Real Coffee with Scott Adams - March 03, 2021


Episode 1302 Scott Adams： Texas Chooses Freedom, AOC and the Minimum Wage, and Dr. Seuss


Episode Stats

Length

59 minutes

Words per Minute

144.90497

Word Count

8,562

Sentence Count

568

Misogynist Sentences

8

Hate Speech Sentences

23


Summary

The BBC apologizes for an interview with a fake Cory Booker, and Scott Adams talks about why he thinks the real Cory Booker is better than the fake one. Plus, a lot of other stuff, including the latest in the war on immigration.


Transcript

00:00:00.000 Boom, boom, boom, boom.
00:00:02.460 Boom, boom, boom, boom.
00:00:05.700 Well, today is going to be one of the best coffees with Scott Adams of all time.
00:00:15.820 I'm going to say that again, but make it sound like extreme sports.
00:00:21.420 Today, coffee with Scott Adams, extreme.
00:00:26.040 It's better that way.
00:00:27.120 It really is.
00:00:27.680 If you'd like to make it even more extreme, even better, what would it take?
00:00:34.880 Hmm.
00:00:35.740 Would it take a cup of mugger glasses, tankard, chalice, justine, a canteen juggernaut flask,
00:00:39.580 a vessel of any kind?
00:00:40.960 Yes, it would.
00:00:43.240 And I recommend filling that vessel with the liquid of your choice.
00:00:48.700 Any kind.
00:00:49.620 For the dopamine push of the day, the thing that makes everything better.
00:00:53.800 It's called the simultaneous sip.
00:00:55.640 Yeah, it's that good.
00:00:56.840 It's that good.
00:00:58.160 Don't miss it.
00:00:58.940 Here it comes.
00:00:59.600 Go!
00:01:03.320 Ah.
00:01:04.480 I feel so bad for the people who missed this.
00:01:07.660 Don't you?
00:01:08.500 A little bit.
00:01:09.340 A little bit of guilt.
00:01:11.700 Well, let's talk about all the things.
00:01:14.300 Possibly my favorite story of the day.
00:01:16.880 You might not have heard this yet.
00:01:18.300 Apparently, the BBC, and in this context, the BBC refers to the British Broadcasting Corporation.
00:01:27.800 If you thought BBC meant something else, well, you've been spending a little bit too much time on the wrong websites, or the right websites.
00:01:37.560 I'm not going to make a judgment.
00:01:38.560 But anyway, the BBC, the one that does news, has apologized for airing an interview with someone posing as Senator Booker.
00:01:48.820 Is that perfect?
00:01:53.280 So apparently some imposter called up saying he was Senator Booker, Cory Booker, and did an entire interview on the BBC.
00:02:01.240 Now, here's my first question.
00:02:05.220 Was the interview by the fake Cory Booker better or worse than the real Cory Booker?
00:02:13.060 Because what is missing from the story is all the crazy stuff that the imposter said.
00:02:19.760 What if the imposter was just as good as the original?
00:02:23.720 What if they couldn't tell?
00:02:26.380 Do we need an original if the imposter does just as well?
00:02:30.020 Well, I suppose we did.
00:02:32.120 Yes, and the joke is, I am not Spartacus.
00:02:36.820 Sometimes, sometimes you think I'm Spartacus, but I'm not actually Spartacus.
00:02:42.740 Maybe he's Spartacus.
00:02:45.840 Definitely not me.
00:02:47.120 I'm not Spartacus.
00:02:48.640 But that guy looks a little Spartacus-y, if you know what I'm talking about.
00:02:53.320 Go talk to him.
00:02:55.660 So what happens, now this was a radio interview.
00:02:58.900 I should have mentioned that.
00:03:00.560 So it was audio only, so it's easier to fake.
00:03:03.400 But what happens, what happens when somebody can make a deep fake that just mimics their own mouth motions?
00:03:16.240 So you think you're calling in on a Zoom to do an interview or something, and somebody just puts up a fake.
00:03:22.240 How far are we from an entire fake video answering interview questions?
00:03:31.120 Now, it would require a real person behind the scenes.
00:03:33.720 I'm not talking about AI.
00:03:35.860 But AI pretty soon, too, right?
00:03:38.460 Pretty soon, 20 years, it's going to take longer for an AI to look exactly like a human in terms of how it acts.
00:03:44.680 But maybe not 20, maybe 10.
00:03:49.660 I've noticed a difference in my trolls.
00:03:53.200 My trolls are very, very different lately.
00:03:57.160 These days, my trolls come in, and they blame me publicly, on Twitter usually, for not criticizing Trump on some topic that I did criticize Trump.
00:04:10.420 So it's not like I haven't criticized him.
00:04:16.480 But all of my trolls are coming in and saying,
00:04:19.220 why didn't you say something when Trump was putting kids in cages?
00:04:23.200 To which I say, I did.
00:04:26.120 I did.
00:04:27.260 And why didn't you say something when Trump wasn't doing all the right things in the pandemic?
00:04:32.980 To which I say, I did.
00:04:35.720 I did do that.
00:04:37.080 So, I've completely run out of trolls.
00:04:41.600 Can somebody put out the word that I'm under-trolled?
00:04:45.740 It's just not the same.
00:04:47.900 I don't want people who agree with me trying to troll me.
00:04:51.580 Can I get somebody who disagrees?
00:04:54.460 Please, just somebody who disagrees with me.
00:04:57.920 Could you troll me?
00:05:00.000 Anybody.
00:05:01.120 Just somebody who's got a different opinion.
00:05:04.420 I miss you.
00:05:05.600 I miss you.
00:05:06.180 The good trolls.
00:05:09.100 Well, Texas and Mississippi are leading the way.
00:05:12.220 And I'm going to give Texas the big credit here.
00:05:15.660 So the governor has said, Governor Abbott has said, Texas is going to open up.
00:05:20.720 Every business is allowed to open.
00:05:23.060 Of course, the businesses can decide on their own.
00:05:25.620 But they're allowed to open.
00:05:26.700 And there is no state mandate for masks.
00:05:30.020 Now, does saying there is no state mandate for masks mean that everybody will stop wearing masks?
00:05:38.460 No.
00:05:39.460 No.
00:05:40.180 No, it doesn't mean that.
00:05:41.440 Do you know why?
00:05:42.640 Because Texans are not a bunch of frickin' morons.
00:05:46.720 Surprise.
00:05:48.200 Surprise.
00:05:49.240 Turns out there's a lot of smart, responsible people living in Texas.
00:05:53.200 And those who damn well better protect themselves until they get the vaccination.
00:05:59.040 Yeah, they'll wear masks.
00:06:00.220 Or they'll not socially mingle with people who might be infected.
00:06:05.580 So I think you can trust, at least at this point.
00:06:09.360 I don't think you can trust it early on in the pandemic because people were not as well informed, not as well trained.
00:06:16.120 But I think you can trust that the people in Texas who are at risk will make the damn decision themselves.
00:06:24.260 They will make the decision.
00:06:25.900 Now, let's talk about whether Texas is doing the right thing or the wrong thing.
00:06:30.940 How many of you are positive that Texas is doing the right thing?
00:06:37.160 And then how many of you are positive that it's the wrong thing?
00:06:41.140 It's too early.
00:06:42.280 Or as the governor of California said, it's reckless.
00:06:45.400 It's reckless.
00:06:47.460 Well, here's the argument.
00:06:50.840 And you have to look at all the variables.
00:06:52.800 If you look at one variable, of course, you're being dumb.
00:06:55.880 So, variable number one, will opening up Texas lead to more infections and death?
00:07:02.660 What do you think?
00:07:03.820 Do you think that Texas opening up is pretty much guaranteed to have some extra deaths?
00:07:11.860 We don't know how many, hoping it's not a new surge.
00:07:15.480 But when you say reasonably, it's fair to say there will be more deaths if you loosen up a little bit.
00:07:21.520 Now, even if you're arguing that Sweden did well, etc., they still had extra deaths.
00:07:28.640 So, I don't think anybody's arguing that there won't be extra deaths, right?
00:07:33.100 Are we on the same page?
00:07:35.440 That Texas is pretty much guaranteed by their actions to have some extra deaths.
00:07:42.220 Now, anybody who says no, I think you're just not informed.
00:07:44.840 Because there's no expert who thinks that the measures have zero effect.
00:07:52.360 There are plenty of people who say, I don't know if it's enough of an effect to be worth the pain it's causing.
00:07:59.200 But I don't believe there's anybody who says, anybody who's an expert,
00:08:03.060 who says that you'd have exactly the same death rate no matter what you do.
00:08:06.900 I don't believe anybody says that.
00:08:08.220 At least in terms of the virus.
00:08:12.120 They might say it in terms of net, but not in terms of the virus.
00:08:16.580 So, is it the right decision or the wrong decision?
00:08:20.140 Here's the best argument I heard.
00:08:22.860 And I would recommend this as a good filter on this question.
00:08:27.660 Question number one.
00:08:29.320 Does the government know the right answer for you?
00:08:33.800 Say you are one individual, you live in Texas.
00:08:38.700 You're just one person.
00:08:40.080 You're not an average person.
00:08:42.120 Because nobody is the average.
00:08:44.140 Everybody's a person.
00:08:46.920 Does Texas know what would be the best thing for you, specifically?
