So I've heard you say that the United States is in a civil war, and I think most Americans don't perceive that. Can you tell us what you mean by that?

What I mean by a civil war, I should say a type of civil war, right? And what I mean is that there are irreconcilable differences that each side is willing to fight for in order to get the outcomes that they want. And And in that environment, the issues of how does the legal system work? Is that going to stand in the way of that fight? Or is there going to be a fight that will make the cause more important than anything. That's the type of situation that we're in. Those gaps, we understand there's wealth and values gaps that are entering into this. We've this through history. Where that goes is a different question. But we are in that type of civil war, are we not?

Clearly, we are. How are they resolved? I mean, clearly, they can be resolved through violence, but what are the What are the ways you resolve the conflict we have?

Normally, they're resolved through conflict because you get to the point where both sides can't reach agreements. Both sides don't even want to talk. Both sides don't want to respect the rule of the law. So when we're dealing with things like sanctuary city issues and we're dealing with enforceability. Who has the enforceability? Okay, and you almost have to play out. Okay, enforceability means police forces and such things. Who has- People with guns.

Yeah.

People with guns and causes. Just because the legal thing says they shouldn't do that, that's not going to stand in the way. We have that a situation. So we are probably past the point of being able to resolve that by compromise and empathy and all of that. Normally, it goes that way. The only thing that can be done is to have the fear of that create a necessity for having another path. We were talking about debt situation. Yes. So can there be a fiscal commission that gets together and then achieves those things or not? I think it's unlikely. I think we're going to more fragmentation. States, there are some States and other states, I think you're going to see more fragmentation. But it's like this dynamic through history. This isn't the first time this happened. This happens repeatedly through history, and usually it runs its course.

So the way our leaders in the United States have dealt with it over the past 30 years has just been to ignore it completely, just to ignore it?

Well, there's a cycle. The cycle was let's say, I don't know, Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill, and they get together and they were operating in a certain way. And the manifestations of the circumstances, the manifestations of debt or wealth gap or values gaps were not as great. So you didn't, over that 30-year period, have as much polarity in many different ways. So now you've gone to greater polarity. If you watch statistics, everything I do comes from measuring things. So I look at statistics. The gap in measuring conservative or liberal votes in the House and the Senate is the greatest gap since 1900. And the voting across party lines is the least since 1900. So you see this gap. You see it in the elections, the blue and red. So it's not just an evolutionary, it's where we are, where we have gotten to. That is the irreconcilable questions, does the Supreme Court... We thought about the Supreme Court differently not long ago. The Supreme Court was the Supreme Court. And So now it's different.

So what accounts... I mean, there are a million ways to measure this in all of them. Do you agree? Well, of course I agree. Of course I agree. I agree with you that every measurement shows the same result, which is the country is polarized.

Okay, so we know where we are Completely.

And we're not sure how it's resolved, but I think it's also worth causing to ask what was the change that led to the polarization? It was unimaginable even 35 years ago.

The change was in a combination of the system working well for the majority of the people, and which has to do with the majority of the people not being productive. You You have productivity equals income. Right. Okay. Now, if you take education and you take measures of how productive or how well-trained you're going to be, you see And therefore also income, your productivity, you see by all of these measures great gaps that exist. So by way of example is unicorns and the changes that we're seeing, fabulous changes in what we're seeing in technologies. But it really comes down to if you take the number of people who have been making those changes and having unicorns in this wonderful world, they go to the best universities and they make these wonderful things happen, that's about 3 million people in a country of a little over 330 million people. If you take the average, 60% of Americans have below a sixth grade reading level, 60% of Americans. When we deal with education, you have to make that population productive. Through productivity, they become educated and they become productive They earn money and you have a better society.

So a number of things changed that. It was the combination of globalization and technology. I remember, and you probably remember, what the middle class working on an assembly line at an auto plant was like and how manufacturing occurred. Yes. Okay. A combination of foreign producers and automation changed all that. Of course. So that produces a larger wealth gap. And then with that wealth gap, we also have very large values gaps.

But it's driven by the wealth gap.

It's It's both. Some population, here we are at the World Government Summit in Dubai. You have very globalization and everybody, the elites, let's call them the elites, where they're among the States are here doing deals and facing questions and all of that. At the same time, then there's those who are dealing with their basics. Wealth gaps contribute to it, but But there's also values gaps.

Technology is part of the reason that we're here.

Religion. Yes. Belief systems. These are important, too.

Of course.

