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

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! 0.95

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 1.00

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. 0.74

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. 0.98

00:17:51.980 And what you would do is build this manufacturing zone that would absorb the people coming over 0.76

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 0.95

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 0.99

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 1.00

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 1.00

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 1.00

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 0.70

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 1.00

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 0.56

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. 0.97

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 1.00

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 0.63

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 0.99

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 0.53

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 0.95

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 0.94

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 0.98

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 0.92

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 0.73

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 0.77

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 0.62

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 0.96

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, 0.84

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 0.91

00:55:26.340 no diversity 0.70

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. 0.92

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 1.00

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.

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

Summary

Transcript