in the private sector, such as bloated administrative systems in private health corporations and insurance companies. These inefficiencies drive up costs, forcing government programs like Medicare and Medicaid to pay inflated prices. Unfortunately, creating a single-payer or similar system is politically untenable at the moment, as many advocates of DOGE also staunchly oppose such reforms. Ideally, we would adopt systems like Japan’s or Switzerland’s, which blend universal coverage with cost efficiency. For now, though, I see the increase in government spending on healthcare as a symptom of private-sector inefficiency rather than the root cause. You’re right that U.S. tax revenue as a percentage of GDP has remained relatively constant, and much of the deficit increase stems from higher spending. However, I’d argue two points: The marginal top tax rate has declined significantly over time, missing an opportunity for additional revenue and exacerbating income inequality. Enforcement mechanisms like the IRS are vastly underfunded, leading to a disproportionate focus on lower-income taxpayers. A 2021 Treasury report estimated that tax evasion among the wealthiest Americans accounts for hundreds of billions in lost revenue annually. Strengthening enforcement, particularly for high earners, could help address revenue shortfalls without requiring broad tax increases. The increase in spending is primarily in mandatory entitlement programs, driven by the aging population and the broken private healthcare system. Again, this spending increase reflects deeper systemic issues rather than being the cause of the deficit. On defense spending, I appreciate your points. While U.S. defense spending as a percentage of GDP is near historic lows since World War II, inefficiencies and waste remain. The Department of Defense’s repeated audit failures and contracting inefficiencies (e.g., Littoral Combat Ships) are concerning, and I agree that structural reforms and increased oversight could yield modest savings. That said, I believe most current defense spending is necessary to maintain U.S. hegemony and the advantages of the unipolar order. Past cost-cutting measures, like BRAC rounds, demonstrate that it’s possible to realign priorities without compromising strategic objectives. A new BRAC could reduce excess capacity while preserving essential capabilities. Regarding regulations, I’m sympathetic to your frustrations with bureaucratic hurdles, and your anecdote highlights a real issue. That said, I think the federal regulatory burden is often overstated. Many of these challenges arise at the state and local levels, such as zoning laws, which significantly impact housing and economic efficiency. I also believe the quantity-based approach advocated by Vivek and DOGE is harmful and often creates more problems than it solves. Effective regulation requires case-by-case quality analysis, which is time-consuming but necessary. We've seen examples of underregulation, such as in the cryptocurrency sector and healthcare coverage denials, that highlight the dangers of a simplistic approach. Conversely, imprudent deregulation-like the rollback of Net Neutrality and environmental protections during the Trump administration-has led to significant long-term harm. Thank you for taking the time to read my comments. Have a good jog lol

I have not read this whole thing yet but don’t want to leave you hanging. But I do agree that the much of the issue in US healthcare is related to multiple payouts and the complexity that leads to driving up admin. Also, consolidation across providers is leading to higher costs. I could go on. I believe we would probably be aligned on this

@@2and20 If by "multiple payouts" you mean the fragmented and non-standardized U.S. healthcare coverage system (e.g., insurance companies, employer-sponsored coverage, out-of-pocket payments, Medicaid, etc.), I completely agree. The lack of a standardized, interoperable payment scheme is a major driver of rising healthcare costs, with administrative expenses estimated to account for ~25% of total costs. As for "consolidation across providers," if you’re referring to the influx of private equity firms purchasing and managing hospitals and healthcare providers, I also agree. This trend often reduces competition, increases prices, and shifts the focus toward profitability over patient care. 👍

Ya we agree. We have already lost a few subscribers because of this video, which is a bit disheartening given it’s an objective take on a really important topic. Thanks for watching and commenting!

​@@2and20The people that unsubbed are woosies

😂😂😂 I mean aye the $56 Billion ain't from the government

Haha no it’s not! Do you guys think DOGE is an important endeavour or a waste of time?

@@2and20it’s political theatre to pull the wool over rubes eyes (you) while billionaires extract even more than they already do😅

We didn’t use the NY Post article as the source of truth! We listed it as a source because it’s easier for the viewer to read but we used information from the Federal Highway Administration, I’ll change the source just for you :).

Ok then what's the truth? I saw the same fight in Twitter but I forgot what he said

@princemc35the truth is that first the money goes to states, who then contract it out. Some states are significantly slower than others. But whatever, I guess billionaires need their tax cuts more than we need public infrastructure. God knows the wealthy are more important than vast majority of average Americans in this country, it’s only fair after they spend billions in buying elections. 🙄

Yea I’m not sure if this is a dig at the Republicans but you do realize that there there were more billionaires endorsing the Democrats right?

@@2and20 i think you replied to the wrong comment section my good sir :). But if not, I was just asking what really then happened to the $5billion cuz the person heading it explained what happened to Elon

Not sure what you mean by this