Tech Layoffs, Midlife Investing, and Parenthood in the Age of AI

[Ad Break]

Kara Swisher: Who's meowing? Who's that meowing?

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

Kara Swisher: And I'm Scott Galloway. Scott, get excited because we're doing your favorite show of the year.

Scott Galloway: Porn?

Kara Swisher: No, no. Scott, immediately you go to the grocery store. Emily Ratajkowski is finally on.

Scott Galloway: She's not calling you.

Kara Swisher: No?

Scott Galloway: Not at all. None of them are. None of them are. Nope, nope, nope.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, we're here doing things a little differently today with some help from our audience, our beloved audience, our fan base.

Scott Galloway: Because you're such a woman of the people.

Kara Swisher: I am. I am. I am. I get stopped all the time. Last night, someone screamed when they saw me in a good way.

Scott Galloway: I scream when I see you.

Kara Swisher: Yes, that's true. Coming up, Pivot listeners will be calling in with questions on topics that matter to them, and therefore, they matter to us. And we're going to be highly respectful, Scott Galloway, because our audience are the reason we do this. And we're going to meet the people, Scott, the people who listen to us. They have questions for us. Okay, let's jump right in and get to our first call.

Scott Galloway: All right, our first caller. Hello, caller. Who are we talking to and what's your question?

Christine (Caller): Well, hello. I'm Christine. I'm calling from San Marcos, Texas, just outside of one of your favorite towns of Austin.

Scott Galloway: Oh.

Christine (Caller): And my question today is about enoughness because I've worked for two decades with materials. I'm an artist that would otherwise go in the trash. So I've thought a lot about this idea of what is enough, both personally and as a collective. And so I'm curious what your relationship is to the concept of enoughness and wonder how you practice it in your life, how you discuss it with your kids, and how you speak about it within your spheres of influence. So, you know, generally, how do you personally square the capitalist drumbeat of scarcity and never enoughness with the real human need to feel sated?

Kara Swisher: Oh, wow. That's a serious question. That's a good one, Scott. Shall I start?

Scott Galloway: Who's meowing? Who's that meowing?

Kara Swisher: Oh, I'm sorry. I have a meowing cat. That's our Christine. By the way, one cat is enough.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, I agree.

Kara Swisher: Kara, do you want to kick us off? Let's keep the cat going. It's okay. It's okay. I love a cat. I love cats. Scott only likes dogs. That's how we live with each other. That is a really good question. I think a lot about enough, actually my whole life. It sounds really weird, but it manifests in kind of crazy ways. I don't like things very much. I like experiences. And I think it's largely because I grew up with a parent who kept buying things incessantly. And it bothers me. And I don't like buying things. I don't like gifts. It's a real issue for my wife and my family. I don't like things. I'm always trying to rid myself of things. I recycle incessantly, even though it doesn't matter. I know it sounds crazy. I'm very aware of stuff. I always want to throw out toys at my children's. I just feel I'd like to have just a suitcase some days. I really feel funny about it. And I don't think it's a good thing. I wish I was one of those people like, as I have enough stuff and I feel good about it, instead it worries me. I know it sounds really nuts, but I touch things and I'm like, oh, this will be around after I die. There's so much stuff in this world and it drives me crazy. And I don't think it's a good thing, but the good part is I don't need a lot. And if I didn't, you know, do okay in my job, I think I'd be fine not having very much stuff. I don't value things. Scott?

Scott Galloway: It's a super interesting question. So I think a lot about this and that is since our species came off the savanna, there was an absence of access to salty, sugary, or fatty food. There was an absence of free play, free safe play. There was an absence of mating opportunities. And then when you introduce industrial production to all of those things, you develop addictions, addictions to trans fats, addictions to gambling, addictions to porn. And I'm very cognizant of those things. And then you couple that with what is a fairly healthy instinct, and that is competitive instinct to want to be better. You're immediately at a stoplight with three people, especially if you're a dude, you want to jet out in front of the other two. So when you collapse those two things, and perhaps you didn't grow up with a lot of money or things or stuff or experiences, you have this insatiable desire to acquire and experience more. And I suffer from that. And then the problem is at some point, when you have enough to state your needs, and then even enough to have more than your needs, it is very difficult to get off that hamster wheel.

And similar to Kara, I've never really been into quote-unquote stuff. I have wonderful homes because it's my strategy is, A, I want to live in beautiful places, but I want to make it difficult for my adult sons to avoid me. So I'm hoping that they'll want to bring their girlfriends and their friends to hang with me or they'll pay the tax to hang with me to be in these beautiful places. But in terms of experiences, I have struggled with more. And that is, I always wanted more money, because money, unfortunately, can be distilled down to a number, and it's very easy to double the number. And in a capitalist society, your worth as a man is unfortunately correlated to how big that number is. So even when I got well beyond probably my financial needs, I've struggled with wanting more and more and more. Every Friday, as a single man in New York, I was thinking, how can I hang out with more interesting people? How can I date hotter women? And no matter how high character or how hot the women I was dating or how interesting the people, I've always thought there's more here and always wanted more.