But we're on the edge of this AI transformation, which seems like it's going to accelerate the trends that have led us to where we are right now. If artificial intelligence increases efficiency but leaves an even greater of people without meaningful work in the United States, what happens?

There needs to be a game plan. Yeah. Okay. There needs to be a game plan. That's the main thing. In other words, I can describe the circumstance. Yes. Okay. And we can agree that there needs to be a game plan. Well, let me ask you since- I'm not responsible for the game plan.

But since you know everybody and you spend your life talking to everybody, and you're one of the world's biggest investors, so you're taking these questions seriously. Are you familiar with the game plan in progress?

There is not a game plan.

At all?

No.

That seems crazy.

Yeah, it seems crazy. It seems we are going from a transition. I'm just being analytical, mechanical. Yes, of course. Okay. We are going from a transition in which there is I don't know, collectivism, a multinational, all the constituents working together environment that has also created a bureaucracy and inefficiencies and so on. So you're going from an environment in which there was a World Health Organization, a World Trade Organization, a World Bank, and all of that to unilateral in my own interest? In other words, as a country or within a country, as a constituency, my tribe, what is my interest, and you're going to fight for it. So we have evolved into that lay of the land situation. And so the question is almost, what is the we? Who is in control? We change control very quickly. And then Who has the plan? So now you get in control. You fight to get into control. You're in control. You got to do things quickly, and you're doing things quickly. We don't have the continuity to be able to work together, to be able to have a plan.

Well, to be more specific about it, I would say that people developing the technologies, so they would be various Chinese companies, of course, but also Google and Microsoft, Sam Altman.

Parker, you're so idealistic, but realistic. Yes, we all should work together.

No, I'm merely saying if I'm unleashing something on the global population, then I think it's fair to ask me, what do you expect to happen to everybody?

No, but I think that's what I mean. The notion that it's fair to denies the reality that we're in an environment of pursuit of self-interest. So If you take the fight, let's say, of technologies, of course, the one who wants to get the latest AI out wants to beat the other one who does it, let alone an American firm and a Chinese firm. I'm just trying to describe the reality of you, Tucker. Now, let's look at those realities. That's the reality. When you say they should, that's the theoretical should. They should come up with schools that is better for the harmony of the people as a whole. Okay, I agree they should. I guess what I'm saying is I'm once again disappointed by people. That's unrealistically idealistic. You got to grow up, Tucker. I know.

I'm 55. I'm still disappointed. But you're absolutely right. I'm not here to inspire a moral lecture from you or deliver one. I just want to know what you think is going to happen. You have these technologies. Is it fair to say that they really are as transformative? They're as big a deal as- Hugely.

The greatest. So I've studied history, right? Yes. I study what was the impact of the printing press and what was the impact for the industrial revolution solutions and so on. This, in my opinion, is the biggest impact that we have because it will revolutionize all thinking that applies to everything. It applies to everything. So whatever you're doing, it will make it much more efficient, much more powerful. But that includes wars, too. Everything is going to be radically transformed because anything that we apply thinking to is going to be very much transformed by it.

We did an interview with a woman called Casey Means. She's a Stanford-educated surgeon and really one of the most remarkable people I have ever met. In the interview, she explained how the food that we eat, produced by a huge food companies, Big Food, in conjunction with pharma, is destroying our health, making this a weak and sick country. The levels of chronic disease are beyond belief. What Casey means, who we've not stopped thinking about ever since is the co founder of a healthcare technology company called Levels. We are proud to announce today that we are partnering with Levels. And by proud, I mean, sincerely proud. Levels is a really interesting company and a great product. It gives you insight into what's going on inside your body, your metabolic health. It helps you understand how the food that you're eating, the things that you're doing every single day are affecting your body in real time. And you don't think about it. You have no idea what you're putting in your mouth, and you have no idea what it's doing to your body. But over time, you feel weak and tired and spacy, and over an even longer period of time, you can get really sick.

So it's worth knowing what the food you eat is doing to you. The Levels app works with something called the continuous glucose monitor, a CGM. You can get one as part of the plan or you can bring your own, it doesn't matter. But the bottom line is big tech, big pharma, and big food combined together to form an incredibly malevolent force, pumping you full of garbage, unhealthy food with artificial sugars, and hurting you and hurting the entire country. So with levels, you'll be able to see immediately what all this is doing to you. You get access to real-time personalized data, and it's a critical step to changing your behavior. Those of us who like Oreos can tell you firsthand. This isn't talking to your doctor in an annual physical, looking backwards about things you did in the past. This is up to the second information on how your body is responding to different foods and activities, the things that give you stress, your sleep, etc. It's easy to use. It gives you powerful personalized health data, and you can make much better choices about how you feel. And over time, it'll have a huge effect.

