Deglobalization, Public Policy, and Government Intervention — with Dambisa Moyo

We’re revisiting one of our favorite interviews featuring Dambisa Moyo. Dambisa is a global economist and bestselling author. Her latest book, How Boards Work — And How They Can Work Better in a Chaotic World, is out now. In this episode, Dambisa discusses all sorts of topics including the private sector, deglobalization, and public policy. Twitter: @dambisamoyo Website: dambisamoyo.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:01Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Northwest Registered Agent. Your business identity is everything that makes your business legitimate and professional. With Northwest Registered Agent, you don't just form a business, you start a complete foundation built for privacy, credibility, and growth. That includes registered agent service, a business address, operating agreement, domain, website, professional email, phone number, and built-in privacy. In other words, your home address, personal email, and phone number stay private. Don't pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for what you can get from Northwest for free. Visit northwestregisteredagent.com/profgfree and start using free resources to build something amazing. Get more with Northwest Registered Agent at northwestregisteredagent.com/profgfree.

• 0:48Speaker 01

  Running a small business means I wear lots of hats. When I put on my hiring hat, I can count on LinkedIn Hiring Pro to make it easy. LinkedIn Hiring Pro helps manage my hiring workflow, puts my job post in front of a unique network of professionals, and matches me with the best candidates for my business. I can also share my job with my network. No other job site lets me do that. No wonder most small businesses say they'd use LinkedIn Hiring Pro again. Hire right the first time. Post your job for free on LinkedIn today at LinkedIn.com/quality.

• 1:27Scott Galloway?

  Welcome to the Prop G Pod. I am out of the office. I know, I know, I need a break. You can sense the stress, you can sense the depression, you can sense the fatigue. I actually have less of those today than I usually have. I hate my life less and less today. Anyways, today, we're running one of our favorite interviews featuring Dambisa Moyo. Dambisa is a global economist and bestselling author, a tall gangster. Talking about an impressive person. She discusses all sorts of topics, including the private sector, de-globalization, and public policy. Deglobalization, you don't hear that word a lot. Dr. Moyo, give us five things or some things that you think will kind of define the post-pandemic economy. What are the enduring changes to our economy?

• 2:10Speaker 02

  So from my vantage point and really based on looking back in history, in particular to the Gilded Age and the years and decades after the period of eighteen seventy to nineteen hundred, the five things that are going to define the macroeconomy, I believe, are really characterized by the overarching view of a more progressive world and one in which the government is more important. So first of all, I think we will see bigger government, and by that I mean larger debts and deficits, if you can imagine such a thing, given where debts and deficits are today. Part of that is really the government's role as a provider of welfare, I think will

• 2:52Speaker 02

  continue. The second point is that government will become bigger, much more important in terms of being an arbiter of capital and labor. We've already seen signs of this, and by that I mean much more important in terms of employment, much more important in terms of supporting businesses. So, for example, the fact that the Fed in the United States have been buying sub-investment grade debt to support certain corporations, and also we've seen in the UK where there've been massive furlough schemes, which I think will be more needed over the long term. I think that's a second thing that we'll continue to see. The third thing

• 3:33Speaker 02

  that I'm sure to see, which is a corollary of government getting bigger, is that I think the private sector will get smaller. And in that respect, we've already seen some of these trends over the past decade. According to Wiltshire and other data sources, the number or the proportion of publicly traded companies in the markets has gone down by about fifty percent, and I think that is a trend we'll continue to see, partly as there's much more consolidation and M and A in the markets, but also as many companies shy away from the sort of heavy regulatory scrutiny and burden, both from institutions and regulators, but also from society more generally.

• 4:18Speaker 02

  The fourth area that I think is really important is that we're going to see more taxation and much more regulation. Again, this was very much thematic in the period post Gilded Age, followed by the crash in nineteen twenty nine, where you started to see much more antitrust legislation. We've started to see hallmarks of that, especially as many of the largest sectors, banking, airlines, pharmaceuticals, technology, et cetera, are now dominated by just a handful of corporations globally. So we've ended up with oligopolies in many of these key sectors, essentially organically, but I think there'll be a greater push

• 5:02Speaker 02

  from governments to really be much more aggressive in the antitrust perspective. And then fifth, one area, a fifth area that I think is going to absolutely define the post pandemic era, which was actually something, a trend that was happening before Covid hit in earnest, is there will be greater deglobalization. And just as an umbrella concept, deglobalization is about trade, it's about the movement of capital for investment, it's about the movement of people in terms of immigration, it's about the the commonality around standards, so such as intellectual property, and it's also very much about institutions

• 5:45Speaker 02

  that govern the global monetary and sort of trade and commerce environment, such as the Bretton Woods institutions, which were established in nineteen forty four, such as the World Bank and the IMF. I think, in fact, I know there was already trend lines showing that that the deglobalization, reduction in trade and capital, a stronger and more aggressive anti-immigration policies, the risk of a splinter net that you'll have a US-led and a China-led versus a China-led type of intellectual property war in technology space, and really the rise of alternative multilateralism.