Kara Swisher: And then he met me and thought, I'm totally sated.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, that's exactly what happened, Christine. Anyways, but the only time I've ever felt sated, and this is virtue signaling, but it's true, is with my boys. Occasionally, you have that moment with your boys where your kid tells you something or you're lying in bed with one of your sons. Your son's kind of just rolling naturally into the TV room and throw their legs over yours. And you're like, okay, this is it. I don't really need a hell of a lot more here. Maybe a third, maybe a little girl, but I don't need more. But what has helped me was understanding the anthropological and sociological reasons I've been addicted to more. I don't have an addictive personality. And then something that was really important for me was an unlock around 2017. When I sold my last company, I was planning to double down and start a private equity firm because I thought I'm wealthy, but I'd like to be super fucking wealthy. And then I had kind of a moment, I lost a friend and I thought, why am I just going for more? Why don't I just go for happy? Because the pursuit of more comes at a cost. There are emissions around the conversion of any substance, whether it's money to experiences or food to calories, there's emissions. And what I decided was I didn't need to create more emissions around pursuing more and more money, more and more like crazier experiences. But I want to be clear, it's something I still haven't reconciled in my life. You can see where it comes from. It comes from a desire to survive, a desire to mate, a desire to have free play, and the fact that industrial production has caught up to that. And as a person in a capitalist society, I think especially men, your worth, your value, the most admired people in the world are the wealthiest people in the world, the people with the most mating opportunities. So this is something I struggle with, but understanding the root causes of it has helped me deal with it. And I want to be clear what I'm talking about is the mother of all good problems.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, I would agree. It's interesting. So I was just thinking this the other day. It's so funny, Scott. I just had an experience with my son, putting him down for a nap yesterday. And he like touched my face before he fell asleep. And I felt so good. Like that was like a really nice moment that I remember. And I was upset about all the apartments of mass kind of thing. And I was in that mode of too much stuff, right? We have too much stuff. He has too much stuff, Too many toys. They had just been fighting over toys, which I can't believe given how many toys they have. And it was just an interesting moment. One of the things Scott was saying about rich people, like right now we're in an era where rich people are getting these jobs they're wholly unqualified for, right? because of this Trump administration appointments of all these billionaires. And I'm like, why are they getting them over really qualified people? And it really sort of makes me sick. Like the idea of this sort of glorification, Scott called it idolatry of the innovator, but it's now glorification of the rich people that they're just, so stuff is just, and the funny thing is many of those people don't care about stuff either, but it's definitely a disease of this culture. And it's, at some point it's not going to be because we're going to, I just, you can feel impending doom with all this stuff. You know what I mean? Like, I don't know. I don't, do you feel, do you have too much stuff? Do you worry about things around you? Me? Christine?

Christine (Caller): Yeah.

Kara Swisher: No. No, I don't. And actually, I was looking at, listening to your podcast the last couple of weeks, and I'm like, you know, honestly, all of these people we're talking about, we're talking about them because at the core, they just don't feel enough. Right? Like, it's more than just what you have. It's who you are. It's how you are in the world, right? Do you feel like you are enough? Yeah. And we profile all these people who are essentially money addicts, right? Like we wouldn't profile somebody who's a heroin addict on your show, but we're like, oh, cool. Let's talk more about this money addict, right? This guy that's never going to fill up, never going to feel enough.

Scott Galloway: Well, that's true. I mean, the holes are so vast, they aren't going to fill them up. And that's, I was literally just thinking this. I was like, you know, I use an expression a lot. They're so poor, all they have is money. And it's a real thing right now because, you know, the idolatry of Elon Musk or any of these people, there's like 10, 11 billionaires in the cabinet. It does set the tone for this country. You know, how can these people be the common man? And yet the common man has a massive crush on Donald Trump or whatever. It's just a really interesting dichotomy. But I think it comes from within, right? Like, I think it comes from within. I think that this is the crux, right? There's no amount of stuff in the world. And again, capitalism builds this in us. Capitalism builds inside of us. That's what marketing is. It's literally the science of creating scarcity.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, 100%. Buy shit you don't need. Right? But I do think, what did I say? I don't know if it's most, but I know this has happened to me. About 10 years ago, I realized that I got peace from less stuff. So I'm moving right now. I do this once every two years. I'm giving away two-thirds of my clothes. anything I won't use in the next seven or 14 days, whether it's 22 pairs of sunglasses that I ended up with, I just give it all away. And I find there is real inner peace, and this is a struggle when you live with someone and you have kids, of simplicity. Like, I would like to live my life like, you know, a neurotic Japanese architect in terms of simplicity. Like, I want a nice bed, no even bed frame, a nice comforter. My entire beauty routine is I splash water on my face, maybe some sunblock. I love, there's nothing like when I stay in a hotel and there's a vanity with no shit on it. I just checked into a hotel because I have to do this podcast because we're moving and I needed a hotel. But all the crap everywhere. I think as you get older, you do, for the first time in my life, I don't own a car and it's freeing because you don't have to take care of it. And what you realize is distinct of the accoutrements of trying to signal your worth as a mate or signal your worth to your friends or impress people. The fewer things you have, I find I get actual peace because every object is not only a piece of clutter that gives you too much distraction. And for me, it creates haze or noise in my thinking. It's another thing you have to manage. And again, I find that that simple lifestyle of less stuff, I want more experiences, I'm still addicted to that, but I have broken the addiction to stuff.

Christine (Caller): And I totally hear that. And I think that's true. But then I also hear you talking about, you extol the virtues of Shein and Timu as great consumerist businesses, right? And it's like, they're doing the thing that, again, it works for money, for capital, but it doesn't work for the planet. It doesn't work for us as individuals, right? So it's this weird dichotomy that we're enmeshed in.

Scott Galloway: But what you would need to do is you would need, so I'm an investor in Shein, and I believe the form of sustainability is giving young people who have less money than they've had relative to their older generation in history, access to more stuff to feel better about themselves. I am all down with the notion that young people need to be rewired to not pursue as much stuff. I don't think it's going to happen for several generations. And I also find that a lot of the, in my opinion, I think young people just want stuff. I think young people wanting a lot of clothes is not only understandable, they're in their mating years, they want to express their identity. And a lot of people who, in my opinion, are being very critical and self-righteous about fast fashion are the incumbents who want you to spend 800 bucks on a Ralph Lauren sweater and that it is to their advantage to shitpost and criticize companies that offer people a lot of stuff for a lot less money. Should we have environmental standards? Yes, pass laws. But the notion we are going to talk young people out of acquiring stuff? I think it's a noble effort. Good luck with that.