Right now, you can get an additional two free months when you go to levels. Link/tucker. That's levels. Link/tucker. This is the beginning of what we hope will be a long and happy partnership with Levels and Dr. Casey Means. It's the time of year we focus on the people who matter most in our lives. Now, if there's one way to show your family, the people you love that you love them, it's by protecting their health and their safety. A really obvious way to do that is by preparing for unpredicted moments. There are a lot of those. Breakdown on supply chains, overwhelmed hospitals, natural disasters, wars. Whatever happens next, you can't see it coming, but you can be prepared for most of it. That's why a Jace case works. A Jace case is a personal supply of prescribed emergency medications. So if things fall apart, you're okay. There's an unexpected global disruption. You can protect yourself and your loved ones. So this February, show them you care. Get the Jace case today. You'll have the right meds on hand when you need them. You only need them once. You ought to have them.

Can you give us some concrete examples that you believe will come to pass in the next few years? What will change that we at this point can understand?

Well, right now, tests of AIs is all of them can pass tests that are are equivalent to the PhDs in all fields in one mind so that there is what we call Mollipaths, the people who can think both across domains. In that, we have these operating so that it's not just like a PhD in one area, it's like a PhD in all areas, and that it could look across those areas and give you answers and operate that way. There's an acceleration of this because it compounds as it learns the learning compounds, and it produces that. That is a reality Today, people just haven't yet experienced all of that. And so you're very quickly going to be in a situation where the problems are going to be given to it. You're going to ask it strategies and so on that can take into consideration all of the things that are happening from everywhere and how the cause-effect relationships work. Think about it this way. There's so much complexity in the world. Everything that we're What happened? There are economic policies, there are economic things, there are financial things, there are health things, there are all of these things.

They all relate to each other. It's called, I think, the butterfly syndrome. So if a butterfly changes, flaps its wings, it has these secondary consequences. This is all very complex. It's very complex for the human mind to think about those things. We're now having a situation where it can all be taken into consideration and be a partner, a thought partner that can actually go beyond our capacities to think about those relationships. In thinking about those relationships and so on, it has an enormous impact. Somebody in medical area was giving me the example of learning about all the causes, but with the data that they're going to have on each one of us about what were our experiences and what is our diagnosis of each of the parts? And you watch that over time. What air do you breathe? What environment are you in? What stress are you in? And all that. That there will be the understanding of these cause-effect relationships that in turn change things. Then you go down to the microscopic level of dealing with, practically at the molecular or cell level in dealing with these problems. Changing of DNA and these types of things.

All of those, we are in the midst of a tremendous revolutionary change.

What about the field of economics? Can you take the art and the guessing out of it at this point? You're saying you have said many times you've a lot about it, but the need of governments to get down to 3% of GDP with their debt, so or else everything collapses. How do you do that? And all these political consequences, the population doesn't want less money spent on them, Obviously, you could get governments falling and stuff. Wouldn't AI just solve that for you? You said it produces strategy.

Does AI control human nature?

No. No. Okay.

Human nature. My bet is that human nature is going to be the biggest force, and it's all going to come down to how we are with each other.

I'm so glad, though. So there'll be room for human beings still, even as we're changing DNA and implanting chips in our brains and stuff.

Well, if not, we're lost. And if so, we're dealing with each other. I don't know how well that's going to go either.

But I wonder, there's There's still debates. I mean, you're effectively an economist. The debates about supply side versus demand side, what is the near and far term effect on these economic causes?

We're going to be able to understand at a micro level how things work better. Exactly. Okay. By the way, again, I put out this writing, this study that shows the mechanics, and I want to convey that mechanic so everybody could see the mechanics. But you're going to go to a molecular level. That means like, nowadays, we or policymakers like the Federal Reserve, think about something like inflation. There'll be maybe five measures of inflation. We're using the term inflation because our minds are limited in its capacity of the number of things we could think about. When we're now in this new reality, which we now are, you can go down to a molecular level, essentially, and saying, I could see all the different transactions of what was bought and what was sold and why. Now I can really have a level of understanding. We don't have to be at this grand level that we don't. We're going to be at the molecular level of understanding individual transactions and what's affecting them and be able to deploy resources at the individual molecular level, just like we can do in biology or physical existence and so on.