• 6:27Speaker 02

  I think all of these aspects of deglobalization will gather momentum in the period post the pandemic. So those are the five things that I would say would highlight the post pandemic era.

• 6:39Scott Galloway?

  A couple of these things. When government's getting bigger, private sector getting smaller. My traditional capitalist DNA says that that results in a lower levels of output and productivity, and that is a bad thing. Where do I have that wrong? What are the good, what are the upsides and the bad sides of a shift to more resources to government coming out of the private sector?

• 6:59Speaker 02

  Well, I think you're not wrong on the superficial level, but I think there's an important caveat, and I should say an important assumption that you're making when you make that claim, which is to say that government is acting inefficiently or ineffectively. You know, we have had periods, and I should say, I'm like you, I'm very much a sort of red-blooded capitalist. I really do believe that the private sector needs an important central role in driving innovation, growing the GDP pie, improving livelihoods, and really driving human progress. So that is very much what I believe. But I also think that we oughtn't to forget that when you look back in history,

• 7:42Speaker 02

  and even recent history, in the United States, for example, the government has been a key player in a whole host of areas that have helped to drive the success of the private sector, whether it's through the Manhattan Project, or DARPA, or development of Silicon Valley, or even go back further in history. Exactly, touche. But also going back further in history, the notion that somebody somewhere with the help of state and ultimately federal government thought about high schools, developing a program or a template for education that could be broad-based. I mean, these are elements, and of course, infrastructure, are just a handful of elements where government,

• 8:25Speaker 02

  which acts on the data-driven, forward-leaning, measured outcomes, and in a non-corrupt way, can be incredibly catalytic for economic success.

• 8:36Scott Galloway?

  When I hear, so I'm going to use the S word, socialism. But I also want to acknowledge it's not necessarily a bad word. Seven of the 10 countries that report the happiest citizenship are socialist. So I want to use it just as an economic construct. It's not an insult. It's not a warning sign. I find a lot of people in the media are using socialism as some sort of cautionary tale. Like, oh, no socialism. But when I think about socialism, I think it's OK. When the state controls the means of production and how its spoils get divvied up. And it sounds like what you're predicting in a post pandemic world is roughly speaking, we're moving towards a more socialist construct.

• 9:15Speaker 02

  Well, I think, again, really depends very crucially on how those governments operate. If you end up with a government that is not really interested in growing the pie, but is more interested in redistributive approaches. I think, yeah, that is an outcome that we ought to all be dissatisfied with. That is not to say that we should be blind to concerns around income inequality getting worse, social mobility down by 50% in the United States over the last several decades, et cetera, et cetera. I mean, those are, you know, we have to be led and policy should be driven and curated based on the facts, which is that, you know, there are certainly losers, winners and losers in a more globalized capitalistic world.

• 10:00Speaker 02

  But, you know, I don't have any objections to socialist quote unquote states that where you see a bigger pie. And again, I'm using your terminology that I did in this context, the notion of socialism, meaning that government is much more involved as an arbiter of capital and labor as opposed to one in which the spoils are just, you know, they're just there to redistribute. I don't think that that is an environment that we should aspire to. And one example of work that I've done, my first book. Um. Which is now over ten years old, um, was really a critique of these large aid programs, which on paper seem very attractive. Oh, we want to help the poor and the best

• 10:43Speaker 02

  way we should help them is through the aid transfers. But you know what I was arguing that that is not the best way. And you actually create dependencies that are in longer term deleterious for economic progress and in ultimately for human, human progress as well. So that's, that's where I stand on this. I'm all for, for government, providing public goods such as infrastructure, providing um public goods such as uh as education and national security. Um. I have deep, deep reservations around um governments that only see themselves as, you know, essentially being short term in their thinking and very focused um on uh on redistribution and not much in terms of long term thinking.