Kara Swisher: All right, we're going to have to, Christine, I love you, Chad. This is a really great topic. It's really important. And it's important to think about. And we absolutely do. And we really appreciate it. What a thoughtful question.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, that was a good question. Thank you so much for listening.

Christine (Caller): No, I love your show. And I just want to say, like one of the things I really love about it is that you demonstrate professionalism and loving qualities in your relationship, right? Like you bring those together in a really beautiful way. And so I really appreciate that.

Kara Swisher: Thank you for saying that. Thank you. And I steal his t-shirts too, speaking of which. And they're lovely.

Scott Galloway: She does. Very soft.

Kara Swisher: It's never enough. There you go. She takes my stuff.

Scott Galloway: Well, they're very soft.

Kara Swisher: Okay. All right. Okay. I don't know what to say. Thank you. Thank you. Bye. Hi to your cat.

Christine (Caller): Okay. Thank you, Christine.

Kara Swisher: Let's move on to our next caller, Rodney.

Rodney (Caller): Hello. How you doing?

Kara Swisher: I'm doing well, Kara. Great to meet you.

Rodney (Caller): Hi, Rodney. Good. Tell us about yourself and ask your question.

Kara Swisher: Yeah. So, Kara, Scott, I run a consulting and investment business that's really focused on increasing wealth and ownership for the bottom 90%, which, Scott, I think it really resonates with you. But for years, I've worked on capital access problems facing minority entrepreneurs. For some context, Black founders received less than 2% of all venture capital. Black women receive 0.35% of venture capital. Again, that's 0.35%. The average loan to white-owned small businesses is over $30,000 higher than for non-white businesses. And on top of that, black entrepreneurs are denied bank loans at nearly twice the rate of white entrepreneurs. And so, as the two of you know, the American Alliance for Equal Rights has successfully sued nonprofits making grants to minority-owned businesses, arguing that these nonprofits are discriminating against white business owners. So the question I have for the two of you, how do we solve this massive capital gap facing minority entrepreneurs without addressing race and racial bias in venture capital and banking?

Kara Swisher: Yeah, the second part is critically important to think about, too, because they were trying to solve this problem a little bit, right, to figure it out. So let's just start very briefly and Scott can go. This is something I've been writing about for decades. We are constantly covering this at All Things D and everything else because the numbers were so out of whack. And it also includes women, right? That's like 8% or 6%. It's dropping. Whatever it is, it's dropping. And they're all dropping, which is really astonishing. So, this means one of two things is that, you know, and essentially it's white men who are getting these, if you look at the statistics over and over and over again. And it either means they're the smartest people on earth and they deserve it more than everybody else or that there's something going on. And there's a couple issues is that these groups of people tend to coalesce with each other and therefore reward each other. So founders help other founders. And very early in my career, when I was writing about this, I was like, this is mathematically, same thing with board of directors, everything else. They would always, one thing is they bring up standards, which I was always like, your company's not doing well. You're allowed to fail over and over again. And they would always use the word standards, which is interesting. And the second thing that was, someone said to me, if there were a Marsha Zuckerberg, you know, then maybe it would be different. I honestly, there is no, it's getting worse. I don't quite know what to do about it because what they do is they tend to reinforce each other. The same thing is happening in AI. The same thing is the next thing, they tend to give each other a step up. And I'm not so sure it's, in some cases it is racism. In some cases it is sexism. But it's something else that is unsolvable because then they act like they're victims. I mean, Marc Andreessen just said, all these wonderful entrepreneurs have been debanked. I'm like, you're not the ones that's been debanked. It's other people. So I still struggle to figure out beyond just calling them racist and sexist, which I don't think is the answer, what is happening. And to solve it, when you try to do that by doing these specialized programs to get people on the same foot, you have these lawsuits, which on some level, you can sort of see it, right? It makes sense. And they take advantage of this. So I wish I had an answer for you. Maybe Scott does. Scott?

Scott Galloway: Yeah, Rodney, it's a really thoughtful question. So first off, I want to acknowledge that I'm a beneficiary of the sexism and the racism and the homophobia that plagued and still is a problem. In the 90s, right out of business school, I started raising money for my startups. And I never really stopped to think, why is it that 99% of the capital is going to straight white males? It just, it never dawned on me that, okay, something's wrong here. And also, we should, as we talk about this, celebrate the fact that's no longer the case. It's still not where it needs to be. But when I walked into my venture capitalist in 2013 to raise money, the 26 partners, my two co-founders who are female, walked me out and said, we can't take money from these folks. And I said, why is that? And said, all 26 partners are male. They couldn't find one female. There's now a third of the partners are female. There has been extraordinary progress. Having said that, it's still not where it needs to be.

So let's move to solutions. There's some very boring ones. Community-based banks. Community-based banks get to know local entrepreneurs, get to know that this guy, regardless of his or her sexual orientation or ethnicity, runs a really successful car wash. And I have a mandate to put a certain amount of my free capital to work in the local community. So community-based banks are really important. The U.S. is too concentrated. Actually, in the U.K., it's crazy. Five banks control 80%. So community-based banking is actually very important. I personally believe we should have a form of tax subsidies or what you would call affirmative action that gives advantage or access to easier and cheaper capital. But I don't think it should be based on identity, race, sexual orientation, or gender. I think it should be based on income. I'm a fan of income-based low-interest loans to startups because I know a lot of very wealthy – 54% of gay men will get college degrees. And soon we're going to find more women in professional services that will have an easier time raising capital. I do believe, I don't think you're doing anyone any favors. I saw this at Morgan Stanley. A certain amount of capital had to go, or a certain amount of the underwriting business had to go to women or minority-owned businesses. And this is what happened. One white dude with big connections found two female partners or two non-white partners, and they called it a minority-owned business. And everyone resented them because they did no goddamn work and they just saw it as an absolute grift. I think that what we need is cheap programs that provide capital and low interest loans and access to capital to people who are below a certain income level. because one of the wonderful things about our society that I think we can take collective victory in and reward in is that as of today, you would rather be born non-white or gay than poor. So I'm a big fan of affirmative action. I'm a big fan of access to low-cost loans, but I think it should be based on the income of your household and your zip code, as opposed to your ethnicity, your sexual orientation, or your gender.

