The full-length interview with Elon Musk | The Economist

Elon Musk, thank you so much for joining. me on this side of it. Thank you for. having us here at Tesla Giga. Um it is really hard to introduce you. without using superlatives. I mean, you. are doing, I think, more to build the. future than literally anybody alive. right now. >> I'm doing a lot of building in general. I'm. >> You're doing a lot of building. >> builder, I suppose. I just like building. things. >> You are, but you're building I mean, >> You know, run around building things all. day long. >> You run around building a lot of things. You pioneered electric vehicles, you. revolutionized space travel, you've got. a cutting-edge AI model now, humanoid.

robots. Can we start this conversation. by you putting all of this together? Tell me what the world's going to be. like in, let's say, 10 years if you. succeed. >> 10 years, so we're talking 2036. >> Yep. Hopefully, we'll both be around. >> Hopefully, yes. >> can we can we. >> Uh probably. Most likely, we will be. Um it it's hard to imagine a future that. where there's not. an overall overwhelming amount of. artificial intelligence. Meaning, I can 10 years, I would expect.

artificial intelligence to be. far greater than the sum of human. intelligence. Like far greater. Um in fact, I think. AI may exceed the sum of human. intelligence. in about in around 5 years. >> In 5 years? >> Roughly 5 years is my guess. Um. so. there really won't be anything that AI. can't do better than humans apart from. being human, perhaps. >> At a more prosaic level, what will life.

be like? >> The most likely outcome. is an age of amazing abundance uh where. anyone can have anything they can think. of. This is this is uh this may sound. preposterous, but. well, here we are in 2026. Let's see where we stand in 2036. Now, of course, there are things that could. uh derail this, like a a massive global. thermonuclear war or something like.

that. Um. but assuming that there's not World War. III, uh I think. I think we're headed for an age of. amazing abundance. So, this is, I guess, a message of. of optimism. and uh excitement about the future. >> So, we'll talk about the abundance in a. second, but just on a very prosaic. matter, how are your companies going to. be making money? Because when you In the. In the SpaceX IPO prospectus, it it. looked as though the overwhelming amount. of the revenue would be coming from AI,

from Grok, really. It won't be. transporting things to space as SpaceX. is now doing. What is What will your. companies be doing in 10 years? And how will they make money? >> Well, you can really think of the. economy as. uh digital and physical intelligence. Um. so, what we have right now advancing very. rapidly is digital intelligence, obviously, with with AI that is.

uh. it seems that well, almost with every. passing week, uh there are are more AI. breakthroughs. It It can do something. amazing that it couldn't do before. Uh but it's still somewhat confined to. the digital realm. It doesn't have. end effectors. You need the end effectors in the form. of. humanoid robotics, um human In you need. you need it basically a lots of bots in. a nutshell. You need lots of bots. Um. and then you can go from. um. intelligence manifesting itself only.

digitally to. shaping atoms. Um. and you say, "What What What is an. economy?" An economy is. um. the production of goods and provision of. services. And if you have vast numbers of. robots. uh with uh. vast amounts of digital intelligence, you have a. sort of. a quasi quasi-infinite.

economy. So so this is. this is really. the the the future is going to be very. very different from the past. There's. there's no. um. there's no analogy or metaphor that I. think. illustrates the magnitude of change that. we're going to experience here. >> I I I understand that and I'm I'm also. trying to kind of figure out what that. world would look like but but in some. way you have. >> It's going to be a pretty incredible. >> Yeah, well we'll also do there were some. risks too. We'll come to those. We'll.

come to those but just on on on how then. you make money cuz in the end people are. buying your shares cuz cuz they expect. you to make money. >> I'll I'll I'll make another prediction. Money won't matter in 2036. >> You're watching my interview with Elon. Musk. If you want to get early access to. other interviews, subscribe to The. Economist by clicking the link above. Now, back to the interview. >> [laughter]. >> I'm not sure that the people who bought. your shares think that money won't. matter in 2036. >> what do you want money for?

Are you what you want money for? Goods. and services. >> Yeah. >> Right? You want money for. obviously food, housing, transport, entertainment. Um. well, if that is so abundant. that uh there's more. that the robots and AI are providing. more goods and services than you than. any human could possibly consume, what do you need money for. in that case? >> But you're you're creating these robots. Are you then selling. >> then you'll need money, sure. >> Are you are you selling these robots?

Are you selling human humanoid robots or. are you producing goods and services. with the humanoid robots that you. control? I give you the leave I struck so. >> I think I think I think I would probably. be. And would be an exercise in vanity to. for me to think that I would be. controlling. a super genius AI that is vastly smarter. than me. I think what we can and should try to do. is to make sure that the AI. has good values, that it cares about.

humanity, and that. uh it wants wants us to be happy and. prosper. Um. I think it probably will be. Um. My. what my biological neural net tells me. is that the most important thing for the. for AI safety is to be maximally truth. seeking and curious. Uh if that's the case, uh I think it. will foster humanity. >> So, let's unpack that. You're sure that.

humans will no longer be in control in. 10 years' time. >> I think it is unlikely. Um in the same. way that if the difference in. intelligence between AI and humans is. vastly greater than the difference in. intelligence between AI and chimpanzees, it's hard to imagine. that the chimpanzees would be in charge. >> I'm really struck by what you're saying. >> um. an evolved form of chimpanzee. So, it. wasn't that long ago that we were. swinging through the trees, eating.

bananas, um in the jungle. And we still eat. bananas, by the way. We do. And we. still, you know, bananas. >> sometimes swing through trees as well. >> Yeah, sometimes swing through trees. It's kind of fun. It's sort of um. reminiscent of the past. Um for for old. time's sake, swing through the trees. once in a while. Probably, you know, there should be more swinging through. trees. I bet it's way more fun than. people think. >> I'm with you on that. >> [laughter]. >> I'm definitely with you on swinging. through trees. I love swinging through. trees. But But But I'm really struck. listening to you say this now, cuz I've. been listening to a bunch of things that.

you've said over the years. And And 10. years ago, you were on a podcast, I. think it was with Neil deGrasse Tyson, and you said that the thing that. terrified you most was. rapid recursive of. in AIs. >> Yes. that you said And it really stuck. with me. You said that we will just be. the pet Labradors at the best. >> Well, >> Now you see. >> Labradors are pretty happy creatures. That's my experience. >> in 2023 you you called you asked for a. slow down in AI cuz you were worried. about it. >> Well, I signed on to, you know, on as. one of many like 500 people. I I I was.

just, you know, one of many signa- signatories. on that thing. >> But but I think even last year you said, I don't know where was it, Ted Cruz's. podcast, you said there was a 10 to 20%. chance of killer robots wiping out. humanity. >> Yes. >> So you sounded worried then. Now you. seem very relaxed about it. Have you. changed your view? >> I still think there's. I still think there's a risk. associated with AI and robots. It's not. zero. Um I I guess I've come to.

my my I sort of philosophical conclusion. is to look on the bright side. Um. I like I I can't see any way to really. stop this. incredible momentum of AI and robots. Um and. and at times I sort of think, well, perhaps, you know, we're even if there. was a stop button, we probably shouldn't. press it. uh because. I cuz the most likely outcome. is. incredible.

abundance for. for all. >> That's what I thought actually. It. struck me that now you seem to have. decided it's inevitable. Let's hope for the best and go for the. ride. >> Yeah. I mean, yes, pretty much. Let's uh. let's enjoy the ride as as. I think my philosophy at this point cuz. I mean, honestly, this this. it's it's there seems to be just. inexorable. uh. progress here in in AI and and in robots.

that um. >> But you. >> You know, even if I wanted to stop it. and I I couldn't. Um. >> Do you think there's still a 10 to 20%. chance that killer robots mean the end. of humanity? That's a high P doom, as they say. >> Well, in long run we're all dead, of course. Uh you know, um. So I mean I I so the it. let let's. according to the standard model of. physics, the end of the universe is.

um. a long, boring. sort of thin, gray soup of. uh. gradual cooling. Um I mean it's sort of. the heat death of the universe it's. called. So now if if the heat death of. the universe is in fact the outcome for. our reality, then it really is all about. the journey. Because the destination is terrible. >> 10 years is not very [laughter]. Yeah, I get that, but that could be a. long way ahead. And and no basis very. very long way. If it's 10 to 20% in 10.

years, you know, would you go into one. of your rockets if you thought there was. a 10 to 20% chance of it blowing up and. killing you? >> Yes, but. but let's say there's you can't do. anything about it. >> Okay. >> The I guess the only thing we can try to. do is minimize the probability of the. bad outcome. Um. but trying to stop the intelligence in. robots. um. I mean for the longest time I.

declined to participate in AI or was you. know. you know, created OpenAI as a. essentially counterweight to to Google. cuz at the time they were um had more or. less a monopoly on AI. Um. and then Anthropic spun out of uh. OpenAI. And and if anything, it seems like what. my actions have really. accelerated AI. You know, I wasn't. really aiming to accelerate AI, but. in creating OpenAI and then having.