00:08:52.140 I'm not talking about what's best for the state.
00:08:54.720 But does Texas know what's best for you, specifically?
00:08:57.480 The answer is no.
00:08:58.380 Because if our government was so well-informed and our science was so accurate that the government
00:09:07.080 could say something like, look, there's a 99% chance that what we're doing is the right thing.
00:09:13.900 I know it's inconvenient.
00:09:15.200 I know people are going to have lots of costs.
00:09:17.780 But we're 99% sure we're doing the right thing in general.
00:09:21.560 Now, if that were the situation, I would feel that the government had some moral right.
00:09:31.660 In other words, if they're really, they got good information, they're trying to save the
00:09:36.220 most lives they can, I feel as if they do have a moral right to maybe force people like
00:09:42.200 me to do some things I don't want to do.
00:09:44.420 In the short run.
00:09:45.840 Right?
00:09:46.060 I don't have a big problem with that concept.
00:09:48.600 But what happens if the government doesn't know what to do?
00:09:51.560 What if the government is not sure if keeping things closed is better net, if you look at
00:10:00.480 the net effect of mental health and everything else, suicides, drug addictions, what if the
00:10:05.500 government itself can't tell?
00:10:08.840 It can't tell if it's good for you or not.
00:10:11.960 Well, then you default to personal freedom.
00:10:16.160 That is the correct decision.
00:10:17.840 We live in a country where the correct default, the thing you do if you don't know what to
00:10:23.920 do, is individual freedom.
00:10:27.060 Now, if we had really strong indication that that so-called individual freedom would lead
00:10:32.720 to a catastrophe of untold proportions, well, then I think the state government has a role
00:10:39.020 in being the adult in the room and forcing you to do what you don't want to do because
00:10:43.820 it's good for everybody, right?
00:10:45.180 There can be those situations.
00:10:46.820 But this isn't that.
00:10:48.960 We are close enough to the end of the pandemic, whether it's six months from now or whatever
00:10:54.280 it is, that I do think that Texas has a completely valid argument that they, Texas, can't tell.
00:11:04.420 They can't tell what's good for you.
00:11:07.460 And if you can't tell, there is only one morally and ethically responsible thing to do.
00:11:14.860 Leave it to the people.
00:11:15.720 Now, educate them as much as you can, right?
00:11:18.600 Do as much as you can to minimize risk.
00:11:23.160 But you have to default to freedom in this situation.
00:11:26.800 Now, should everybody do it?
00:11:30.660 Do you think all of the other states, California, should just say, ah, Texas is doing it, let's
00:11:36.080 do it?
00:11:37.220 Nope.
00:11:38.460 No.
00:11:38.780 Now, even if you think that what Texas is doing is 100% the right thing to do, that does
00:11:44.360 not mean that the other states should do it.
00:11:48.040 Because I'm in California, we'll probably stay locked down longer than other people.
00:11:52.260 Even in California, although I am jealous, I'm envious of the Texans who have more freedom
00:11:59.660 than I have, I'm okay waiting.
00:12:02.440 And the reason I'm okay waiting is that I don't mind Texas being the control, the control
00:12:10.880 case, right?
00:12:12.320 I would like to see if Texas runs into a big problem because they're handling things differently,
00:12:18.180 but I want to keep California the same just long enough to know for sure, all right?
00:12:25.220 I feel as if it's worth risking a state or two to leave them behind long enough to see
00:12:31.380 if there's some big difference.
00:12:33.180 If it happens to be my state, that's not ideal, but whether or not my state had changed things,
00:12:38.760 I probably would have acted the same or very similarly.
00:12:42.460 I mean, I could have gone to more places, but I probably would have stayed out of, you
00:12:47.360 know, even if the restaurant said you could go there for full capacity, put yourself in
00:12:53.820 my shoes, I've got asthma, I'll be 64 in a few months.
00:13:00.080 So I'm sort of on the edge of the bubble, depending on your point of view, of risky, risky people.
00:13:07.920 If California opened up like Texas, I wouldn't go back to normal because I might have only
00:13:14.000 one more month before I'm vaccinated, maybe a month.
00:13:20.560 I'll tell you, my personal risk management assessment is if it's really one month,
00:13:26.820 and I think it is, before I get vaccinated, I'm going to be extra careful for one month.
00:13:32.820 Does that not make sense?
00:13:36.160 That I should be extra careful?
00:13:38.620 Because now that it's only one month, that's not big risk to save my life, you know, if
00:13:44.140 there's some deadly risk.
00:13:46.340 If it were six months, maybe I'd say, ah, I've got to live.
00:13:50.080 But one month?
00:13:51.340 I can wait one month, you know?
00:13:53.980 I'm going to...
00:13:55.200 And I think a lot of Texans, especially anybody over 60, is going to say the same thing.
00:14:01.040 You know, if they want to take the risk, they have the option now.
00:14:04.360 So I think this is great.
00:14:06.320 I just don't know that you could say with any confidence that it will work, as well as
00:14:12.180 they hope it will, but it's great that they've made the decision with this bias, a bias toward
00:14:18.800 freedom.
00:14:19.600 Every time you see a bias toward freedom, you've got to be happy about that, right?
00:14:24.480 Even if it's the wrong, even if it works out poorly, you've sort of got to be glad that
00:14:30.900 Texas exists.
00:14:32.340 So thanks for Texas.
00:14:35.540 You know, I keep watching this developing situation of immigration and, you know, the
00:14:40.580 more unattended kids, and I guess the predictions are over 100,000 unattended kids will show up,
00:14:47.000 and there does seem to be clear indication that the smugglers are, you know, the people who
00:14:53.380 smuggled the kids across the border, that they've stepped up operations because they think Biden
00:14:58.880 will be soft on immigration.
00:15:00.940 And they seem to be right.
00:15:03.540 So given that every Republican in the world said, hey, if you make it desirable and easy
00:15:10.980 and better to come to the United States than staying where you will, where you are, you'll
00:15:15.960 get more people.
00:15:16.580 And sure enough, that's exactly what's happening.
00:15:20.300 Now, I feel like what's different and special about this border situation is you had such
00:15:25.720 a clear Democrat standard of what you could or could not do at the border.
00:15:34.520 And I don't think they're going to be able to hold it because they're either going to create
00:15:38.640 a humanitarian disaster by being too good to people, which looks like that's developing,
00:15:43.680 or they're going to have to change the policy and make it like Trump.
00:15:49.640 So what happens if this, and what's special about the border situation is you don't have
00:15:55.080 to wait a long time to see how it turned out.
00:15:57.660 How long would it take you to find out if something you did for the Green New Deal worked?
00:16:03.560 It could take decades, right?
00:16:05.080 You might not know for years and years whether the vast expenses or changes you're doing for
00:16:11.780 the Green New Deal are going to work.
00:16:13.680 But with the border stuff, I think we'll know with complete certainty within one year,
00:16:20.180 right?
00:16:20.960 Within one year, I don't think we'll be arguing whether letting everybody in and being friendly
00:16:27.920 to the children and especially kind, we're not going to wonder what that did, because
00:16:33.120 we'll just look at it.
00:16:34.080 We'll know.
00:16:35.080 So what happens if it's a disaster?
00:16:37.460 Because it looks like it's shaping up that way.
00:16:40.400 But honestly, I would still like to bet on the government.
00:16:47.140 I know that's the worst bet, betting on the government to do anything right.
00:16:51.400 It's a terrible bet.
00:16:52.320 But the thing I don't do, that a lot of you in my audience do, is that just because I can't
00:16:59.820 figure out how something could be done, I don't assume that it can't be done.
00:17:04.960 Now, in my mind, I can't think of any way that making it really, really easy and desirable
00:17:10.420 to get into this country illegally, I don't see any way that could work.
00:17:14.900 But I'm also open to maybe somebody does.
00:17:19.800 Maybe we test something.
00:17:23.780 I've always wondered what would happen if you built a special opportunity zone right along
00:17:29.920 the southern border of the United States.
00:17:32.600 I'm just going to toss this idea out here.
00:17:35.020 Suppose the United States says we're going to build a zone where you can move your manufacturing
00:17:40.500 from China to here, and for however many years you won't pay any taxes or there'd be tax rebates.
00:17:49.600 Maybe there's no minimum wage.
00:17:51.980 And what you would do is build this manufacturing zone that would absorb the people coming over