• 11:24Scott Galloway?

  So the rescue package, the stimulus, the CARES Act, PPP loans, grade our response so far, our economic or fiscal or monetary response to the um crisis. What did we get right? What did we get wrong?

• 11:37Speaker 02

  I think the original approach um across the world was three things. I think it was one, um, multi, it was not multi dimensional. I think everybody interpreted it as being a healthcare problem first, and that all the advice came from healthcare experts. It was very little sort of, let's bring a bunch of experts around the table, uh, whether they're economists or socio anthropologists, et cetera. I think that was one era. Um. A second era is I think we didn't really view it as a long term problem. I think there was a lot of a sense that it would be quickly resolved. Um. We, we couldn't imagine that it would take on.

• 12:15Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, we just disappear.

• 12:16Speaker 02

  Yeah, that we just couldn't imagine. We were not, we have not planned for something that could happen for another couple of years. And even with the evidence that Spanish flu was from eighteen twenty, excuse me, I beg your pardon, nineteen eighteen to nineteen twenty, um, we still assumed we, we, you know, with technology and knowledge, we'd be speedily out of this situation. And yet here we are. Um. Now we have to face all the distribution issues around the vaccine, et cetera. The third thing, which I think we could have done better is this is a global healthcare problem. And yet we've all gone to our respective corners to solve it unilaterally. Um. So I think there, for me, especially somebody who's quite a globalist, uh, I think that that's a failure.

• 12:57Speaker 02

  Um, in, in a lack of coordination, very emblematic of, of some of the deglobalization points that I raised earlier. We're in a world where people um think that the world should be more Balkanized.

• 13:08Scott Galloway?

  Doesn't deglobalization, isn't, isn't that really a step backwards?

• 13:12Speaker 02

  Oh, from my vantage point, absolutely. But I mean, see, I, I am very much a big believer of what's offered or been proffered in textbooks around globalization. I think we should all produce in the world what we're best equipped to produce. Um, that's the fundamentals, comparative advantage or competitive advantage, however you want to, to describe it. And unfortunately, for a whole host of reasons, we've ended up in a world where places that should be doing certain things and, you know, I'll give an example of my home continent of origin, Africa, which is largely subsistence farmers, largely agricultural, it has the largest proportion of untilled arable land left on the planet. That economy, those economies really should

• 13:56Speaker 02

  be at the forefront of feeding themselves as well as the world. But you have subsidy programs which are very rational um in some respects, in more political respects than economic respects, because politicians want to win the state of Iowa and Idaho, et cetera. So they've got to pander and protect the markets of their farmers. And similarly, through the uh common agriculture policy in the European Union, they want to protect British farmers and French farmers. And so they lock out African and South American food producers. And as a consequence, we move, we move away from, from globalization. So I understand the rationale on paper, but you know, we all, we're all poor for it. You know, I, I

• 14:39Speaker 02

  wish we, we'd been a much more coordinated global world. But um, you know, it's a far cry, the reality is a far cry, what I'd call real politique is a far cry from what is uh, what is in textbooks.

• 14:52Scott Galloway?

  When you look at our economy and our policies, if there were one or two structural changes you would like to see implemented, what would they be?

• 14:58Speaker 02

  It's a great question. I actually published something on LinkedIn recently. I won't go through all of them. It was sort of three things we should start doing, three things we should stop doing, and three things we should keep doing. And this is for the for the United States. I won't go through all of them, but it's certainly the case that for the United States, for me, the biggest vulnerability is the political environment. It's far too short term. We're in a situation where the political infrastructure in democracies is misaligned from a lot of the long term problems that the global economy and the US economy faces, whether it's technology and the risk of a jobless underclass, demographic shifts that are leaving people unemployed, concerns about the environment. These are

• 15:43Speaker 02

  all long term. Income inequalities, these require deep thought and they require long term solutions, but our politicians are rewarded for short term thinking. The other thing, which is to me very obvious, and it's been frustrating to see decade after decade not really resolved with any gusto, is the is the sort of boosting the infrastructure. America's infrastructure is graded D plus by the American Civil Engineering Corps. You know, this is just not the the sort of backbone of a successful economy for the 21st century. And similarly, you know, education remains incredibly weak. Look at the OECD PISA statistics in mathematics,

• 16:24Speaker 02

  reading, science, American students are now, they used to be in the top three, now they're in the bottom 30 of the world in terms of rankings. And as you probably know, this generation of Americans, for the first time in the history of the country since 1776, will be less educated than the preceding generation. I mean, this is just not a formula for success, no matter what caveats people might attach to them. I think we really have a lot of work to do.