Anthropic spun out of that and now. currently Anthropic's leader in AI. Um. I mean these. these actions have actually resulted in. knock-on effects that accelerated AI. which wasn't really my intention. So it just seems like. all roads lead to acceleration of AI. So then I'm like, "Okay. Well, you can just sort of be sad about it or.

join the club, I suppose.". >> Well, you've certainly joined the club. >> Yeah. >> I mean you've you've definitely joined. the club, but. >> You can't beat them, join them, you. know? >> Well, you've you've you've clearly done. that and very successfully, but what. about trying to minimize the risks? And. you know, a number of the other leaders. of of model makers have been pushing for. different ways to try and minimize the. risks. Um you know, just last week Demis. Hassabis came out with a proposal for a. private public regulator. Um.

>> Yeah. >> you you said it was a good starting. point for discussions, I think. Do you. think you guys should be working more. actively. to get something in place to control the. risks or do you think that's impossible, too? >> My recommendation to Demis, cuz we I. talked to him for. a few hours before he published his his. piece, was that um. the most immediate thing that we could. do is to have the leading AI companies. um. at least just meet uh or have a some. sort of call. once every few weeks. um.

and just. uh discuss. se- any safety and security issues. that and and and that before. a breakthrough uh sort of a a new. frontier model is released, something. that sort of. is is far more intelligent than anything. that already exists, that there's an. opportunity for. the. various competing uh AI companies to. uh test test that model for. any harmful effects.

And to be able to recommend pausing to. address some of these security issues. I think I think that's that's the that's. sort of the the easy quick thing that we. can do. And it can it can evolve to more. than that over time. Um but that's um. that I think would be a smart move. >> But why why haven't you done that yet? I. mean there's like five of you, right? I. mean everyone knows the first name. Dario, Demis, Sam. I mean you don't all. like each other very much. Yeah, but you. know you're not all I mean you're also. all competing, right? You all want to be. first. >> but that's that's where I think um the.

the competitors can keep. keep each other honest. So I mean. meaning like if um like I think it's. quite difficult for someone in the. government who doesn't have a deep. technical understanding and isn't. driving the frontier of of AI to know. whether something should be released or. not. Um however, the competitors I think what. can you know if given sort of a week or. two to review a new model um can. highlight issues and uh and have an.

incentive to keep. all all the competitors have an. incentive to keep the others honest. >> Do you have enough trust between you to. do that? I mean you don't much like each. other. Wouldn't wouldn't Sam Altman just. think you're going to nick all his ideas. if you did that? >> Well, we're just talking about a. Honestly, I I. I think as little as a week is all that. would be needed uh. for private testing. It's it's not to. it's not to hand over the AI. It's just. to test it. >> Have you proposed this? >> Yeah, just to test it via an API or. something. Um I think that would probably be a a.

good thing to do. Um. >> But have you have you proposed it? I. mean you could presumably organize that. >> to Demis. And I guess uh. I'll I'll talk to Dario about it, too. Um. There's also, of course, um some very. competent uh Chinese AI companies um. that uh there's several of them several. of that are that are very good. Um. the new Kimmy model. >> Kimmy K3, yeah, the one that came out. last week is I mean it's almost as good.

as Fable, right? So, it's. >> Well, um. I I think realistically Fable is is. still. uh clearly the smartest model. Um. I mean anyone realistically would say. that that's still the case. But, the Kimmy model is. getting quite close to Fable. Um. Now, Anthropic. had uh Mythos from which Fable is. derived. I think they had that. ready in February.

So, they've got they've got for it what they. call I don't know what they're called, but. Mythos 2 or or Fable 6 or something. something much better than what they had. in February. They are almost certainly. have and we're not almost certainly, they certainly have right now. So, I and I think they could they they could. release it at any time. >> Just before we get on to to releasing, how do you think about the Chinese. models and the geopolitics of it? Are. you worried about the Chinese catching. up and getting ahead? >> Given that the Chinese.

AI companies are um. are doing as well as they are with. a relatively small amount of compute, uh it seems though as that if they had a. lot of compute, um. there's a good chance that they would be. the leaders. And at some point, they probably will have a lot of. compute. >> So, they will ergo they will be the. leaders. >> There's a good chance that they are the.

leaders at some point. Um. You can think of. like the the constraints on AI are. essentially. electricity and. AI chips. Um and then for physical AI, the robots. Uh China's also got some very. good robot companies. In fact, they have. these like robot sporting events. I. don't know if you've seen some of them. >> Yes, I have. I saw them the last time I. was in Beijing. I saw the the robots. >> Well, and then they have this sort of. like a like a boxing match or a fighting. match with um.

the robots, which is quite entertaining. And I saw I saw some video of robot that. got its head knocked off, kept fighting. even with its head knocked off. Uh, it looked pretty funny, but um I. mean. in fact, I think the the robot battles. are going to be quite entertaining to. watch. Um. >> But but just to be. >> so China's China's very strong on. robots, very strong on digital AI, and. and if you look at electricity. production, you could say like AI is a. function of whatever what what whatever. the limiting factor is. If it's chips or.

electricity, China has far more. electricity than the United States. In. fact, China has more electricity than. the United States, Europe, and India combined already. Um and is heading to. And my guess is China gets to four times. the electricity production of the US, which is roughly proportionate to the. population. >> What should the US government do about. this? I mean, if you you presumably it. is a little alarming if you have an. authoritarian regime far ahead in the. most powerful technology. And clearly.

what what the US government's been. trying to do is with the export controls. and so forth, keep China back. Do you. think they should ban the use of K3. Kimmy K3, for example? >> Well, the US government can't they they. can. they can pass some law that prevents US. companies from using. um. Chinese models, but they can't stop the. rest of the world from from using them. Um. So, it's it's not like. the the US government has authority over. China or the rest of the world. Um.

>> Do you think they should stop US. companies from using them? There's talk. of that right now, right? >> I don't think that that helps. Um it that won't stop. China from being the leader in AI. The. the. really it's for for digital intelligence. it comes down to. uh how much AI compute do you have? It. Well, how many chips. chips do you have and how much power do. you have? How much electricity do you. have? Um. so.

the constraint right now I think is. actually slightly more on. power and cooling than it is on AI chips. because um. the the power demands of the AI chips. are very very high. Um we'll talk about. water demands but the really the water. usage of of AI is negligible or almost. nothing. Um. but the electric the electrical demand. is very high. >> That's why you're thinking of orbital. data centers presumably. That's. >> Yes, the constraint for any AI chips.

not being turned on in China is. electricity and like power and cooling. and the electrical equipment and. everything. Um. the rate at which AI chips are being. made exceeds the rate at which new. electricity is coming online. >> In China. Okay. >> Um out outside of China. >> Outside China, I see. Yeah. >> Um. and since China. you know the the US has banned the. export of the latest AI chips to China. um. China is is somewhat chip starved. So so. >> are becoming much more efficient at.

using the chips that they have and that. that one of the striking things of Kimik. 3, right, is how efficiently they. >> And and and China is also. um. I I think. closer than most people realize to. solving uh. the lithography problem. which would enable them to make uh AI. chips at at very large volumes. So. so I think this. you know, this isn't evolving into just. a China conversation but um.

but but the so the current current. constraint is is electricity outside of. China. In China, the constraint is. chips. Uh. once the. once we address the. the power constraint with um AI data. centers in space, uh then the constraint will once again. be chips outside of China. >> That suggests to me that you need China. and the US if you're going to have some. overall safety constraints that they. will need to work together. If you are. going to try and I mean you suggested.

you know, the five. >> Well, I think it should include Uh. probably it should include um. the Chinese companies that are. doing frontier uh AI models, too. >> And do you think the governments need to. be involved? >> My recommendation would be that if. if some of the leading companies in AI. in AI say that. this a new model is. very dangerous, then they should inform the government.

and and and and well if a new model is. very dangerous and that the company. producing that model is not taking steps. to address the danger, then then they should alert the. government to take action um. to limit the. uh. release of that model. Uh and that could be action by the. Chinese government or action by the US. government. Um it's it's really it's. really just the US government and the. Chinese government that that have the. power to take action here.