00:17:58.740 the border.
00:17:59.720 So they would come over the border, but then they would learn English and they would learn
00:18:04.300 a skill.
00:18:05.360 They would have a job.
00:18:06.480 They'd be doing something that's good for the country.
00:18:08.140 And they wouldn't even get into the interior of the country, because you would have a whole
00:18:12.080 zone which would be the very best place for them to go, because it would be built for
00:18:17.800 them.
00:18:18.500 It would be built for a place that wants as many employees as they can get.
00:18:22.700 Come on over.
00:18:23.740 But it would be American-owned and run.
00:18:26.620 And you would just use it as an immigration control that has the secondary benefit of reducing
00:18:34.700 our dependence on China.
00:18:37.020 Could you do that?
00:18:37.840 I don't know.
00:18:38.840 So I don't know if any of that would be practical or economic.
00:18:41.560 But you can imagine really creative ways to approach immigration, which, as AOC says, and I'm
00:18:51.500 the only person on this live stream who's willing to say this, I like the fact that she wants to do
00:19:00.560 something that we don't know how to do.
00:19:02.020 I like that.
00:19:03.740 I want my leaders to be pushing us to do things that look kind of impossible.
00:19:10.920 And this looks kind of impossible.
00:19:13.640 Being kind to people on the border at the same time you're controlling your own country's fate.
00:19:20.460 I don't know how to do it.
00:19:22.120 Do you?
00:19:23.160 I don't know anybody who knows how to do it.
00:19:24.860 But AOC is pushing it without knowing how to do it.
00:19:28.460 I don't hate that.
00:19:30.600 We can't do it until we know how to do it.
00:19:34.520 But I can't hate the fact that she pushes the impossible.
00:19:38.420 I kind of like it.
00:19:39.940 I think that's, you know, mentally that's where I like to be, is, you know, how do we do the
00:19:44.820 impossible as opposed to saying, well, that's impossible.
00:19:48.380 Walk away.
00:19:49.100 Can't do it.
00:19:49.680 So I think she's a valuable asset, even if you think all of her ideas are bad.
00:19:55.940 But what's going to happen with the kids in cages situation should have some carryover effect
00:20:01.040 to other Democrat stuff.
00:20:03.540 What happens if the, let's say hypothetically, and it looks like it's heading in that direction,
00:20:08.680 let's say the disaster or the immigration policies of the Biden administration become
00:20:14.560 an unambiguous disaster.
00:20:18.460 So much so that even Democrats say, oh, this is a disaster.
00:20:22.880 It didn't work.
00:20:24.140 What would happen to their other policies?
00:20:26.680 Because isn't the main problem with Democrat policies that they have somewhat lofty objectives,
00:20:33.820 which you might like, you know, everybody's doing well and making money and there's fairness
00:20:38.260 and equality.
00:20:39.080 Those things all sound great.
00:20:40.680 Who's against any of that?
00:20:42.100 But if you don't know how to get there, that's a problem.
00:20:44.700 So I'm thinking that even the Green New Deal will suffer if the immigration thing falls
00:20:49.200 apart, because it will feel the same.
00:20:53.260 Immigration has this weird quality where you say to yourself, wait a minute, human nature
00:20:58.840 guarantees that your plan can't work.
00:21:01.840 And I think people will just take that thinking to other Democrat policies.
00:21:05.920 So I think the Democrats are really in trouble with immigration, not just because of immigration.
00:21:13.640 Here's a question to you.
00:21:16.940 And I'll base this on overhearing something the other day.
00:21:20.340 I was in a position the other day to overhear some teens talking about, you know, I'm going
00:21:30.100 to be as generic as possible, talking about lifestyle things and, you know, some things that would
00:21:36.100 be in the general social discussion, let's say.
00:21:40.340 And I was blown away.
00:21:43.860 I mean, absolutely blown away.
00:21:45.700 Because things coming out of the mouths of young people, very unfamiliar to what I would
00:21:52.160 have heard in my day.
00:21:53.720 Is it better or is it worse?
00:21:56.000 Probably better.
00:21:57.520 Probably better.
00:21:58.440 Because what I heard was an insane amount of lack of bigotry.
00:22:05.340 Insane.
00:22:05.980 Like a kind of an open-mindedness that is just shocking in a good way.
00:22:16.740 It's shockingly healthy to hear young people with not even a trace of what you would have
00:22:25.600 considered, I guess, a normal amount of bigotry, sexism, anti-whatever, anti-this or that.
00:22:32.000 It's really weird.
00:22:32.660 But at the same time, the young people will talk quite bluntly about ethnicity.
00:22:39.560 Like that's very much on the top of people's thoughts, you know, this group and this.
00:22:44.740 But it has more to do with cliques and who's friends with who.
00:22:47.380 And it doesn't seem to be about race.
00:22:49.920 It seems more about who's hanging out with who.
00:22:52.740 But I'll tell you, if you want to feel or see the future, if you want to see the future,
00:23:01.720 you've got to listen to kids talking candidly.
00:23:05.120 It's pretty positive.
00:23:07.560 But here's the bigger question I have.
00:23:10.120 Could you teach kids, if you get them young, to be politically independent?
00:23:15.220 You could.
00:23:19.240 But would we?
00:23:20.360 Because you'd be taking away the parents' responsibility in some sense.
00:23:24.640 Because, you know, you think the parents are the ones who should determine their opinions
00:23:28.820 as opposed to the school.
00:23:31.540 But I wonder if you couldn't teach young kids that blindly joining a political party
00:23:38.880 and assuming that everything that one party says is right
00:23:42.040 and everything the other party says is wrong,
00:23:45.320 couldn't you teach them just that that's always wrong?
00:23:48.740 Just to prepare them for the fact that the other side sometimes is right?
00:23:54.300 I feel as if you could prime them to make them a little bit more fluid in later life
00:23:59.820 about whether they would, you know, cross party lines
00:24:03.480 or just be open-minded to stuff.
00:24:06.340 So I know you couldn't teach a kid to be a Republican or a Democrat
00:24:10.560 because that would be way over the line.
00:24:12.800 But couldn't you teach them how to not fall into a team mentality?
00:24:18.440 And you don't even have to mention which team you're talking about.
00:24:21.140 Just don't make your decisions based on the team.
00:24:24.400 That's it.
00:24:25.460 I think you could.
00:24:26.520 You could get them young enough.
00:24:27.780 It seems like that would be valuable
00:24:29.220 because most of our current problems are this team play stuff.
00:24:36.780 There was an article on February 21st in the Wall Street Journal
00:24:40.480 by Martin Koldorf.
00:24:43.880 Koldorf seems to know what he's talking about from Johns Hopkins.
00:24:48.100 So he's, you know, a medical professional from a credible place.
00:24:52.860 And he's saying that in this article, it's now a few weeks old,
00:24:56.820 that the number of COVID cases, that how rapidly it dropped in January,
00:25:03.040 can't be explained by the holiday traffic.
00:25:08.400 Now, I had been saying, duh, infections are down because it's not Christmas anymore.
00:25:14.340 And you could pretty much track the holidays or the spikes.
00:25:18.060 And then after the holidays, things calm down.
00:25:20.500 It's pretty universal.
00:25:22.160 And so I thought it was pretty clear.
00:25:24.940 To me, it seemed, I could be wrong,
00:25:28.180 but to me, it seems really obvious
00:25:30.300 that the traveling for the holidays is the big, big problem.
00:25:35.100 And that when it's done, you would get less of it.
00:25:39.380 And it makes sense to me because I would think
00:25:41.020 if I were to put the single biggest variable,
00:25:45.600 it would have to be the amount of time you spend indoors
00:25:48.560 with bad ventilation.
00:25:52.660 So I'm not counting, let's say, if you're in Africa or India
00:25:56.380 and you always have your windows open because it's always hot.
00:25:59.440 So that's different.
00:26:01.060 But if you're indoors with the windows closed,
00:26:02.980 it's how many people are coming in and out
00:26:05.780 and are in close contact.
00:26:07.800 It's probably just that.
00:26:09.980 When I say just, it's probably 60% of all infections
00:26:13.740 are exactly that,
00:26:15.700 something that happens in your own house or in a house.
00:26:19.480 So I don't know how holidays could not be the explanation
00:26:24.820 of most of the dip,
00:26:26.360 but his claim is that the only way to explain it
00:26:30.200 would be if people have T-cell immunity
00:26:33.500 from related coronaviruses maybe,
00:26:36.860 or there's way more infections,
00:26:38.660 so we have more herd immunity than we know.
00:26:42.560 What do you think?
00:26:43.980 Do you think that we can just look at this data?
