Real Coffee with Scott Adams - Episode 1521 Scott Adams： Probably the Best Coffee With Scott Adams of All Time

00:00:00.000 Good morning, everybody, and welcome to Coffee with Scott Adams, one of the highlights of

00:00:10.320 your day, and certainly mine.

00:00:12.880 And I don't know if you can feel it yet.

00:00:16.660 Do you feel every particle in your being start to get a little bit lighter, feel a little

00:00:22.600 better?

00:00:23.180 Things are starting to shape up, aren't they?

00:00:25.480 Aren't they?

00:00:26.320 Well, it's going to get even better.

00:00:28.060 It's going to get even better.

00:00:30.000 What would you need to do that?

00:00:31.320 Well, amazing content that's coming up, but also the simultaneous sip, and all you need

00:00:37.480 is a cup or a mug or a glass, a tank or a chalice or a canteen, a jug or a flask, a vessel of

00:00:41.880 any kind.

00:00:42.900 Fill it with your favorite liquid.

00:00:43.920 I like coffee.

00:00:45.600 And join me now for the unparalleled pleasure, the dopamine of the day, the thing that makes

00:00:51.400 everything better.

00:00:53.720 It's called the simultaneous sip, and it happens now.

00:00:56.240 Go.

00:01:00.880 The breathless anticipation of simultaneous swillage.

00:01:05.380 Well put.

00:01:06.340 Well put in the comments there.

00:01:07.700 Well, did you see the viral video of, there was some school, this might be fake news by

00:01:18.400 the way, but because it's fun, I'm going to treat it like it's real.

00:01:25.740 So I think it's fake news, but maybe, maybe not.

00:01:29.560 But, so allegedly there was some school that banned backpacks.

00:01:35.700 That's the sketchy part.

00:01:37.660 Was there really a school that banned backpacks?

00:01:40.920 All right.

00:01:41.140 So first of all, I don't believe the story at all.

00:01:42.820 But, the story goes that they banned backpacks and then the kids decided to take advantage

00:01:51.700 of the specificity of the rule to bring things that weren't backpacks, but could still transport

00:01:59.980 books.

00:02:00.400 For example, one kid brought in a, one of those outdoor trash bins, gigantic trash bin.

00:02:08.920 He just dragged that into school, filled with his books.

00:02:12.460 Another brought a, a baby stroller.

00:02:16.740 I think one had a dog cage on wheels or something.

00:02:21.780 Now, I'm going to say I don't believe it's a real story, but it was pretty funny.

00:02:26.480 If it, if it is real, let me know.

00:02:30.680 Here's a commercial failure, as in an advertising commercial.

00:02:35.600 Intel, the company Intel, not the, not the intelligent services, but Intel, the company

00:02:41.740 had a commercial.

00:02:43.380 And the, the gist of it was they had people come in and use their new computer, or a computer

00:02:49.880 with their chip in it, I'm not sure.

00:02:51.100 And the people were amazed and surprised to find out that what they thought was an excellent

00:02:59.500 Macintosh computer, or an Apple computer, was actually a PC.

00:03:06.620 And that was, that was the essence of the commercial.

00:03:10.260 The people who think Macintosh, or Apple, keep saying Macintosh.

00:03:14.100 The people who think that the Apple laptops are just the best, when they use this PC, the

00:03:21.940 PC was so good that they thought it was an Apple computer.

00:03:26.360 That was the commercial.

00:03:29.060 How'd they do?

00:03:31.240 Is that the worst idea for a commercial?

00:03:34.180 Let me tell you what teens really love.

00:03:39.120 And not just teens, but young adults as well.

00:03:42.860 You know what people really like?

00:03:45.860 They like to have the cheap imitation knockoff of high quality goods.

00:03:55.860 I'm pretty sure that Intel just told their customers that the good one is an Apple laptop.

00:04:03.280 Yeah, but if they want, they could, you know, if they could handle the embarrassment of not

00:04:08.460 having an Apple product, they can get something that works pretty well too.

00:04:12.860 Other people might not even know the difference.

00:04:17.680 So that's like the worst commercial idea I've ever seen, to tell people that their product

00:04:22.800 is almost as good as the competition.

00:04:24.480 Well, we've got a new Department of Justice policy in which the people are being reminded, the

00:04:39.580 public is being reminded not to get too aggressive with the school officials, because there's lots

00:04:46.000 of complaints about everything from mass to critical race theory being done in schools.

00:04:51.340 And I guess parents are getting pretty aggressive.

00:04:53.720 And so the Justice Department decided to weigh in and say, don't do that.

00:04:58.960 We'll put you in jail if you go too far.

00:05:03.220 Now, some people are saying, are they just using the power of the state to shut down dissent?

00:05:13.780 Well, I don't know.

00:05:17.600 I mean, it seems to me this could go either way, because who exactly approves of people getting

00:05:23.840 physical, for example, or threatening somebody at home?

00:05:28.580 I'm not sure I approve of that stuff.

00:05:31.560 And that stuff needs to probably be illegal at some point, right?

00:05:35.460 So I'm not sure there's anything to this story.

00:05:39.400 We imagine this is, it's always the slippery slope toward having parents not have any input

00:05:47.260 at all.

00:05:47.940 But I doubt it.

00:05:49.180 I imagine parents can have as much input as they want, as long as they don't push or threaten

00:05:53.460 people.

00:05:55.240 All right.

00:05:55.960 A lot of hallucinators coming after me today. 0.98

00:05:58.040 People who are declaring my idiocy in a hallucination that they had, and then criticizing me for their 0.96

00:06:08.800 hallucinations. 0.97

00:06:10.720 For example, if I say something about COVID or anything in that category, I get this comment

00:06:20.000 to me.

00:06:21.340 You don't understand the risks.

00:06:23.160 Well, shouldn't they be arguing with my argument?

00:06:29.580 Why are they arguing about some quality of me?

00:06:33.360 As soon as you see that, what does that signal?

00:06:36.100 What does it signal when somebody goes after the messenger and doesn't even touch the argument?

00:06:42.220 Cognitive dissonance, right?

00:06:44.020 It's cognitive dissonance.

00:06:45.280 Because if the argument was the problem, well, they would just go after the argument.

