Elon's Drug Denial, Trump's Tariff Play, and Taylor Swift's Master Move

Kara Swisher: Hi, everyone. This is Pivot from New York Magazine and the Vox Media Podcast Network. I'm Kara Swisher.

Scott Galloway: And I'm Scott Galloway. How are you doing, Scott? Where are you? What's behind you? Is that another AI situation?

Kara Swisher: Another situation?

Scott Galloway: No, I'm in the Faena Hotel in South Beach. I was in Paris over the weekend. I went to the French Open, which was lovely. And then I jumped on a plane yesterday and came here, forgot my computer on the plane.

Kara Swisher: What? What do you mean you forgot your computer on the plane?

Scott Galloway: The third computer I've left on a plane this year. Year to date, I've left three computers on planes.

Kara Swisher: Why? Why?

Scott Galloway: Because if my dick wasn't attached, you'd find it on a card table next to a script of Goodfellas in Soho, Kara.

Kara Swisher: I'm so glad I didn't find that. Yeah. What would I do with it if I found your dick? That's an interesting question. There you go.

Scott Galloway: Put it in the refrigerator. So, anyways, I lose everything, but I'm safe and sound at the Faena, and my good friend Pablo Doritos saved my ass or bacon and got me a new Macintosh, and Drew and the team have fired it up, and now I'm doing podcasts.

Kara Swisher: Are you ever getting your computer back?

Scott Galloway: The wonderful thing about technology now is it doesn't matter. I'll get, I've already, I'll have a new one for me when I get back to New York and they're dumb appliances. It's all in the cloud now. So, some lucky flight attendant has a lot of porn coming his way this weekend.

Kara Swisher: I left things on planes and I go and find them. I go to the lost and found and I dig through it and I found all my stuff dispersed. So I go and look for things when I leave them.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I do the trade off. I was going to go back to the airport and I figured it would cost me a half a day, and I don't want to do it. I just try to get another computer.

Kara Swisher: You're not worried about people getting access to your things on that laptop? All your secrets?

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I don't know. So they want to know what cock gobbler site I'm spending time at? I have a lot of personal stuff on my computer. Yeah, my life isn't that interesting. It's pretty much arrested adolescence and someone who doesn't like themselves. It's not going to be that interesting a journey. But you're right about that your stuff moves with you throughout the cloud now. Your computer doesn't matter. It's just a dumb appliance tapping into the cloud. It really doesn't.

Kara Swisher: I lose a lot of laptops. I think it's much more damaging when you lose your phone because that takes a while to set up. That's harder to put together.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, that's right.

Kara Swisher: I noticed at your apartment you have a drawer of AirPods and extra things for your computer because you seem to probably lose them, right? So they're sitting there.

Scott Galloway: I think one of the, there's a few things in your life that really connote luxury and economic security. And one for me is I don't have keys. I cannot have keys. I'm physically incapable of holding on to keys and I have no keys.

Kara Swisher: What about like a wallet? You have a wallet though, right?

Scott Galloway: No, now I just use my phone. Although actually I carry my black car because it signals masculinity.

Kara Swisher: Oh, I'm sad.

Scott Galloway: So I do like to throw that down and say, daddy's here. Daddy's here. And he's bringing, he's bringing.

Kara Swisher: You throw it. Oh yeah, that's right. Yeah, you can't just place it down delicately. That makes that big titanium sound like, that's right. That's right. Mate with me and your kids are more likely to survive than if you mate with someone who has a Discover card.

Scott Galloway: You're not mating anymore. So why do you need to throw down the card?

Kara Swisher: You never stop wanting, though.

Scott Galloway: Oh, okay.

Kara Swisher: You never stop wanting. So you do it via the card. Okay. All right. Yeah. Anyways, what are you doing? Enough about me. I'm in San Francisco.

Scott Galloway: Again?

Kara Swisher: Yes. I'm here for a week.

Scott Galloway: Why are you there?

Kara Swisher: Filming a secret thing.

Scott Galloway: Filming a secret thing?

Kara Swisher: Yeah. I can't talk about it because stupid people are.

Scott Galloway: Oh, yeah, right. You guys are so big time. Whatever. You're so big time.

Kara Swisher: I'm filming a thing. I'm going to be jumping in the Pacific Ocean. NPR on cuts to the National Forestry Service DEI Department with special report with Kara Swishover. Yes, that's what I'm doing. But I will be jumping in the Pacific, eating oysters, and hanging out with my brother, among other things, part of this filming.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, it's nice.

Kara Swisher: So, I love being in San Francisco. It's really nice.

Scott Galloway: Is this your health thing that you roped me into?

Kara Swisher: What?

Scott Galloway: Yeah. You're doing it with me.

Kara Swisher: Yes, you are doing it with me. You have to.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, okay.

Kara Swisher: This is not a Monday. Our relationship is over if you're not in it because I will cry. I will cry.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I'm excited.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, we're going to do it. It's going to be fun. It's a thing that has to do with health that I'm doing for an organization I have a relationship with.

Scott Galloway: Does it rhyme with CNN?

Kara Swisher: Yes, it does. Talker, it's not Fox. It's as much as I can say or else I'll get a call from one of our listeners. Kara Swisher on the New American Mail from Fox Reports. Deal with your debt and don't call me when I'm trying to make some money for you. Anyway, I'm here and then it's going to be fun. And I was going to have the kids be out here in Amanda, but Claire is in public school, so she's there until the end of June, which is interesting. So she can't – she must finish her.

Scott Galloway: Well, what's interesting about that? I'm still waiting for the interesting part.

Kara Swisher: Okay, I'm just saying. She's still in school. So anyway, I'm here, and I'm going to have a great time. Do you guys have big plans for the summer? What do the Squishers do over the summer?