00:26:48.440 Can we just look at the curves and look at the data
00:26:50.920 and make the conclusion that it's T-cell immunity?
00:26:57.500 I feel like that's a little too far.
00:27:01.000 I feel like we don't have the data to say that that's the case.
00:27:05.480 But his case is,
00:27:07.020 it's an argument by ruling out the other things.
00:27:11.180 So can you rule out the most obvious thing,
00:27:15.580 which is that holiday travel brought people together
00:27:18.220 who don't get together
00:27:19.100 and put them indoors for a long period of time?
00:27:23.000 So I'm going to say I don't buy it.
00:27:25.260 I don't buy it.
00:27:26.240 I do buy the general notion
00:27:28.220 that there might be more immunity in the public than we know
00:27:31.840 and that it might be a pretty big variable.
00:27:35.220 But I think the big dip had to be the holidays.
00:27:37.980 I just feel that way.
00:27:38.880 All right, we need more.
00:27:41.180 Yeah.
00:27:42.420 We need more information.
00:27:44.120 So apparently some more rocket attacks
00:27:47.360 are happening in Iraq on American military bases.
00:27:51.920 And there was a contractor who died from a heart attack
00:27:54.580 during an airstrike.
00:27:56.760 So I don't know.
00:27:59.420 Was it the airstrike that killed him?
00:28:01.200 I guess you could say so.
00:28:03.020 And here's the real question.
00:28:04.700 So now that Biden had responded
00:28:07.140 to the last attack by Iranian surrogates,
00:28:11.060 is this Iran just seeing how far they can push Biden?
00:28:15.320 Is that what's going on?
00:28:17.360 Because if Iran is saying,
00:28:19.240 oh, we'll just keep pushing, just keep pushing,
00:28:22.340 would they have done this under Trump?
00:28:24.900 Do you think that Iran would have attacked
00:28:27.620 a second military base through a proxy, not directly?
00:28:32.080 Do you think they would have approved that attack under Trump?
00:28:35.680 I feel as if no.
00:28:39.900 But you can't know, right?
00:28:41.180 But the thing that Trump had going for him
00:28:42.920 is that he was less predictable.
00:28:46.080 And I feel like we put Mr. Predictable into the office
00:28:49.500 and Iran is just running with it
00:28:52.520 because they can predict him.
00:28:54.420 Maybe.
00:28:55.280 We'll see.
00:28:55.740 So I guess Governor Cuomo of New York
00:29:02.600 was stripped of his emergency COVID powers
00:29:05.080 just weeks before they would have expired anyway.
00:29:10.000 Can New York get any dumber?
00:29:12.920 I think New York is just...
00:29:15.260 It seems to be setting new records for dumbness
00:29:18.280 because I don't believe that the governor's emergency powers
00:29:23.000 were really the problem here.
00:29:25.580 Was anybody arguing,
00:29:26.820 you know, he did ask if he could kiss that woman two years ago,
00:29:34.220 so therefore he should not have emergency COVID powers.
00:29:39.620 What?
00:29:40.440 I feel like New York is just shooting the missiles in the foot
00:29:43.180 because they're mad at their governor.
00:29:45.500 Why would you want to take away his tools
00:29:47.340 if you're keeping him in the job?
00:29:49.420 Yeah, we'd like you to still be, you know, in charge,
00:29:52.440 but could you do it with fewer tools?
00:29:55.880 Well, why would I do it with fewer tools?
00:29:58.300 No reason.
00:29:59.120 It's, you know,
00:29:59.960 it has something to do with a girl you tried to kiss,
00:30:03.480 a woman you tried to kiss.
00:30:06.140 So how does that make sense?
00:30:08.840 It's just like New York proving how dumb they are,
00:30:11.540 no matter how mad you are at your governor.
00:30:15.260 All right, are you ready for the most controversial part?
00:30:19.420 Of this periscope.
00:30:21.120 Are you ready?
00:30:22.880 I'm going to bring up a topic you hate,
00:30:25.780 but I'm going to put a new twist on it.
00:30:28.160 So you should stay for the new twist, all right?
00:30:30.760 Because it's even new for me.
00:30:33.120 There's a Rasmussen poll
00:30:34.720 on what people think about transgender athletes,
00:30:38.800 and specifically, of course,
00:30:40.040 everybody's talking about
00:30:41.740 transgender athletes playing women's sports.
00:30:45.780 And we found that the majority of the public
00:30:51.740 is against it.
00:30:53.700 Majority of the public
00:30:54.820 doesn't favor transgender
00:30:59.080 being able to play on women's sports teams.
00:31:03.400 And so we should go with the majority, right?
00:31:06.820 What do you say?
00:31:08.160 We live in a sort of a democracy-ish kind of a place.
00:31:12.420 Should we go with the majority?
00:31:16.460 All right, well, here's something
00:31:18.340 that you could pull out of these numbers,
00:31:20.700 the Rasmussen poll.
00:31:23.140 Women under 40,
00:31:25.880 57% favor transgender athletes
00:31:30.600 playing female sports.
00:31:32.700 So the category of people
00:31:34.360 who are most directly affected,
00:31:36.760 besides the athletes,
00:31:38.260 the transgender athletes themselves,
00:31:39.660 are women under 40.
00:31:42.140 Because they would be the ones
00:31:43.160 on professional teams,
00:31:44.940 the ones who recently played sports,
00:31:48.560 you know, not that long ago
00:31:49.680 in high school and college,
00:31:51.120 and would even be having kids at 40.
00:31:54.980 You know, that's the age
00:31:56.080 where your kids are getting into athletics
00:31:58.400 early in school.
00:31:59.940 And that group,
00:32:01.580 the ones most directly victimized,
00:32:06.320 can I use that word?
00:32:07.380 Because that's how it's being spoken.
00:32:09.760 I don't use that word to speak of this.
00:32:12.540 But some people are saying,
00:32:14.920 hey, what about that
00:32:16.460 biologically born female athlete
00:32:20.880 who now can't get first place
00:32:22.640 because the transgender athlete
00:32:25.160 is just getting all the medals
00:32:26.340 and winning everything.
00:32:27.820 If the people who are most affected
00:32:30.200 are by a strong majority
00:32:33.100 in favor of doing it,
00:32:35.960 is it any of your business?
00:32:39.780 Do you think everybody
00:32:41.520 should have the same weight of opinion
00:32:44.380 if there's only one group
00:32:46.100 that is impacted by it?
00:32:50.760 Right?
00:32:52.400 Should these two people
00:32:53.660 have the same vote on this topic?
00:32:55.940 There's a hermit
00:32:57.660 living in the Alaska outback.
00:33:02.040 American citizen.
00:33:03.220 So American citizens get to vote,
00:33:04.920 get to have an opinion.
00:33:05.980 But doesn't have a kid.
00:33:07.660 It's a man.
00:33:08.580 It's a hermit
00:33:09.180 living in Alaska.
00:33:11.660 How is that person
00:33:12.960 in any way
00:33:14.280 important to this question
00:33:16.780 of transgender athletes?
00:33:18.520 Completely unrelated.
00:33:20.420 Does that person's opinion,
00:33:22.380 should it count
00:33:23.520 as much as somebody
00:33:25.100 who is the very center
00:33:26.440 of the question,
00:33:27.740 which is
00:33:28.500 non-transgender athletes
00:33:30.420 who would be affected
00:33:31.260 by having
00:33:31.940 people on the team
00:33:33.660 that are superior athletes?
00:33:36.600 What is fair?
00:33:38.300 So forget about the question,
00:33:39.820 forget about the topic.
00:33:41.640 Forget about the topic
00:33:43.060 being transgender athletes.
00:33:45.020 Just forget about it.
00:33:46.360 Just answer the question
00:33:47.580 in the generic question.
00:33:49.360 If the people
00:33:50.040 who are most affected,
00:33:52.060 victimized,
00:33:53.560 if you want to call it that,
00:33:55.100 say let's do this
00:33:56.600 by a strong majority.
00:33:57.920 This is a strong majority.
00:33:59.680 Right?
00:33:59.880 It's overwhelming.
00:34:02.800 Shouldn't they get
00:34:03.620 what they want?
00:34:05.540 Why is it the hermit
00:34:07.300 in Alaska
00:34:08.660 who gets an equal vote?
00:34:13.160 Somebody says,
00:34:14.280 stop.
00:34:15.520 All right,
00:34:15.840 you're going to go away.
00:34:18.860 Rose,
00:34:19.840 you don't get
00:34:21.220 to be here anymore.
00:34:22.020 hide user
00:34:25.420 on this channel.
00:34:26.580 Okay,
00:34:26.900 you're gone.
00:34:28.140 Now,
00:34:28.980 again,
00:34:30.440 I'm open
00:34:31.280 to any counter-arguments.
00:34:32.520 I like counter-arguments.
00:34:33.700 And in fact,
00:34:34.660 this is weird,
00:34:35.440 but I enjoy
00:34:36.280 being proven wrong
00:34:37.440 because I think
00:34:38.420 it makes this better.
00:34:40.140 You know,
00:34:40.480 the thing I do.
00:34:42.220 Anytime I can be
00:34:43.340 proven wrong
00:34:44.240 and it's confirmed,
00:34:46.600 that's kind of exciting
00:34:47.740 to me
00:34:48.720 because I don't feel
00:34:50.340 any shame from that.
00:34:51.740 I feel like
00:34:52.300 everybody's wrong.
00:34:53.740 So if you can learn
00:34:54.360 something,
00:34:55.100 good.
00:34:56.280 All right,
00:34:56.640 so my only thing
00:34:57.300 I'm going to add to that
00:34:58.120 is although legally
00:34:59.580 everybody gets the same vote
00:35:01.000 in this country,
00:35:01.820 we don't want to change that,