Kara Swisher: But that's largely because it's now been attacked, right? That way to solve this problem. And it's going to be, and they're going to win. I'm sorry. I hate to say it, but they've been winning all over the place.

Scott Galloway: Yeah, it continues to win.

Kara Swisher: You know, Americans do have a vision of themselves. It's like, I got nearby my own, whatever it happens to be. And what about this ethnic group? And what it does is it pulls people together. In a lot of things, what Scott's saying is true, because no matter what money you get, whether if you're a woman or a minority, which aren't minorities anymore, by the way, is you get this idea that you somehow got an advantage when all these, I always point out, you all got advantages because of blank. And so, you know, I just had a really interesting interview with Van Latham and Anthony Scaramucci were all together. And Anthony said, you know, we all have to now get away from identity and this and that. And so, and then we'll all, we have to believe ourselves. He think he said something. And I think he really means this. We're not, we're not racist. We're the human race. You know, he did that thing. And Van looked at him and said, you first. That's right. Right? Which I loved. And of course, you know, and Anthony got it, which was interesting because he was like, well, I know you think I started, you know, a mile ahead. He goes seven miles ahead. You started seven miles ahead and you want me to catch up. It was the greatest, it was the most interesting exchange of people. But it was right now in this country, there is that sense as if you didn't make it because there's something wrong with you. Right. That's what the Trump people are doing a lot of and and appealing to that American way, including with Latinos. Latinos, you know, they are getting in for free. They're getting a hotel room and you're not, you know, let's shift it to that because they're doing it to immigrants right now, which are based, make the heart of our country. But it really does resonate, unfortunately, with a lot of voters until they understand the inbuilt advantages that a certain group of people get. But back to Rodney's question around access to capital or venture capital, What's even more frightening is, or as frightening, is the concentration around white males in terms of funding. In particular schools, right, Scott? I mean, particular schools, regions.

Scott Galloway: 100%. Yeah. But where it gets, when I talk about frightening, 40% of venture capitalists are from two schools. And then I would bet, and no one wants to do this analysis because I bet it would be scary, Harvard and Stanford. I bet 60 to 80 percent of the capital deployed is from people who went to two schools. So you want to talk about groupthink. And guess what? If you're offering concierge medicine to people in Palo Alto, you can get funding. Right. So if you are going to have an overlay, the question goes to most people, I believe, even most Republicans believe that people are born based through no fault of their own. The smartest thing I ever did was being born a white heterosexual male in 1964 in California. That was the smartest thing I've ever done. And none of that was my fault. And I realize that now. And I think most people realize some people are born with such headwinds that they deserve a little hand up. Call it unfair advantage, call it discrimination, call it whatever you want. Some people need a hand up. The issue is what determines who gets the hand up. And if you wanted an overlay above people from low-income backgrounds, which I think is the primary consideration or what the University of California calls an adversity index, I believe, and I just gave this speech today to the largest bank in Europe, start hiring people who don't have traditional four-year degrees and, for God's sake, stop fetishizing elite colleges. Because that is the caste system in America. Two-thirds of Harvard's freshman class identifies as non-white. Guess what? They don't need any fucking programs or help. I don't care what color sexual orientation they are. If you're a freshman at Harvard, you do not need government help. At the same time, in my view, a white straight kid from Appalachia being raised by a single mother, I think that kid faces real headwinds. And here's the thing. If you just based it on income and you just based it on people who didn't have the opportunity to go to elite colleges, the affirmative action programs in place would still have the same impact on 70 percent of the population. Because what we still have in this nation is an economic apartheid where white families are worth one hundred and fifty thousand and Latino and black families are worth thirty thousand. But there are a lot of non-whites who are wealthy. If you have wealthy parents, a lot of these problems go away. Not all of them, but a lot of them. So the key is what are the metrics given today, the reality of today and what's happening today and the fact we've made progress that help the people that need it the most. The most disadvantaged Americans are people born to poor households. That's 100% true.

Rodney (Caller): Two quick things. So one, Scott, totally hear you on that. I will note too, though, that even in terms of like those Harvard graduates that are students of color, there's still like differentials with like their white counterparts. One other thing real quick, the irony about Stanford as well is that Stanford University is producing some of the best research out there that indicates, and this is something that Scott, like when you're in business school, the data was there, the data set didn't exist.

Scott Galloway: Yep.

Rodney (Caller): That really points out that entrepreneurs of color, fund managers of color, oftentimes can outperform their white counterparts. There's a huge data set. And also at Columbia University, I know it's a competitor to NYU, Scott. But at the end of the day, there's a lot of data set right now that really indicates that people of color, minority entrepreneurs, really can be successful. And that's a whole data set. And that bias question is still really strong. But that should attract more capital.

Scott Galloway: And I would argue, quite frankly, I don't buy that minority-owned business owners are any better than non-minority-owned business owners. What I buy is that they have a harder time getting capital, so there's a dearth of capital which drives up returns. And I don't – so the bottom line is, how do we get to a post-racial, post-sexual orientation, post-gender society, recognizing we're going to have to lift some people up? And again, I think the way to do that is through income.