Scott Galloway: No, I'm going to be taping this series. But go to Vermont. I think we'll probably go to Vermont. We'll do –

Kara Swisher: Sorry. We're not the Galloways that are like, go from Aspen to Ding Ding Dong. What's the point of making all this money to go to Vermont? I don't want to go to Aspen and hang out with you. Why would I want to do that? Vermont is pretty.

Scott Galloway: You so want to hang out with me.

Kara Swisher: I do. I like hanging out with me.

Scott Galloway: That's true. That's true. But let me say, I am going to do a great vacation next year. Next year, next summer. I'm going to do Greece.

Kara Swisher: When you hit 70, you're going to start slowing down.

Scott Galloway: No, I'm going to rent a boat.

Kara Swisher: You're going to stop and smell the roses.

Scott Galloway: Italy or Greece, that is next summer. That is what's going to happen. That's what's going to happen.

Kara Swisher: I love both those places.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I'm going to do something really... I had a big birthday party. When I do it, a good thing. I do a nice thing.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, I put away the Christmas tree, but I'm not going to get into that. We've got a lot to get to today, including Elon Musk and ketamine, obviously, Trump's latest fight with China and Taylor Swift's blockbuster business move. But first, Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa had some very comforting words about Medicaid cuts for constituents at a town hall on Friday. Let's listen to a clip.

[Audio clip plays: "Well, we all are going to die. Sarah, for heaven's sake. For heaven's sake, folks."]

Kara Swisher: Oh, my God. But thank goodness. She's such an asshole. She were constituents. But thank goodness she apologized afterwards. On Instagram, here's what she had to say. Uh-oh. "I made an incorrect assumption that everyone in the auditorium understood that, yes, we are all going to perish from this earth. So I apologize. And I'm really, really glad that I did not have to bring up the subject of the tooth fairy as well." What? What? She did a non-apology apology. She was making fun of people for being angry at her. She is not, Joanie, you're not Trump. Just so you know, you don't do a good job. You sound like an asshole. So it's interesting. They're all trying to cosplay Trump, and none of them are good at it. So she was like, you assholes who thought I was mad for saying we're all going to die when people were concerned about Medicaid. I mean, she's not a serious public servant if she can't be like suck it up and answer a question. And then she trolls them like a 12 year old boy. It's insane.

Scott Galloway: I think more importantly, do you know what I have in common after my vasectomy with a Christmas tree?

Kara Swisher: I don't know where this is going. Go ahead.

Scott Galloway: We both have decorative balls. All right, back to Joni.

Kara Swisher: Okay. Like, the thing that has become an unfortunate theme in the Republican Party, and I also think across America right now, and I was just talking to Jess about this, is I think social media has created such a strong profit incentive in getting people pitted against each other and enraging them. And then at the same time, speedballing that rage by shoving all of the prosperity that everyone else seems to be enjoying, that people are just so upset and so angry and that they respond to the Republican Party being a little bit cruel and coarse. And I think unfortunately across the Republican Party, you're seeing this adoption of a narrative where they conflate leadership with cruelty and coarseness. And I just don't think you ever would have heard a senator say that. I was shocked. I was sort of like, really? But they're all cosplaying Trump. Is it effective? Think of it from a marketing point of view. I could tell you no one thought it was funny. With Trump, it might be funny. You might take it. Do you think it works across other... And especially, I'm sorry to tell you, Joni, it doesn't work for a woman. It doesn't work for a woman to be a dick. That's my feeling, and I hate to be sexist about it, but she seemed like such a stupid little shithead. But what do you think?

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I think it reflects something deeper and more uncomfortable about the United States, and that is we've decided that, you know, kind of cruelty is the point, that you can cut America first. Okay, so we're closing down hospitals in Myanmar for people with serious diseases or food kitchens in war-torn parts of Ukraine, but that somehow has been conflated with leadership, the coarseness and cruelty. And I think that these Republican town halls have been awful for Republicans. They make for really good TikTok moments. But I worry they're not indicative of how a lot of America feels, where America feels that, okay, you have these Democratic elitists that after they make their money with low taxes, all of a sudden get very concerned about me. 40% of American households have some sort of medical or dental debt. And every day, 210 times a day on my phone, I'm reminded about people having extraordinary lives that I'm not participating in. And then I have a social media platform that I spend five or seven hours a day on trying to convince me that it's my neighbor who's the enemy, not soldiers pouring over the border in Ukraine. And I think there's just so much rage in America and so much anger against other Americans that an unfortunately large number of Americans kind of enjoy this harshness and this cruelty. And distinct of what Joni's doing, or Senator Ernst, I just think we've lost a little bit, a lot of at the hands of, I don't think people recognize just how much our discourse has been coarsened by social media. And that people have been taught. And I was thinking just about dating. Do you remember, when you were in your 20s and 30s and you were dating, do you remember the politics of anyone you dated? It didn't come up. And you didn't, there was a general sense that as Americans, we were these good people and we had a certain commonality and a certain thing in common. You know what? Men and women liked each other. I've been thinking about this a lot. I think social media has done a great job of convincing the genders that the other gender is the problem, that men believe that women's assent is the culprit for their descent. And that's not true at all. Whereas women think it's the patriarchy and that men don't have problems, they are the problem. We've convinced that gender is the greatest alliance in history to dislike each other.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I think there was hatred before that. I think it's just it becomes manifest when she does like she may have been irritated at this town hall, for example, because someone yelled at her. And by the way, if you're a senator, man up, Joni. If someone yells at you, have the grace to be able to answer without being a douche nozzle. But I think that she is doing something that is coarse and rude. And I don't think it works. I think people are like, what? Like, why are you such? I think there is still a sense of certain decorum. And I agree with you. I was always worried about social media spilling out into the world, right? And it has, whether you're in a car, people yell at you on the street. There's more and more of that, that people behave online, offline like they do online. That said, I don't think doubling down on douchery is the way to go. And I do think there's going to be a reaction to it when it's other people, not Trump. I think people get tired. People are already tired of it with Trump. I think they don't. Look, you see losses in all these places that they shouldn't be losing in. And I do think there's a real opening for someone with common decency and calm it the fuck down, everybody. I do. I don't think everyone wants to spend their lives as a 12-year-old asshole. But it has to be decency. So, for example, I think the real opportunity that Democrats are missing is to propose an alternative to this tax bill where we seize this enormous white space of the adult in the room. Right. We say, okay, this is our plan. We're going to means test Social Security and raise the age limit. We're going to dramatically lower the exemption for the trust exemption. We are going to increase taxes on corporations and the wealthy, and we are going to, across the board, hold Medicaid, Social Security, and military spending flat for the next 15 years and even cut it 2% a year. And within eight years, we're going to reduce the deficit from $2 trillion to $200 billion a year. And what they would do is Fox News and CNN would all line up these bills next to each other and say, okay, one expands the deficit or adds to the deficit $3.75 trillion. This one will reduce the deficit. It'll never pass. It has no hopes. But it would position the Democrats as the adults in the room. This is Rahm Emanuel saying this, this forget about the for reals. Talk about what you do, whether you're going to make it happen or not. Instead, we're clutching our pearls and highlighting these very real, very ugly things that are happening rather than saying, OK, you guys have to be more than what's bad about what they're doing. You have to propose your own solution.