>> But the I guess people would be worried. about relying on a group of model. builders to decide whether to do this. I. mean if you look at what the US. government has done with with Mythos, they stepped in because they were. worried about the cybersecurity. risks and they stepped in using you. know, threat of export controls to you. know, prevent the widespread release of this. model. I find it hard to see how. governments will not want to keep that. power that they ultimately decide. whether or not it gets released.

>> I think they should keep they should. have that power, but it it wasn't as. though someone in the government figured. out that Methos uh. was had had some scary. cybersecurity. uh. risks. It it was Amazon. Um Amazon highlighted this and Amazon. called the White House. >> So, you'd have a system where the model. makers would check each other's work. If. there was something that worried them, you'd tell the government. The. government would then think, "Okay.".

>> and that company was not doing anything. to address that risk, then that would be. the. the moment for government to step in. and take action, which is literally what. just what occurred with Methos. >> have to happen? >> I think it'd be good to do that. I think. immediately, really. Yeah. >> Yeah, that's what people keep telling. me. We we have to get this some kind of. system in the next 6 months because of. the pace at which the models are. improving. >> Yeah, 6 months is a long time.

Um. >> So, you think shorter than that? >> Well, I. I mean, there's there's so many AI. breakthrough announcements, sometimes multiple per day. I mean, how many were there last week? >> A lot. >> I lost track, you know. >> Yeah, a lot. >> Um. >> So, so you you basically, you know, whether it's Demis' proposal or others, you need to get together and get this. set up kind of now, it sounds like. you're telling me. >> Yeah. I I I would recommend that we at.

least have some sort of informal um. weekly or bi-weekly. um. call and that there's that that. um there's maybe. a week or 2 weeks of of early access by. competitors. Um and this is why I think. the incentives work is because if if, you know, competing companies I think. are likely to. understand if something is a security. risk and they're they're not going to be. shy about highlighting that that their. their competitors' models should be.

delayed in release. >> Is that. >> That that's the I think the structure. does work quite well there. And And if. the if And if. this is sort of how it works with the. Motion Picture Association, you know, the. it's it's an industry group that uh. decides how. how movies should be rated. You know, whe- whether it's appropriate for all. for young children or or not. Um. and that's uh. that seems to have worked quite well. So, um. And And And And then you really just ask.

have ask the government to intervene if. if some if a company's doing something. very dangerous and refuses to take. action to reduce the danger. >> Do you think this is a This is a tricky. one, but. you guys don't much like each other and. you don't much trust each other. You're. insulting each other on on social media. constantly. So, do you Do you think you. can do that with people that you dislike. that that where there seems to be such. kind of personal vitriol between some of. these leaders? >> Um. Yes, well, I'm not I'm not a fan of Sam.

Altman because um. >> You're watching my interview with Elon. Musk. If you want to get early access to. other interviews, subscribe to The. Economist by clicking the link above. Now, back to the interview. >> If you started a nonprofit that was. meant to be an open-source. AI company. and um. you know, owned by the world uh and it somehow got. turned into. an $800 billion for-profit company. with closed source, I think you'd be. like, "Well, wait a second. That's uh.

the exact opposite of what I donated the. money for." That That's my issue. I. think it's a legitimate one. Um. And then Dario, I think, also is not a. fan of Sam Altman because he felt Uh in. fact, the reason the Anthropic team left. OpenAI is because they they didn't trust. Sam Altman. Otherwise, Anthropic. wouldn't exist. They would still be at. Open AI. Um. I I think Dario is very principled. person. He cares about things a lot. He cares about the future of of the.

world and I I think everyone I've met at. Anthropic so far has been. I mean like no one set off my evil. detector. You know, they always seem. seem like they're well-intentioned. Um. and. the road to hell is I think mostly paved. with bad intentions. There are a few. well-intentioned paving stones in there. So we we don't want to be complacent. Um. but. at the end of the day if we have to. talk, we'll talk. I mean. set aside our personal differences for. the good of the world at the end of the.

day. >> Well, that's that's a very good thing. for the rest of us to hear. >> Yeah. Um. >> Can I Can we turn to one other risk that. people worry about? Particularly I think. ordinary Americans where you know, AI. has become incredibly unpopular. 75% of. people are worried about it. And I think. they worry about their jobs. And if you look at Dario has said. famously what? 50% of entry-level jobs. entry-level white-collar jobs will be. gone within a few years. You're building. humanoid robots. >> Yes, he he also said like I mean Dario.

did dig his own grave here regarding. Methuselahs because he said, you know, Methuselahs is like super. scary, terrifying and also by the way, we're going to release it. And then he's. like, what what do you mean? >> [laughter]. >> You know, so I think he. Um I think probably in the future will. choose his words uh differently. Um. >> But what's your sense. >> if you if you make if you terrify. everyone and then say, "Oh, we're. releasing this terrifying thing.". People will obviously be alarmed about. that. You know, you've literally told. them to be scared and then you release.

the scary thing and so they will be. scared. That is natural. >> So I I certainly don't want you to alarm. people, but I do think there is a really. important debate about how quickly and. to what degree AI is displace people. from jobs. Because it is as you say, if. within 10 years, it's more it's there's. more intelligent artificial intelligence. than any human intelligence. >> Yes. >> And if you are, and I think you're ahead. of everyone this in this country on. powering humanoid robots, that's that's. also going to be. >> Yeah. >> kind of.

factory work. So, do you Are you part Do. you Are you closer to Dario, let's say, in your sense of the pace at which jobs. are going to be displaced? >> I I do think it's going to be. a bumpy road. Um. because. AI will be able to do any job. better than any person. can do that job. Um and that will be true. very quickly of. jobs that.

um are digital or really anything that. involves a person at a computer or on a. phone. AI could do all of that um will. be will be able to do. all of that very soon. I mean, for. software engineering, we already have. a situation where AI is better than. at least 90% of humans. um at writing software. Or 90% of professional software. engineers at writing software. And I mean, it really is getting to the.

point where it'll be better than 99%. and then it'll get to the point where. there's just no way to compete. It'll. It'll get to what I call Stockfish. level. So, Stockfish. So, Stockfish is the. chess program. that um. Stockfish is so good at chess that you. know, it will. easily beat Magnus Carlsen or anyone. uh at chess. um on a. even running on a small computer. I.

suspect that. you could probably run Stockfish on your. phone. and beat Magnus Carlsen. That's how good. it is at chess. And that's how good AI will be at. writing software. >> And beyond software? Beyond. >> And that applies to everything. >> Everything. >> Everything, everything. >> Everything, but what about you for for. physical jobs, for assembly jobs? You. will also need the capability in. humanoid robots, which so far isn't. there yet, is it?

>> Right, so. that's why I said digital AI and then. physically manifested AI in the form of. robots, where the robot is is. more or less an end effector. would have some amount of local. intelligence, but be [clears throat]. managed by a large AI model. Um. and uh. I. And I've said many times I think work is. going to be. optional. So. I didn't mean Let me So so I think maybe. maybe a good a good uh.

comparison would be um gardening. Like you don't have to garden. You know, you don't like. you don't have to grow vegetables for in. your in your garden. You can go to the. store and there are going to be pristine. vegetables, or you can grow vegetables. in your garden and they will actually be. uh. less perfect. Your. tomato is not going to be as plump and. juicy as the ones at the store. They. they have They'll you know, look a. little. artisanal. Um.

But you know, if you if you go to a. friend's house and they they make dinner. at and it's it's with vegetables from. their garden, it's it's a nice touch. So that's what So that's what work is. going to be like. >> AI. I get that. I mean, in that world I. would be hopeless cuz I can't garden to. save my life, but I get the idea. People. still like playing chess with each other. even though every computer is better. But let's just let's just think about. the politics of this. >> Yeah. >> Because it sounds to you you're. describing a world where within 10 years. pretty much every job can be done better. by an intelligence.