Kara Swisher: Well, Rodney, you know, it's the human race. It's not race. That's right. That's right. Honestly. That's a really thoughtful question. Thank you, Rodney.

Rodney (Caller): All right, Rodney, thank you.

Kara Swisher: Thanks, Kara. Thanks, Scott.

Scott Galloway: Thank you.

Kara Swisher: All right, Scott Galloway, let's go on a quick break. We come back. We'll take some more calls, including someone named Scott.

[Ad Break]

Scott Galloway: Mint is still $15 a month for premium wireless. And if you haven't made the switch yet here are 15 reasons why you should. One, it's a month. Two, seriously, it's a month. Three, no big contracts. Four, I use it. Five, my mom uses it.

Kara Swisher: Are you playing me off? That's what's happening, right?

Kara Swisher: Okay. Give it a try at mintmobile.com slash switch. Upfront payment of $45 for three-month plan, $15 per month equivalent required. New customer offer first three months only. Then full price plan options available. Taxes and fees extra. See mintmobile.com.

[Ad Break]

Kara Swisher: Support for Pivot comes from LinkedIn. From talking about sports, discussing the latest movies, everyone is looking for a real connection to the people around them. But it's not just person to person. It's the same connection that's needed in business. And it can be the hardest part about B2B marketing, finding the right people, making the right connections. But instead of spending hours scavenging social media feeds, you can just tap LinkedIn ads to reach the right professionals. According to LinkedIn, they have grown to a network of over 1 billion professionals, making it stand apart from other ad buys. You can target your buyers by job title, industry, company roles, seniority skills, and company revenue, giving you all the professionals you need to reach in one place. So you can stop wasting budget on the wrong audience and start targeting the right professionals only on LinkedIn ads. LinkedIn will even give you a hundred dollar credit on your next campaign so you can try it for yourself. Just go to linkedin.com slash pivot pod. That's linkedin.com slash pivot pod. Terms and conditions apply. Only on LinkedIn ads.

Kara Swisher: Next up, someone named Scott with a K. He has a question about finding work in tech. Go ahead, Better Scott, with a better spelled name. Tell us your name, where you're from, and your question. It's a To Scott podcast today.

Scott (Caller): Yeah. So my question is, lately my LinkedIn feed has looked like the hunger games for middle and senior managers in tech. A lot of them, like me, were laid off in preparation for that big recession that never came last year. I assume a lot of this was due to overhiring during COVID. I thought I was going crazy because nobody was really covering this. But lately, Aki Ito at Business Insider has written a series of articles about it. Last week, she wrote about how middle management or senior management job postings are down 42% since 2022. Hiring is down 43% and 57% for middle and senior managers, respectively. I've seen firsthand how applications for some of these roles can be 800 people and up. The short version of my question is, why do you think this is happening? And do you see these patterns changing anytime soon?

Kara Swisher: Wow, that's a good question. It's actually been covered more than you think. I've read lots of articles. They overhired in the pandemic and then started shedding workers to do efficiencies, get their stock prices up, save money. I don't know an organization that's not laying off, not just because they're in a painful position. It's because they want to show better results. They realize they can do things. In tech, it's particularly because they had a gravy kind of way. Let's add some more, whatever. It doesn't matter. There was a real grab for talent that went on for years. So this is a group of people that are used to constant abundance.

Kara Swisher: I'll tell you a couple of things, and then Scott can weigh in. AI is going to change everything for everyone, and they're realizing they can do a lot more with less. There is not a CEO I've talked to in the last year who hasn't talked about cutting staff enormously. One person was telling me, we're not going to name who, where they were going to go from 6,000 software engineers to 2,000 or 3,000 in a year. They were really looking for efficiencies using AI. With coding and everything else, that takes out the middle of people. I just think every CEO is not doing it out of distress right now. They're doing it out of efficiency, and they like it. They also saw someone like Elon Musk or others make cuts and have... well, I think there was a discernible difference. But in his case, he was using his platform for something else, which was influence. But they like to see it. Once people like him did this, they all kind of got the religion that we can do this and we can get these people back. There isn't, except at the highest levels of AI researchers or really high-level people, that you're all interchangeable, just like factory workers were. Same thing's happening in law. Same thing's happening in every single industry where they can replace and use AI or other technologies to do so. I don't think it's stopping anytime soon. Scott?

Scott Galloway: Yeah. The analogy I would use is that Ozempic or semaglutide drugs tell the brain to stop sending signals that you're hungry. They send signals that you're sated much sooner. The most seminal earnings call I've seen in business was three earnings calls ago for Meta, where they announced that they had increased their revenues by 23% while decreasing headcount. If you're in the tech industry or software that's eating the planet and every year controls more and more of GDP, and your revenues are likely growing, there's a signal going to your brain: need to hire more, need to hire more. What is going through every board, and I know this firsthand, and they can't say this in all hands. They can't say, "I've got good news. Our revenues are up. But the great news is I'm going to need fewer of you next year." They don't say the last part because it is not aspirational. But the reality is the most seminal breakthrough technology in history is first and foremost, I think, being used for drug discovery and health care. I think that'll be its biggest value add. But its second biggest value add is around efficiency, which is Latin for do more with less people.

Scott Galloway: You put that on top of the cloud and you just have every CEO thinking, how can I grow my revenues eight percent next year with ten percent less people? It's up and down the stack. It's not senior managers — they tend to figure out a way to hold on to their jobs, not always, but most of the time. But middle management, and you'd hate to be in a back office right now for a B2B company or compliance or legal, whatever it is, these things that can be routinized. So there's going to be a lot of pain.