00:35:03.580 sometimes you should look
00:35:04.880 at who's affected.
00:35:07.100 Right?
00:35:08.440 And to me,
00:35:09.280 that matters.
00:35:10.100 All right.
00:35:11.500 AOC is making more news
00:35:13.060 by saying the minimum wage
00:35:14.740 should be raised,
00:35:15.740 of course.
00:35:16.120 But I want to show you
00:35:18.020 her argument style.
00:35:21.180 All right?
00:35:21.620 So here's a tweet
00:35:22.500 and we'll talk about
00:35:25.120 whether the minimum wage
00:35:26.380 should be raised,
00:35:27.320 but that's going to be separate.
00:35:28.820 Here,
00:35:28.980 I'm just going to talk about
00:35:29.940 her technique,
00:35:32.240 her persuasion.
00:35:33.140 Okay?
00:35:33.700 So I told you
00:35:34.280 I try to teach you something
00:35:35.360 every live stream
00:35:36.580 and here we're going to learn
00:35:38.360 from AOC's technique
00:35:40.120 the same way we would learn
00:35:41.120 from Trump's
00:35:42.200 persuasion technique.
00:35:43.480 Here's the tweet.
00:35:45.300 AOC says,
00:35:46.120 it is utterly embarrassing
00:35:47.400 that, quote,
00:35:48.440 pay people enough to live
00:35:49.980 is a stance
00:35:50.880 that's even up for debate.
00:35:53.380 Override the parliamentarian
00:35:54.820 and raise the wage.
00:35:56.680 So she's asking her own party
00:35:58.300 to act differently,
00:35:59.520 asking Biden and Harris
00:36:02.500 to override this.
00:36:05.260 McDonald's workers in Denmark
00:36:06.620 are paid $22 an hour
00:36:08.280 plus six weeks paid vacation.
00:36:10.760 $15 an hour,
00:36:12.140 which is what she wants
00:36:13.180 in this country,
00:36:13.720 is a deep compromise,
00:36:15.480 a big one,
00:36:16.360 considering the phase-in.
00:36:17.780 I mean,
00:36:18.080 considering you don't even
00:36:19.060 get to $15 for a number of years.
00:36:22.060 Now,
00:36:22.580 let's talk about her technique.
00:36:26.220 I love starting out with
00:36:28.020 it's utterly embarrassing
00:36:29.420 because she's taken
00:36:31.280 an economic question
00:36:32.680 and moved it directly
00:36:34.560 into feelings.
00:36:35.540 If you're going to influence
00:36:37.600 somebody,
00:36:38.100 you want to go for the feels
00:36:39.520 because they'll always
00:36:40.860 argue you on the data.
00:36:43.220 If she made her argument
00:36:44.660 entirely upon data,
00:36:46.880 people would just argue
00:36:48.020 the data.
00:36:49.060 They'd say,
00:36:49.720 well,
00:36:49.940 you don't know that
00:36:50.800 and can't be sure.
00:36:52.760 That's it.
00:36:53.600 So arguing with data
00:36:54.740 would have no real value.
00:36:57.080 So she doesn't.
00:36:59.380 That's what makes her,
00:37:00.820 you know,
00:37:01.320 a little bit better
00:37:02.080 than other politicians.
00:37:03.320 She doesn't do the thing
00:37:05.840 that won't work
00:37:06.700 in terms of persuasion.
00:37:09.900 Then she says
00:37:10.840 that to pay people
00:37:12.060 enough to live
00:37:12.900 is a stance
00:37:13.760 that's even up for debate.
00:37:15.700 That is really,
00:37:17.340 really good framing.
00:37:19.140 Even if you don't agree
00:37:20.240 with her point,
00:37:21.080 we're not talking about
00:37:21.920 the politics of the policy,
00:37:24.320 but that's just so well said.
00:37:27.840 I mean,
00:37:28.100 it's just framed
00:37:28.960 with perfect persuasion.
00:37:30.920 And then she goes on
00:37:31.960 saying what she would
00:37:34.140 like to be done.
00:37:35.180 Again,
00:37:35.700 perfect persuasion.
00:37:37.760 Your persuasion
00:37:38.620 is useless
00:37:39.340 if you make a point
00:37:41.380 and don't have
00:37:42.000 a specific thing
00:37:42.840 you're asking for.
00:37:44.020 So she makes her point,
00:37:45.220 goes right to
00:37:45.740 the specific request.
00:37:47.260 Again,
00:37:47.800 perfect form.
00:37:49.320 And then she says
00:37:50.160 that then she does
00:37:51.700 the comparison thing
00:37:53.640 where you make
00:37:54.580 a big first ask
00:37:55.940 so that whatever
00:37:57.040 you're asking for
00:37:57.800 sounds not so bad.
00:37:58.800 So she uses
00:37:59.880 the Denmark comparison
00:38:01.000 because 22
00:38:01.900 is such a big number
00:38:03.220 when you're only
00:38:04.540 talking about
00:38:05.080 raising it to 15
00:38:06.100 that your brain
00:38:07.540 starts to say,
00:38:08.560 wait a minute,
00:38:09.600 Denmark's at 22
00:38:10.720 and the country
00:38:12.640 is now falling apart.
00:38:13.900 Denmark's doing okay.
00:38:15.920 15 doesn't sound
00:38:17.020 so bad.
00:38:17.900 Don't get ahead of me.
00:38:19.000 Don't get ahead of me.
00:38:20.560 I know what you're
00:38:21.200 going to do.
00:38:21.880 I'll get there.
00:38:22.920 I'll get there.
00:38:23.660 It's not all good.
00:38:25.860 So I read that
00:38:26.960 and I thought
00:38:27.320 well that's
00:38:28.120 a pretty good argument.
00:38:29.260 Now for background,
00:38:30.920 AOC has a background
00:38:32.160 in economics.
00:38:33.420 A lot of people
00:38:33.940 don't understand
00:38:34.640 that in college
00:38:36.020 she actually has
00:38:37.160 an economics degree.
00:38:39.520 As do I.
00:38:40.600 I have a degree
00:38:41.080 in economics
00:38:41.760 and an MBA.
00:38:43.220 And if you were
00:38:44.040 to ask me,
00:38:44.760 Scott,
00:38:45.440 forget about
00:38:46.040 the morality part.
00:38:48.080 Forget about
00:38:48.720 the morality.
00:38:50.140 Just does this
00:38:50.980 work economically?
00:38:54.380 Because the things
00:38:56.020 you're looking at
00:38:56.640 is you're not
00:38:57.880 just raising
00:38:58.960 somebody's pay.
00:39:01.540 It's coming out
00:39:02.500 of somebody's pocket.
00:39:04.160 So how many businesses
00:39:05.320 will go in a business?
00:39:06.820 How many fewer employees
00:39:08.420 can be employed
00:39:09.260 because now you can't
00:39:10.340 afford as many of them?
00:39:12.040 How do you do the math
00:39:13.380 and figure out
00:39:14.480 what works?
00:39:16.060 Now wouldn't you say,
00:39:17.860 Scott,
00:39:18.420 every time you depart
00:39:20.220 from the free market
00:39:21.980 and you put the government
00:39:23.580 in there,
00:39:24.000 you get a worse result.
00:39:26.100 How many of you
00:39:26.680 believe that?
00:39:27.840 In the comments,
00:39:28.880 tell me.
00:39:29.560 Is that a fair thing
00:39:30.820 to say?
00:39:31.440 Is that a good
00:39:31.920 general statement?
00:39:33.160 That whenever you
00:39:34.140 remove the free market
00:39:35.620 and insert
00:39:37.040 government
00:39:38.100 control,
00:39:39.760 that's never good.
00:39:42.080 Right?
00:39:43.120 Never good.
00:39:46.400 Well,
00:39:47.020 if you believe that,
00:39:48.680 why do we have
00:39:49.800 a minimum wage now?
00:39:51.000 Why do we have
00:39:57.440 a minimum wage now?
00:39:59.320 Do you know,
00:40:00.480 I wasn't,
00:40:01.320 I can't remember
00:40:01.980 specifically,
00:40:03.000 but don't you think
00:40:04.000 that whenever the
00:40:04.980 minimum wage was
00:40:06.000 put in place
00:40:07.500 or the minimum wage
00:40:08.580 was raised,
00:40:09.880 don't you think
00:40:10.540 we had the same
00:40:11.340 argument every time?
00:40:13.440 Was it right
00:40:14.260 the last time?
00:40:15.980 Do you remember
00:40:16.520 when they raised
00:40:17.160 the minimum wage
00:40:18.240 to what it is now
00:40:19.380 and then the economy
00:40:21.220 fell apart?
00:40:23.060 It didn't.
00:40:24.720 It didn't.
00:40:25.900 It's the same
00:40:26.540 argument that we know
00:40:27.740 wasn't true before.
00:40:30.460 We don't have to guess.
00:40:33.040 We know.
00:40:34.400 Because the minimum wage
00:40:35.800 has been raised before.
00:40:38.380 And the country survived.
00:40:41.160 Now,
00:40:41.400 did it cost people jobs?
00:40:42.700 Yes,
00:40:43.020 of course.
00:40:44.020 Did some businesses
00:40:45.020 probably go out of business?
00:40:46.820 Yeah,
00:40:47.100 the ones that were so weak,
00:40:49.600 so weak,
00:40:50.600 they couldn't afford
00:40:51.260 to do this.
00:40:52.480 Were those businesses
00:40:53.380 going to last?
00:40:54.720 Were those the businesses
00:40:55.840 who were paying
00:40:56.420 a lot of taxes?
00:40:57.900 No.
00:40:58.700 They couldn't have been
00:40:59.600 paying a lot of taxes
00:41:00.500 because they didn't
00:41:01.120 have enough margin
00:41:02.100 to even give their
00:41:03.420 employees a raise.
00:41:05.260 So,
00:41:06.440 you have,
00:41:07.720 you have two arguments here.
00:41:09.500 And they're both
00:41:10.360 pretty good.
00:41:11.660 And they're on
00:41:12.380 different sides.
00:41:13.140 The pretty good argument
00:41:15.600 against raising it
00:41:17.120 is free markets
00:41:18.360 are better.
00:41:19.860 You won't get people
00:41:21.320 coming into the market
00:41:22.320 who would only
00:41:23.740 take those low jobs.
00:41:25.160 They couldn't get
00:41:25.700 a better one.
00:41:26.900 So,
00:41:27.260 you're not training people.
00:41:29.140 So,
00:41:29.560 the argument against it
00:41:30.780 is completely solid.
00:41:33.840 Completely.
00:41:35.040 I mean,
00:41:35.360 it's,
00:41:36.040 you know,