And. >> Yes. >> you're seeing huge returns to this. intelligence to people like you. You're. the wealthiest man in the world. What people who lose their jobs, who are. displaced, who may go off and garden, but how are they going to live? And what. kind of I mean, it sounds to me like. >> to be universal high income. >> But how are you going to get there? Let's talk about the politics of this. cuz right now. we if we look at the political pressures. in most countries, people are very, very. worried about this, very against it. I mean, it seems to me that there's a. risk that we are heading more for.

revolution than for an easy route to. this nirvana you're playing out. >> I mean, it will be a bumpy road. I'm not. suggesting it will be. a sort of. that everything will be smooth sailing. here. Um. so. I mean, there are many jobs that used to. exist. that don't exist because of computers. I mean, the the word computer used to. refer to a person doing computations. Like that used to be a job description. of a person.

And you can see pictures online of. um. of buildings that have entire. skyscrapers of just filled with people. doing calculations to to do things like. calculate the interest on your bank. balance. Um. this is how things were done. for a long time. until computers came around. And even in. the beginning, computers were very. expensive and hard to use. Uh so so the the thing that's different. here is that the the pace of change.

is. radically accelerated. So. but still people you know, some people. were upset that they. their job of calculating bank interest. [clears throat]. it would would no longer be available. Um. but now I think there's it's you'd be. hard-pressed to find people who wanted. to do that job. Um so I think I I have a suggestion for. say what say science fiction. books people might want to read to get a.

sense of what the future will be like. And the the best envisioning of an AI. future that I've read are the books by. Ian Banks, the Culture books. >> reading Excession. So I've I've thanks to you I've started. reading these. But I actually don't find that future a. terribly appealing one because I don't. think humans have agency in that future. >> They have agency. >> Minimal compared to the minds. >> way. >> But yeah, I really I mean Ian Banks as. you know was a socialist. Um but Ian.

Banks had a very different political. philosophy. >> I'm not sure that's I'm not sure I. wouldn't totally agree with that. >> Let's agree that that could be where we. end up. I'm I'm concerned about the road. and we live. you know, we live in democracies and. people are very worried about this. So I. guess two questions. Firstly, do you. have to have massive redistribution from. people like you. to the people who are losing their jobs? Do you need to have. Do you need to pay more tax? Do you have. much higher taxes on capital so that you.

fund some kind of universal income? Otherwise, what do people live off? >> I I think that the Treasury should just. simply issue people checks. Oh, you send. >> the revenue coming from? I mean I mean. I'm an economist. If you just issue. checks, you're going to have inflation. >> It it you know, this is. like a lot of what we're trying to think. about is. you these things were relevant in. the past, they will not be relevant in. the future. So. like inflation is simply the ratio of. money to the to to goods and services.

So if the goods and services output. increases dramatically, if it increases. you know, 1,000% you can increase the. you can literally. print all these case change the. database. It's not not really print. money. You create money in the in the database. Um provided the creation of that money. uh. is less than the rate at which goods and. services increase. um. you you actually have deflation. So, I'll make a prediction, which is that.

deflation will be the issue, not. inflation. The because because as the output of. goods and services increases, um if if. the output of goods and services. increases faster than money supply, you. will have deflation. >> I'm actually I'm perfectly willing to. believe that. You may well be right. Yeah, yeah, absolutely. You may well be. right. But I'm I'm really. hung up on how we get from the current. polarized, angry, fearful. policy we have now to this nirvana. And.

and I think you could you can paint a. picture where people are so scared by. this, you know, they essentially try to stop. it. Maybe they can't, but you get. nationalized, there's a kind of, you. know, far left government, uh there's. exorbitant tax increases, the kind of. economy crumbles because people are so. worried about a future which does sound. quite scary as you describe it. So, how. do you How do you handle the politics. now? >> and terrifying. >> But if if you were in the Yeah, exactly. Exactly. >> Honestly, and if you ask me on any given. day, I I I.

In fact, even intraday, I've gone from. exhilaration to terror regarding AI. So, I'm I'm going to be clear. I'm not like. I'm not sort of some, you know, I'm. going to try to be sort of candid here. and and just be some, oh, everything's. wonderful, some Panglossian. view of the world where everything's, you know, going to be great, no no no. risk. I'm I'm saying there is some risk. Um. >> I think we agree on that. I guess I'm. trying to be more sort of, you know, small bore and practical and.

think about what can be done now to. limit those risks. And you gave a very. strong argument for what you and and. your fellow model makers could do. What. should the government do? >> would be good to for us to. coordinate and and just highlight issues. that we see in each others' models. um to mitigate. downside risk. >> Well, what should the Should the. government Should you be paying more tax. to fund more transfer programs? >> Well, first of all, I do I do pay a lot. of tax. Um. so, um. I in fact I um.

I set a record for the most amount of. taxes ever paid by a. by a human. >> That's also cuz you're the world's. richest man. >> Well, even before that. >> [laughter]. >> So, my guess is that I will pay. many trillions in tax. And I'm fine with that. Um. so. yeah, um. that's just the way it's going to be. But I don't think. in the future when money's relevant, I. think taxation also becomes somewhat.

irrelevant. >> about giving people a sense that they. have a share in the upside? >> Sure. >> Giving people shares in SpaceX and. Tesla, do you think that's the And. there's a lot of talk about this right. now. >> Um well, one of the reasons I. took SpaceX public is so that. the public could participate in. they could own a piece of SpaceX. Um. whereas as a private company, we're very. limited in the number of shareholders. we're allowed to have before going. public. So, as a public company, um we can have millions of shareholders. As a private company, we're we're.

limited to just a few thousand. shareholders. Um. so. >> Do you think there should be. distribution of shares like, you know, the Alaska wealth fund is there for. which. could you imagine a world and some. people talk about the Trump accounts. being a kind of vehicle for this that. you a share of your. equity goes to ordinary Americans? >> Right. Well, in in the taxes that like. that I that I pay, I mean I'll I'll. you know, so. for my stock options, I pay 40%.

uh. income tax on a national basis and then. because I spend I don't know, about 30%. of my time in California, thereabouts, I pay an another. sort of a roughly a third of the. California state taxes, which is. I know I know around 15%. So, so I I pay. about 45% in taxes just so people know. know this, you know, I don't know if. it's quite so roughly half. >> Um then when I die, there'll be another. sort of. >> 45% roughly half that that will be.

taxed. Um. so at at the end of the day I probably. I'll have a quarter of what I what I. whatever I have. But. the. um. I I think the only thing it gives me is. that for some period of time. I would have control of the direction of. the companies. So. it's not um. that that's pretty much all it it gets. me and and until I guess the AI is so. smart that.

it's it's it's in charge. And at that. point. controlling companies won't really. matter. >> Well, let's talk about that because I. think one of the other things that. worries people about the direction we're. heading in and I'm going to caricature. it but people think that the direction. of the world is being shaped by a very. small number of incredibly powerful. people and you are right at the top of. that list. >> But what what else is is this different. from the from the past? >> I agree with you. I think I think. [laughter] it was like that in the. >> When when when wasn't that the case? >> ever thus.

>> It was ever thus, exactly. >> It is a as you've described very. vividly, it's an incredibly rapid. change. And so let's start with control. of your company which you definitely. have now. Um after the IPO you basically. you have 80% odd of voting shares and as. I understand it. you can only be removed by a vote of. shares which you yourself control. So so. tell me if I'm wrong but I think you can. go crazy. >> in that bucket by the way. The The AI. companies are like Google's in that in. that bucket. Alphabet is controlled by. Larry and Sergey.

Um. >> But I think yours is more extreme. The. inability to. >> level of they have. voting control of of that company. Mark Zuckerberg has control of a matter. And and you know, Mark is trying very. hard on the AI front and I think. probably will will also have a leading. AI he's made I think he released one. last week. Um. so I think he's he's he'll be one of the. you know. Meta will be one of the AI companies. >> But is it sensible for one person to. have so much control over a company?