00:06:49.900 They'd just publish a link or say, well, that makes no sense because you haven't considered

00:06:54.700 X or Y.

00:06:56.160 But they can't.

00:06:57.320 The problem is that they don't know how to do that.

00:07:01.280 So anybody who has a counterargument that makes sense uses it.

00:07:06.860 You'll rarely find an exception.

00:07:08.740 People don't go after the personality of the person unless they have nothing to say.

00:07:17.120 Yeah.

00:07:17.600 So here's another one.

00:07:20.560 Somebody said to me, you don't understand that it's politicians that close the economy,

00:07:25.340 not viruses, because I was talking about the risk of coronavirus would be closing the economy.

00:07:31.460 Well, yes, I know that the politicians make the decision, but we haven't turned off the

00:07:36.920 laws of cause and effect.

00:07:39.060 Whatever made them to make the decision last time might make them cause it again.

00:07:44.800 You could argue all day long that they shouldn't close the economy.

00:07:49.760 But if we know it happens, it's part of the risk.

00:07:52.920 Right?

00:07:53.240 You can't turn off cause and effect just because you think it ought to be turned off.

00:07:58.180 And my favorite one is that I used to be smart and have good takes, but suddenly all my takes 0.99

00:08:04.480 are crap now. 0.98

00:08:05.220 What are the odds that I went from clever for decades to really dumb on just this one topic? 1.00

00:08:15.060 Possible. 0.94

00:08:16.220 Totally possible, right? 0.99

00:08:17.880 Somebody could be smart and general and dumb on one topic. 0.99

00:08:21.040 Probably see it a lot. 0.99

00:08:21.940 But it shouldn't be your first guess.

00:08:25.500 Play the odds.

00:08:27.580 Play the odds. 1.00

00:08:28.860 I probably didn't guess suddenly stupid. 0.99

00:08:31.840 There's probably just something that we differ in the data, we differ in what is logical. 0.99

00:08:37.960 Tell me what that is.

00:08:39.380 We'll see what we can do. 0.99

00:08:40.860 Somebody says it's the marijuana and I got stupider. 0.95

00:08:44.000 Well, you have no idea how much marijuana I smoked when I was younger. 0.96

00:08:46.840 Let's talk about that Facebook whistleblower.

00:08:52.460 So this is Hagen, I guess it is.

00:08:55.580 Hagen?

00:08:59.300 So apparently it's just a fact now that Instagram harms children, especially young girls.

00:09:09.060 Do we accept that as just a fact now?

00:09:11.320 Just a fact?

00:09:12.000 And so I asked this in a poll on Twitter.

00:09:18.140 I said, what do you think will harm the most teens in, say, the next year?

00:09:22.740 Vaccinations, Instagram, or fentanyl?

00:09:27.180 Which one of those things is the most dangerous to kids?

00:09:31.960 I feel like it's Instagram by a lot.

00:09:35.160 And in fact, that was the poll result.

00:09:37.640 You know, this is a highly unscientific poll.

00:09:39.500 But Instagram got 39%, and the vaccinations got 29%, and fentanyl got 31%.

00:09:46.260 So according to the unscientific poll, Instagram is more dangerous than fentanyl and vaccinations.

00:09:55.480 Joe Manchin is holding tight with, and mostly because of the data ceiling.

00:10:01.860 So Joe Manchin says that the $3.5 million would just be too much money.

00:10:08.900 Too much money.

00:10:10.620 How does Joe Manchin decide that?

00:10:14.340 What is the, what mechanism does Joe Manchin use to know how much debt is the right amount?

00:10:21.860 Did he talk to economists?

00:10:25.540 Because they don't know.

00:10:29.660 The economists don't know.

00:10:31.420 How much is the amount of debt that would crush us, and how much is it going to pay for itself, for example.

00:10:37.160 You know, Biden says it's going to pay for itself.

00:10:39.860 Now, he might be a businessman. 0.96

00:10:41.020 You know, I'm not saying he's dumb.

00:10:44.080 He seems like a high-functioning person.

00:10:47.040 But he's holding up the entire country.

00:10:51.440 And frankly, I'm glad he is.

00:10:53.880 You know, so I'm not anti-Joe Manchin, right?

00:10:56.640 So understand where I'm coming from.

00:10:58.820 I'm not anti-Joe Manchin.

00:11:00.240 And I'm kind of glad he's holding up the vote on the infrastructure thing.

00:11:05.580 But you have to ask the question, based on what?

00:11:08.580 What is his reasoning?

00:11:10.420 I like it.

00:11:12.240 But what's his reasoning?

00:11:14.660 He's not an economist, right?

00:11:17.460 And even the economists don't know how much is the right amount of debt.

00:11:22.000 So it's kind of a weird situation that we've got one person in charge of Congress.

00:11:26.720 And he is making decisions based on absolutely no expertise or knowledge.

00:11:34.940 I think he'd probably admit it.

00:11:37.100 If you ask them the direct question, what is the right amount of debt?

00:11:41.080 Because it's not zero, right?

00:11:43.380 If you say to me, Scott, the right amount of debt is zero.

00:11:46.420 No, it's not.

00:11:47.720 No, it's very much not zero.

00:11:50.080 It's some large number.

00:11:51.860 I just don't know at what point is the breaking point.

00:11:54.300 Yeah, I mean, debt is good if you use it right.

00:11:59.060 Debt is not bad universally.

00:12:01.700 Sometimes you need to invest in stuff.

00:12:06.160 Manchin is one of 52 senators, so you can't say he's holding it up.

00:12:09.460 Yeah, your point is taken.

00:12:10.960 He's one of 52 senators.

00:12:12.840 But he's the only one that matters.

00:12:16.240 Because for all the obvious reasons.

00:12:18.600 So you know what I'm saying.

00:12:20.180 But I get your point.

00:12:20.960 Paul Rubin writes in the Wall Street Journal that the woke, he calls the woke left's primitive

00:12:28.300 economics.

00:12:29.960 And his point is that the socialism kind of model works good in a tribal situation where

00:12:41.400 your amount of stuff is limited.

00:12:44.000 If you can only gather a limited amount of stuff or grow a limited amount of stuff or

00:12:49.200 hunt a limited amount of stuff, you kind of have to share it with the tribe.