Scott Galloway: Agreed. I agree with you. I do think there's, but I think there's, what I'm saying is in her doing this, this is what she's got. The opening is to not just be the adult in the room, be the like good person in the room, right? Like the one who's going to help people. And I do think people get tired of the dunking. They do. They don't like doing it themselves. Most people don't. And they don't like it being done to them. And so I do think there's an opening. The adult in the room is a good way to put it, but a kind adult in the room. And I think there's a huge opening for a Democrat to be like that.

Kara Swisher: Agreed. Speaking of adults, Texas Governor Greg Abbott has signed a bill requiring an app store to verify users' ages to protect children online. The bill, which will go into effect at the start of next year, makes Texas the second state to patch such legislation following Utah. Apple has argued the strategy will threaten the privacy of all users. They have a good argument that way. Meta argues the app stores are the best party for the job. They trying to trade it back and forth. It a really complex topic because it does come into privacy issues. And at the same time you and I agree that there got to be some way. I just don know who should be policing this situation. Would we be in a better place if all states pass similar legislation? Are we better off if the bill, you know, having hope in a bill like COSA or whatever? How do you feel about this? Because who is the one that should, I mean, cigarette manufacturers kind of have to have those warnings and the people who sell the cigarettes have to not sell it to kids, even though sometimes that happens. Same thing with liquor. What are your thoughts on this? I feel like you know more about this than I do.

Scott Galloway: When people come up with, when they're faced with the issue of is it at the device level or at the app level, I think the answer is yes. And that is with tobacco, I think both retailers and manufacturers face liability. And my sense is, okay, in terms of age gating, it feels like it should be at the device level because it seems like it would be more efficient and practical. Right, you cover everybody. Yeah, to say, okay, because we can track your activity across all apps, we have a pretty good sense for what your age is. And we don't allow anyone under the age of 16 to have car keys or operate a car. So why would we let anyone under the age of 16 operate? I don't think anyone under the age of 16 to be able to operate a smartphone. I don't think you put a video arcade, a porn site, Netflix, and a casino in a 15-year-old's pocket. I just don't think that's a good idea. And then they have an incentive to make it so complicated that parents can't figure out parental controls. We tried to implement parental controls for my son last weekend, and within about three minutes, he'd figured out the password and reinstalled everything. So I guess what I'm talking about is at the device level maybe, but I still think the app should be on the hook for a second layer of protection. What are your thoughts?

Kara Swisher: I think you need to wear two condoms here. I think the difficulty is, say you go to a bar, they look at your license for a second and you keep it. So it's not a privacy issue. I think the idea of Apple collecting people's data like that seems a little troubling.

Scott Galloway: Privacy? Well, because they have—

Kara Swisher: Well, no, that's their argument, is that they would be keeping the data of people in ways that they don't now, right? They don't know who picks up their phone or whoever is. And so there are problematic situations of how you store that information and who knows who can see it, etc. So there's no question there's not a privacy issue because it's a persistent validation, right? As opposed to where do you have a persistent validation except with the government and your license plate? I suppose in a way with airlines, when you fly, when you give them your data or your birthday and stuff like that. So there's always going to be a privacy problem and there's going to be people who steal it or some issues around it. But it seems to me the device is where it should be. And at the same time, there should be some liability for, in this case, Apple is the retailer, I guess. And Meta is the cigarette manufacturer, right? And so I think both of them should have some culpability. They should be working together rather than fighting over who has to deal with it in some fashion to make, you know, especially the top 10 biggest apps, for example, should all be working with all the device makers to make not just Apple, but Google and everything else. So probably the device maker. But the whole privacy argument I find is so cynical and indefensible because I have to give up my privacy every time I get on a plane. Not only that, they get to go through my liquids. They know where I'm going. And by the way, if I buy a one-way ticket, they violated my privacy and they're more likely to do an additional security screening. They know my age. They know my status. They look, the guy at immigration looks to my passport and asks me, when was I in Israel? And what was I doing there? You Americans, part of a modern society is the following compact. You agree to have a certain amount of your privacy violated in exchange for utility. And what they're claiming is that the privacy violation of a 15-year-old knowing their age identity, think about how ridiculous that is. So instead, we're going to enable this person to give their data and have their data molested by the CCP of who they are, their preferences, their sexual orientation, what they do, what their key relationships are. I mean, the notion that these people give a flying fuck about their privacy is just so, it's just not, it's laughable. I think we should have a national bill like this and then we should know who's using our phones and on the road to younger people being restricted from using social media. And I'm sorry, kids. That's what Scott and I think, because we're old grandpas.