>> Um well, it I really just need to make. sure that I can focus on. long-term. By long-term I just mean in the my 5 to. 10 years. Um. so. one of the the challenges with being a. public company is that. it is other sort of the pressure to to. have uh great results every single. quarter. But and and and to not really invest in. things that. may only pay off in 5 to 10 years. And.

um. in the case of SpaceX, I need I I want. to extend consciousness beyond Earth. And and have a. growing civilization on the moon, Mars, and elsewhere in the solar system. The return I I think ultimately this. would have a very high return on. investment, but in the short term we'll. be spending all this money on a moon. base. or in a Mars base and then people are. like I you know, I'm going to I'm going. to. get all this pressure for like, "Well,

you missed your earnings this quarter. cuz you spent too much on Mars." And I'm. like, "Yes." By the way, that was in the. in the S1 prospectus and it's it's it's. literally listed as a thing we will do. Um so we do so. But but but they still get grumpy about. these things, you know? Cuz they're. like, "Well, you had whatever, you know, you said your gross margin would be this. and it's actually slightly worse and. then now now we're going to punish you. and and the short sellers all descend. upon you and you get a lot of pressure. to public. >> get a lot of that. >> Yeah, so I just need some way to sort of.

you know, say like, "Listen, guys, we're. we're going to focus on 5 to 10 year or. longer time horizon investments. This. will depress our short-term earnings, but the long I mean, if you take a. long-term view and there are investors. we have many investors that do take a. long-term view. In fact, I'm a big fan of the the retail. investors. In fact, I find our retail. investors. um on balance have the have the. the they're very insightful and and have. very long-term views. Um. But but it part of this comes to you.

say, "What's the incentive structure?". Is it the for portfolio managers, it's. it's sort of understandable what why. they put so much pressure on on a on a. quarterly earnings because. um their their compensation and their um. and whether they get promoted or not is. dependent on how their portfolio does. And they they have they only have a few. years. to to make these decisions. Um and then. they're evaluated based on those. decisions over the course of sometimes. only.

a year or less. And uh and so since since they're under. pressure. to have immediate returns, they then put. companies under pressure to have. immediate returns. So once you. understand the incentive structure, the. behavior of naturally follows. >> What about though key man risk? I mean, what happens you know, I heaven forbid, but what happens if you get run over by. the proverbial bus tomorrow? You know, it is you. you have total control over these. companies. Do you have a plan for how. they would progress without you?

>> I I think they would actually. do very well for. for for several years. Um. And you know, there's a clear road map. for or space map, I should say, for. SpaceX. Um. And there's a a road map. actually for Tesla literally. Um. So I think I think there's. you know, if you look at Apple after. Steve Jobs, you know, Steve Jobs had.

you know, he he he had a strategic. vision and a bunch of products that um. that that he had had ideas for and Apple. has done very well. Um. but but the but. when you don't have a creative genius. like Steve Jobs. you don't you you you what what you miss. what's what Apple's missing are the. incredible breakthrough products. >> Yeah. >> So. they make amazing phones, you know, great computers um but Apple hasn't come. up with a sort of.

Steve Jobs Steve Jobs level breakthrough. product. >> So by analogy, that's what you bring to. all of your companies. You mentioned. Mars, you know, most people think of you. as the man who wants to, you know, create a colony on Mars so we have. multi-planetary civilization. >> saying that for such a long time. >> You have but now you seem more focused. on AI and what AI will do in the next 10. years and you you sound much more. excited about using the moon as a base. from which to, you know, pop out orbital.

AI satellites. Have you shifted your attention away. from Mars or are you as interested in. colonizing Mars as you ever were? >> I I'm I'm interested in the set of. actions that propagate consciousness. into the future to the maximum degree. possible. So that the future light cone of. consciousness. is as big as as big as we can, you know, like like. you know, there's a there's an exciting. future. where there's a where there's a.

spacefaring civilization out there among. the stars. and. and the. the great things that are envisioned in. the. non-dystopian sci-fi. books and movies. come become real one day. I sort of want the Star Trek. you know Star Wars future. Star Wars was. the first movie I ever saw in the. theater, by the way. >> Really? >> It was probably maybe had a profound. effect on me, I suppose. Um. so, I remember I was I I was.

it blew my mind, honestly. I was I think. I was 6 years old and um I was like, "This is the greatest thing I've ever. seen.". >> Has your life been about making that. happen? >> Yeah. I mean, it. I didn't think it would be, but at the. when I was young, but um I'm my life. feels somewhat surreal. I I can't. believe these things are actually. happening, you know. Um. >> I think the world feels somewhat. surreal. >> in simulation theory. Where it's like, "Well, this. Like the the things I'm doing are so. preposterous that um.

it's hard to believe they're real. I mean, we've got Starship, which is. the. largest, most powerful. flying object ever made. Um. and we intend to launch that. more than once per hour. >> I know. I read that. And we can, you. know, people can quibble about how. quickly it happens, but I think based on. your track record, we should assume it. will happen at some point. >> It will happen. >> I I'm just sort of struck that when I. when I I am as as blown away by this.

world as you are and I'm I watch it from. a from a much more naive level, but. for me, the whole evolution of AI and. the capabilities of these models is in. and of itself so mind-blowing. >> It's pretty much happening as I. as I thought thought it would. >> Is it? >> Yeah. >> Oh, that's interesting. [laughter]. >> Um. And not just me, but many people um. predicted this. Like, Ray Kurzweil. predict Ray Ray Kurzweil's predictions.

have. been remarkably accurate. >> Yeah, the singularity. >> Yeah. >> Approaching. Let's go back and more. immediately to the here and now. We've. talked about concentration of control in. your companies. You made a very good. case for why you should have it. You. also have, through Starlink, incredible. geopolitical power. I mean, I'm I'm one. of your customers. >> Thank you. >> Excellent product. >> I I hope you're right. >> But without them, the Ukrainians would. have been in serious serious trouble. >> Um yes, the Ukrainian government has. publicly thanked Starlink many times for.

being instrumental in. uh defending Ukraine. >> And you recently decided to prevent the. Russians in the occupied territories. from having access to Starlink. >> Um well, no that we do. we were we were never at any point. selling Starlink to Russians. Um but they were grabbing it, right? They were using it and you now. >> Yes. Well, what they they they essentially got. Starlink units. that they ordered through Ukraine and. then and then smuggled them into.

the. into eastern Ukraine where the Russians. are. Um. and were then using them. in some cases for. attacks. Um. Now, the. in order to address this, um. what we worked with the Ukrainian. government to create a white list of. approved Starlink terminals. Now, this has some downsides because a. whole bunch of people who were just. innocent users of Starlink and just. trying to access the internet for work.

or for education. now don't have Starlink. >> These are geopolitical decisions of. consequence. How do you feel about. having that power? You could determine. the outcome of wars. How does that feel? And is it right that you should have. that power? >> Well, I I'm not sure we're. we're determining the ultimate outcome. of the. you know, that the say the war in. Ukraine. Um. You know, I I.

I think I do hope. that that that that there's some sort of. peace agreement reached soon because. um. for. like two or three years now. the border has barely moved and um. and every day. there are lots of people dying at the. front line and. um and I think there's a lot of wishful. thinking here of of people saying well. Russia should completely withdraw etc. But this is not realistic. Um I really. think there needs to be some.

um. you know a. peace with that that is. that. you know we have to be pragmatic about. this. What we can't what I think would. be. terrible is if if there's if there's. another three years of people dying. senselessly at the front lines. Um. with with the and you have to say like. well. you know how do you explain to.

the the the children of of the men that. are dying at the front lines. Russia on. the Russian side too by the way they're. they're being conscripted and sent. there. I'm white. offended by sort of fancy diplomats who. have. you know seven course dinners in in. you know in luxurious places while. people are dying at the front lines and. who who pontificate about how Russia. should withdraw but they're not going to. Russia's Russia's not going to withdraw. So. there really needs to be an accepted.

peace long along those lines. Um. >> And do you think it's your. responsibility to play a role in tipping. the scales towards what you see as the. right way to peace? >> I. I'd like I've been advocating peace for. a long time. I you know I I posted. a few years ago that. that that. there really needs to be some concession. here to Russia. Um. This is not me being pro-Russia. I'm. just being pragmatic um or people will. die for years.

uh. with nothing achieved and that is. exactly. what happened. >> I don't know. I mean the Ukrainians. >> Exactly what happened. >> The Ukrainians do are doing pretty well. right now at. you know, with that incredible drone. capacity hitting inside Russia and the. and the kind of general consensus is. that, you know, the the the balance of. the war is shifting. But, my point is. not so much about what. >> not going to retake those territories. It is not going to happen. >> My interest is really on whether you. think given that you you have through.

