We're a technology show, and I've wanted
to ask you to come on following the debate because of your background,
because of the reporting of your relationship with former President Trump
and the Trump campaign team. But we should talk about last night.
So the floor is yours. Your reaction to that debate?
Well, look, I was in Atlanta last night, got back to my home in Columbus today.
And after sleeping on it, my conclusions are same as what we saw last night,
which is this was sad for the United States of America to see the current
president, Joe Biden, in the mental state that he's actually in.
There was a lot of joking about drug testing or were they going to drug him
up? It looked more like he had a lobotomy.
And I just think that that's a sad thing.
Speaking as an American, regardless of partisanship.
When you think about the country that has produced the greatness of innovation
and the leaders leading companies in the

private sector. To see the person who's leading the federal government himself be as absent as he was yesterday, I think is really a damning indictment of the modern Democratic Party. The president did a good job for me. Yeah. Mr. Ramaswamy, may I just jump in? And it's interesting that you ran as a presidential candidate for the Republican Party. You are representing former President Trump. But you started by speaking about President Biden's performance. Many are frustrated this morning that we actually didn't hear any answers to the questions posed to former President Trump about what he would do if reelected, what some of his policy platforms were. What did you learn about what former President Trump might do, whether he'd be re-elected to the White House? Well, you asked me about my impressions. And I think the number one most salient thing about the debate for anybody who watched it was indeed the surprise of Biden's performance, which is why I

commented on it in response to your
question, but I agree with you.
It's much more productive to talk about the policy vision of the man who's
likely to be the next president, which is Donald Trump.
And I think one of the things that took away from yesterday was talking about
the revival of American success and a focus on the economy.
The fact of the matter is President Trump, I think, demonstrated that
despite being a member of a different economic class than most Americans, he
is a billionaire. He is still somebody who understands.
Prices have gone up, but wages have remained flat.
And I think that part really landed. I wish the debate had gone into greater
depth on policy. Frankly, if Biden had shown up with
greater mental acuity, we might have had that opportunity.
In many cases, the things he said were incoherent.
That stopped that debate from being as useful as it could.
But what did we learn last night?

And then the combination of recent
speeches that President Trump has given. Economic growth is a core objective for
Donald Trump. That's not a left-leaning message or a
right-leaning message. Economic growth is an inherent and
worthy objective, from bringing down the tax burden, to the regulatory burden, to
drilling for oil and natural gas, and increasing the supply of energy to bring
down costs. Those are core issues that I think
matter not only to business owners and economically minded voters.
It's a factor that matters to all voters.
And that was one of the more powerful things that came out of last night. The discussion about the economy and the economic vision for the next four years.
Mr. Ramasamy, may I just point out what you
said on prices and also wage inflation?
You said prices have gone up, but wages have remained flat.
That is no longer true. If you look today, we saw inflation in
May, down fractionally almost today, but

wages were up 7/10 of a percent.
I just want to get the latest. Let me out.
Let me, let me just comment on that in direct response to that.
So your numbers, guy, I like that. As you well know, I believe you well
know inflation is accumulative, right. So that is the inflation rate.
But inflation over the course of the last several years, you want to look at
actual many consumer goods and products are up by over 50% since the time Biden
took office. How much does a carton of egg costs?
How much does a car cost? How much is your electric bill?
Those are undoubtedly higher than when Joe Biden took office.
And it is a hard fact that wages have not gone up at the same rate.
So I don't want to play this verbal jujitsu of the last month's numbers are
going to get in the facts. I'm all in favor of it.
Those are the hard, indisputable facts.