Scott Galloway: Well, but one of the most powerful forces in the universe is biology, specifically the ways we change, mature, evolve, grow and die. And I don't think we spend enough time talking about what a powerful metric and indicator and arbiter of these rules ages. For example, if you are under the age of 16, you should not have a smartphone. If you are under the age of 21, you should not have alcohol. If you're under the age of 18, you should not be allowed to join the military. If you are over the age of 75, you shouldn't be allowed to run for president. And instead, we've decided that we have this amazing indicator that is 95% of Americans over a certain age are incapable of doing a certain thing. 100% of people under the age of 16 do not make great decisions around drugs. So why would we not leverage this amazing thing called biology as indicated by this other thing called age and time? For all of time, it has been a consistent indicator of someone's cognitive ability decline. And yet we decided with technology and with presidential elections, we're just going to ignore biology.

Kara Swisher: You have convinced me. Biology is undefeated. I actually said that this weekend to someone. I'm like, oh, my God, I'm quoting Scott Galloway. What is wrong with me?

Scott Galloway: None of us is getting out of here alive, Kara.

Kara Swisher: All right. So anyway, we're with Texas. Oh God, we're with Texas, but we are. All right. Also, this is something I want. Listen, I'm going to put a challenge to Scott Galloway here. I want to have a serious take without a single Taylor joke. Taylor Swift has regained ownership of her master recordings after a years long attempt. Swift's masters were previously owned by private equity firm Shamrock Capital, which purchased them from music manager Scooter Braun in 2020. The rights include Swift's first six albums, music videos, concert films, and more. She remade a lot of the songs that were on the Masters, Taylor's version, in order to go around them. And they've become very popular, actually. On most of the services, you get Swift's version of her Masters, but she didn't own them. She reportedly paid around $360 million in the deal. I would like a serious take. What do you think about this, about her doing this?

Scott Galloway: I think it's capitalism. I think if she wants to own her own catalog, that's her business. I don't think she has any, I mean, she's an adult. I think this is pretty simple. I don't think there's much more to this than it's a marketplace. And she has the rights along with anybody else to buy them.

Kara Swisher: Why is it good to have them? This is what I was sort of interested in.

Scott Galloway: Well, she gets control. So, for example, we wanted, when we were doing the intro song, which we spent six months trying to figure out for Pivot, right? It was just too serious. It wasn't right. So we wanted a new one. And I wanted, I thought, you know, we got to pay the money and we'd be worth it. We should get Tracy Chapman's Revolution. We both love Tracy Chapman. We thought it was a great song. And somebody immediately said, no, Tracy Chapman doesn't license her songs because she's worried that some car company is going to license Fast Car. Yeah, toilet paper. So this is what she gets. She doesn't have a toilet paper company or a suppository using Shake It Off. I mean, so she gets control. Good, good idea. Anybody who has, and this is really going to go crazy in AI, when all of a sudden Lincoln starts giving people advice because whoever owns his image and likeness licenses it to AI. Or if Warren Buffett doesn't have serious IP protection that his heirs will agree to, his heirs in three generations, some kid who's got a cocaine habit and has squandered all of his inheritance says, well, I'm going to start an investment app using Warren Buffett, his likeness and his image. So the advantage to her is that she has other considerations than just purely monetizing every ounce and every dollar out of her songs.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, it's a smart move to have on them. It's worth it to her. It's worth it. It's worth it to her. She can control her legacy. She can decide how it's used and how it's not used. Yeah, she proves herself to be a very good business person. And at the time, it was the standard deal to give away almost all your rights. And so it is really interesting that a lot of artists, including Ryan Coogler and others, are getting their rights in some fashion, whatever. The deals are getting very interesting in that regard. And the reasons are very many. In her case, it is to be able to monetize it in the way she wants to monetize it versus some hedge fund, for example. So smart move by Taylor Swift. She owns herself. She's a young woman. She'll be able to benefit from this for many, many decades to come, I suspect. And she wants her legacy to be what she wants it to be. So good for her. Good for her. Good for her. Good. Not making one Taylor Swift. Very nice.

Scott Galloway: Okay, Scott, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, Elon leaves Doge with a black eye, a literal one, and a new report on his ketamine use.

Scott Galloway: With Thumbtack, you don't have to be a home pro. You just have to hire one. You can hire top-rated pros, see price estimates, and read reviews all on the app. Download today.

Kara Swisher: Scott, we're back. Elon Musk says the New York Times was "lying their ass off." I didn't know they had an ass. In a new report about his alleged drug use, he posted on X that he tried the prescription ketamine a few years ago, and while it helps for getting out of "dark mental holes," he hasn't taken it since. Which is not true, because he told Don Lemon he was taking it last year. The article claims Musk used ketamine often and also took ecstasy and psychedelic mushrooms in the last year. The Times is standing by its reporting quite strongly, noting the story was based on interviews, private texts, documents, and photos.

Kara Swisher: The drug use story dropped just as Elon had his big Oval Office farewell, which was weird, where he sported a black eye he says came from his five-year-old son. After the send-off, Trump insisted Elon's not really leaving, saying "Musk, you're back and forth" since Doge is his baby. Talk a little bit first about the drug use, which I think everybody—it's so clear. What was interesting, the internet was populated with videos of him looking like he was on drugs. You can't find a video where he's not doing this weird neck-eye thing that he does all the time. Talk a little bit about the drug use and then go to the Oval Office press conference and any takeaways from the whole Doge saga. Just so people are clear, Elon's right-hand man, Steve Davis, also left Doge. Like Elon, he was a special government employee, limited. A lot of people are leaving. All the people that came in and took over, Steve Davis's wife is leaving. They're sort of dropping off. We'll get to the NASA head in a second, but talk a little bit about the drugs and the legacy of Doge.