00:12:54.360 Socialism.

00:12:56.060 But capitalism breaks that model.

00:12:59.460 And capitalism is where everybody gets more.

00:13:03.600 So instead of dividing what you have, you just make more, and then everybody gets a little.

00:13:08.380 And then the capitalist gets the most.

00:13:10.640 That's the incentive.

00:13:11.520 So do you buy that?

00:13:14.400 Do you buy that the main difference between the left and the right's views on economics

00:13:21.200 is that the right actually understands economics?

00:13:25.960 At least they understand supply and demand, and they understand human motivation.

00:13:32.580 Right?

00:13:33.060 The right understands human motivation, and they calculate it in all of their systems and

00:13:38.500 policies, and the left doesn't.

00:13:40.260 They act like it's not a variable, which is wrong every time.

00:13:45.420 It's never right.

00:13:47.160 As soon as you ignore human motivation, you're wrong every time.

00:13:50.820 Every time.

00:13:51.700 You're developing a policy or a system.

00:13:55.360 So do you buy that?

00:13:56.720 I would go so far as to say that both the left and the right get science wrong way too often.

00:14:04.520 It has nothing to do with being on the left or the right.

00:14:07.660 Getting science wrong just means that humans aren't really good at science.

00:14:11.820 And we think we are.

00:14:12.980 We can get the basics.

00:14:14.340 But then we're done after that.

00:14:16.220 So I think we're both wrong on the science on different things and different times.

00:14:21.920 But only one side gets the economics wrong.

00:14:26.400 Will you go with me on that?

00:14:28.420 Any human can get science wrong.

00:14:30.840 That's pretty easy, because we just don't quite have the brains that can grasp the higher level stuff.

00:14:35.980 But economics, conservatives understand that human motivation has got to be a top variable or nothing works.

00:14:44.800 They got that part right.

00:14:46.560 And the left doesn't.

00:14:48.480 So I'd say everybody's bad at science, but only the left is bad at economics.

00:14:54.300 Of course, these are gross generalizations, obviously.

00:14:58.180 All right.

00:14:58.540 I saw Viva Frye use the term experimental in a tweet today for the COVID vaccination.

00:15:07.080 I would like to suggest that anybody who uses the word experimental for the vaccination,

00:15:13.100 and of course, I know what you mean.

00:15:14.660 You know, everybody understands that it was, you know, a quick job and wasn't tested as long as other vaccinations and stuff.

00:15:22.560 And also new technology.

00:15:23.960 But calling it experimental, I would say, is word thinking.

00:15:29.440 Meaning, it's trying to win an argument with a word, and that's not how it works.

00:15:35.040 I mean, it can work, but that's not how you should win an argument, with a word.

00:15:39.200 You know, don't define a word and say you're done.

00:15:41.800 And I would argue that experimental might be cognitive dissonance.

00:15:45.920 It might be a tell for cognitive dissonance, if you're using that word.

00:15:50.760 It's perfectly reasonable to say all the following things.

00:15:55.980 We don't have as much of a track record.

00:15:58.540 And at least two of the vaccinations are a platform that we have less experience with.

00:16:04.640 Does that increase your risk?

00:16:06.660 Well, we don't know if it increases the actual risk, but it increases the perceived risk, which is what you make your decisions on.

00:16:12.760 So, I would argue that you don't want to use the word experimental.

00:16:21.180 It's sort of a tell that you're not thinking through.

00:16:25.200 Or let me put it this way.

00:16:27.160 The way I receive it, since I can't read your mind, I don't know what anybody's thinking when they say it.

00:16:33.220 But the way it's received is, oh, that's just a propaganda word.

00:16:37.620 And then I turn off the rest of the sentence.

00:16:40.520 So, persuasion advice to Viva, who I generally agree with on most things. 0.96

00:16:47.900 I can't even think of anything I disagree with them on.

00:16:50.060 But just a persuasion suggestion.

00:16:55.220 Don't use the word experimental.

00:16:56.700 And that really puts you in a category.

00:16:59.960 And I don't think you want to be there.

00:17:04.160 Here's my take.

00:17:07.760 See how much of this you agree with or disagree.

00:17:09.980 And I'll be watching the comments as I go.

00:17:11.900 I say, without being an expert on any of this stuff.

00:17:16.620 And by the way, you should watch Viva and Barnes.

00:17:19.000 It's a great, it was one of the best podcasts, in my opinion.

00:17:22.260 One of the best podcasts out there.

00:17:28.520 Let me see how much of this, the following you agree with.

00:17:32.300 Number one, that every vaccination is a different risk management decision.

00:17:38.740 By itself.

00:17:39.780 It has to be looked at by itself.

00:17:41.900 It has its own risk management.

00:17:43.980 Everybody agree with that so far?

00:17:46.300 Such that, let's say you had lots of experience with chickenpox vaccination.

00:17:53.280 What does it tell you about measles vaccinations?

00:17:57.460 A little bit, maybe.

00:17:59.760 But certainly no certainty.

00:18:01.740 Because they're different.

00:18:03.220 And the risk is different, etc.

00:18:05.280 Now, I've said that the risk of COVID is a risk to the economy.

00:18:11.040 Whereas those other ones are not.

00:18:15.360 Let me, I know I'm going to get a pushback on this.

00:18:18.140 So let me put that out there and see your comments.

00:18:21.100 COVID is a risk to the economy.

00:18:24.240 But the others were not.

00:18:25.580 Why?

00:18:26.140 Why?

00:18:26.580 Somebody says, why?

00:18:29.680 Is it because the data suggests that it's a risk to the economy?

00:18:33.720 It doesn't matter.

00:18:35.460 If you're thinking, Scott, Scott, Scott, we shouldn't have closed the economy, that's the wrong answer.

00:18:42.860 What we should or shouldn't do is irrelevant to your risk management decision.

00:18:48.380 What we would do is relevant.

00:18:51.460 What you should do is not part of the conversation.

00:18:55.600 Because we're not doing what we should.

00:18:58.300 We're doing what we're doing.

00:19:00.620 And everybody might have a different opinion of what we should do.

00:19:03.500 So should is a word that shouldn't be part of your calculation.