• 16:50Scott Galloway?

  Yeah, the short term thinking here, there's just so many examples, I think, of the H1B visas. If 50% of doctoral candidates are immigrants, and we've decided to take our secret sauce and and and stop it at the border, right? And then I but the ultimate manifestation, and I would be curious to get Your view here is mine, I'm a glass half empty kind of guy, is our skyrocketing deficits. We show up and we say, I know, we won't have to tax the rich more because they're my donors. And we'll throw bread and circuses at the populace and we'll borrow money against future generations. I mean, at what point do, my understanding is we have the budget this year that we were projected to have in 2044.

• 17:35Scott Galloway?

  We've exploded our deficits. At what point do the deficits begin to register at all on our current abilities? We know that long term, someone's got to have to pay this money back. But at what point does, you know, it's not a problem till it is a problem. When does it become a problem?

• 17:51Speaker 02

  Yeah, well, frankly, it becomes a problem when the people who are holding your debt no longer want to lend to you. And as you know, China, if it's not number one, it's usually number one or two. It's sort of the vibe for the first and second position between China and Japan. China is the largest foreign lender to the US government. I mean, this is just a vulnerability that to me seems so stark. You know, how can you have your biggest lender be in many respects your biggest rival? You're being very harsh in terms of trade, in terms of security, intellectual property, et cetera. But on the other hand, they're holding the largest amount of debt, which they can very easily put the squeeze on the US. Now, some people say, well, we're a reserve currency.

• 18:36Speaker 02

  Well, you know, I really do think that the world is changing incredibly quickly. And there needs to be a better recognition of what is at stake. And I worry that that's not the case. And the other reference to your question is have a look at the book that was written a number, a couple of years ago, a few years ago by Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart, two economists I really like a lot. They wrote a book called This Time It's Different. And they basically looked at nine hundred years of government debt. And they concluded that, you know, when government debt to GDP ratio goes over sixty percent, it becomes an incredibly dangerous precarious place, not only because of what I just said,

• 19:17Speaker 02

  who's, you know, who's lending to you, but also because your economic growth starts to slow considerably.

• 19:24Scott Galloway?

  Mm hmm.

• 19:25Speaker 02

  And, you know, just as a way of thinking about growth, you need to be growing at three percent per year in order to double per capita incomes in one generation. That's a generation being about twenty five years. So if you're growing below three percent and for governments that have sixty percent debt to GDP ratios, you're really growing at around two percent. You have enormous vulnerabilities, which could be anything from income inequality problems, but can very quickly seep into civil unrest and more deep seated challenges to the sort of viability and stability of an economy. Perhaps the last thing I would just point out is, as you know, the US debt to GDP ratio is now a hundred percent debt to GDP.

• 20:08Speaker 02

  Globally, debt to GDP is around three hundred and twenty percent. In terms of what can really be done, I think there are very few levers left, if any, for the United States, if they're not really sort of embarked upon in a very aggressive way.

• 20:27Scott Galloway?

  Coming up after the break.

• 20:29Speaker 02

  Boards need to have more visibility around ethical issues. And this is largely because we have a lot of ethical issues around data privacy, use of data privacy. You know, we all want a vaccine, we all want a cancer cure yesterday, as soon as possible. But, you know, what freedoms are we willing to sacrifice in order to speed that up?

• 20:52Scott Galloway?

  Stay with us.

• 20:56Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Nutraful, the number one dermatologist recommended hair growth supplement brand used by over one and a half million people. With age comes knowledge, patience, and for some, hair loss. Didn't say it was all good things. And for those who want to do something about it, there's Nutraful. Nutraful has formulas built for men at different life stages. They have Nutraful Men for guys age 18 to 49, plus the new Nutraful Men 50 and older. That's the first product of its kind specifically for men over 50. You can now address the key root causes of thinning wherever you are in life. Grow visibly thicker, fuller hair in just three to six months. Start Nutraful today and make the hat optional. Visit nutraful.com and enter promo code PROP G for $10 off your first month's subscription and free shipping.

• 21:41Scott Galloway?