00:41:36.320 human motivation
00:41:37.460 is very predictable.
00:41:39.800 There will be
00:41:40.360 fewer people hired
00:41:41.340 in the short run.
00:41:43.140 But on the other hand,
00:41:45.780 the AOC argument is
00:41:47.460 there are plenty
00:41:48.780 of cases
00:41:49.440 where people argue
00:41:50.680 the same thing
00:41:51.460 was going to happen
00:41:52.140 and it didn't.
00:41:54.420 We just adjusted.
00:41:56.300 We just adjusted.
00:41:58.200 Somehow.
00:41:59.740 So,
00:42:01.060 here I am
00:42:01.720 sitting here
00:42:02.260 with two degrees
00:42:04.340 that should allow me
00:42:07.400 to answer this question
00:42:08.520 and have a,
00:42:09.600 like a really
00:42:10.420 smart opinion
00:42:11.680 that it's a good idea
00:42:12.900 or that it's a bad idea
00:42:14.520 to raise the minimum wage.
00:42:16.360 I don't.
00:42:17.840 Do you?
00:42:20.760 You've watched me
00:42:21.660 for a long time
00:42:22.460 and I honestly
00:42:23.640 don't know
00:42:24.380 if this is a good idea
00:42:26.220 or a bad idea.
00:42:27.540 And I don't even know
00:42:28.720 how you'd check
00:42:29.420 because I wouldn't believe
00:42:30.860 anybody's prediction.
00:42:33.040 Would you?
00:42:34.440 Would you believe
00:42:35.620 anybody's
00:42:36.420 economic projection
00:42:38.100 of what would happen
00:42:39.040 if we did it?
00:42:39.640 I wouldn't
00:42:40.260 because the one thing
00:42:41.600 I do know
00:42:42.300 is that I wouldn't
00:42:43.520 trust any economic prediction.
00:42:46.580 Would you?
00:42:47.900 And if you don't
00:42:48.680 trust the experts,
00:42:50.720 what are you going on?
00:42:53.000 What are you going on?
00:42:54.660 All right.
00:42:55.100 But here's the punchline
00:42:56.520 to the whole thing.
00:42:57.680 While it is
00:42:58.580 a tremendously good
00:42:59.740 persuasion play
00:43:00.880 to say that Denmark
00:43:02.200 has $22 an hour
00:43:03.800 and all this
00:43:04.500 paid vacation
00:43:05.700 and stuff,
00:43:06.220 it took about
00:43:07.860 a minute
00:43:08.280 for somebody
00:43:09.740 to come into
00:43:10.300 the comments
00:43:10.880 and say
00:43:11.500 Denmark doesn't
00:43:13.860 have a minimum
00:43:14.800 wage.
00:43:17.380 The whole thing
00:43:18.320 is bullshit.
00:43:19.980 Denmark doesn't
00:43:20.760 have a state
00:43:22.160 mandated minimum
00:43:23.160 wage.
00:43:24.620 They just don't
00:43:25.380 have one.
00:43:27.060 So the whole
00:43:27.860 argument is just
00:43:28.580 complete bullshit.
00:43:30.600 But,
00:43:31.340 did it work?
00:43:33.340 Yeah.
00:43:34.400 Yeah,
00:43:34.660 it works really well.
00:43:35.480 As an argument,
00:43:36.840 it works really well.
00:43:38.120 It works as well
00:43:39.080 as President Trump
00:43:40.760 saying,
00:43:41.320 you know,
00:43:42.120 your TV won't work
00:43:43.700 when the windmills
00:43:44.500 stop turning.
00:43:46.460 Right?
00:43:46.900 It's not exactly
00:43:48.180 the most honest
00:43:49.280 argument in the world,
00:43:50.400 but you get the point.
00:43:51.720 Right?
00:43:51.960 You get the point.
00:43:53.720 So it's the same
00:43:54.520 technique.
00:43:56.680 All right.
00:43:58.460 So just as
00:43:59.780 President Trump
00:44:00.720 did not pass
00:44:01.960 a lot of the
00:44:02.480 fact-checking,
00:44:03.560 but yet he was
00:44:04.380 amazingly good
00:44:06.680 at persuading
00:44:07.740 and the things
00:44:08.740 that he persuaded
00:44:09.500 toward were also
00:44:10.440 good,
00:44:11.660 I can't even
00:44:12.500 think of an
00:44:12.920 exception.
00:44:14.760 Right?
00:44:15.120 I mean,
00:44:15.500 arguably,
00:44:16.020 I can't think
00:44:16.480 of any exception.
00:44:17.740 So I don't mind
00:44:18.640 that Trump
00:44:20.260 plays fast
00:44:22.340 and loose
00:44:22.720 with the facts
00:44:23.300 as long as
00:44:23.800 the direction
00:44:24.340 he's going
00:44:24.920 is quite
00:44:25.880 obviously a
00:44:26.700 good direction
00:44:27.180 for the country
00:44:27.780 in a lot of
00:44:28.560 people's opinion.
00:44:29.560 That's fair.
00:44:30.080 AOC doing the
00:44:31.180 same.
00:44:33.960 Here's a
00:44:34.480 question for you.
00:44:38.640 Well,
00:44:39.180 actually,
00:44:39.620 let's talk
00:44:40.380 about Dr.
00:44:41.020 Seuss.
00:44:41.720 How many
00:44:42.320 of you
00:44:42.640 have now
00:44:43.520 seen the
00:44:44.600 so-called
00:44:45.260 offensive,
00:44:46.680 racially
00:44:47.820 offensive
00:44:48.780 Dr.
00:44:50.060 Seuss
00:44:50.420 drawings?
00:44:52.380 It's been
00:44:52.900 in the news
00:44:53.380 for a while
00:44:53.860 that there
00:44:54.780 are some
00:44:55.700 Dr.
00:44:56.120 Seuss books
00:44:56.540 with racially
00:44:57.320 offensive drawings.
00:44:58.320 How many
00:44:58.700 of you
00:44:59.040 have seen
00:45:00.080 them?
00:45:01.260 Because I'll
00:45:01.700 bet you all
00:45:02.060 have opinions,
00:45:02.820 don't you?
00:45:03.920 How many
00:45:04.380 of you
00:45:04.660 have seen
00:45:05.220 them?
00:45:06.380 I have now
00:45:07.200 seen them
00:45:07.760 thanks to
00:45:09.080 a tweet
00:45:09.820 by Joel
00:45:10.540 Pollack
00:45:11.180 and it's
00:45:13.500 the only
00:45:13.700 place I've
00:45:14.140 seen them.
00:45:15.000 I haven't
00:45:15.420 seen them
00:45:15.800 anywhere else
00:45:17.040 except one
00:45:19.060 tweet pointing
00:45:19.740 to a blog
00:45:20.320 article and
00:45:21.120 that was
00:45:21.440 Joel Pollack
00:45:22.340 who pointed
00:45:23.420 to the article
00:45:23.960 and he didn't
00:45:24.320 write the article.
00:45:26.260 And I'm
00:45:26.600 looking at
00:45:26.960 your answers
00:45:27.420 and I
00:45:28.400 only see
00:45:28.980 one person
00:45:30.840 says they've
00:45:31.780 seen them.
00:45:32.800 But you all
00:45:33.500 have opinions,
00:45:34.260 don't you?
00:45:35.380 Oh,
00:45:35.600 a number of
00:45:36.480 you have
00:45:36.640 seen them.
00:45:37.680 So for
00:45:38.600 those of you
00:45:39.160 who hadn't
00:45:39.660 seen them
00:45:40.140 and then you
00:45:41.080 did,
00:45:41.680 did it change
00:45:42.320 your opinion?
00:45:44.300 Did you get
00:45:45.020 a different
00:45:45.380 opinion after
00:45:46.000 you looked
00:45:46.340 at them?
00:45:47.520 I did.
00:45:49.060 I did.
00:45:50.180 Let me tell
00:45:50.660 you what my
00:45:51.100 first thought
00:45:51.860 was.
00:45:53.000 We weren't
00:45:53.820 being shown
00:45:54.380 the pictures
00:45:54.940 and that led
00:45:56.040 me to believe
00:45:56.600 that maybe
00:45:57.080 they weren't
00:45:57.540 that bad
00:45:58.180 because if
00:45:59.620 they were
00:46:00.000 that bad
00:46:00.520 wouldn't they
00:46:00.880 just show
00:46:01.300 them?
00:46:02.200 Because the
00:46:02.800 media leans
00:46:03.500 left,
00:46:03.940 right?
00:46:04.220 So if they
00:46:04.700 were really
00:46:05.060 that bad,
00:46:06.020 I feel like
00:46:07.100 we definitely
00:46:07.740 would have
00:46:08.100 seen them.
00:46:09.300 So I was
00:46:10.040 biased toward
00:46:11.060 thinking there's
00:46:11.620 probably nothing
00:46:12.140 there.
00:46:13.020 There's probably
00:46:13.360 imagination and
00:46:14.720 you're reading
00:46:15.880 into it a little
00:46:16.580 bit.
00:46:17.580 And then I
00:46:18.100 looked at
00:46:18.440 them.
00:46:21.860 They're
00:46:22.460 pretty bad
00:46:23.220 bad by
00:46:24.040 today's
00:46:24.560 standards.
00:46:25.500 By today's
00:46:26.240 standards,
00:46:27.420 pretty bad.
00:46:29.180 Pretty bad.
00:46:30.340 By the
00:46:30.940 standards of
00:46:31.580 when they
00:46:31.880 were drawn,
00:46:32.580 not at all.
00:46:33.800 Not at all.
00:46:34.500 I mean,
00:46:34.760 if you put it
00:46:35.220 back in its
00:46:35.760 historical context,
00:46:37.440 I don't even
00:46:37.820 know if anybody
00:46:38.400 would have
00:46:38.680 even raised
00:46:39.180 an eyebrow.
00:46:40.700 The most,
00:46:42.920 I'll describe
00:46:43.700 them for you.
00:46:44.520 So there are
00:46:44.880 three images I
00:46:45.640 saw in particular.
00:46:46.420 One was
00:46:46.980 some,
00:46:48.500 probably a
00:46:49.300 Middle
00:46:49.520 Eastern,
00:46:50.000 I imagine
00:46:53.060 an Islamic
00:46:53.760 guy riding
00:46:54.540 a camel,
00:46:55.820 wearing sort
00:46:56.600 of traditional
00:46:57.340 look and
00:46:59.040 having a
00:47:00.120 cartoon face
00:47:01.080 that looks
00:47:01.640 caricature-ish
00:47:03.740 of the
00:47:04.760 region.
00:47:06.180 Not too
00:47:06.940 bad.
00:47:07.700 I would say
00:47:08.120 on that one,
00:47:09.720 if that had
00:47:10.240 been the worst
00:47:10.860 one, I would
00:47:12.600 say give it a
00:47:13.220 pass.
00:47:13.900 Because really
00:47:14.400 it looked like
00:47:15.080 more, they were
00:47:15.640 trying to get
00:47:16.120 the clothing
00:47:16.660 right.
00:47:17.840 It didn't
00:47:18.160 look like,
00:47:19.140 I don't know,
00:47:20.000 is riding
00:47:20.500 a camel
00:47:21.120 somehow an
00:47:22.940 insult if
00:47:23.860 people actually
00:47:24.560 ride camels
00:47:25.380 and it's a
00:47:25.820 thing.
00:47:26.160 I don't know.
00:47:26.740 That one
00:47:27.080 didn't look
00:47:27.440 bad.
00:47:28.860 Then I
00:47:29.100 looked at