00:19:08.540 Just look at the cause and effect.

00:19:11.520 Given the government we have, and we can't change it, right?

00:19:15.860 The government we have, the public we have, the risks that we have.

00:19:19.280 If COVID started killing, you know, way more people than it is at the moment because we just opened everything up and dropped all the restrictions.

00:19:28.320 And I don't know if that would make a difference, but let's just say it does.

00:19:33.420 That would close the economy.

00:19:36.880 Maybe you disagree.

00:19:38.860 And maybe if you were in charge, you wouldn't close the economy.

00:19:42.420 That's irrelevant.

00:19:44.120 You're not in charge.

00:19:46.160 The people who are in charge will feel that they'll lose their jobs if too many people die.

00:19:52.420 So their incentive, as government officials, their incentive, unfortunately, doesn't align with yours.

00:19:59.120 Your incentive is to run your life with a risk management that you feel comfortable with.

00:20:04.960 That's not their incentive.

00:20:06.900 Their incentive is not for you to run your life with your own risk reward.

00:20:11.440 Their incentive is to have the fewest number of people die or get hospitalized.

00:20:16.300 Because that's how they keep their jobs.

00:20:19.000 So they're not about the same risk management calculation you're about.

00:20:22.720 You're not even on the same team.

00:20:24.360 Similar to drafting you for the war.

00:20:29.700 You getting drafted might be really bad for you, but that's not why they did it.

00:20:34.680 They didn't draft you for your benefit.

00:20:36.640 They drafted you to go in the war for the nation's benefit. 0.67

00:20:39.640 So the individual calculation and the government's calculation will always be different in this kind of situation.

00:20:46.980 And maybe it has to be.

00:20:48.540 Maybe it has to be.

00:20:50.440 And you can't change the fact that they will manage to the lowest number of deaths.

00:20:56.880 That's not going to change.

00:20:57.900 So if COVID went wild or wilder or was completely uncontrolled and there were, let's say, no vaccinations or anything else, would it close the economy?

00:21:10.880 Yeah, of course it would.

00:21:12.320 Of course it would.

00:21:13.220 Because it did before.

00:21:14.600 I think it would again.

00:21:16.440 The same forces would be at work.

00:21:18.660 You just have to get the death rate up to a certain level and then everything would close again.

00:21:22.580 Maybe differently.

00:21:24.520 We might be smarter about it, how we close things, but it's going to be a drag on the economy.

00:21:30.740 So here's my take.

00:21:32.900 The COVID vaccination did not have the same risk profile as any of the prior vaccinations.

00:21:39.100 If we had the luxury of waiting five to 15 years of watching the COVID vaccination before making it more mandatory, or at least requiring it for certain things, I suppose, we'd love to do that.

00:21:57.680 We all agree on that, right?

00:21:59.200 If we had the luxury to wait five or 15 years to just watch this COVID vaccination to feel really safe about it, we'd all love that.

00:22:09.680 But we don't.

00:22:11.080 That's not one of the choices.

00:22:13.260 One of the choices is you better do something pretty quick or you're in trouble.

00:22:17.380 So that risk profile is not like measles.

00:22:20.300 It's not like chickenpox.

00:22:22.120 So the moment you say, well, let's treat them like they're somehow this similar class of risk, completely wrong.

00:22:29.500 They might be a similar risk, but remember, your individual risk,

00:22:39.100 has nothing to do with what the government does, because they don't care about your individual risk.

00:22:44.220 They care about the group risk.

00:22:46.460 So you might say to yourself, well, I got a kid.

00:22:48.960 My kids, no way they're going to get COVID and die.

00:22:51.620 You know, so, you know, kids, of course, I think, have to be their own class for analysis.

00:22:58.580 So I agree with that.

00:22:59.660 I don't think you make one rule and it applies to kids and it applies to everybody, but we're not.

00:23:04.320 We are making different rules for different ages, as we should.

00:23:09.420 So group risk should include economics.

00:23:16.620 That is correct.

00:23:17.460 Group risk should include the economics.

00:23:20.960 So let's see if we can agree with the following statements.

00:23:25.660 Nobody, including our experts, are super good at evaluating risks.

00:23:33.920 True?

00:23:35.500 Nobody, including our experts, are super good at evaluating risks.

00:23:40.860 Who's on board with that so far?

00:23:43.780 We're all bad at it, even the experts, because there's a little bit of guessing going on, right?

00:23:48.880 But there are some things that you as an individual can make a decision on without knowing all the risks.

00:23:55.660 Such as your personal freedom, right?

00:24:00.580 Do you need to know everything about your risks to make a good decision about your own personal freedom?

00:24:07.540 Nope.

00:24:08.520 No.

00:24:09.220 You could be wrong.

00:24:11.540 It's your personal freedom.

00:24:13.820 Emphasis on personal.

00:24:15.520 You could be wrong about your risk.

00:24:17.840 It's your decision.

00:24:19.200 You get to make that decision unless the government tries to stop it.

00:24:23.080 So I think that comparing the vaccination to any other is bad thinking because the risk profiles are different and we should not expect that we would treat them the same.

00:24:38.840 If the risk of COVID is more immediate and affects the economy and maybe it's a bigger population of people who die, I don't know if that's true, but if you believe it is true, you would treat them differently.

00:24:51.340 And one of the things you might do is rush a vaccination.

00:24:56.480 Something you would never do if you had the luxury of waiting, but you don't.

00:25:01.040 All right.

00:25:03.940 FDA approved more rapid testing.

00:25:06.600 Looks like a big deal.

00:25:07.720 Cost as little as $10.

00:25:10.800 Already there are several companies that make them, but this new one, Akon, it's going to double the capacity and you'll get a, looks like it's a nasal swab and you get a, you get a answer in 15 minutes.

00:25:23.160 Somebody is going to win a Pulitzer Prize for figuring out why this hasn't already been done because here are the problems we didn't have.

00:25:35.180 We didn't have a problem with money, capacity, science, know-how, anything.

00:25:43.580 We didn't have any, we didn't have any, we didn't have any obstacles.

00:25:49.260 I mean, not, we didn't have any obstacles that would have stopped us from having the same availability as some European countries already have.

00:25:56.620 Right.