I mean, this will... Lots of downsides to AI, obviously. I dread it. I would end it if I could. But there are upsides, and this sounds like one of them. Of course. We have a COVID again, and we're thinking about, should we issue COVID checks with AI? We can know the effects of it.

What the money is going for, and that'll change everything. It'll change the controls. But it is, of course, a two-edged sword. It'll change who controls it, who has access to it? Who can use it detriment to other people? All of these things are part of the question.

Is there any way to avoid totalitarian social controls with AI?

I think there's a question of whether you can have social and totalitarian controls, or maybe you just have anarchy. I mean, I don't know where we're going. I cannot tell you what this world... I do believe we're going to through a time warp. What I mean, it's going to feel like you're going through over the next five years. That environment is because of these five major forces, the death of all of these things, and the changes in the technologies, particularly artificial intelligence and related technologies. The world five years from now is going to be a radically different world. I don't know what that's going to look like. When you go into the world of quantum computing and what quantum is like in so many different ways, it raises questions of, what is that like? I'm not smart enough to tell you what that world is going to look like.

But as an investor for 50 years-Who is in control?

I don't know who's in control.

Okay, but right. So this is the opposite of what you've done your whole life, where you try to predict five years hence, that's your whole business, right?

Well, I said my business is try to predict. But I'd say, first thing, whatever success I've had in life has more been due to my knowing how to deal with what I don't know than anything I know. Okay? So how you deal with what you don't know- I believe that. Okay, is so important. So Yes. My business in a nutshell is I try to find a bunch of bets that I think are good bets, but to diversify well so that I have a bunch of diversified bets because I do not know. I mean, in terms of my actual track record, I've probably been right about 65% of the time, okay? And any one bad bet can kill you. So I've known how to deal with that. That's what I've learned, including how to deal with what I don't know.

So now you're describing an environment where you can't really know anything about the world in five years?

Well, I could place good bets. There are some things that are highly knowable. Highly knowable, like they say, death and taxes, demographics. So I can know or have a view, for example, that owning, I believe, owning dead assets is not going to be a good thing. So I could think about alternative storeholds of wealth. I can think about that. I can place some bets that allow me... They're not the certain bets, but I can place enough bets and have enough diversification that I can be relatively confident of some things, but never absolutely all totally confident. But I think when we're coming back anyway, that's the reality. I'm just describing our reality the best I can. That's why people who are confident in the future and are just experiencing the present. Right now, people are describing, all of them are describing how things are. Almost everybody thinks the future is going to be a modified version of the present.

A pure extrapolation forward. Yeah.

Okay. Things are good. All right. I get it. Okay. Well, I'll guarantee you there will be big changes.

Those are dumb people, you're saying, making those comments?

I'm saying it's understandable, but when you study change and the nature of change, the world changes in dramatic rays because of causes that we can look at and get a good understanding of. But we can't be sure about anything because of the nature.

But in this specific case, that's always true and wise people understand that. You're not in control of the future. Of course, you're not God. But in this specific case where there are specific technologies whose development we understand because we're watching it, it almost feels like there's no human agency here. Not one person ever suggests, Well, why don't we just stop the development of the technologies by force.

Well, I think you're being theoretical. I don't know. Just look how the system works, okay? Who makes what decisions how? I think you have the bias of, We should stop all these technologies and just stop it? Somebody else has another view, and the other people have other views. And then there's a means by which those views turn into action. Decisions. And so it's correct, the system that we're dealing in will make those types of decisions, and we could discuss the pros and cons of all of those things, but that's just how it works, right?

I don't know. I mean, there are all kinds of pernicious long-standing things that we've stopped, like the global slave trade. The Brits are like, We're not for this. We're stopping it. And they did.

Tucker, you are using that we stopped, okay?

No, Britain stopped it.

Okay, but I'm just trying to say, you have to look at the system and say, who has their hands on the levels of power? And what will they do and what are their motivations? How does the system work? I think that's right. Okay. How does the machine work to make decisions? Okay, so if we can agree on this person makes these types of decisions about these things and it works this way, then we can say we, the collective we, can do that. But this theoretical collective we that is going to make this. It's like we could sit here and be very theoretical.

I get it. A determined nation probably can't stop this. My second question is, you keep hearing that there's this AI race between the United States and China. Is it true that one country will be completely dominant by the end of this race and that that will be meaningful?