  Find out why Nutraful is the best-selling hair growth supplement brand at nutraful.com, spelled N-U-T-R-A-F-O-L dot com, promo code PROP G. That's nutraful.com promo code PROP G. Support for the show comes from Upwork. Trying to scale your business? At some point, you're probably going to hit a point where you need some help. Sometimes, the best way to break through that is bringing in the right talent at the right time. Upwork can help. Upwork is a one-stop platform where you can find, hire, and pay expert freelancers across more than 125 categories. Whether you need specialized skills for a single project or extra support to keep up with demand, it's easy to connect with experienced professionals, review their work, and find the right fit.

• 22:26Scott Galloway?

  You can move faster without taking on the commitment of full-time hires. And for businesses that need the very best talent, Upwork Business Plus provides access to the top 1% of freelancers on the platform. AI-powered matching connects you with qualified candidates in under six hours, cutting down the time spent searching. Upwork also takes care of contracts, payments, and other administrative tasks, so you can spend less time managing logistics and more time focused on what's next. Visit upwork.com/propg right now and post your job for free. That's upwork.com/propg to connect with top talent ready to help your business grow. That's U-P-W-O-R-K dot com slash propg. Upwork.com/propg.

• 23:10Scott Galloway?

  And you serve on a bunch of corporate boards. I know you're interested or have written about corporate governance. What do you think are the one or two structural changes? Or what would you, how would you like to see boards of directors of public companies change?

• 23:21Speaker 02

  So, you know, just to give some context, I do have a book called How Boards Work. I think that there is a lot of a sort of a blind spot by a number of people, even even our own employees, about what the mandate for the board is, what levers boards have to influence change. Boards have been around since around 1674. And, you know, by and large, we haven't changed that much. I mean, in the margin, there have been some changes, but really fundamental change hasn't really been the case. I say that really with part temerity and part humility, because I think there's something to be said about a good governance structure. But on the other hand, I don't want to claim or to assert that other

• 24:04Speaker 02

  boards didn't have challenges. I mean, try being a board member in the middle of the World War I or World War II. It must have been incredibly difficult. So, you know, it is challenging, yes. However, I do think there are some specific opportunities. I think boards need to have more visibility around ethical issues as one area. So, you know, there are some companies that are going as far as thinking about having ethics committees on the board. And this is largely because we have a lot of ethical issues around data privacy, use of data privacy. You know, we all want a vaccine. In fact, we all want a cancer cure yesterday, as soon as possible. But, you know, what freedoms are we willing to sacrifice in order to speed that up? Do we want our pharmaceutical companies to do

• 24:48Speaker 02

  trials in a place like China where jurisdictions where the use of data is perhaps not as managed or policed as aggressively as the West? So that's a fundamental question. I mean, there are other questions such as ESG broadly defined, and I'll pick climate as one example. How do we think about climate and ESG compliance being, you know, is it comport with being an investor in China? Or is it against being an investor in China? I mean, this is, these are questions that I think ethics committees on a board or an ethics lens on a board will have to consider. The other one, another example of something I think would need to change, I mean, is in some respects obvious, but in other ways not. And that is really...

• 25:33Speaker 02

  We do need to have better understanding of trade offs. Um. I fear that there's a lot of campaigning, a lot of very aggressive policing of, you know, twenty first century capitalism boards specifically, I mean, there's campaigns to defend companies, but there's just a lack of understanding about the importance of corporations and um their role in the world. If I may give you a very quick example, on the one hand, um, you know, we are all, I mean, I think there are very few people who are climate change deniers. I think the evidence is is pretty clear that uh human beings are contributing to the heating of of the world. But, you know, on on one hand, we have to do something about climate change.

• 26:14Speaker 02

  On the other hand, we can't be so reckless as to just turn the lights out when there are about, you know, one point five billion people on the planet who don't have access to energy in a cost effective and sustainable sort of stable way. This is a problem because, you know, i- we might solve one problem, i.e. we turn out the lights um because we want a sort of more sustainable energy approach. But on the other hand, we leave a lot of people incredibly impoverished, no access to education, um and you create another problem because then you have mass disorderly migration. Um, you know, I like to to encourage people to think about right now. We spend so much time on Zoom screens and really heavily dependent

• 26:56Speaker 02

  on uh on virtual and uh electronics as you and I are doing right now. Um, but the truth is, if you're sitting in in a place like my home country of Zambia, you know, for seventeen, eighteen hours a day, you don't have any, you know, any electricity because of load shedding. And it's same is true in places like South Africa. It's a very specific example, but it's a very generalized problem that we cannot and boards should not be in a place where they're being forced to uh answer questions without thinking more generally about trade offs and and broader concerns for society.