00:25:56.980 We had no more obstacles than they did and probably more resources.

00:26:01.320 So why did it take us so long?

00:26:04.200 It has to be corruption.

00:26:05.340 Now, I understand that Scott Gottlieb's book may attribute it to bureaucracy.

00:26:15.160 Not buying that for a second.

00:26:16.960 And I'm not sure he's talking about the same thing.

00:26:18.640 I didn't read it.

00:26:19.720 I just heard about it.

00:26:20.780 So I may be conflating two different stories.

00:26:23.260 I think I might be actually.

00:26:24.880 But the point is we don't know.

00:26:28.660 Does that bother you?

00:26:30.520 We don't know why this took so long.

00:26:33.060 And I don't buy the bureaucracy.

00:26:36.780 Because you know what also stopped, would have stopped vaccinations?

00:26:41.240 The bureaucracy.

00:26:42.480 Are you telling me that the bureaucracy approved super, let's say, provocative or controversial vaccinations on a, you know, compressed timeline?

00:26:56.720 You're telling me the bureaucracy got that done.

00:26:59.200 And they couldn't approve tests which would have essentially no risk.

00:27:05.660 They couldn't do that.

00:27:07.160 So the bureaucracy can approve the hardest thing you could possibly ever approve, rapid vaccinations.

00:27:13.340 And they couldn't approve a test that doesn't even affect your body.

00:27:20.080 Seriously.

00:27:21.900 That's not the bureaucracy.

00:27:23.360 Trust me, you know, there are a few people who appreciate the power of the bureaucracy more than the creator of Dilbert.

00:27:35.280 But this doesn't look like bureaucracy to me.

00:27:38.340 This looks like some kind of corruption.

00:27:40.580 I don't know who or where.

00:27:42.520 But it's some kind.

00:27:43.560 So somebody's going to get a Pulitzer Prize for digging into that and finding out who it was and what their benefit was for stopping it.

00:27:55.320 There's a, you know, the book Peril that everybody's talking about by Woodward.

00:28:01.420 John Dickerson of CBS News talks about, he says,

00:28:06.100 To which I say,

00:28:25.640 Was there really a transcript?

00:28:30.260 Is there an actual written transcript of an actual private conversation between Pelosi and Milley?

00:28:36.980 And a author of a book had access to it?

00:28:42.080 What?

00:28:43.780 Can somebody give me a fact check on that?

00:28:46.100 Is there an actual transcript?

00:28:48.660 Like it was recorded and then released?

00:28:52.780 That's not true, is it?

00:28:54.280 Oh, somebody says a FOIA.

00:28:55.640 Like, eh, maybe?

00:28:58.380 Yeah, I doubt it.

00:28:59.560 But, so we don't know the details of this story.

00:29:02.040 But let me add a generic.

00:29:04.820 Which is this.

00:29:06.640 Are you aware that when people are quoted in books,

00:29:10.820 it's rarely what the person actually said?

00:29:15.000 How many of you know that?

00:29:16.460 How many of you know that when you see somebody's exact words in quotes in an article or a book,

00:29:22.220 chances are, very high, like maybe 85%, that they didn't say that?

00:29:29.180 Did you know it was high as, you know, that's just my experience.

00:29:32.240 85% of the time it's a manufactured quote.

00:29:36.360 They're manufactured.

00:29:37.400 In other words, the journalist or writer talks to the subject for a long period of time

00:29:44.320 and then says to himself, well, he said three or four things about this topic,

00:29:50.060 but they were kind of long and they don't fit into a quote.

00:29:52.900 So I'm going to bake them into a little quote.

00:29:55.680 I'm going to put quotes around it because I feel like I've captured the essence of what he was trying to say.

00:30:01.560 And I'll just put a quote around it so it doesn't look like I'm saying it.

00:30:06.520 Super common.

00:30:08.160 Do you know how many times I've seen my own words with quotation marks around them in articles?

00:30:14.140 A lot.

00:30:15.220 Hundreds.

00:30:16.120 Hundreds and hundreds, many hundreds of times.

00:30:18.160 I've seen myself quoted in the news.

00:30:21.460 How many of those times did I actually say the actual sentence that's in the quote?

00:30:27.640 10, 20%.

00:30:28.960 That's it.

00:30:31.000 The rest are literally made up.

00:30:33.560 And as a consumer, if you don't know that,

00:30:36.440 you're really going to be confused about what's really happening.

00:30:40.480 All right.

00:30:41.980 Let's talk about the good news.

00:30:44.660 For the golden age.

00:30:45.800 You know the Adams Law of slow-moving disasters?

00:30:50.200 It says that if society can see a big problem coming for long enough,

00:30:54.620 we've got lots of warning, we always fix it.

00:30:58.240 We always do.

00:30:59.380 We didn't run out of food.

00:31:01.180 We didn't run out of oil.

00:31:03.320 And we closed the ozone hole.

00:31:06.420 We'll fix climate change.

00:31:09.000 That's my personal optimistic view.

00:31:10.960 Yeah.

00:31:11.440 Because we had enough time.

00:31:12.440 Even though it looks like we don't have enough time and we're rushing against the rising temperatures,

00:31:18.460 I think we have enough time.

00:31:20.240 But here are a few things that are happening.

00:31:22.420 Number one, a company called Dimensional Energy.

00:31:26.340 They're making jet fuel, which is the hardest thing to replace.

00:31:30.400 If you're trying to get to a low-carbon situation, it's hard to replace jet fuel

00:31:35.660 because you can't do it with a battery except for small planes.

00:31:39.380 But for a big jet, we don't yet have a battery capacity for that.

00:31:43.480 But this company, Dimensional Energy, sucks the CO2 out of the air,

00:31:47.940 puts it through a chemical process, and creates jet fuel out of the air.

00:31:54.760 They suck jet fuel out of the air.

00:31:59.840 Now, it's not jet fuel when they suck it out.

00:32:01.820 It's just CO2.

00:32:03.480 But they chemically translate it into jet fuel.

00:32:07.380 And apparently they are going to power this whole thing with the sun.

00:32:11.380 So they'll have a big sun factory out in the desert somewhere or someplace remote.

00:32:15.540 And the sun will burn down and create enough energy to translate this CO2

00:32:21.900 that they've sucked out of the air into jet fuel.

