Vermont independent Senator Bernie Sanders serves as a ranking member of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and he joins me now. Do you think this is going to work. I guess is my first question.I mean, I feel like I've watched uh politicians try to tell people to try to message their way out of economic problems before, and as far as I can tell, it does not have a great record. >> Hey Chris, what I want to know, are kids actually buying pencils at all. let alone $37 for a beautiful little ...

Name a time government intervention worked out in your favor? ...

Core Viewpoint - The current valuation of Netflix has seen a significant increase in forward earnings multiple, rising from 25 times to 40 times over the past 18 months, despite the stock's recent performance being driven more by fundamentals than by multiple expansion [1][4]. Group 1: Market Sentiment and Valuation - The initial bullish sentiment for Netflix was based on a lower earnings multiple, but concerns over AI risks, tariffs, recession, and government intervention led to a shift in investor focus towards Netflix, which was perceived as less risky [2][3]. - The stock has appreciated by 45% this year, but the expansion of its earnings multiple has plateaued, indicating a shift towards fundamental growth [4]. Group 2: Consumer Behavior and Market Position - Despite concerns about consumer spending and a bifurcated market, Netflix is viewed as an exceptional value, particularly when considering its cost relative to consumed hours [5]. - The company has not seen significant reductions in subscriptions compared to other streaming services, suggesting strong consumer loyalty [5]. Group 3: Growth Potential - Recent milestones, such as record viewership for specific events and content, indicate that Netflix may still have substantial growth opportunities, especially as streaming continues to capture a larger share of video consumption [6][7]. - Approximately 40% of all video consumption is now on streaming platforms, providing a favorable environment for Netflix's growth, although its market share within the streaming sector has remained relatively stable over the past four years [7][8].

But what about the commitments he's getting in return about investment in America from Apple, from foreign companies, in part to avoid the tariffs, but also just encouraging all of this investment and manufacturing. So, do you think Apple's not acting in its own self-interest. I'm sure I'm sure it is. And I'm nothing against Tim Cook.I mean, Tim Cook's doing what he as CEO should do visav his shareholders. But when the state becomes involved in picking winners and losers, there's only one way this game ends ...

Group 1 - The article discusses the shifting perspectives of Democrats and Republicans regarding the Federal Reserve's independence and its role in economic recovery [3][4][5] - It highlights the contradiction in Republican demands for rate cuts from the Fed, contrasting with their historical stance against government intervention in the economy [6][8] - The piece argues that government intervention, including actions by the Fed, cannot effectively stimulate economic growth, especially when it substitutes market mechanisms [9][10] Group 2 - The article emphasizes that economic growth fundamentally originates from the private sector, and any government actions merely redistribute resources rather than create them [7][8] - It critiques the notion that the Fed can alter economic realities, labeling such beliefs as delusions [10]

Government Intervention & Equity Stakes - The US government received 10% ownership in Intel in exchange for previously awarded funds from the CHIPS Act and the DoD secure enclave program [1][4][5] - Critics argue the government's equity stake resembles a communist state, but this ignores historical precedents [2] - The government has a history of taking equity stakes in companies during crises, such as the 2008 financial crisis (TARP program) and the 2020 COVID pandemic (CARES Act) [2][3][4] - In 2009, the government owned 60% of GM, helping control its restructuring and board appointments before eventually selling its shares [3] Industry Impact & Future Outlook - The Intel deal is not an isolated incident, but part of a pattern of government intervention in unique situations [4] - The US government is not expected to take equity positions in private sector companies all the time [5] - The government has a history of getting paid for stepping in to help in unique situations [5]

Government Intervention & Industry Impact - The Trump administration is exploring new ways to involve itself in US industries, potentially through equity stakes, starting with the steel industry and now considering the chip industry [1][2] - The administration aims to secure deals that demonstrate a return of manufacturing to the US, particularly in the chipmaking sector, where the US has lost its leading role [2][3] - Discussions are underway regarding the US government potentially taking a stake in Intel to support the company's manufacturing hub in Ohio, which faces financial difficulties and production delays [3][4] - The administration's approach includes considering taking 15% of certain chip sales revenue when those chips are sold to China, raising questions about the future of companies like Nvidia and AMD [6] - Concerns arise regarding the level of control the government might exert over Intel's operations if it acquires a stake in the company [9] - The administration's actions are drawing comparisons to a centrally planned economy, deviating from traditional capitalism and raising questions about the government's role in deciding winners and losers in the economy [10][12][13] Legality & Precedent - The legality of deals involving government stakes in exchange for lifting export controls is being questioned [15] - Concerns exist about the precedent set by the government taking stakes in large US companies beyond temporary bailouts and the extent to which this resembles past interventions like the auto industry bailout [16] - The potential for government involvement in company decisions, such as board seats, raises concerns about whether government officials are best suited to run companies while also managing government responsibilities [17][18] Financial Implications - Intel could use the funding from the government during a difficult financial period [4][10] - The Trump administration is exploring ways to generate revenue through unconventional deals, such as taking a percentage of revenue from chip sales to China [7][8]

Government Intervention - The chip-payment arrangement is described as a legally questionable and heavy-handed government intervention into business [1] - This intervention occurred after President Trump returned to office [1]

Geopolitics & Energy Security - The German government is considering measures to potentially block the sale of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline [1] - Speculation has arisen regarding the possibility of resuming gas deliveries from Russia via the Nord Stream 2 pipeline [1]