Scott Galloway: Well, sure, but the key piece of data here is that Taylor Swift has 500 songs about dudes leaving her and not one single song about giving a good blow job. Just connect the dots, Kara. Connect the dots.

Kara Swisher: [Laughs] I've got a sickness, Kara. I couldn't help it.

Scott Galloway: That is so—

Kara Swisher: I know you have to.

Scott Galloway: I couldn't help it. I didn't hear anything you said. I was thinking about my Taylor Swift joke.

Kara Swisher: I know. You were waiting. You couldn't hold it in.

Scott Galloway: You can't hold it in. I couldn't. I didn't hear anything you said. All right. Something about Elon Musk. You love talking about Elon Musk. You put up so many posts about diapers. Just so you know, excessive ketamine causes you to pee too much in your pants. So go ahead. We got the world's most powerful man, the president, and the world's wealthiest man, both wearing diapers.

Scott Galloway: Look, I go to a different place with this. The first thing is I think that there is a mythology and lazy thinking around drugs and alcohol. Between 90% and 94% of people are able to manage their professional, their personal, and their substance lives. A lot of people do recreational drugs, a lot of people drink a lot of alcohol and are able to manage all of it really well. As a matter of fact, the majority—

Kara Swisher: Speaking for a friend, but go ahead.

Scott Galloway: The majority of people can manage it. But that five or ten percent, it can come off the rails. And not only that, you become very susceptible to moving into that decile if you have other stressors in your life. For me, this isn't a story about drug abuse. I think the guy is coming off the rails. And I want to be clear here. In no way am I intimating violence or wishing harm against anyone. I think this guy probably has some of the lowest life expectancy of any public figure right now.

Scott Galloway: I've been involved in two interventions. I've had a decent amount of people professionally and personally who've struggled with drugs and alcohol. If the New York Times reporting is accurate, which I believe it is, his ketamine use and his other drug abuse—he mixes a lot—is so out of control. And then you couple it with something that's even more dangerous: a following.

Scott Galloway: What all the research is showing is that there is this myth or this trope of the woman who can't find a dude, and her life is awful because she can't find a guy and have kids. The majority of the research is all leading to one place: relationships in a heteronormative relationship are actually more beneficial and important to the male than to the female. Widows are happier after the guy dies than when they were married. Widowers are much less happy.

Kara Swisher: I will be sad when you go, but go ahead.

Scott Galloway: I appreciate that. When men don't have a romantic relationship as a guardrail, they come off the tracks. They become much more prone to self-destruction. They reinvest that energy in nationalist content, conspiracy theory, video games, porn. I'm not pathologizing all single men here, but a single man is much more vulnerable to bad things in life than a single woman. A woman, oftentimes when she has a lack of romantic opportunities, rechannels that energy into her friend network, into professional opportunities. A lot of what's happening in the "mating crisis" is that women, as they've economically become more prosperous, have just decided that these heteronormative relationships aren't a great deal for them. And men really need relationships.

Scott Galloway: The thing that is really dangerous in the cautionary tale here is that not only does Elon Musk appear to have out-of-control drug use, but he appears to have absolutely no guardrails in terms of a close friend network or a monogamous romantic relationship. That is an incredibly dangerous cocktail. What defines America right now is that we have an individual who is the world's wealthiest man making decisions that, according to several agencies, are going to result in several hundred thousand of the poorest children around the world dying. But we forgive him, even with this rampant out-of-control drug abuse and this personal life that just seems chaotic, because he has so much money.

Kara Swisher: Yeah. Look, it's well known that he takes drugs. People come up to me and tell me about a party in Los Angeles. This is 100% accurate reporting by the New York Times. A lot of people can be functional and do it at the same time, but there are so many warning signs here. One of the ones that troubled me was a line deep in the story where it says he was warned in advance about the drug tests. That jumped out at me. The Trump people rail against people on Medicaid having to have drug testing, but he gets warned in advance? Who was warning him in advance? That was a whole story by itself. Of course he was warned in advance so he could get clean. That to me was disturbing. It was like watching in real time someone who is headed to a very bad place, hurting people as he hurdles through this very strange life of his without any caring.

Kara Swisher: Give me your take on Doge, because I think it's been incredibly damaging. I don't think there's been good things about it at all. In fact, it's sullied the idea of government efficiency. The government has come out with a much cleaner bill of health around this bullshit notion of waste, fraud, and abuse. They just weren't able to find it as easily as they'd hoped. Some people are reporting that the effective savings are like $7 to $9 billion, which isn't even the amount of the subsidies.

Scott Galloway: I always come back to this statement. Look what money's done to us. If you had a sibling, a brother who was exceptionally talented and worth $400 million, but it was clear he was radically addicted to ketamine, at a parent-teacher conference he was giving Nazi salutes, he was fathering multiple children with multiple women who were all suing him for sole custody because he hadn't seen that child, he had declared war on one of his children publicly, and then he shows up with a black eye—wouldn't you get anyone who cares about this guy to do an intervention?

Kara Swisher: Yes, 100%.