00:32:24.580 Now, jet fuel is one of the bigger contributors to climate change.

00:32:30.640 So it's a big deal.

00:32:32.460 And it's even better than you think.

00:32:35.000 They think that at a scale, once they build a bigger operation,

00:32:38.800 they can get the cost of a gallon of jet fuel down to a dollar.

00:32:42.220 Follow the money.

00:32:47.240 If the economics of this are accurate,

00:32:50.500 this is the only way we're going to make jet fuel.

00:32:53.500 We're not going to make jet fuel any other way,

00:32:55.620 if you can make it for a dollar a gallon.

00:32:58.220 I don't know what jet fuel costs,

00:32:59.940 but I'm sure it's as much or more than a tank of gas for your car

00:33:04.480 that's five bucks in California.

00:33:10.360 So that's good news.

00:33:11.500 And it's already working at a small scale,

00:33:14.820 so we don't have to wonder about the technology.

00:33:16.920 All we have to do is scale it up.

00:33:18.920 It's now an engineering problem.

00:33:22.740 Let me say that again.

00:33:24.440 The solution to climate change,

00:33:27.000 if this is true,

00:33:28.760 if you can actually do this as inexpensively as they claim,

00:33:32.880 if that's true,

00:33:35.320 we're done.

00:33:37.260 Climate change is just an engineering problem now.

00:33:41.960 It's not a political problem.

00:33:43.920 It's not a scientific problem.

00:33:46.360 It's just an engineering problem.

00:33:47.960 You get a bunch of engineers to build a bunch of these plants,

00:33:50.120 they suck it out of the air, 0.94

00:33:51.560 boom, we're done.

00:33:54.560 Here's another one.

00:33:55.680 Good news.

00:33:57.180 A company called...

00:33:58.260 I don't know the name of the company.

00:34:02.000 But they've built a gigantic warehouse,

00:34:05.460 like really gigantic,

00:34:06.940 using AI and robotics and stuff like that.

00:34:10.500 And apparently,

00:34:11.840 it's in the Appalachian Mountains.

00:34:14.040 And if you do it right,

00:34:16.140 and it's a high-tech operation,

00:34:18.580 you reduce the water use by something like 90%.

00:34:21.820 So we've got this gigantic water problem

00:34:24.760 and also a gigantic cost-of-living problem.

00:34:28.300 And they can substantially reduce the cost of food,

00:34:32.720 substantially reduce the use of water,

00:34:35.360 which is a big deal

00:34:36.100 because agriculture uses most of your water,

00:34:38.980 and probably bring down the cost of food 0.82

00:34:43.460 as well as the shipping costs.

00:34:46.220 Because in theory,

00:34:47.120 you could build one of these facilities or more

00:34:49.620 in every population center,

00:34:51.160 and then suddenly,

00:34:52.560 you don't have to ship it.

00:34:54.360 I mean, as far.

00:34:55.900 So, this is gigantic.

00:34:59.480 Are you worried about climate change

00:35:01.360 making it too hard to grow food?

00:35:03.840 Problem solved.

00:35:05.780 And again,

00:35:06.660 all this has to do is be economical.

00:35:09.820 And you're done.

00:35:11.100 We'll just build more of them.

00:35:12.920 Just keep building.

00:35:14.300 And I think this is part of the answer to housing

00:35:17.320 and just an inexpensive life

00:35:20.760 that doesn't break the bank.

00:35:23.680 This might be part of it.

00:35:25.960 Well, there's news that Dan Scavino

00:35:28.920 is missing in action,

00:35:32.160 and they can't serve him the subpoenas they want to

00:35:34.500 to have him testify about January 6th.

00:35:37.960 There's a rumor that Dan Scavino went hiking

00:35:41.720 in the Carlton Preserve.

00:35:45.520 Anybody?

00:35:46.960 Anybody?

00:35:48.900 There's a rumor that he went hiking

00:35:50.640 in the Carlton Preserve.

00:35:53.740 Some of you got that joke.

00:35:55.820 Some of you got that joke.

00:35:57.220 It's not true.

00:35:59.440 But I'm not even going to explain it.

00:36:03.520 Ask a friend.

00:36:06.060 If you didn't get that joke.

00:36:07.400 All right.

00:36:08.940 Let's talk about Taiwan and China.

00:36:12.040 So as you know,

00:36:12.880 China's sending a bunch of warships

00:36:14.520 flying over Taiwan.

00:36:18.320 And Jack Posobiec tweeted

00:36:21.820 about the Taiwan stuff.

00:36:23.800 He says it's heating up

00:36:25.000 more than people realize.

00:36:27.000 He says this isn't just posturing.

00:36:28.900 There are top Chinese generals

00:36:31.360 telling Xi

00:36:32.180 they want the green light

00:36:34.100 to attack Taiwan.

00:36:36.700 What's your interpretation of this story?

00:36:39.120 Let's take it as a given

00:36:40.540 that Jack Posobiec has good sources.

00:36:43.700 That's been my experience.

00:36:45.160 He has good sources.

00:36:46.480 So I'm going to take it as true

00:36:48.360 that we have some intel on this.

00:36:52.220 And he's heard it.

00:36:53.960 How do you interpret that?

00:36:55.400 Do you interpret it as,

00:36:56.360 oh my God,

00:36:57.200 war is going to break out in any moment?

00:36:59.320 Because the generals

00:37:00.040 are itching to do it?

00:37:02.340 I don't.

00:37:04.220 Here's my interpretation.

00:37:07.520 If you're a general,

00:37:09.520 you need to tell Xi

00:37:12.020 you're ready to go.

00:37:13.220 Give me the green light.

00:37:15.040 Isn't that just good generaling?

00:37:17.200 Generals being generals.

00:37:18.640 Don't we have an attack plan

00:37:20.180 for basically everything?

00:37:22.120 Don't our generals have a plan

00:37:23.780 for attacking just about anything,

00:37:25.780 including China?

00:37:27.280 Of course they do.

00:37:27.960 And don't those generals

00:37:29.680 probably tell their commander-in-chief

00:37:32.280 in the United States,

00:37:33.600 not on this topic,

00:37:34.660 but on other topics,

00:37:36.200 let us do it.