00:47:29.320 the next
00:47:29.620 one.
00:47:30.300 It was
00:47:30.500 some
00:47:30.740 characters
00:47:32.380 drawn as
00:47:32.940 Chinese
00:47:33.360 characters
00:47:33.900 that looked
00:47:34.900 like Fu
00:47:35.840 Manchu
00:47:36.400 with robes
00:47:37.800 and little
00:47:38.760 facial hair
00:47:39.540 that you
00:47:40.300 would see
00:47:40.600 in some
00:47:40.900 stereotype.
00:47:42.660 And they
00:47:43.520 were carrying
00:47:44.040 on their
00:47:44.360 head, I
00:47:44.840 think there
00:47:45.140 were three
00:47:45.400 or four
00:47:45.720 of them,
00:47:46.380 they were
00:47:46.620 carrying on
00:47:47.060 their heads
00:47:47.440 as if they
00:47:47.960 were porters,
00:47:48.860 you know,
00:47:49.000 carry things
00:47:49.620 on their
00:47:49.900 heads.
00:47:50.520 A big
00:47:50.900 cage with
00:47:51.540 some Dr.
00:47:52.260 Seuss animal,
00:47:53.420 but then at
00:47:53.960 the top,
00:47:55.080 the top of
00:47:55.940 the cage,
00:47:56.800 was this
00:47:57.360 drawing of
00:47:57.820 a little
00:47:58.240 white hunter.
00:48:01.020 So you've
00:48:02.200 got the
00:48:02.720 Chinese characters
00:48:04.380 carrying on
00:48:05.680 their head a
00:48:06.440 cage of an
00:48:07.000 animal and
00:48:07.700 on top of
00:48:08.240 it the
00:48:09.300 white guy.
00:48:09.800 not so
00:48:13.720 good.
00:48:14.700 But if you
00:48:15.380 take it
00:48:15.660 back in
00:48:16.000 time,
00:48:17.980 who were
00:48:19.200 the porters
00:48:19.900 if you
00:48:20.340 went to
00:48:20.780 China and
00:48:21.960 you organized
00:48:22.760 an expedition,
00:48:24.460 who would
00:48:24.860 be carrying
00:48:25.300 the stuff?
00:48:27.700 Chinese
00:48:28.140 citizens,
00:48:28.740 right?
00:48:29.120 So if you
00:48:29.820 just put it
00:48:30.240 in its
00:48:30.500 context,
00:48:31.400 it's actually
00:48:32.080 what it
00:48:32.580 would look
00:48:32.940 like if
00:48:33.540 you don't
00:48:34.420 factor in
00:48:35.080 that he
00:48:35.520 made all
00:48:35.860 the Chinese
00:48:36.300 characters
00:48:36.780 look,
00:48:37.760 let's say,
00:48:38.760 stereotypical
00:48:39.660 of that
00:48:40.340 day.
00:48:41.560 And not
00:48:42.280 in a good
00:48:42.580 way.
00:48:43.340 So that
00:48:44.160 one I would
00:48:44.580 say was a
00:48:45.440 problem.
00:48:46.640 I could see
00:48:47.560 how somebody
00:48:48.080 would say,
00:48:48.460 this is a
00:48:51.380 little marginal,
00:48:52.180 let's get
00:48:52.940 rid of this
00:48:53.300 one.
00:48:53.780 But then the
00:48:54.240 third one
00:48:54.820 showed some
00:48:56.420 black characters
00:48:57.800 from Africa
00:48:58.940 carrying some
00:49:00.440 other Dr.
00:49:01.120 Seuss
00:49:01.300 character.
00:49:02.800 And then
00:49:03.340 again a
00:49:03.800 little bit
00:49:04.200 more of a
00:49:04.700 problem.
00:49:06.040 The black
00:49:06.620 characters,
00:49:07.200 may I
00:49:08.920 use an
00:49:09.960 offensive
00:49:10.320 word if
00:49:11.420 I tell
00:49:11.800 you that
00:49:12.240 there's no
00:49:12.740 offensive
00:49:13.260 intention,
00:49:14.360 okay?
00:49:15.000 So what
00:49:15.620 I'm going
00:49:15.880 to say
00:49:16.140 next will
00:49:16.760 sound
00:49:17.080 offensive,
00:49:17.700 but it's
00:49:18.100 not my
00:49:18.400 intention.
00:49:19.680 So intention
00:49:20.320 matters more
00:49:20.960 than words
00:49:21.640 or they
00:49:22.020 should.
00:49:22.940 I'm just
00:49:23.520 going to
00:49:23.740 say it,
00:49:24.660 all right?
00:49:26.320 He drew
00:49:26.880 the black
00:49:27.620 characters to
00:49:28.480 look like
00:49:28.880 monkeys,
00:49:30.260 all right?
00:49:31.240 Now,
00:49:31.840 if that
00:49:32.320 doesn't
00:49:32.660 offend you,
00:49:34.120 I don't
00:49:35.140 know what
00:49:35.440 would.
00:49:35.740 I mean,
00:49:36.220 that's
00:49:37.180 about as
00:49:37.540 offensive as
00:49:38.220 you can
00:49:38.480 get.
00:49:39.100 Now,
00:49:39.880 was he
00:49:40.280 thinking that
00:49:41.180 when he
00:49:42.740 drew them?
00:49:43.420 Or is it
00:49:44.120 just an
00:49:44.620 artifact from
00:49:45.520 his drawing
00:49:46.140 style,
00:49:47.460 which is it
00:49:48.620 just fell
00:49:49.140 out that
00:49:49.580 way,
00:49:49.920 but he
00:49:50.200 wasn't
00:49:50.500 thinking of
00:49:51.160 it in
00:49:51.340 any way
00:49:51.760 like that?
00:49:53.840 It's a
00:49:54.420 problem.
00:49:55.560 Now,
00:49:55.780 I said
00:49:56.020 before that
00:49:56.680 the easiest
00:49:57.540 way to
00:49:57.960 solve it
00:49:58.380 would just
00:49:58.740 be find
00:50:00.000 a black
00:50:00.860 cartoonist
00:50:01.580 and just
00:50:02.560 say,
00:50:02.840 hey,
00:50:02.940 do us a
00:50:03.360 favor.
00:50:04.180 Can you
00:50:04.540 redraw
00:50:05.100 these so
00:50:06.220 that we
00:50:06.520 can tell
00:50:06.960 they're
00:50:07.200 African
00:50:07.640 natives,
00:50:08.940 but they
00:50:09.640 don't seem
00:50:10.160 offensive to
00:50:10.840 you?
00:50:11.820 Just give
00:50:12.560 us a
00:50:12.800 hand.
00:50:13.660 I mean,
00:50:14.120 if you
00:50:14.500 looked at
00:50:14.820 the whole
00:50:15.400 body of
00:50:15.940 Dr. Seuss
00:50:16.940 works,
00:50:17.700 there are
00:50:17.820 only just
00:50:18.220 a few
00:50:18.520 pictures.
00:50:20.080 Why don't
00:50:20.420 you just
00:50:20.720 have the
00:50:21.060 people who
00:50:21.800 are most
00:50:22.520 the victim
00:50:24.200 of that
00:50:24.700 characterization
00:50:25.300 have them
00:50:27.420 take a
00:50:28.900 shot at
00:50:29.280 it?
00:50:29.980 Just redraw
00:50:30.560 it.
00:50:31.620 Annotate
00:50:32.080 it.
00:50:32.720 Make sure
00:50:33.100 everybody can
00:50:33.660 see the
00:50:34.020 original and
00:50:35.020 tell them
00:50:35.420 why you
00:50:35.720 changed it.
00:50:36.880 I don't
00:50:37.260 think it's
00:50:37.620 a big
00:50:37.820 problem.
00:50:38.940 I think
00:50:39.160 it's easy
00:50:39.740 to solve.
00:50:40.900 Just have
00:50:41.300 a little
00:50:42.020 bit of
00:50:42.520 technique.
00:50:44.040 Just get
00:50:44.380 the right
00:50:44.680 person
00:50:44.960 involved.
00:50:45.520 It literally
00:50:46.480 would be
00:50:47.040 one drawing
00:50:48.000 out of a
00:50:48.380 whole book.
00:50:49.480 No big
00:50:49.960 deal.
00:50:51.320 I wouldn't
00:50:51.960 lose the
00:50:52.320 original,
00:50:52.740 though.
00:50:55.020 Here's a
00:50:55.800 provocative,
00:50:57.120 sexist
00:50:57.580 hypothesis
00:50:58.160 from user
00:50:59.820 Novikis
00:51:00.840 on Twitter
00:51:01.740 and I'll
00:51:03.260 try to
00:51:03.640 characterize
00:51:04.980 the claim
00:51:06.160 is that
00:51:07.580 societies
00:51:08.300 that have
00:51:09.020 the most
00:51:09.440 gender
00:51:09.920 equality
00:51:10.500 are also
00:51:11.940 the most
00:51:12.520 ethically
00:51:13.120 and morally
00:51:14.020 superior.
00:51:14.800 So it's a
00:51:15.460 two-part
00:51:15.900 opinion.
00:51:17.600 Do you
00:51:17.920 agree with
00:51:18.260 the first
00:51:18.600 part?
00:51:20.620 That societies
00:51:21.400 that have
00:51:21.740 the most
00:51:22.220 gender
00:51:24.220 equality
00:51:24.840 are,
00:51:27.020 and it's
00:51:27.640 not a
00:51:27.940 coincidence,
00:51:28.300 that they're
00:51:29.940 more ethically
00:51:30.640 and morally
00:51:31.380 superior.
00:51:32.300 Do you
00:51:32.500 buy that?
00:51:34.260 It might
00:51:34.780 be an
00:51:35.020 opinion,
00:51:35.760 social opinion
00:51:36.480 sort of
00:51:36.880 thing,
00:51:37.080 but I
00:51:37.340 do.
00:51:39.020 I would
00:51:39.780 say
00:51:40.000 observationally
00:51:41.060 that feels
00:51:41.500 about right.
00:51:42.360 It doesn't.
00:51:43.340 I've seen
00:51:43.880 a lot of
00:51:44.180 people say
00:51:44.620 no.
00:51:47.060 I don't
00:51:47.660 think that
00:51:48.060 the people
00:51:48.580 saying no
00:51:49.160 have a
00:51:50.480 bad argument,
00:51:51.440 by the way,
00:51:51.960 but I'm a
00:51:52.420 little surprised
00:51:53.000 that there
00:51:53.380 are as
00:51:53.520 many no's.
00:51:55.400 Oh,
00:51:55.580 interesting.
00:51:56.100 Okay.
00:51:56.860 All right,
00:51:57.260 but let me
00:51:57.560 just finish
00:51:58.000 the point.
00:51:58.600 So this
00:51:58.880 is not
00:51:59.180 my point,
00:51:59.840 I'm just
00:52:00.220 putting it
00:52:00.740 out there,
00:52:01.620 that wherever
00:52:02.520 you have
00:52:03.040 more women
00:52:03.820 with more
00:52:04.320 equality,
00:52:04.820 there's more
00:52:05.240 moral superiority,
00:52:07.140 but it's
00:52:08.260 also the
00:52:08.960 reason you're
00:52:09.600 doomed.
00:52:11.640 It's also
00:52:12.660 the reason
00:52:13.380 you're doomed,
00:52:15.000 because the
00:52:16.380 country with
00:52:16.960 the most
00:52:17.300 morality and
00:52:18.280 equality will
00:52:20.100 be the
00:52:20.500 weakest country
00:52:21.480 in terms of
00:52:22.500 homeland defense.
00:52:24.200 That all of
00:52:25.360 those things
00:52:25.760 that make you
00:52:26.400 ethically and
00:52:27.620 morally superior
00:52:28.580 put you in
00:52:30.800 peril,
00:52:31.760 right?
00:52:32.940 Because if
00:52:33.760 you want to
00:52:34.120 be protected,
00:52:36.120 you want the