And we don't have to argue the facts,
because most Americans who pay those bills already have a deep understanding
of that. And I do think that that is going to be
a guiding force in what we see this November.
Mr. Ramasamy, you and I both agreed on one
thing, which is that we will talk about technology and policy from it, from a
technology standpoint. You mentioned energy and oil in
particular. One of the things that I reported was
that you act is almost an intermediary between former President Trump and Elon
Musk. And it seems as if the former president
and Elon Musk are now speaking or at least have spoken.
Where do you see them finding middle ground and an influence if former
President Trump were to return to the White House?
Well, I respect the two of them individually, both as people who have
succeeded in this country through the private sector.
I think we all share a belief, all three

of us, that we need more of those voices
in American politics driving change not as professional politicians, but people
who look at political problems through the lens of an entrepot.
Her and the business leader objectively. And so I think that that's a common
cause that I would say is put on that basis for the friendship with both of
them. The reality is one of the things that
we're all rooting for as well is not only an economic revitalization of the
U.S., but a revitalization of innovation in the United States of America.
I think we have seen a decline in the rate of innovation in the U.S., but that
is ultimately our competitive advantage in the end is the ultimate innovation
and the innovative spark of starting the greatest companies known to mankind
generally here in the United States, which then has collateral benefits of
creating jobs and creating wealth. But it's also the founding spark of
American exceptionalism, right? Our founding fathers were the likes of
Thomas Jefferson, who not only wrote the

Declaration of Independence, he also invented the swivel chair and the polygraph test. Benjamin Franklin. I think of Elon Musk as a modern Benjamin Franklin type of figure, invented the lightning rod and the Franklin stove. Yet these were also the people who led the country politically and set it into motion. So I think we have a chance to revive that 1776 kind of spirit. And I think there's a role for a modern Washington, a modern Jefferson, a modern Benjamin Franklin. I think in many ways Donald Trump is stepping up to be the modern George Washington of our time. Elon Musk reminds me of the Benjamin Franklin's of their day. And so I think we found different common cause in our love of this country to revitalize that founding spirit, even though each of us have had our own successes separately in the private sector. And I'm biased, but I'm of the view that we need actually more of those people.

stepping up to play different roles in
defining the future of our politics in America.
Mr. Ramaswamy, can I ask just very quickly,
is as a matter of checking, have you spoken to the former president since
last night? I haven't spoken to him since last
night, no. And the reason I ask is about your role
with with with him directly and also his team.
One of the areas of reporting a focus has been discussions you may have had
with him around crypto and the role that crypto may play if former President
Trump returns to the White House. Could you tell me a bit about that and
the conversations that you've had? Some of that started actually after I
left the race. I left the race after the Iowa caucus,
but before the New Hampshire primary. And I could tell you one part that was
so sort of totally public on that stage was in New Hampshire.
I began my conversations with Donald Trump about why in my campaign I had
been opposed to a central bank, digital

currency, a CBDC. And one of the things that impressed me about President Trump was his intellectual curiosity about that issue. I've met a lot of politicians, including Republicans, who have heard the vague acronym CBDC, but don't know the first thing about what it actually means, but they pretend like they do. Donald Trump was the opposite of that. He actually said, What the heck is that? Tell me what it is. And then he asked me, What are the best arguments for why they're actually supporting it? And I thought that was a mark of a good leader who wanted to understand the best arguments for the other side. And later on, he said it from the campaign stage and from events. I feel comfortable sharing this part of it where he came out then after a thoughtful consideration, after careful study of the issue of his opposition to a central bank digital currency, and he explained why it's a threat to liberty.

The flip side of that is why you might favor decentralization and alternative options from people just staying tethered to the dollar of holding the Fed accountable by having other options in the marketplace of alternative currencies. So I think there's been a number of productive conversations he and I have had. And one of the things that I look at this for is it's not a sector. I don't look at cryptocurrencies, a sector to the contrary. I look at the first principles of the United States of America founded on competition and choice and financial freedom. And I think those principles are certainly what motivated my interest in these issues in the campaign. And I think that's what's also helped a lot of my conversation with President Trump is let's start with first principles of what's right for America, not what's good for one sector or another, but then let's adopt the kinds of policies that actually allow America to remain the beachhead of innovation rather than playing from behind.