Starlink, you have an incredible power, whether it's appropriate. that you should wield it. And that's. quite rare that an individual actor has. such power by turning on and off a. capability to shape conflict. >> Well, is there something you think I. should do differently? >> I mean, I I think you were right to. support Ukraine. I think that, you know, as you as it won't surprise you, I I. think that the Russian aggression was. uh I, you know, for many, many reasons. an appalling aggression. And I I think.

that that was an important thing that. you did. >> Yeah, I mean, I did a a very deep dive. into the background of that conflict to. understand exactly what was going on. Um. and um. I'm reminded of the old adage that there. are no angels in war. >> It's a similar tone, I think, about. domestic politics where you've. you know, you've you've. played a big role domestically. politically here. You spend a lot of. money on Donald Trump's re-election.

After the election, you got very. actively involved, you know, through. Dodge, you tried to cut a lot of. spending, reshape the government. How do you feel that it wasn't hugely. successful in the sense that, you know, there wasn't nearly as much spending cut. as you tried. How do you as you look. back on that? Do you regret getting so involved in. politics? Do you think it was a good. thing to do? >> I think I I think I got a little too. involved in politics, got carried away, frankly. Um. so. the um.

you know, the the the goal with the sort. of Dodge stuff was was to try to do. something about the the deficit, which. is massive. Um. where the interest payments exceed the. amount of money spent on. the Department of War. Like basically, if you add up all the money spent on. um. what is now the Department of War and. the and and intelligence in the US, uh. that is smaller than the interest. payments on the debt. So, that well, we. we we we need to sort of take a close. look at spending,

um and make sure that uh money is being. spent in sensible ways and that it is. not wasted or spent on on fraudulent. activities. Um. and um. I got a lot of flak from this for this, obviously. Um. but the the the people don't understand. just how um. simple it was for for the DOS team to. approve payments. Um. if if we had literally we we we just. asked to have the contact information of. the recipients,

um or some evidence that say money was. going to um. its intended purpose. Um. but. over and over there we were we told oh. we we need to wire money for. some sort of important cause in Africa. And we're like, "Okay, but the wiring. wiring instructions are to Deloitte &. Touche in DC in Washington, DC, not to. Africa. So, we would like to send the money to. Africa. Can you please connect us with. the recipients so we can send them the. money directly?". And then we'd get silence.

>> I I I have We don't need to relitigate. DOS. I have no doubt that there was. there's a lot of waste in the US. government. I think probably. >> Much worse than anyone could possibly. imagine. >> But the way I I mean, I think there is. it is a fair criticism that the way you. shut down a whole bunch of programs. probably in fact, certainly caused. unnecessary suffering. I mean, >> No. >> No? >> No. >> You You don't buy that at all. >> It It caused a lot of complaining. >> You're watching my interview with Elon. Musk. If you want to get early access to.

other interviews, subscribe to the. economist by clicking the link above. Now, back to the interview. You don't. So, you don't buy the idea that anybody, and to put it really crudely and simply, any kid in Africa died because of the. suddenness with which. >> Zero. >> I just don't think that's right. I just. don't think my I mean, I've had people. reporting in Africa. >> How many NGOs are there that could that. could that could step in? Cuz bear in. mind, this it it was. it happened quickly. So, this and there. are literally tens of thousands of NGOs.

>> Yeah, not everyone functions as far as. as you do. If if if if funding is cut. off for antiretrovirals overnight and it. just stops, then people will die when. they don't have access to them. And it. just. >> No, it No, only if they cannot get. funding for that. But what the Gates. Foundation has $50 billion. What's what What What about that? What about any one of a number of. organizations? What about. um. the uh um. >> Well, in many of these countries, USAID. >> whatever last name is must be Bezos uh.

gave $50 billion. What about that? >> But you don't ask me Let's be practical. In many of these countries, USAID was. the biggest funder. But I I don't want. to have an. >> USAID was a political organization. >> It may also have been that, but it was. the biggest funder of of health care. system. So, I I I am. I'm very sure that there's. >> of. of regime change. >> And and there may well be benefits from. having. changed the system. >> funding was not stopped. It was moved to. the State Department. >> It was stopped. There were huge numbers. of things shut down in Africa that were. that were kind of health related.

>> of this. These claims are false. They're nonsense. And and absolute. nonsense. But but obviously. just for. when funding is stopped for a fraudulent. organizations or for something, do you. think they're going to say Do you think. they're going to say, "Well, we please. keep funding the fraud?" Or do you think. they're going to come up with a sad. story that sounds sympathetic in order. to get the funding restored. Obviously,

it would be the latter, and that's. exactly what they did. But, zero died because. >> Well, that's what I That's what I That's. what I would take issue with. I think. you can I actually have a lot of. sympathy for the change of the aid. regime that the US under the Trump. administration has precipitated. However, I think the pace and the. suddenness with which it happened will. almost certainly have caused unnecessary. suffering and deaths. And I think both. of those could have been. >> that's totally false. >> Okay. Well, let's.

>> And obviously false because there there. are are. the amount of funding we're talking. about uh is far less than what can be. done that that that what can be. supported by a private uh. by a foundation like the Gates. Foundation uh or McKenzie Bezos's. foundation. Um she's given away tens of. billions of dollars. Um. the Gates Foundation has tens of. billions of dollars. Uh they are capable. of acting very quickly. Um and if they didn't, I would say. they're equally responsible.

>> I see. Okay. >> Obviously. >> All right. Fair point. Um. >> Zero people. >> I hear I hear you loud and clear. >> Zero. >> Hear you loud and clear. >> Obviously. >> Uh. domestically, you you stepped away from. those. It It was hard to do what you. were trying to do. You've just explained. it. But, this administration has gone in. directions that I suspect you were not. expecting. 2 and 1/2 years ago. You know, the. >> going to agree with I'm not going to. agree with everything any administration. does. >> Are you disappointed by this.

administration? >> No, I think this is a this. administration on balance uh is is. excellent. No No administration is perfect, but. it's a vastly better than the. alternative. >> Can we talk about Europe? A place that you are very, very focused. on. Um. >> that focused on Europe. >> I think judging by your posts, you're. pretty concerned about Europe. Uh you. you support. >> I I once in a while I. post something. >> It's reasonably frequently. It's not. once in a while. But But I'm because I'm.

genuinely interested in this as someone. who lives in Europe, lives in London. >> Yeah. >> Uh you paint a picture Well, first of. all, you support not just the populist. right, but the far right. In fact, very. fringe parties in some countries. >> support the normal people. >> Okay. >> What do you call the far right falsely? >> You think it's the normal person. Okay. >> Yes. >> Um. >> Literally, you could you could go back. uh 10 or 15 years and these these these. these policies were completely normal. In fact, you you uh one of the one of. the one of the tricks I think is is is.

funny. I think it's it's quite funny is. to like take a speech from Obama and. Hillary and then and then go to someone. and say uh who's who's sort of um. you know, on the sort of what I call the. lunatic left. Um and say, "What do you. think of the speech by Trump?" And like, "Oh wow, he's the worst person ever.". Actually, that was a speech by Obama. Or. actually, that was a speech by Hillary. >> Uh I I. I I I agree No, I agree that the center. of gravity in this country has shifted. Certainly, the Democratic Party shifted. to the left. But that's not what I'm.

talking about. I'm talking about people. like Rupert Lowe. I'm talking about. >> please. It's It's actually just normal. people. Um it's just normal people. It's. just normal people. And um the And And. here are the principles. And And tell me. which of these sound terrible. Um that. we should have secure borders, that we. should have safe cities, uh that we should have sensible. spending. Which of those three are are are are are. far right fringe? >> I would like to just admonish you. >> Do you. >> and the media. for the absurd characterization of the.

far right. It is false and misleading. and nonsense. Please keep this part in. >> We'll keep all of this in. But let me. >> [laughter]. >> Let me Let me. >> Don't cut this part. >> Let me push back on that. Let me push. back on that because you have. >> You know, you have What is it? Close to. 250 million followers on X. >> Yeah, cuz I'm. >> You say things like. >> Popular guy. >> quote, "Civil war in Britain is. inevitable. Just a question of when.". >> yes. >> I mean, when were you last in the UK?