Scott Galloway: I want to move to a question: what do you do about it? I hear from a lot of young men that are struggling. Increasingly, I'm hearing from people in their 30s, 40s, and 50s who say, "I need to reinvent myself. My career path has been derailed because I was a good software engineer. Maybe I wasn't a genius, but I was good at what I did. I was working remotely, making 150K a year. And all of a sudden, I can't find a job." Overnight, a switch went off. The first thing I say is to forgive yourself. I've been unemployed for a good three to five years of my life. I was kind of wandering. I had pretend jobs. I joined NYU so I could say I was doing something. But I was kind of lost trying to figure out my next gig. Most successful people have had those stretches of needing to reinvent themselves. Things aren't working out the way they thought. That is part of it.

Scott Galloway: The key is, every morning waking up — I used to do it at night — tomorrow, I need to do three things. I need to call people that I don't necessarily want to call. I need to have some coffees. I need to think about some stuff. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. If you get an opportunity, go at it and see if you can grow it into something good, even if it's a pay cut or not your dream job. Give yourself a statute of limitations and force yourself to take stuff. What I find with a lot of these people is they have the exact wrong amount of money: enough money that they don't have to take the next thing, but not enough money so they can retire. So they end up waiting too long.

Scott Galloway: The other thing I would suggest is form a kitchen cabinet of people and be very transparent. "This is what's going on with me. This is what I'm trying to do. Here are some ideas." It is really hard to read the label from inside of the bottle. It creates an insecure time. Also get alignment with your partner. "This is what's going on. This is how it affects our spending on our lifestyle." Be transparent. "I'm feeling insecure." I think this is harder on men than it is on women, because men have a predetermined expectation that they'll be the economic provider. So I think it really messes with a man's self-esteem. But getting alignment around your partner, being open and vulnerable with other friends, and being willing to ask for help. I know so many people that ended up in such a bad place and we had no idea they were struggling. We could have helped them. Don't be afraid to ask for help. Forgive yourself, a kitchen cabinet. Don't let perfect be the enemy of good. Every night, these are the three of the five people, jobs, things I'm going to do to try and find that next thing. But more than anything, forgive yourself. This happens to everybody at some point.

Kara Swisher: Also, you might have to think about shifting. This has happened to so many other industries. This is happening because these CEOs have gotten a taste of blood. They know they can do just as well with fewer people. They don't have to cater to people who aren't the top people. They don't have to buy kombucha for all. They don't have to do all the things they did for years. It was borderline ridiculous — dry cleaning, kombucha, food from Cambodia. It was crazy. Google was nuts back in the day. It was fun. But you could tell that the bosses didn't love having to cater. A lot of these employees acted like children, like they were on the land of perpetual everything. These changes from AI are going to be significant. It won't just be tech people. It will be lawyers. I just read a story about breast cancer detection being better by AI by some number that would matter to a woman who has breast cancer. You can just see more and more of it. Each of those people is a job. But what Scott said is absolutely true. You're going to have to accept it and try to figure out what the next step is.

Scott Galloway: In three short years, 36 months, from 2021 to 2024, we transitioned from a war for talent to a war on talent. That's a 180-degree turn in terms of creating stress in households.

Scott (Caller): I was a systems engineer and people were bidding on my services. And now 60% of my department was laid off. It's a huge shift in our economy. It's a bummer for junior employees who are coming up. They don't have the people that they report to who actually understand their jobs or what they do. Executives now have triple digit numbers of direct reports. For example, I'm in creative. I usually run creative teams in-house at tech companies. I can't see someone coming in for their first role as a video editor or a graphic designer getting that specialized coaching and feedback that's going to usher them into the next level of their career, because they're not going to have that type of boss anymore. It sucks for me right now, but it really sucks for the people who are just starting their careers and they're going to have a boss who doesn't even know their name. Especially if they're working remotely.

Kara Swisher: Yeah, exactly. Anyway, Scott, we really appreciate it. I think it's absolutely true. Mentoring is over. I feel the same way in reporting and everyone feels it. Most importantly, Scott with a K, were your parents hippies or are you from Denmark or something? What the heck? Scott with a K?

Scott (Caller): It was an act of teenage rebellion. I was writing for the school newspaper. I changed it. I loved how it looked in my byline.

Kara Swisher: You're a creative director. He's a design director. I like it. You're so groovy. Scott with a K. I think you're a more attractive Scott.

Scott Galloway: I don't know what to say. I'm Barbra Streisand. Papa, can you hear me?

Kara Swisher: Anyway. Scott, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

Scott (Caller): Thank you, Kara. Thanks, Scott. Bye, everybody.

Kara Swisher: All right, Scott, let's go to our next caller, Jane, who's an American living in the UK, just like Scott. You're in Edinburgh, right, Jane? Is that correct?

Jane (Caller): I am, yeah. I'm up in Scotland.

Kara Swisher: All right. What is your question for us?

Jane (Caller): My partner and I are in our mid-30s, and we're planning to start a family. We see the joy that it brings our friends and families and feel confident that it would be very rewarding for us to be parents. But we are also very concerned about the dangerous technology that our kids may grow up around, namely social media and AI. Child safety is just not valued on these platforms. My question to you guys, your favorite topic: if you were in the shoes of a 30-something today, would you both dive into parenthood again? And how might you approach it differently given the above?

Kara Swisher: That is an excellent question, Jane. I did dive into parenthood again. I have older kids who are 19 to 22 and I have two younger kids who are three and five. So yes, I would have. If I was 30 again — and I'm pretending I'm 30, obviously, and I'm a really, really old parent, I double that age — I absolutely would. I'm not doing it to be apocalyptic. Some people have kids when they feel things are going terrible. I don't think they are. I believe in the future. Parenting, I think for both Scott and I, has been the best thing we've done. I think we're both very successful, but I don't think anything matters as much as our kids to us. It gives you something that's so hard that when you do it well, you feel amazing. When we do a job well, we feel okay, but when we do kids stuff well, I think we both feel much better as people.