00:37:38.000 They said that in Afghanistan, right?

00:37:40.240 Yeah, let us stay.

00:37:41.920 Let's keep some people there forever.

00:37:43.360 The most ordinary thing in the world

00:37:46.840 bordering on nothing

00:37:50.000 is generals wanting to fight wars,

00:37:53.280 or at least telling the boss

00:37:54.440 they want to fight a war.

00:37:56.060 Telling the boss,

00:37:57.000 you know,

00:37:57.240 put us in the game

00:37:58.100 is just,

00:37:59.300 seems good politics.

00:38:00.360 I'm not sure I could go so far

00:38:03.020 as to say that that's telling us

00:38:04.480 they're ready to strike.

00:38:06.800 Because I can't imagine

00:38:08.060 that China would benefit from it.

00:38:11.260 I think their economy

00:38:12.160 would be crashed for 100 years.

00:38:14.880 And I think they'd know that.

00:38:18.420 CNN has a story that says

00:38:20.320 in several states,

00:38:21.940 Texas, Idaho, Alabama,

00:38:23.260 Georgia, Oklahoma,

00:38:24.120 Kentucky, Arkansas,

00:38:25.120 and North Carolina,

00:38:25.820 have 15% or less

00:38:28.020 of their ICU capacity available.

00:38:31.780 So ICU capacity

00:38:33.420 in those states I mentioned,

00:38:35.640 15% or less capacity.

00:38:40.500 Anybody?

00:38:41.840 In the comments?

00:38:43.020 In the comments,

00:38:43.960 why is that fake news?

00:38:45.980 Come on,

00:38:46.640 you're all trained.

00:38:47.400 You know this one.

00:38:48.560 You all know this one.

00:38:49.740 That's the normal amount

00:38:51.020 of capacity in an ICU.

00:38:54.680 15% of capacity

00:38:55.800 capacity is a lot, actually.

00:38:58.080 It's not tight.

00:39:00.220 That means that they

00:39:01.340 wish they had more.

00:39:03.480 Because the ICUs

00:39:04.500 try to operate

00:39:05.220 close to that level

00:39:06.740 because they're expensive.

00:39:09.360 So you want to utilize them

00:39:10.400 as much as possible.

00:39:11.760 So you build them

00:39:12.640 such that they're always

00:39:14.220 close to capacity.

00:39:17.140 So CNN reports this

00:39:18.300 without ever telling you

00:39:19.260 what the normal capacity

00:39:20.400 is for an ICU.

00:39:23.400 Yeah, somebody in the comments

00:39:24.660 says 90% is the goal.

00:39:27.420 This is the fakest

00:39:28.500 of fake news.

00:39:29.700 Now, I'm not telling you

00:39:31.400 that that's, you know,

00:39:32.760 that's enough capacity

00:39:34.260 because you could crash

00:39:35.340 that with a wave,

00:39:36.480 I guess, of COVID.

00:39:38.420 But they need to add

00:39:39.580 a little context here,

00:39:40.900 please.

00:39:42.600 All right,

00:39:42.860 Monica Lewinsky is,

00:39:44.160 I think there's some

00:39:45.160 documentary about

00:39:46.340 Monica Lewinsky now.

00:39:47.720 So she's in the news again.

00:39:48.720 And she says,

00:39:49.180 Bill Clinton's role

00:39:51.420 in the affair scandal

00:39:52.600 was wholly inappropriate.

00:39:55.140 I guess we all agree

00:39:55.960 with that,

00:39:57.180 as was hers.

00:39:58.580 And she says the same thing.

00:39:59.780 Her own role,

00:40:00.900 she's not defending.

00:40:02.840 But what about the part

00:40:05.860 about going public?

00:40:08.440 Those are two different crimes,

00:40:10.980 if I could use crime

00:40:12.020 in a generic sense,

00:40:13.000 not a technical sense.

00:40:14.040 Because Bill Clinton

00:40:16.600 made one bad mistake,

00:40:19.000 which was Monica Lewinsky. 1.00

00:40:21.920 Monica Lewinsky made 1.00

00:40:23.200 two bad mistakes.

00:40:25.260 One was getting involved

00:40:26.540 in the affair.

00:40:27.160 She was an adult.

00:40:28.560 Yes, I understand

00:40:29.400 the power differential

00:40:30.320 and all that,

00:40:30.820 but she was an adult.

00:40:32.460 We don't give adults a pass.

00:40:34.940 Right?

00:40:35.520 We don't give adults a pass.

00:40:37.300 Clinton lied,

00:40:38.160 and he should have.

00:40:38.960 I approve of his lie.

00:40:41.720 I approve of his lie.

00:40:44.040 For the country.

00:40:45.460 Was the country better off

00:40:46.580 if you found out

00:40:47.340 that the affair was real?

00:40:49.960 Did that help you

00:40:50.780 in some way?

00:40:51.900 No, it just caused us

00:40:53.160 to be caught up

00:40:54.120 in some impeachment drama.

00:40:56.260 It didn't help the country.

00:40:58.420 So, this is my opinion.

00:41:00.820 Bill Clinton, yes.

00:41:02.120 What he did,

00:41:02.720 he has to answer for,

00:41:03.560 and he has.

00:41:05.000 What Monica did 1.00

00:41:05.980 in terms of the affair,

00:41:06.900 she has to answer for,

00:41:07.820 and she has.

00:41:08.240 And she takes responsibility,

00:41:09.840 and I appreciate that.

00:41:11.600 But the real crime here

00:41:12.740 was the making it public.

00:41:15.660 Am I wrong?

00:41:17.120 That that was the bigger crime?

00:41:19.000 Because that's the part

00:41:19.760 that paralyzed the country. 0.94

00:41:21.840 They could have had sex 0.98

00:41:23.040 all day long 0.99

00:41:23.820 in the Oval Office

00:41:24.560 if they just didn't

00:41:25.320 tell us about it.

00:41:26.680 Still would be

00:41:27.360 wholly inappropriate,

00:41:29.080 but at least,

00:41:29.980 you know,

00:41:30.220 the commander-in-chief

00:41:31.040 would not be so tense.

00:41:35.060 Yeah.