Scott Galloway: I don't think his kid hit him. But here's the thing: if you're worth $400 billion, not $400 million, the world admires you. And thinks it's not drug abuse, it's you being provocative and authentic and different. I just come back to the idolatry of money. We have decided that money conflates with character and leadership. If he was worth $400 million, no one would put up with this shit. A mid-level accounting firm wouldn't let him be a partner if they saw evidence of this.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, well, money takes care of a lot of things. What's interesting is his influence over Trump may be fading. Trump is not thrilled with people with substance abuse problems. He was cruel to his own brother. It may be fading more quickly than expected. The White House has withdrawn the nomination of Elon's billionaire pal Jared Isaacman to lead NASA just days before the expected Senate confirmation. Trump announced the decision Saturday night, citing a "thorough review of prior associations," as if they didn't know he gave to Democrats. Apparently, Isaacman had donated to both Republicans and Democrats, which is totally normal for a business person. But according to the New York Times, Trump was aware of those donations before nominating him. The pulling back is a setback for Musk because this is his pal. Having Isaacman, who's flown two private missions with SpaceX, at the helm of NASA would likely have been a major asset in securing contracts and missions. What did you think of this? They're sort of purging all the Musk people in terms of perks. It may be pressure to hand over that $100 million check he promised. Maybe he's just flexing his muscles. But it seems like a direct hit at Elon to do this right. And that whole Oval Office thing had such a performative quality. The key was—I actually felt sorry for Musk. Trump handed him a shitty little key to the White House. I thought, oh my God, that is so awkward and embarrassing. Thank you for your work. Here's a key in a box. That to me was like, ouch.

Kara Swisher: But what do you think about the political power here?

Scott Galloway: The president has incredible political instincts. He sees things that other people don't see and goes places no one else would go. It ends up not only being less damaging than we thought, but despite the media's reaction, it appears to sometimes resonate with the larger population. I think he's decided that the half-life of Musk's usefulness to him is over. He absolutely doesn't want to piss him off—Musk has an incredibly powerful platform. He does not want him spending a lot of money. The thing about Musk and drug addicts in general is they generally aren't that reliable or consistent. I think Trump is a bit afraid of Musk and thinks, "This guy could turn on me." So he's trying to thread this needle of getting him out of the White House. Supposedly him and Bannon almost came to blows, and it was creating real chaos in the West Wing. So he wants to get him out, move him aside, and stay on good terms with him.

Scott Galloway: This is essentially what every good manager's goal is when firing someone. My approach to firing is: whenever I ask about someone we're worried about, people make excuses for them. "We're reassigning them. We're redefining the job role." I'm like, fire them. Nine times out of ten, when someone's not working, the people making excuses are wrong. The organization's not changing. The sooner we can move, the more generous we can be. You sit them down and say, "Listen, it's not working here. We can go into why, but we're going to let you stay as long as you need so you don't lose your health insurance. We're going to help you find another job." I think that's the objective here.

Kara Swisher: Except why do Isaacman? Why do that the same weekend? It was really interesting. I guess the vote was coming up, but still.

Scott Galloway: I think something came out. Wasn't there something about his path? I think they basically said, "This is not the guy." Or there's probably another donor who's given more money. Who knows?

Kara Swisher: Yeah, but why do that? Why such a public slap in the place that Elon loves? I felt it was a weird shot across the bow. It was an affront to Musk. Why bother? You could still control NASA contracts with him there, right? They'd have to watch it, I guess. It was interesting. I think he'll probably be going away for a little while now and maybe getting the help he desperately needs.

Kara Swisher: All right, Scott, let's go on a quick break. We come back. Trump goes back to the taco playbook with his latest tariffs.

[Ad Break]

Kara Swisher: Scott, we're back. President Trump is doubling tariffs on steel and aluminum from 25% to 50%. He says it'll boost U.S. manufacturing. Canada is not too happy. The timing coincides with what Trump is calling a "blockbuster agreement" between U.S. Steel and Japan's Nippon Steel. Details are murky, though Trump is claiming U.S. Steel will remain controlled by the U.S. Senator David McCormick also said the U.S. government will get a "golden share" in this deal, giving the administration board member approval along with other key decisions. This has been rattling about for a while. I think it has almost nothing to do with this.

Kara Swisher: While Trump has been facing legal roadblocks on his tariffs, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick explained on Fox over the weekend that tariffs are here to stay. They've been signaling that to all the reporters. "Rest assured, tariffs are not going away. He has so many other authorities that even in the weird and unusual circumstance where this was taken away, we just bring on another or another." So he's talking about the legal pushback, but he's doubling down. It's fine for the U.S. Steel thing. They get a golden share. Sure. Why not?

Kara Swisher: Talk a little bit about this, and then we'll talk about China. He's now accusing Beijing of totally violating the trade agreement that paused retaliatory tariffs. It looks like he's ginning things up and he's done with being Mr. Nice Guy there. Talk first about the steel, then we'll get to China.

Scott Galloway: I think a lot of people have heard of the "taco trade," but they don't really understand it. Trump always chickens out. What it actually means is the following: the stock market will move. He announces tariffs on Apple products, Apple goes down 3% to 5%. He announces huge tariffs on China, 135%, and shipping companies dependent on Chinese exports lose 30% or 40% of their value overnight. EU tariffs, EU stock market declines. The incredibly consistent, massively profitable trade has been to assume that this is all bluster and these tariffs will not hold, and the companies that took an initial dive will recover. It has been one of the most consistent profitable trades: Trump always chickens out, his threats are bluster, he's bluffing. You go long those companies and you make a shit ton of money. He has announced or reduced tariffs 50 times. So far, as far as I can tell, we're going to get a reduction in the price of Aston Martin engines from Britain. There's been almost no meaningful deal struck here.

Scott Galloway: I used to think he was an idiot in terms of basic understanding of economics and was hoping through bluster and saber rattling to bring different economies to the table. I no longer believe that. I believe he is purposely creating massive volatility so that him and his insiders can make billions of dollars in market manipulation and insider trading. In a year, the tariffs are going to look remarkably similar to the way they did before the Trump administration. When Attorney General Bondi is trading and selling Trump Media shares the morning he announces these incredible tariffs taking the markets down, it means all rules and fear around insider trading criminality have gone away.