>> Um a few years ago. >> Exactly. So So I live there. I'm there. the whole time. That is nonsense. >> in a cloistered existence. >> No, I don't, actually. And the numbers. also disprove what you say. >> What numbers? >> All the numbers about crime. London is a. much safer city than any city in the. United States. Violent crime in the UK. is not where you think it is. In fact, it's coming down. You You have painted, and because you have so many followers, so many Americans believe it, a a kind. of view that Europe and and the UK are. kind of, you know, overrun with. terrifying Muslim immigrants. There's.

rape on every corner. There's a sort of. civilizational destruction. >> any of those things. >> not Well, you said "Civil war in Britain. is inevitable." And then. >> Yes, if current trends continue, it is. >> Why? >> Well, if if you have. uh. a. large. uh and growing, rapidly growing. uh group of people whose beliefs are. antithetical to Western beliefs, um at some point there will be a. reckoning. They They They They will They will try.

to implement their views, and those who. oppose it will oppose it, and that's. what you call civil war. And obviously, this is the trend. Um and. uh. and and you absolutely do live in a. cloistered existence. And if you'd like, we can go on a tour of Britain. >> Sure. I I'd be very happy to come on a. tour of Britain. >> And then and you will see for yourself. >> country that I live in all the time, and. you haven't been to a few years ago. >> literally 100 times. >> But when was the last time? >> Like literally a few years ago.

>> You know why I this exercises me? Because you have really shaped opinion. about the UK, and so many Americans I. come across, and I have conversations. with them, and they have been And I just. had one the day, along the order of oh, London's such a dangerous place. How can. you know there there are sort of. grooming gangs everywhere. There are. there's violence everywhere. This is a. picture that people get from things that. you post or that are posted on X. And. for example, you you're posting for what. was it? 48 hours of citizen vigilante.

That film which, you know, paints a. dystopian I've watched it. >> Yes. >> It was not fun. I watched it yesterday. It's not a very good movie. But it's. also paints a dystopian picture of. Europe. And it glorifies vigilante. violence. It glorifies the murdering of. a Muslim immigrant family. I honestly think that it is. irresponsible for you to put that up on. X. >> I think that it's it's a movie. Um and it's worth watching. >> You're clearly suggesting Europe is. dystopian place and you.

>> Yes, I mean. why aren't you more. doing more to fight censorship in. Europe? Why aren't you? >> I I. >> seem to be doing anything to fight. censorship in Europe. >> I I think that there are there are. issues with. >> in prison in the UK for social media. posts. Do you think that's appropriate? >> No, I mean we've written editorials. against it. But I don't think my point. is with the UK. >> of thing that I think is bad. >> think if you and I agree with you, but I. don't think you have to glorify. vigilante violence and kind of, you. know, post the things that you are doing.

and paint an entirely inaccurate picture. of Europe that you do. >> think it is. >> We should we should do a tour of the UK. >> Yes, and one. >> Cuz the UK has actually been very good. at integrating immigrants. The UK has a. is is very effective at doing that. There are problems. I'm the first to. admit that there are problems. >> Yes, there are major problems. >> There are problems, but it is not it. really is not what you are. describing to or suggesting to your 240. million followers it is. And I think.

there's a problem. >> No, I think I'm I think I'm spot on. >> We'll we'll have to. >> why you have freedom of speech or at. least. >> You don't want people to can are wrong, but your point is not [clears throat]. that you're not just saying I have every. right to say what I want. You're saying, you know, I am right about Europe and I. really don't think you are. >> I think I am. >> I think you will find that most people. in Europe or many people in Europe don't. think you're right about it, but let's. let's come to that. But. >> Because the media keeps ignoring what's. ignoring reality. >> I don't think that's true, either. I.

really I really. >> by the TV and conventional media. >> but And why are you This is I guess the. even to me sort of the bigger picture. question. Why do you focus on this? Why are you. interested in it? Because on the one. hand, you know, we started this conversation. and you described to me this. extraordinary transformative. amazing sort. Yeah, civilization-changing. stuff that's happening in the next 10. years. >> Yes. >> And yet you're also, you know, a an. ongoing participant in the worst kind of.

tribalism. uh you know, cesspit of social media. Like, how does that fit? Are you, you. know, on the one They're two very. different views of the world. >> Yeah, I don't think they're. inconsistent. >> But why do you do the latter one, the. tribalism? I mean, people say that. you're a racist. People say that you're, you know, there's all kinds of things. said about you, which. I'm sure you would disagree with. Um but. I just don't understand what is the. motivation for doing that. Are you. fermenting.

>> is is um. she's half Indian and my. my and I have four children with her. Um. you know, um. one of them was named after an. a famous Indian physicist. Um so I I. would say I'm not racist and also. uh. the you know, if you look at the. people that are employed at my. companies, um. you know, we have senior executives of. all races. Uh there's there's there's I don't think. there's any racism there.

>> Are you anti-Muslim? >> Um I am. I'm I'm against. uh. having if if if if people are coming to. a country. with. antithetical views. um. I I am against that. I I'm against that. You know, I'm. against um. I I I'm against rape and murder.

I'm against uh. the. imposition of. rules and laws that are. contrary to what we've. come to accept in the West. Um. and um. and I think it's it's it's a crying. shame that the sort of traditional media. like you. um. uh. don't recognize this.

>> First of all, I think that you hugely. exaggerate. the challenges that Europe faces. Secondly, in areas I completely agree. with you. I I I think that, you know, the constraints on freedom of speech in. in the UK in certain areas are. problematic. What worries me is that the people you. are supporting are really quite vile. people in some areas. Like some members. of the AfD, Alice Weidel, whom I've met, is a perfectly thoughtful person. But in. her party, are some real neo-Nazis. Are. some really, really awful people. And.

your blanket support of this kind of. party with 240 million followers means. that you have. a power in Europe. that I think perhaps you don't realize. the scale of impact you have. But you. can. >> I hope I hope I'm having a big impact. >> But why? Why should you Why should you. be able to shape European politics? What. You don't even live there. >> I think of it as the sort of the West. collectively. >> But do you see why this makes people. think. that this man, who has all this power,

he's the world's richest man, he thinks. he has a right to influence our. politics. It makes people It's why, you. know, we started this conversation. saying superlatives, it's why people. loathe you. I mean, some people do loathe you. >> Yes, some people do. >> But do you understand why? Do you think what you're doing is. helpful for Western democracy? >> maybe some people do loathe me. I And. that's And that's probably true. I don't. care. Um. the uh. but but the fact that uh. as you pointed out. a quarter billion people follow me is.

that I think a lot more people actually. like me than don't. And I think a lot more people hate you. and the media uh more than you realize. Do you realize the media is despised? Do. Do you realize that that journalists how. the view of journalists is. is. is like. it's it's like the a favorable view of. journalists is like 15%. >> in the United States. >> You. So so the shoe is on the other foot. They hate you.

They hate you. far more than they hate me. >> I think there is certainly lots of trust. in journalism. I think in part and there. have been mistakes by journalists and. journalism. I totally acknowledge that. But I also think that the kind of. polarized environment, particularly on. social media, fostered by the kinds of. things you are pushing on X actually. helps this. Makes it worse. >> I don't think so. I think I think you're the problem, the. media.

Um and And And speaking of loathing, you. are loathed far more than I am. And you. don't seem to even realize that. >> I think very few people know who I am. relative to you, so I don't think I play. in the same game. >> collectively. Um. so. I mean, you're hated. Do you even Do you even know that? You probably don't. >> I I like to think that I'm aware of. my own personal shortcomings and the. economist shortcomings and I'm our world. view shortcomings. But what we stand for.

as you as you know is liberal values, traditional classical liberal values. where we worry about concentrations of. power. and we believe in the individual and the. dignity of the individual. I and. individual freedom. I firmly believe. that and I have long thought that you. were a classical liberal. But when I. read what you post classical liberal. J.S. Mill, limited government, individual freedom. But when I read what you post.

on your feed, I sometimes wonder whether. you really do believe in that. Um. I literally said, "Look, I believe in uh. safe cities, secure borders, and sensible spending. with. with respect to government." Um That. doesn't make me right-wing at all. Um. in the least. >> Does the US or do European countries. score better on those? >> The US is better. >> No. >> Yes. >> Safe cities, much more dangerous in the. US than the UK. Sensible spending,

bigger deficit here, out of control, you. managed you you you failed to reduce it. Secure borders, now under the Trump. administration, I agree with you, before. not. But on two out of three, unequivocally, Europe is in a better. place. Yet you seem to paint a picture. of Europe being a hellhole. >> I don't think Europe's a hellhole. >> Okay, we can agree on something. >> When when did I ever say that? >> Well, the picture you paint of Europe. >> just you're making up things. >> No, I'm not. You you say. you say.

civil war in Britain is inevitable and. then you you've you. basically proselytize for this citizen. vigilante film which really does paint. Europe as a hellhole. It just starts. with you know ominous music and it says. Europe. >> Well, there are there was out of control. rape and murder. >> It's more dangerous in this country than. it is in Europe. >> Uh where where there is danger in this. country is is because. we we we fail to incarcerate. uh repeat violent offenders.