Kara Swisher: My kids kind of missed the big social media thing. They tended to use Snapchat, and I didn't feel as bad about that as other mediums. Both my older boys do not use social media. They think it makes you feel bad. They don't even use dating apps. They both have girlfriends they met in person at parties. They use YouTube and Reddit because they like recommendations of shows they can watch. They use it for entertainment, absolutely. But they don't do doom scrolling or endless scrolling. With my younger kids, they don't use it. They only use the iPad to watch Frozen for the 109th time. I will keep my daughter off of social media probably till 16. My kids went on at 13 maybe, or they got phones when they were somewhere in that age. But my kids will not be on stuff until much, much later because of the deleterious effects. These tech people don't care. They don't care about safety. I don't care what they say. So, Scott.

Scott Galloway: This is an easy one, Jane. Tonight, you go out, you drink, you go home, you have a lot of sex, and you keep doing that until you get pregnant. On the whole, no one is entirely certain what's going to happen in the future to what generation, but on the whole, the line is up and to the right. Your kids are most likely going to have the best lives on average of any kids ever born ever — except if the second kid you have. Things generally get better. They're going to enjoy hot showers. They're going to enjoy civil rights. They're going to enjoy Spotify. They're going to enjoy equal rights. They're going to enjoy more democracy. They're going to enjoy more agency as young people. They're going to have their parents around longer because you'll live longer. Have — you seem like a thoughtful person. If you have a certain level of economic security and a loving, confident partner, get on it. Get on it. Get on it. And plus, they'll have a Scottish accent. Get on it. And have boys. And if they have Scottish accents, send them to New York. That's going to be playtime for the little boy.

Scott Galloway: By the way, the most talented people in Scotland have one thing in common: they've left. So stay there, have some kids, unless you are on the tenure track at St. Andrews, or you're on an oil platform making a ton of money in the North Sea. I love Scotland. I'm not going to post about Scotland. It's a beautiful place for a good six weeks a year. By the way, my favorite team is Rangers FC. I don't know if you follow football. But back to the question: having kids — you're being way too thoughtful. You're being way too careful. It's going to be... why don't you want to have kids? Why are you worried?

Jane (Caller): I'm not worried. I guess it's a hesitation. What prompted all of this was the story about the young man who committed suicide after Character AI.

Kara Swisher: Yeah. I just interviewed the mother on the podcast. It's very upsetting.

Jane (Caller): I guess that's an isolated incident. I would like to believe it.

Kara Swisher: No, actually, it's a really... I urge you to listen to it because she did everything right. She was very on her kid about social media. When you listen, you'll think, this wasn't someone who wasn't paying attention. This was someone who was paying attention.

Scott Galloway: Having children, your greatest worry will be their safety. It's not necessarily online. It's driving. It's other kids. It's drugs.

Jane (Caller): I guess the driving and the drugs and stuff, I mean, I had that. It's part of growing up. But the AI situation just feels bigger and scarier to me. More dire.

Kara Swisher: Because I think it's something that you could not know is going on in the background.

Scott Galloway: Jane, grief and anxiety are the receipts for love and joy. There is no risk-free return. If my boys had been born in Germany in 1920, they would have ended up dead on a Russian field in the late 30s. You just don't know. What you do know is that your life is going to go really fast. Things show that happiness is a function of very basic things. The most basic thing you can do is procreate and raise kids with a loving partner. The odds that they have really wonderful, prosperous lives have never been greater. This is such an easy one. Get on it. Start procreating.

Kara Swisher: You're always thinking about it. It never goes away. There'll be new threats, new anxiety. One of my sons yesterday was vaguely sad over something and I was on four alarm fire. It was because of work or something. We'd had this wonderful dinner just recently. And then I detected slight sadness and I lost my mind. I thought, Kara, get a hold of yourself. But one thing is, you're going to be exhausted. I am so exhausted. I can't even tell you.

Scott Galloway: She's about 40 years younger than you.

Kara Swisher: Yes, I get that. So I was exhausted back then. It's tiring, Jane. Don't let them tell you differently. And it hurts.

Scott Galloway: Get on it. Get on it. Get on it. And then name your kids Kara Scott. Obviously. And if you have a little girl and there's a little too much going on, we'll take her.

Kara Swisher: No, you're not. You were talking about having a daughter all the time. I need someone to take care of me.

Scott Galloway: Look at how sexist that is. Your boys can take care of you.

Kara Swisher: Boys don't do that. Anyway, Jane, thank you so much.

Jane (Caller): Thank you both.

Scott Galloway: Thank you, Jane. Get on it. Find that love machine you call a partner. Get on it. Any way you want to do it is your way, but you'll never regret a day in your life. You won't.

Kara Swisher: You really won't. Until you do.

Jane (Caller): I respect you both greatly. Thank you. And I appreciate the resounding advice.

Kara Swisher: Don't have 12 children like Elon Musk and ignore them. Don't do that.

Jane (Caller): Not the plan. I think I'm getting too old for that.

Kara Swisher: No, it's not. That's who you're talking to. Talk about windows that should have been shut decades ago.

Scott Galloway: Jesus.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, Jane, thank you so much. All right, Scott, let's go on a quick break. When we come back, we'll take one more listener call. It has to be the best.

[Ad Break]

Kara Swisher: Scott, we're back with our final listener call. Let's talk to Steve in Alaska.

Scott Galloway: Ooh, I like Alaska.

Kara Swisher: Steve, what's your question? Explain yourself to us.