Scott Galloway: He has basically said to his local cronies, his PE and hedge fund guys who tuck him in at night, "I'm thinking about massively increasing steel tariffs tomorrow." Which, by the way, took Cleveland-Cliffs, Nucor, and Steel Dynamics up 27%, 11%, and 5.9% because domestic steel manufacturers are going to get to charge unearned prices due to massive tariffs on steel coming in. What does that mean? The prices of homes and cars are going to go up. If you believe the taco trade, you would now go short those companies, believing he's not going to be able to implement those tariffs. The courts are basically saying, "This is not a wartime. You do not have license to impose these tariffs." The IEEPA can only be done in exceptional measures during times of terrorism or cyber attacks. George W. Bush invoked them during 9/11. They said this does not meet that test. The trade would be to go the other way. But I'm now of the mind that these people are not dumb. They're creating massive volatility that them and their cronies and their loyalists are making tens of billions of dollars off of through market manipulation and insider trading.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I think you've been talking about this for a couple of weeks now. One of the things he really focused on was China. He didn't give specifics about the problems with China violating things. But U.S. Trade Rep Jamieson Greer said China has been slow-rolling compliance, particularly on exports of rare earth materials, which we need desperately. China is hitting back, accusing the U.S. of undermining the recent agreement with "discriminatory measures" like AI chip export controls and criticizing the plan to revoke student visas, specifically targeting Chinese students in America. Despite all the tough talk, Trump says he "sure held a chat" with Chinese President Xi to work things out.

Kara Swisher: Is this even more taco behavior? This is the key relationship, presumably. But the Wall Street Journal also had a piece that was really interesting about how all these attempts to hobble China, particularly in tech, aren't working and in a lot of ways are backfiring. Scarcity brings innovation, and many people feel China's doing just fine. So is China different from your perspective?

Scott Galloway: There's the tariffs, and then there's the war on these elite institutions. The tariffs will do structural damage. Everyone is trying to reroute their supply chain around America. They're like, "We can't handle this toxic uncertainty." The fear around this nonsense with Harvard—by the way, both Xi Jinping and his rival, who disagreed on a lot, both had one thing in common: they sent their kids to Harvard. What's so insane and cynical about this move is they're doing it under the banner of antisemitism, but the funding they're trying to cut is around medical research or scientific research, of which we get huge dividends and which Harvard is outstanding at.

Scott Galloway: I think he is looking for some sort of "big, beautiful deal" and that Xi is going to call his bluff. I think they have totally overplayed their hand. The person torn between two lovers right now is Tim Cook. Tim has nowhere to go. It would be easier to get to splitting the atom during World War II than it would be for us to return all manufacturing of the iPhone to the U.S. right now. It's an impossibility. China is restricting the granting of visas to Chinese people who Apple is trying to transition to India so they can assemble one screw and say "made in India." It's all tariff gaming. Tim Cook is literally caught between these two people. The more consistent player and the easier player to deal with is Xi. He doesn't know what Trump's going to do. But if you look at what's happened to Apple stock, people sort of don't believe it's really going to affect them. They believe that supply chain that has absorbed 25 million people and $50 billion a year in five super centers around China is going to survive, that Trump will eventually back down.

Kara Swisher: Or go away. Or forget about it or move on to something else. I feel like China has got his number more than anybody else in terms of manipulating him. Putin does too. He's so easily manipulated because he's so obvious. The idea that he's playing 3D chess is ridiculous. I think we're going to end up in exactly the same place, and we are not going to realize the threat that China does. Our best move is to get along with China, to protect ourselves as a country and figure out ways to protect ourselves from things they could do. But this way, they are in the pole position with him. Everyone's just waiting for him to stop talking and move on. His mouthpiece, Howard Lutnick, seems like an idiot. No one believes them because they're so capricious. Every time they make a new announcement about a tariff, there's even less volatility. The market is absorbing these threats and saying they're not credible.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, he's making himself less credible. That's absolutely what's happening here. He's not a very good negotiator, as it turns out, which you would have known if you followed his business dealings over the many decades.

Kara Swisher: All right, Scott, one more quick break. We'll be back for wins and fails.

[Ad Break]

Kara Swisher: Okay, Scott, let's hear some wins and fails. Why don't you go first?

Scott Galloway: Well, my fail—the two images were summarized here. My fail was seeing kids, teenage boys in zip ties detained by ICE. It's just like, do you realize how much damage that does to America?

Scott Galloway: The cocktail, the peanut butter and chocolate that has created the strongest nation in history, and most people don't know—most people around the world don't know Americans, don't come to America, but they're willing to work with us. They think twice before they try to damage us or steal from us because they know our memory is long and our reach is far. And also that coupled with a general sense that at the end of the day, they're the good guys.

Scott Galloway: And when an image is shot around the world of our own security agencies putting children in zip ties, it just does so much damage to our reputation as the good guys. Basically, we're no longer the good guys. And as evidenced by the scariest piece of data I've seen this year, other than 51% of men 18 to 24 have never asked a woman out in person, the second scariest piece of data is that now globally, more people think China is a force of good in the world than the U.S. And that makes our deep pools of capital more shallow. People don't want to invest in us. People are less likely to inform when they think there's a terrorist cell trying to infiltrate our borders. It makes their scientists less likely to come here. It makes them much less likely to want to buy our products over Chinese products.

Scott Galloway: That is my fail, that image. And I won't go into the semantics of it. I don't know the specifics, but there's just some basics here. Okay, the memo, memo too. All ICE employees: never, ever have a minor in zip ties or in handcuffs. Ever. Ever. If they pose a risk to you, you have to incur that risk. If they become violent, fine. But we never put minors in zip ties or any other sort of restraining device. Anyways, that's my loss.