Mr.
Ramaswamy just one item on on the idea. The President has to block anything or
anyone from doing a cbdc. I think the Fed has said clearly many times that it's
not going to introduce one unless mandated by Congress, that that's the
Fed's position on that. I want to ask you about artificial.
And just since there's about closing the loop on that, Janet Yellen has exit has
certainly stood for her advocacy on the executive branch, often sponsors
legislation that goes through Congress. That's how things work in Washington,
DC. But I do think it's good to have a
president one way or another that's clear about his position.
And I think that Donald Trump adopted the right position in his clarity.
We would like to talk about artificial intelligence.
And I appreciate that this was not a question posed last night, but any of
the policy questions posed weren't really answered by either participant.
But when former President Trump was in

office, we weren't talking about the idea of an existential threat from a large language model in the many hundreds of billions of parameters. We weren't talking about the need to regulate A.I.. So former President Trump doesn't have the experience of that. But do you think that he has this sort of academic study enough or he's thought about it because going into office, if he were to regain the White House, would be an issue to consider? I do. I do wish this had been a topic both at that debate and even in the Republican primary debates, where this issue did not come up once as well, even though I suggested it many times. It's an important issue for the future and it falls outside of traditional partisan boundaries. So I'm glad you're bringing it up. Is President Trump going to claim to be a domain expert in A.I. or something that he's not a domain expert in know? And that's what I love about him.

But I think he's going to be able to attract the best minds around him to set rational policy that at once allows the US to be a leader in innovation, while at the same time acknowledging a different kind of risk than we faced in the past from different types of generative. I personally, one of the things I think makes a lot of sense as a first step, rather than creating some sort of central government bureaucracy to handle this, is just treat it the same way you treat other sectors just in the same way that you're a chemicals manufacturer and you can't dump in somebody else's river. If you're the developer of a protocol or an algorithm that has unpredictable but nonetheless realized negative effects, that you're liable for those effects, basic principles of the law that we already use elsewhere, but to use them in this new domain as well. And what I have seen from President Trump, it's the same question that came up even in the last topic we discussed.

is a level of intellectual curiosity,
somebody who has been an executive. Somebody who, unlike Joe Biden, frankly,
from seeing what we saw last night, is still intellectually with it enough to
be able to go deep on the details, attract the best people, and make the
rational policy decision. Not in an ideological or ideologue-driven manner
when it comes to A.I., but in a manner that's driven by our actual
understanding of the facts. And so I do have confidence in his
ability to lead here. Mr.
Ramaswamy, I'm sorry to disrupt you a shorter time, and I want to make the
most of it. Have you been asked to submit
documentation for vetting for a potential cabinet position in the event
of a Trump White House? We've had a lot of conversations about
the future. I have not been asked to be the vice
president, but whatever it is, I'm going

to look at what maximizes impact on the
country, and how we make sure that a second Trump term is as good as it possibly can
be. And I am hopeful that we're going to see
the strongest ticket, not just of this century, but of my lifetime.
And I think after last night, we have a unique opportunity in this country for
this not to just be a 50.1 election. We had a lot of thin margin, thin ice
elections. This could be a Reagan that 1980, 1984
style landslide, remixing minorities, Hispanics, blacks, young people,
creating a new coalition in this country that's pro-American and goes beyond the
boundaries of the traditional Republican Party, Wall Street.
And this will be those America first principles that Trump ran on.
So that's what I'm rooting for. I appreciate Dante.
I am out of time, but I need to ask you about BuzzFeed, but also the idea. I'm
being told over and over, your interest.

in a media company, something like a
vice. You know, you've been buying up BuzzFeed shares.
It's reported your statement. What happens?
What are you aiming to do here? Well, look, I'm now the second largest
class, a shareholder at BuzzFeed. I've been very public in my letter that
this is a company that has struggled and failed for reasons that I still think
are fixable. A lot of people know what BuzzFeed is.
They don't know what the brand actually stands for.
And I think they have a historic opportunity to do what many in the
mainstream media have an opportunity to do. Build a brand centered on trust and
the pursuit of truth by saying that, you know what, we platform all voices. Left,
right, doesn't matter, across the cultural spectrum and use that to define a
coherent and powerful brand that I think audiences are hungry for, especially of
younger audiences today that are sick.

and tired of yesterday's legacy media,
but want authenticity, want to trust content creators.

Ramaswamy Says More Innovation Needed in the US

Welcome to the Bloomberg Technology YouTube channel. Subscribe for original series and mini-docs on game-changing technologies, profiles on innovators, live conversations with experts, and breaking technology news & analysis from Bloomberg TV.