00:52:37.360 person on your
00:52:37.960 side who's the
00:52:38.600 worst person in
00:52:39.320 the world.
00:52:40.640 You don't want
00:52:41.420 the ethically and
00:52:42.460 morally appropriate
00:52:44.420 warriors on your
00:52:45.580 side.
00:52:46.340 You want the
00:52:47.180 ones who will
00:52:47.660 burden the
00:52:48.100 village,
00:52:49.320 right?
00:52:50.160 I mean,
00:52:50.920 you wouldn't say
00:52:51.920 it out loud,
00:52:52.660 road.
00:52:53.300 But if you
00:52:53.860 had a choice
00:52:54.440 between your
00:52:55.080 country being
00:52:55.720 destroyed and
00:52:56.480 you being
00:52:56.960 killed,
00:52:58.000 or your
00:52:59.820 military people
00:53:00.740 might be kind
00:53:02.640 of badass,
00:53:04.100 might kill a
00:53:04.840 little bit more
00:53:05.400 than you
00:53:05.740 expected,
00:53:06.400 might take
00:53:06.860 more chances,
00:53:08.420 might do a
00:53:09.560 lot of things
00:53:10.020 that maybe you
00:53:10.800 wouldn't think
00:53:11.340 are a good
00:53:11.740 idea,
00:53:12.560 but maybe you
00:53:13.260 need that.
00:53:14.580 So the
00:53:14.820 trouble is that
00:53:15.520 the more
00:53:16.300 dangerous you
00:53:18.000 are,
00:53:19.080 the more
00:53:19.520 likely,
00:53:20.380 even if you
00:53:21.180 lose nine
00:53:21.740 out of ten
00:53:22.180 times,
00:53:23.440 if you're
00:53:23.900 the more
00:53:24.220 dangerous one,
00:53:24.920 you only have
00:53:25.360 to win that
00:53:25.840 one time,
00:53:26.860 and then you're
00:53:27.540 in charge.
00:53:28.840 So somebody
00:53:31.020 says that's
00:53:31.440 why Sweden
00:53:31.980 is in bad
00:53:32.720 shape.
00:53:33.240 I don't know
00:53:33.660 if that can
00:53:34.140 be proven
00:53:35.280 by any data,
00:53:36.180 but I do
00:53:37.000 think this is
00:53:37.560 an interesting
00:53:38.160 point,
00:53:39.240 that the
00:53:40.040 nicer you
00:53:40.880 are as a
00:53:41.460 society,
00:53:42.100 the more
00:53:42.460 vulnerable you
00:53:43.180 are to
00:53:43.580 societies that
00:53:44.900 are not as
00:53:45.600 nice.
00:53:46.360 Now the way
00:53:46.920 Novik has
00:53:48.440 put it is that
00:53:49.120 they are male
00:53:49.660 dominated societies.
00:53:51.180 If you look at
00:53:51.680 Russia,
00:53:52.300 male dominated,
00:53:53.780 China,
00:53:54.660 male dominated,
00:53:55.720 those are two
00:53:56.500 biggest problems,
00:53:57.980 and would
00:53:58.540 those male
00:53:59.360 dominated cultures
00:54:00.700 produce,
00:54:02.600 let's say,
00:54:03.800 let's take
00:54:04.420 China for
00:54:04.820 example.
00:54:05.600 We believe
00:54:06.420 that China is
00:54:07.060 doing all
00:54:07.480 these terrible
00:54:08.380 things to
00:54:09.580 us,
00:54:09.880 from shipping
00:54:10.720 us fentanyl,
00:54:12.380 to stealing
00:54:14.060 our IP,
00:54:15.220 to spying,
00:54:16.040 to gathering
00:54:16.440 our DNA,
00:54:17.280 to all these
00:54:17.660 things.
00:54:17.940 would China
00:54:20.300 be doing
00:54:20.780 all of
00:54:21.320 those things
00:54:21.980 if they
00:54:23.380 had a
00:54:23.980 gender equal
00:54:26.040 society with
00:54:27.160 women in
00:54:27.840 charge as
00:54:28.400 much as
00:54:28.740 men?
00:54:29.500 Would they
00:54:30.040 do all
00:54:30.360 those things?
00:54:31.800 What do
00:54:32.080 you think?
00:54:33.840 What do you
00:54:34.260 think?
00:54:35.680 Would China
00:54:37.620 be as
00:54:38.320 aggressive if
00:54:40.060 they had
00:54:40.420 gender equality?
00:54:41.180 I feel
00:54:45.220 like they
00:54:45.660 would be
00:54:45.960 less
00:54:46.240 aggressive,
00:54:47.120 and that
00:54:47.420 there's
00:54:48.080 something to
00:54:48.560 this
00:54:48.840 hypothesis.
00:54:51.640 So,
00:54:52.400 anyway,
00:54:52.860 I just
00:54:53.060 put that
00:54:53.360 out there.
00:54:53.760 It's very
00:54:54.200 sexist,
00:54:55.060 but it
00:54:56.580 does match,
00:54:57.360 it matches
00:54:57.860 observation,
00:54:59.040 even if my
00:54:59.720 observation is
00:55:00.420 so biased
00:55:00.980 that I
00:55:01.420 can't see,
00:55:02.400 I can't
00:55:03.160 see it
00:55:03.400 clearly.
00:55:04.780 Somebody
00:55:05.040 says the
00:55:05.500 CCP is
00:55:06.340 not China.
00:55:07.140 Yeah,
00:55:07.480 that's a
00:55:08.200 fair statement,
00:55:09.120 but the
00:55:09.560 Communist Party
00:55:10.260 is male
00:55:10.760 dominated,
00:55:11.720 so that's
00:55:13.100 the point.
00:55:16.020 They have
00:55:16.720 100 million
00:55:17.280 excess men,
00:55:18.440 somebody says.
00:55:21.120 Do they?
00:55:25.560 China has
00:55:26.340 no diversity
00:55:27.120 on their
00:55:27.640 corporate
00:55:28.100 boards of
00:55:28.680 directors.
00:55:33.780 In the
00:55:34.460 future,
00:55:35.420 yeah.
00:55:36.580 All right,
00:55:38.200 so that's
00:55:38.700 all I got
00:55:38.980 for today,
00:55:39.500 and I
00:55:40.360 will talk
00:55:40.700 to you
00:55:41.080 tomorrow.
00:55:45.280 All right,
00:55:45.960 YouTubers.
00:55:49.100 Yeah,
00:55:49.620 it's from
00:55:49.940 the one
00:55:50.280 child family
00:55:51.220 rule,
00:55:51.700 I guess.
00:55:53.880 Swedes get
00:55:54.520 paid five
00:55:55.220 weeks of
00:55:55.640 vacation,
00:55:57.000 somebody
00:55:58.780 says.
00:56:03.040 Why do
00:56:03.640 I always
00:56:04.000 wear the
00:56:04.340 same shirt?
00:56:04.780 I do
00:56:07.680 this in
00:56:08.000 my pajamas.
00:56:09.460 So the
00:56:10.100 shirt you
00:56:10.820 see is the
00:56:11.340 shirt that I
00:56:11.800 wore to
00:56:12.080 bed.
00:56:12.760 So I'm
00:56:13.600 always in
00:56:14.240 my pajamas.
00:56:16.220 I can
00:56:16.800 prove it.
00:56:23.840 Pajamas.
00:56:24.240 And I'm
00:56:25.600 always barefoot.
00:56:26.280 So I've
00:56:31.040 created this
00:56:31.660 entire show,
00:56:33.680 which now
00:56:35.060 has national
00:56:36.220 prominence,
00:56:37.440 and I've
00:56:38.060 never once
00:56:38.580 worn pants.
00:56:41.620 I mean,
00:56:42.320 I have
00:56:42.620 pajamas on,
00:56:43.840 and I've
00:56:44.360 never done
00:56:44.760 it in my
00:56:45.200 shoes.
00:56:46.060 So I
00:56:46.660 like a
00:56:47.020 job that
00:56:48.640 you can
00:56:48.920 do in
00:56:49.200 your pajamas
00:56:49.840 without
00:56:51.520 shoes,
00:56:52.700 and make
00:56:54.680 a lot of
00:56:55.020 money.
00:56:55.980 Now, I'm
00:56:56.560 not making
00:56:56.920 a lot of
00:56:57.220 money, but
00:56:58.180 it is
00:57:00.340 monetized.
00:57:04.740 Yeah, it
00:57:05.260 is the
00:57:05.480 best way
00:57:05.800 to do a
00:57:06.200 show.
00:57:08.080 Do I
00:57:08.580 still go on
00:57:09.240 other people's
00:57:09.900 podcasts?
00:57:10.480 Not at the
00:57:10.940 moment.
00:57:14.960 I'll
00:57:15.360 confess
00:57:15.640 something to
00:57:16.240 you right
00:57:16.560 now.
00:57:18.920 The
00:57:19.320 enjoyment
00:57:19.900 I get
00:57:20.460 out of
00:57:20.780 doing this
00:57:21.380 and also
00:57:22.000 the content
00:57:22.540 I do
00:57:22.960 for Locals,
00:57:24.080 which is a
00:57:24.720 subscription
00:57:25.220 site where
00:57:25.840 I put a
00:57:26.180 lot of
00:57:26.420 my content
00:57:26.980 that you
00:57:27.760 don't get
00:57:28.080 to see.
00:57:30.160 I enjoy
00:57:31.060 that so
00:57:31.620 much that
00:57:32.760 my cartooning,
00:57:33.880 it's just
00:57:34.380 hard for me
00:57:34.960 to do it.
00:57:36.240 It's 30
00:57:37.080 years of
00:57:37.540 drawing these
00:57:37.960 same characters.
00:57:38.780 It's really
00:57:39.220 hard now to
00:57:40.300 make myself
00:57:40.860 sit down and
00:57:41.400 do it one
00:57:41.840 more time,
00:57:42.620 which is what
00:57:43.260 I have to
00:57:43.600 do today.
00:57:44.780 And I'm
00:57:47.060 way behind
00:57:47.520 deadline,
00:57:48.000 or I'm
00:57:49.280 too close
00:57:49.700 to the
00:57:49.900 deadline,
00:57:50.280 actually.
00:57:50.860 So I've
00:57:51.200 got to get
00:57:51.500 ahead on
00:57:51.820 deadlines.
00:57:52.420 It's going
00:57:52.520 to take
00:57:52.680 me a few
00:57:52.980 months,
00:57:53.760 and that's
00:57:54.920 all.
00:57:57.160 Will you
00:57:57.620 have on
00:57:58.060 Jovan
00:57:58.620 Pulitzer?
00:57:59.640 No.
00:58:00.460 No,
00:58:00.720 there's a
00:58:01.120 certain type
00:58:01.520 of guest
00:58:01.900 that I'll
00:58:02.480 never have
00:58:02.940 on,
00:58:03.720 and that's
00:58:04.100 anybody who
00:58:04.580 can make
00:58:04.940 a claim
00:58:05.580 that I
00:58:06.180 don't know
00:58:06.580 enough about
00:58:07.240 to ask
00:58:07.800 the right
00:58:08.140 questions,
00:58:08.900 and he
00:58:09.240 would be
00:58:09.520 in that
00:58:09.800 category.
00:58:10.240 what school
00:58:16.820 of economics
00:58:17.740 did you
00:58:18.300 learn?
00:58:19.240 I wouldn't
00:58:19.620 say it was
00:58:20.080 a school
00:58:20.600 of economics,
00:58:21.400 I just
00:58:22.220 have a
00:58:22.460 degree in
00:58:22.860 economics,
00:58:23.560 so we
00:58:23.900 got to
00:58:25.040 see a
00:58:25.260 lot of
00:58:25.460 stuff.
00:58:31.800 All right,
00:58:32.600 that's all
00:58:32.920 for now,
00:58:33.300 and I
00:58:33.540 will talk
00:58:33.940 to you
00:58:34.300 later.
00:58:35.240 Thank you.