Scott Galloway: And I was equally excited by the image and the video of 40 strategic bombers at different Russian airfields being blown up. I mean, you cannot imagine. This is arguably the most precise, genius, and well thought out and bold military operation since the IDF's operation against Hezbollah and the Pager operation. They managed to smuggle in trucks to different areas, a thousand miles inside Russian territory, figure out a way at the exact right moment with soft assets on the ground—i.e., Ukrainian spies on the ground—to geolocate these strategic bombers. And then these trucks, their roofs would collapse or retract and they would launch these drones. And these drones took out 40 long-term strategic bombers precisely that had been bombing Ukrainian cities. And by the time I knew what was going on, the agents and the launch vehicles and the trucks had returned to safety or been abandoned. This was 18 months in the planning. It was incredibly strategic, brave.

Scott Galloway: I mean, nothing creates momentum and respect like this type of bravery and this type of thoughtful action. I was just so excited to see this. I think it puts new wind in the sails and morale of not only people within Ukraine fighting this fight on behalf of all of us, but it also makes us more inclined in the West to support Ukraine because we see when we put our dollars and our support to work, these people are not messing around. They are very good at what they do. This will go down in history as one of the great, brave military operations. And you're going to see in about 18 months, two or three different dramas on Netflix and on Hulu about this operation.

Scott Galloway: Anyways, the Ukrainian special operation to take out 40 long-range strategic bombers who were shelling and bombing Ukrainian cities, that's my win. I've got to say, a remarkable country. The minute this is over, that is going to be the most important technological country, I think. We talk about certain countries like Israel and others. It already was, but going forward, once they get out of this mess, the rebuilding of Ukraine should be really interesting, especially for technology. I think it's going to be one of those great countries. And in 10 years, we'll be sort of like, what? Like that kind of thing. I just feel like Ukraine is so impressive in terms of pushing people out of their country, trying to, as difficult as it is.

Kara Swisher: You're right. I was sort of gobsmacked that they were able to do that, and relatively easily, it looks like, which tells you everything you need to know about Putin's Russia. That's a good one. My fail continues to be this idea that the damage Elon Musk has caused through Doge and the damage of the coarsening really has to stop. I think the fact that everyone was sitting around acting like this guy was great at the Oval Office when he clearly is in distress. And listen, I have no sympathy for Elon Musk, but it's sad to look at. It's sad to watch someone of so much possibility become such a small-minded, angry victim. All the interviews were depressing. Every single interview was depressing. People wrote a lot about how money doesn't buy happiness, and that seems to be the case here. But the fact that we excuse it and just don't call it out. And to be attacked. The New York Times, I thought, did a great job in that story and has kept at it. That's a hard story to say yes to, I suspect, because he could easily sue them or whatever else with a lot of nonsense. But it just makes you feel like you know where this is all going. And it's sad that nobody will intervene or can intervene, really, in that regard.

Kara Swisher: For a win, there's a new musical here in San Francisco I'm hoping to see this week called *Co-Founders* that's described as *Hamilton* meets Silicon Valley. Reid Hoffman is the backer. The show has a song that feels particularly appropriate. It's called "Pivot," and it's not about us, Scott. Let's listen to a short bit of it.

[Song clip plays:] *"Was a dating site with video / Twitter was a podcast called Odeo / Flickr Was an early MMO / Never ending game / Way before the photos / The pivot ain't folklore / So when you're thinking you can't score / Just make your way to the dance floor / You'll get a second chance / But you might have to dance for / You pivot, turn your feet 90 degrees / Get down and get up so bend those knees / All right, we've been pivoting for..."*

Kara Swisher: Isn't that good? It's pretty good.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, it was good.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I think that should be our new theme song. So that's what Reid's been up to. He's trying not to get attacked by Trump and Musk and doing that. I love that Reid Hoffman. I wrote him, I'm like, what? And it was like, good for you. Good for you, Reid Hoffman, for doing that. I kind of liked it. It's here in San Francisco until July, so you should go see it. I'm excited to see it. I love the theater. It makes me happy whenever I go.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, we want to hear from you. Send us your questions about business, tech, or whatever's on your mind. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to submit a question for the show. Call 855-51-PIVOT.

Kara Swisher: And elsewhere in the Kara and Scott universe, this week on *On with Kara Swisher*, I talked to editor-in-chief of *The Atlantic*, Jeff Goldberg, Mr. Signalgate. Let's listen to a clip.

Jeff Goldberg [clip]: Deeply corrupt governments and societies don't work very well. They don't. And sometimes they bring themselves to a crisis point, at which point the people say enough and something good happens out of that. So, I mean, I think that's ultimately where we're heading. Unless the American people who are supplied with cheap calories, abundant video entertainment, and actual drugs just have given up on the idea of standing up for traditional American principles. I mean, we have to consider that. As long as you feed people enough food and give them enough diversion. I mean, it sounds very Roman because it is. Bread and circuses.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, bread and circuses. Maybe it won't. So anyway, it was a great interview. He's really terrific. What a thoughtful person leading a very important publication right now. He's made it important through his leadership.

Kara Swisher: Okay, that's the show. Thanks for listening to *Pivot*. And make sure you like and subscribe to our YouTube channel. We'll be back on Friday. Scott, read us out.

Scott Galloway: Today's show was produced by Lara Neiman, Zoe Marcus, Taylor Griffin, and Kevin Oliver. Ernie Andrews Todd entering this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows, Ms. Severo, and Dan Chalon. The Shark Kroos, Vox Media's executive producer podcast. Make sure to follow *Pivot* on your favorite podcast platform. Thanks for listening to *Pivot* from New York Magazine and Vox Media. You can subscribe to the magazine at nymag.com slash pod. We'll be back later this week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. Kara, have a great rest of the week.