• 27:31Scott Galloway?

  So to wrap up two things, I want to do a lightning round with you, but I want to give you the ability to pass because some of these questions, someone as thoughtful with your credentials doesn't want to, just want to give a three or five second answer. In a decade, global superpower, China or the US or other?

• 27:46Speaker 02

  Could it be both of them? Or what does, what does other mean? Somebody else?

• 27:50Scott Galloway?

  I was thinking somebody else, but say more, say more.

• 27:53Speaker 02

  I, I, I think that it will be finely tuned. I think that both economies will be important players in different, in different areas and there's going to be forced cooperation, 50/50.

• 28:05Scott Galloway?

  Well, that's optimistic. I think that's actually probably a decent outcome.

• 28:10Speaker 02

  That's what my portfolio says.

• 28:12Scott Galloway?

  And do you, stock market, NASDAQ, up or down next, call it next 24 months?

• 28:18Speaker 02

  Up.

• 28:20Scott Galloway?

  Up?

• 28:21Speaker 02

  Yeah.

• 28:22Scott Galloway?

  Number, number of households that are food insecure in the US, up or down over the next five years?

• 28:26Speaker 02

  I'd say up. I think the number is one in seven in the US. I'm, I fear it's going to be higher. Yeah.

• 28:32Scott Galloway?

  And do you think that we as a nation become less or more polarized?

• 28:36Speaker 02

  I'm afraid it's probably going to be more polarized.

• 28:40Scott Galloway?

  So let me just add to that. If there's more food insecurity, which sounds like more income inequality, if we become more polarized, isn't the risk of revolution much greater over the next five or seven years in the US?

• 28:51Speaker 02

  Well, I would say in principle, risk of anything, yes, is, is rising. But I, I think at the same time, the institutions in the United States are becoming more transparent, more inclusive. I think what needs to be done is, is greater conversation. And, you know, I'm, I'm, I've been reading this book, I'm actually rereading a book called The Art of Thinking Clearly, which came out a number of years ago, but it's really interesting because we make, there's so many fallacies, so many assumptions made about what quote unquote, the other side think. And so I think really public policy's duty and the next, you know, certainly generation, but certainly the next five years or so is really to try and bring people together, having proper conversations about what America means, what

• 29:34Speaker 02

  it's supposed to be and how it's going to get to that place, as opposed to pointing fingers. And I've talked about this. I think one of the weaknesses in the country, which I really love living in America. But one of the challenges has been it's been too easy to blame someone else. It's always China's fault or it's globalization's fault. And there's no real acknowledgement that we've made some catastrophic errors that need to be rectified. So I'm optimistic about the US because I think they're very quick to to solve problems.

• 30:02Scott Galloway?

  And last question, advice to your 25 year old self, or specifically, we have a very young viewership on the podcast here. What advice would you offer them?

• 30:11Speaker 02

  I would say two things. One is things take time. Don't try and be clever. You know, we've all looked for shortcuts. They don't exist, so you've got to do your time, basically. And the other one is no doesn't mean never. It just means not now, which I think is really important. People, they get told no, and they think it's the end of the world. When actually, it just might mean that you need to work a little bit harder or differently. And so you really shouldn't be discouraged. It just doesn't mean never. It just means not now.

• 30:39Scott Galloway?

  Dr. Dambisa Moyo is a global economist and bestselling author who influences key decision makers in strategic investment and public policy. A trusted advisor on macroeconomics, geopolitics and technology themes, and serves on a number of global corporate boards, including 3M, Chevron and Conde Nast. She worked at the World Bank and Goldman Sachs for nearly a decade and joins us from her home. And where are you, doctor? Where are you right now?

• 31:03Speaker 02

  New York City.

• 31:04Scott Galloway?

  In New York, greatest city in the world, greatest city in the world.

• 31:07Speaker 02

  So nice, they had to name it twice.

• 31:15Scott Galloway?

  We'll be right back.

• 31:19Scott Galloway?