No, I think that what's going to happen is, and again, I'm speaking now probabilistically, I think that China There will be different types of developments, but by and large, it's very difficult to keep intellectual property that when you take the products of the intellectual property, you put them in the public. Exactly. That will last about six months. I mean, at most, and you'll develop the nearest... And so intellectual property protections, and isolation is probably not going to work. And so now we're going to have different advantages and disadvantages. Let's say, for example, in China's case, there are many fantastic chips, not quite at the same level. See, we design chips, but we can't produce chips effectively. We can't produce. By and large, we can't produce things, any manufactured goods, as effectively, cost-effectively, by and large. We have a problem doing that. What we'll do is we'll design those better chips, you won't have the intellectual protections, and you're going to then have the production of things in China at a very inexpensive way. Manufacturing. China has about 33% of the manufacturing in the world, which is more than the United States, Europe, and Japan combined.

They manufacture effectively cheaply. They will embed chips in the manufacturing. The application of chips, they are more ahead on. China is more head on. The application of chips, robotics. So we're talking about just thinking. But when you connect the thinking to bodies that are automatic bodies, and you have robotics and so on, they're ahead on that type of thing. Different entities are going to be ahead in different ways, and we're going to then be in this world in which there's competition in that world. Then there's an attempt to be protectionist or whatever, or to fight those differences, and that's what the world looks like.

Does the combination of AI and robotics bring manufacturing back to the United States?

We are behind in both of those areas, greatly behind. I would say we're not going to have competitive advantages in those things. What we're competitive in is that small percentage of the population that is uniquely Inventive. In terms of inventiveness, the number of Nobel Prize winners in the United States. United States dominates Nobel Prize winners in the world. The inventiveness, best universities and so on. We have a system that is a legal system and a capital market system, and we can bring the best from the world all to the United States to create an environment. If we could work well together in that inventiveness with With rule of law working and all of that working, we have those things that are our competitive advantage. We do not have manufacturing, and we're not going to go back and be competitive in manufacturing with China in our lifetimes. I don't believe. Now the question is how we deal with that.

Our inventiveness, you just said, and many have said, comes from our education system, from our universities. But then you began the conversation by saying that AI is already-And foreigners.

Well, sure. If you look at that population, there's 3 million people who's just basically changing, about half of them are foreigners. If you can attract the best and the brightest, and there's a lot to be attracted to in the United States from the best and the brightest, because we are a country of all of these different people operating this way, and we create these equal opportunities. Look who's running some of the companies. They come from different places. If we can have the best in the world come in that environment to be creative and so on. We can invent and so on, but we can't produce.

But the people you're describing have come to our universities. That's basically- That's right. Silicon Valley is there because Stanford is there.

That's right.

I was in a restaurant the other night. In fact, this weekend, and I had a little trouble hearing what people were saying. I thought to myself, I'm a little young to go deaf. Why? Well, because I grew up shooting, bird hunting, target shooting. I remember my father saying, Just stick a Marl filter in your opposite ear and you'll be Fine. I wish we'd had suppressors, but we didn't. You can now check out Silencer Central. Silencers play a crucial role in improving accuracy, maximizing your experience, and protecting your hearing. They're not dangerous or scary. It's just the opposite. Not using them can be dangerous. Have dinner with me in a restaurant and you'll know what I mean. Silencer Central can fix your problems immediately. They will find the perfect silencer for you and make it very easy to buy one. It's not the hassle you thought it was. I know because I just went through it. So you get approved, and then Silencer Central ships your order straight to your door. No hassle whatsoever. It is easy. It doesn't get any better, in fact. If you thought it was impossible to shoot suppressed, you were wrong.

Go to silencercentral. Com right now, start browsing, use the code Tucker10 for 10% off your first purchase of banish suppressors. Highly recommended.

But you began the conversation by saying that AI is now at the point where the machines have the equivalent knowledge of a PhD in every different topic. So at some point, are you going to have universities?

We'll redefine what universities are like, but you're going to have that combination of things working together. Because still, we're a long way from, not a long way, but we're away from the point of the decision making will be made by the AI. And the wisdom will be by the AI. You're not going to have the AI determine how you raise your kid, and different people will raise their children differently and so on. The actual, you'll rely on it, but it's really the magic for the foreseeable future is remarkable people with remarkable technologies producing remarkable changes. And then we're going to have then the consequences of that.

As long as human decision making plays a role, I'm totally fine with it. But you say that the university is going to change. I mean, how could it not? I thought the Internet was going to get rid of universities. It didn't happen. But I mean, how long does it take for the current model to change? It's pretty resistant to change.