Steve (Caller): Well, hi, good morning. Thanks for taking my question. My wife and I are both early 50s and just haven't been very smart about investing. We have a big savings account — we're good savers — but we know it could be doing more for us. We're looking forward to maybe 10 years down the road to retiring, want to be able to travel. We're looking for smart investing options that aren't overly risky, but are doing better than the ridiculously small percentage we get from our savings account.

Kara Swisher: Right. So you're risk averse. You're a little more risk averse than most.

Steve (Caller): Yeah. When we first got into it maybe five years ago, we looked at it too closely. We put some money in Roth or something and it just kind of... not tanked, but started losing money right away.

Kara Swisher: And you didn't buy that Bitcoin last year. Okay. All right. I think I'm going to let Scott have this one. The only thing I would say is that you probably should have started earlier. These things compound. But I'm not an investment expert. Scott is. So I'm going to give this one to him fully. Go ahead, Scott.

Scott Galloway: Expert's a dangerous word. The first thing, again, is to forgive yourself. There's a lot of people in their 50s who don't have anything. The fact that you've even saved money means that you and your partner are ahead of like two-thirds of Americans. So what do you do? For the most part, don't believe you're smarter than everybody else. I strongly believe that low-cost index funds are the way to go. You want to reduce your fees and you want to be totally diversified. You don't need to find the needle in the haystack. You want to buy the whole haystack.

Scott Galloway: I would do something along the lines of 50% in an S&P fund, or maybe QQQ if you want a little bit more exposure to aggressive tech companies. There's a lot of great financial advisors on — I hate to say it — TikTok and on Instagram reels, where you can type in or into AI, type in your exact personality, situation, and it'll look something like this: 50% in an S&P or S&P related low cost index fund through Schwab or Vanguard. You do not want to pay fees. 30% in some sort of index fund that gives you exposure to international or some sort of a credit or debt fund. Again, the key is low fees. And then maybe treasuries such that you have access to some capital, some liquidity in case you run into a short-term liquidity crunch, one of you loses your job or something like that.

Scott Galloway: Since the beginning of the market, the returns have been around 8% or 9% in the S&P. In the NASDAQ, it's been 11%. That may not sound like a lot, but even though you're in your 50s, you're probably going to be working or making money for the next 20 or 30 years. When Social Security kicks in, you should be able to reverse engineer back: how much money do we need to save such that when we're 70 and we slow down, with our Social Security, with taking out three to four percent of our nest egg, what is that number that we need? Then reverse engineer back and determine how much money you need to add to your savings or that investment every year. But it's something along the lines of 50, 30, 20 low cost index funds.

Steve (Caller): Great. It sounds like a good formula. I think we just get tripped up with starting out. It's interesting to hear those parameters and the need to get going.

Kara Swisher: One of the things that's important to remember is understand exactly what you need. The other part is how much income do you actually need? How much savings do you need? It's surprisingly a lot less once you start paring away things. It doesn't mean living badly. But I think a lot of people don't understand how much less they need than they think they do, especially if they have good health care. Although insurance obviously isn't controversial right now, payments of insurance. But you have to look at both sides of it: not just what money you'll make, what money you have to expend, and where you can live. A lot of people are moving different places. Imagine your 70s: where could you live that is economical based on what you have? If you don't have quite enough, where else? I don't think people think of those options as much as the spending part of what they need versus how much they have to have.

Scott Galloway: Move to Alaska.

Kara Swisher: Oh, wait. It's probably pretty low cost of living.

Steve (Caller): Alaska's expensive, I believe. It is, yes.

Kara Swisher: Really? I did not know that. Because they've got to drag everything up there and everyone's along the coast.

Steve (Caller): Yes, it is. Hawaii, same thing.

Scott Galloway: My total exposure to Alaska is the great series Northern Exposure. A wonderful series in the 90s.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, think about both sides of it when you're doing it. I don't think people think of that enough. Understand what you're spending. Really pay attention to what you're spending now. I don't mean being parsimonious, but you'll be surprised how much money you waste. Anyway, Steve, thank you so much. We really appreciate it.

Steve (Caller): Thanks very much. Pleasure to be on.

Kara Swisher: All right. Thanks for listening. We appreciate your being a fan of Pivot and taking time to ask a great question. Scott, isn't it great how our listeners are so smart and so interesting? Those are really smart questions. Good questions. And they're so interesting as people. Nice, civil. We do urge people to talk to us. I love when people talk to us. I just love our listeners. I'm sorry. I just love them so much. I think they're so thoughtful. Every time I greet them personally, they have great questions. We love doing these things.

Scott Galloway: Can you get Kara to sign her book for me?

Kara Swisher: No. Hard no. Go away. No.

Scott Galloway: Why don't you sign it for me? I'll give you my permission.

Kara Swisher: People think that's the funniest joke. They come up with a book open to sign. And just as I'm about to sign it, they flip it around and it says "Burn Book." And they wait for everyone to laugh. I'm like, this is like the oldest joke in the book. Everybody does this to me.

Kara Swisher: Anyway, if you've got a question of your own, we're going to do this more because we really like it. If you've got a question of your own and you'd like answered, send it our way. Go to nymag.com slash pivot to send a question for the show or call 855-51-PIVOT. Okay, Scott, that's the show. My favorite show of the year really is. Please read us out.

Scott Galloway: Today's show is produced by Lara Neyman, Zoe Marcus, Taylor Griffin, and Christine Driscoll. Ernie Intratod engineered this episode. Thanks also to Drew Burrows and Mia Silverio. Nishat Kerouaz is Vox Media's executive producer of audio. Make sure you subscribe to the show wherever you listen to podcasts. 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 next week for another breakdown of all things tech and business. And get to business. And when I say get to business, I mean get to busy with your love machine. Have children.