  Support for the show comes from Vanta. As AI adoption grows, so does your company's security risks and requirements. New frameworks, audits and vendors keep piling on, but your team isn't getting any bigger. Most compliance tools promise automation, but you're really stuck doing all the work by hand, chasing screenshots, validating controls and playing catch up. When audit season comes around again. Vanta works differently. The regentech trust platform is built to scale with you, not slow you down. With over 1,400 automated tests across 400-plus integrations, Vanta collects evidence and monitors your controls year-round, cutting your audit prep by 82%. Plus, you can access the Vanta agent everywhere you work, whether your team is in Vanta every day or living in tools including Claude or Cursor. Want proof?

• 32:04Scott Galloway?

  Over 16,000 fast-growing companies like Ramp, Rider, and Harvey save time and resources while scaling fast with Vanta. Learn more at vanta.com/profg and get $1,000 off. That's spelled V-A-N-T-A dot com slash prof G for $1,000 off.

• 32:25Speaker 03

  Blowing ad budget on metrics that look great till the CFO sees them? That's bull spend. And marketers are calling it out in Dashboard Confessions.

• 32:34Speaker 04

  I remember telling my boss, "It'll be good for the brand," when leads were slow. Yeah, it wasn't.

• 32:42Speaker 03

  Cut the bull spend. LinkedIn lets you target by company, job title, and more. Advertise on LinkedIn. Spend $250 on your first campaign and get a $250 credit. Go to LinkedIn.com/campaign. Terms and conditions apply.

• 33:03Scott Galloway?

  Algebra of happiness. I've found that when I had kids, I was working around the clock. And one of the most rewarding things I remember about having kids at home or babies, we had a newborn and a three-year-old at home. I was working pretty much around the clock in Manhattan. And when I would head home, I remember I would come down 10th Street and make a right on 4th Avenue. And right when I made that right, I'd start walking faster. And I was just so excited to see my new family. It was just such a... A wonderful feel to have people you love and who love you. And there's nothing like the welcome you get from kids when they're at that age where they still like dad or daddy. It was just wonderful.

• 33:48Scott Galloway?

  And that last 100 meters. By the way, once I saw them, they were great for 10 minutes and then they just turned into total needy jerks. I found that anticipation was one of the most rewarding things about being a dad. Whenever I would get on a plane home, I would immediately just get kind of this strange sense of impatience and a little bit of anxiety, but mostly hopefulness and anticipation of getting to see my family. But as soon as I got to the airport after a client engagement or a meeting, that anticipation and that excitement would build. And the closer I would get to home and then finally to that last 100 meters was just wonderful. And I think that's been one of the nicest. If I look back on the film that is my life, jeez, that'd be one fucked up documentary.

• 34:32Scott Galloway?

  You don't want to see that on your Netflix home screen. Anyways, the frames that were really rewarding or burned brightest for me weren't necessarily even being with people, weren't necessarily even going on some great vacation. It was the anticipation. So where does this take us? Build some anticipation in your life. Build some frames that you can look forward to. Call people that you love, that you haven't seen in a while, whether it's friends, whether it's grandparents, and put something on the calendar and then call them, call them, and create anticipation. Create that last 100 meters. Create a sense of wanting and longing. And even if you have, even if something happens where you have to cancel, the best thing for me about seeing people, about vacations, about doing something wonderful, has been the last 100 meters before that thing happens.

• 35:16Scott Galloway?

  Build the last 100 meters in your life. Start making plans and reach out to people and give them that last 100 meters. Make some trips, put some things on the calendar, and then express to people, tell them how excited you are to do this, but more specifically to do this with them.

• 35:34Scott Galloway?

  Our producers are Caroline Shager and Drew Burrows. Claire Miller is our assistant producer. If you like what you heard, please follow, download and subscribe. Thank you for listening to the Prop G Show from the Vox Media Podcast Network. We'll catch you next week on Monday and Thursday.

• 35:49Speaker 05

  They're running a Cover 2 defense. But you're running to get game day deals on Uber Eats. Keep everyone at tonight's watch party fed with deals from your go-to restaurants. Or stock up with deals on your favorite snacks and groceries. Whatever the occasion, get game day deals on Uber Eats all season long. It's not football without food. Uber Eats. Order now. Terms apply. Product availability varies by region. See app for details.

• 36:19Speaker 06

  Now at Kroger, your points add up to more ways to save every trip. Use them your way to take dollars off groceries at checkout or save at the pump. You can even save up to $35 on your next fill-up. Same points, more choices. And with low prices on fresh, quality food, plus digital and personalized offers tailored to how you shop, your dollar goes further. Redeem your points online or in the app. Kroger. Fresh for everyone. Restrictions apply. See site or store for details.