I think it's... Yes, it's slow to change, and those who change slowly will be left behind, and then you'll have the best. I would say you see things taking place, but anyway, I would expect that it's going to... Life is more like a game, I think. It's almost like a video game. You're going to be able to have real-world learning experiences in many different ways to be able to provide education, but it's going to be interactive. You're going to see a type of merging, whether you like it or not, you're going to see a type of merging of the man and the artificial intelligence.

Does that worry you?

Of course, it worries me, and then it excites me. What worries me most fundamentally is how people are with each other. Can we put harmony and happiness Togetherness. Can we resolve decisions, issues? Can we deal with these issues together? That is the most important thing. I think we emphasize too much the wonderful, remarkable things that we get from AI, like we'll have greater life expectancy and less disease, and we can have all of those things. But the question is, do we have a harmony, quality of life? It's I did a study. Also, I put it out free online, which is ratings, not the statistics used for rating various conditions of countries, 24 top countries. It's called the Global Power Index. It's online free or anybody who wants to look at it. I rated different powers: economic power, military power, education power, and so on. Then I rated health, how long you live, the diseases you're encumbered by, and so on, and happiness, what your happiness level is. What's interesting about that is that the measures of power don't have a past at a certain level of living standards, don't have a correlation with health, which is amazing because you have all the money to produce the health, and have no correlation with happiness.

That, for example, in the United States, which is the most powerful country in the world by these measures, our life expectancy is five years less than Canadians, so they're right next to us, and five years less than countries of equal income levels. Okay. So health, there's poor correlation. And in happiness, there's correlation. Like Indonesia has the second-highest happiness rating. So all I'm saying is we think about also how we work with each other, how we are with each other. The highest determinant of happiness is community.

Of course.

If you have a good community, you have happiness, and it has a positive effect on health. So I I think it all comes down to how we are with each other in dealing with all of the questions that you're raising.

There's been no advance in changing human nature over time, right? I mean, let's It's a technological advance, no advance in getting along with each other.

It goes in ebbs and cycles. I would look at it this way. There are many religions in the world. Most of the religions have two components to them. The first component is follow the word of God, and you have to follow it in that way. But the others are about harmony. In other words, how do we create a harmonious society? You look at the Ten Commandments or something, and there are rules for how do you achieve harmony. There are things like karma. Okay, how do you achieve harmony? Different societies communities have different ways of trying to achieve harmony. I think that's important. Harmon. I think it comes down to some basic things. I study this thing and I go around the world. I think first, Do you educate, raise your children well? In other words, educate them in capabilities, so they're capable, but also in civility and how they are with each other. Because a capable civil person will come out to a society in which they can work well together to be productive. That people have to be productive, right? But in order to be productive, you have to have a harmony. They have to deal with the questions.

I'm answering your question about how we deal with this. I'm saying we have to deal with it together. There's only in an environment where there's harmony rather than fighting. Are you going to be able to address the types of questions that you're raising, right? When you ask me what's going to happen with AI, and then you say, We need to do this and we need to do that. It strikes me that how the whys deal with each other, to be able to deal with those things is the most important things. And there are basics of how we deal with each other. That's the most important thing.

I agree with that. Last question. I don't think you grew in a billionaire world?

No. My dad was a jazz musician and we had a low middle class family, but I have it everything I ever needed.

Well, so that's my question. Now you live, obviously, in a billionaire world, which is where do you run into more happy people?

Oh, Almost general. If you get past the things that your basics, if I can... Health, education, habitat, and you get past those, you've got everything you need. Then if you have community, you have everything you need.

That is the best. Riddelio, thank you very much.

Thank you.

If you've been paying attention, you know that ALF is not just another nicotine pouch. It is literally the best nicotine pouch in the world. And we know because we use it all day long. We've used all of them. Turns that you can actually make money by telling people about ALP. We're launching our affiliate program. If you have an audience, big or small, you can cash in. You earn a 10% commission on every sale of ALP that you bring in. To make it even easier, we'll give you a 10% off link for your followers. They save, you earn. It's really simple. By the way, compared to all the other products people sell online, ALP is truly good. It's delicious. It is easy to sell because it's heartfelt. To spread the word, get rewarded for it, you can sign up at ALPpouch. Com. It's ALPpouch. Com, A-L-P-P-O-U-C-H. Com. Best nicotine pouch in the world..