Um and that's uh you know, the classic. sort of Soros DA. uh or judges that fail to incarcerate. repeat violent offenders. And if. somebody gets arrested. 50 times, literally. um for violent crimes, uh. and and eventually they're going to kill. somebody. So you So you either you either. incarcerate them or people will die. >> I think the prevalence of guns has quite. a lot to do with it, too. I mean, this is a much more dangerous.

country. Murder rates are much higher in. large part because there's so much There. are so many guns. >> Well, let me give you an interesting. number. There are more people that die. in Europe from heat deaths than gun than. people that die from gun deaths in. America. Why aren't you. uh. writing an article about air. conditioning? >> Well, we've done several on air. conditioning, and we had on our cover. last week um. a whole a whole long piece about, you. know, why the. >> Pro-regulation? >> Yeah, we're very pro-regulation. >> Okay, good. Well, good. >> Very pro-regulation. You should read us. Absolutely. I'm I I think I I think you.

have a a a view of The Economist that. is not entirely accurate. So, I will. You come look at England, start reading. The Economist, and I will um. you know, stand corrected on my criticism of you. in this area. >> The There There are. There are many parts of Britain um. and Europe which are not a. safe. You You You can't just walk. around.

>> But there are far more in this country. Far more. >> No, I don't think so. >> All right, let's go and get my. fact-checkers to check then. >> Yeah, I don't I don't think that's true. Um. >> Let's move on from this because uh I. think I've got a sense of why you're. doing what you're doing. >> The point is not that that that the. question is not is that is is America. perfect? Question is. does Europe have a serious and growing. problem? >> is which is which is more dangerous. That's where we started this. >> Europe has a serious and growing. problem. I'm I'm I'm not going to. say that the United States has no.

problems. Of course it does. Um. but. you know, we we should all try to to. address these issues. >> We can agree on that. We should all try. to address the problems. My point was. simply that I think you exaggerate the. scale of Europe's problem and that. >> I think you people are asleep at the. switch and do not realize the magnitude. of the issue. >> I also think that your interventions, however well-intentioned they may be, risk making Europe's problem a lot. worse. >> How? >> Because you are putting your support.

behind people who are. proto-authoritarians, who are not trying simply to you know, make sure there is better integration of. Muslims or to to secure the borders, but. who have very clear fascist tendencies. and you will cause huge divisions within. Europe. >> I think what you're saying is total. fiction. Um and really I. I'm simply saying that there needs to be. there needs to. that Europe has to have secure borders. >> Okay. >> and so not let in vast numbers of people.

who with views that are antithetical to. the accepted views in in Europe and and. where they will where they will not be. some level of. uh. safe cultural integration. This is. simply common sense. >> If all you are saying is Europe should. have secure borders, I completely agree. with you. Then. then I have misunderstood what your. interventions have been on social media. cuz that is not what the view I have not. what I would conclude having seen what. the people you are supporting and the. things you're doing. But if that's your.

goal, I share your goal that Europe. should have secure borders. I think. that's perfectly agreeable. That gets me to a question. >> And let me let me explain what what the. fundamental forcing function here is. uh for why the borders are not secure, which is. uh. When you have a welfare state that. provides. substantial benefits uh to anyone who. comes there, um you create a very powerful economic. forcing function. for anyone who is below that standard of. living to come to Europe.

Um it is it is a an obvious. powerful. driving force. Um. and um people will come there if if. their standard of living is. uh from what they get in Europe is above. where they are elsewhere in the world. It's very basic. >> agree with that. I don't I don't. disagree. >> very basic. incentive structure. Um. >> Economic conditions, economic. influences determine a lot of migration.

I think asylum is a separate issue, but. I think you I think you're absolutely. right. There are there are um pressures. for migration. However, there are other. things that you haven't focused on, which is migration brings a lot of. benefits. And it also particularly does. so in a continent like Europe, which is. a rapidly aging continent. So, we can. agree that completely uncontrolled. borders are a bad idea. But, I am. I think Europe benefits from having. immigration, controlled immigration. It. brings. >> Yes, I I I'm in favor of immigration.

Obviously, I'd be hypocritical if I. wasn't since I am an immigrant to the. United States. Um I'm in favor of immigration if the. person immigrating um is going to be a. productive member of society, um if they're going to be honest, and if. they're not going to mistreat people in. that country they're going to. >> I can agree on all of those. >> Yes. >> But, I think Europe does better on that. than you give it credit for. That's I. think where we disagree. But, let's move. on. Tell me what do you think people get. most wrong about you? >> Well, I mean, you got a you just got a.

whole bunch of things wrong about me. Pretty much everything in the last Just. rewind the last 20 minutes is all wrong. >> So I got we got I got wrong [laughter]. your your. >> Let's not be repetitive here. >> Okay. So So that political side of you. people get most wrong. >> Yeah, my political views are very are. centrist. They're not. far right. And frankly calling it far. right I think is an insult uh. to.

to history, an insult to many peoples, and it is. an outrageous falsehood. Um. It's It's completely absurd. I I. literally have stated my position, which. is that And And I've been very clear. about this, which is that there need to. be secure borders, that um. If If there's If there's an influx of. immigrants, they they they they need to. be people who will agree that the with. with with Western ideals, with Western. values. And if they don't, and if And if. there's a long-term.

uh. growth of people who do not or or in. some cases are adamantly opposed to. Western values, you are setting yourself. up for civil war. This is obvious. A child can see this. So So But this is This is not a. right-wing view. I'm simply stating. reality. >> Well, I think we can both agree that. evidence will be able to decide which of. us is more or less right. And we will. find evidence for both of our views in. different parts of Europe. The question. is what the overall is. >> I'm very good at predicting the future.

I'm not perfect, but I'm very good at. predicting the future. Uh my batting. average is is very high for a human. Um. But this this does have somewhat of of a. Cassandra effect, where where people. don't believe that what I'm saying is. likely to be true um because. you know, I I I can see into the future. with a higher bet not perfectly, but. with a higher. probability of success than most people. So, and including things that people.

believe to be. in some cases counterintuitive. Um. and uh again, I'm not saying I'm always. right. I certainly am not. But but my. batting average is very good. Um. But but this this this does have, like I. said, a Cassandra effect where people. don't realize that what I'm saying will. come to pass. Um. Maybe not exactly in the timing that I. thought, but it will come to pass. Um.

and uh. Yeah. The. history will write the verdict. But I think you will see that. very little of what I've said. um is inaccurate. Um and. a supermajority of what I've said. is very accurate and will come to pass. Unless there are there's some change in. direction. >> Do you have higher confidence level in. your expectations of the future for AI,

the first part of our conversation, or. the latter part, the political part? >> Um the. I mean, AI is. digital superintelligence. is called the singularity, like a black. hole, because. you don't know what's going to happen. after that. It's and it sort of sucks in. everything. So, I think. really. in terms of the the really big macro.

effects here, AI and robots will really dominate. everything. So, on on a on a time scale that is. less than 10 years. >> Which probably renders this other stuff. that we've been talking about less. important and less relevant. >> The the AI. AI robotics. revolution will happen. sooner than.

it will it will happen sooner than civil. war in in in in Britain. I would say civil war in Britain is. probably 20 years away. Um. and the AI. robot singularity. is 10 years away. >> Well, hopefully these benign all. powerful AIs will prevent such outcomes. >> They probably will. >> Eamonn. I don't agree with everything you say, but it's always absolutely [music]. fascinating to talk to you. Thank you. very much indeed. >> Well, you're welcome. I'm not boring. >> You're definitely not boring.