00:41:35.460 So, her friend,

00:41:36.420 Linda Tripp,

00:41:37.080 who talked her into it,

00:41:39.060 you know,

00:41:40.280 certainly has

00:41:40.900 some responsibility

00:41:42.800 there, too.

00:41:45.100 But,

00:41:45.780 I can't give

00:41:46.740 Monica Lewinsky

00:41:47.960 a pass

00:41:48.620 for making this public.

00:41:50.420 That is one

00:41:51.080 of the worst things

00:41:51.820 any citizen

00:41:52.520 has done

00:41:52.940 to this country,

00:41:54.560 short of terrorism.

00:41:57.320 Is that hyperbole?

00:41:58.820 It's one of the worst things

00:41:59.820 a citizen

00:42:00.360 has done

00:42:00.820 to the country,

00:42:01.900 short of terrorism.

00:42:03.500 and, you know,

00:42:05.400 mass shootings and stuff.

00:42:07.820 Somebody says

00:42:08.320 not even close.

00:42:10.560 Their affair

00:42:11.280 was outed by Drudge.

00:42:14.380 That's not the way

00:42:15.200 I remember it.

00:42:17.060 Maybe I do need

00:42:17.900 a fact check on this,

00:42:19.040 but I remember it as

00:42:20.440 maybe Drudge outed it,

00:42:22.720 but it wouldn't have

00:42:23.280 been a thing

00:42:23.740 unless she admitted it,

00:42:24.700 right?

00:42:25.580 I think it was

00:42:26.360 the admitting it

00:42:27.180 that made it a thing.

00:42:28.780 Because presidents

00:42:29.560 being accused

00:42:30.200 of having affairs

00:42:30.980 is kind of,

00:42:32.340 you know,

00:42:32.600 one news cycle

00:42:34.620 and gone.

00:42:36.100 That's not really

00:42:36.960 the big problem,

00:42:38.360 just being accused.

00:42:39.420 It's the admitting it

00:42:40.220 that's the problem.

00:42:42.380 All right.

00:42:44.420 And I also think

00:42:45.480 that this whole thing

00:42:46.300 infantilizes women. 0.96

00:42:49.520 It infantilizes women. 1.00

00:42:52.480 Put your,

00:42:53.340 let's do the

00:42:54.180 Alan Dershowitz test,

00:42:55.420 okay?

00:42:56.240 Here's the

00:42:56.620 Alan Dershowitz test.

00:42:58.660 Imagine the affair

00:42:59.900 happened,

00:43:00.540 but the 22-year-old

00:43:01.780 in the story

00:43:02.320 was male.

00:43:04.960 Would we treat

00:43:05.960 a male 22-year-old

00:43:08.080 who had an affair,

00:43:09.100 let's say,

00:43:09.640 with,

00:43:10.020 I don't know,

00:43:10.960 Angela Merkel

00:43:11.640 or something,

00:43:12.780 would we treat

00:43:13.480 that 22-year-old

00:43:14.760 as like,

00:43:15.200 oh,

00:43:15.400 there was a power

00:43:16.040 differential?

00:43:17.100 Even though there

00:43:17.780 would be.

00:43:18.680 And even though

00:43:19.240 it does matter.

00:43:20.240 I'm certainly

00:43:20.720 agreeing it matters.

00:43:22.260 But would we

00:43:22.840 treat these situations

00:43:23.860 the same?

00:43:25.540 I'm going to say no.

00:43:28.140 I'm going to say no.

00:43:29.100 I think we're

00:43:30.100 infantilizing women 1.00

00:43:31.140 here.

00:43:32.240 I think it's

00:43:33.140 insanely sexist

00:43:35.440 to imagine that

00:43:36.300 Monica was just 1.00

00:43:37.180 a victim to the

00:43:38.080 power and the

00:43:39.400 situation.

00:43:40.820 I just don't think

00:43:42.000 a man would be

00:43:42.800 treated like this.

00:43:44.560 I think a man

00:43:45.240 would be treated

00:43:45.840 with more respect,

00:43:46.960 frankly.

00:43:47.920 And I don't think

00:43:48.680 that's cool.

00:43:50.140 All right.

00:43:51.140 Bill Gates is part

00:43:52.260 of fake news.

00:43:53.240 You probably,

00:43:53.920 some of you,

00:43:54.480 might have fallen

00:43:54.980 for this.

00:43:55.500 The story is

00:43:56.720 that in a 2010

00:43:57.600 TED Talk,

00:43:59.480 he talked about

00:44:00.580 using vaccinations

00:44:01.880 to reduce

00:44:02.780 population growth.

00:44:04.980 People interpreted

00:44:06.020 that as killing

00:44:07.360 people to reduce 1.00

00:44:09.300 the population.

00:44:10.920 No,

00:44:11.820 he didn't say

00:44:12.300 that.

00:44:13.020 He also did not

00:44:14.080 say we'll vaccinate

00:44:14.980 people to make

00:44:16.500 them unable to

00:44:17.440 have children.

00:44:19.180 No,

00:44:19.740 he didn't say

00:44:20.140 that.

00:44:20.720 The context

00:44:21.400 was that

00:44:23.200 vaccinated

00:44:24.740 societies do

00:44:26.320 better.

00:44:27.020 And when

00:44:27.280 countries do

00:44:27.920 better

00:44:28.280 economically,

00:44:30.700 their birth

00:44:32.600 rate goes down

00:44:33.140 automatically.

00:44:34.840 So what Bill

00:44:35.420 Gates said

00:44:35.880 was sort

00:44:37.920 of a big

00:44:38.280 nothing.

00:44:39.220 If you

00:44:39.660 vaccinate

00:44:40.260 better

00:44:40.760 these developing

00:44:42.120 countries,

00:44:43.240 they would be

00:44:43.940 part of a

00:44:44.680 package of

00:44:45.200 things that

00:44:45.620 make them do

00:44:46.160 better.

00:44:47.120 And as they

00:44:47.660 do better,

00:44:48.160 they have

00:44:48.440 fewer kids.

00:44:50.380 Is that

00:44:50.960 controversial?

00:44:53.160 Now,

00:44:53.640 you might say

00:44:54.160 we shouldn't

00:44:54.580 get vaccinations.

00:44:55.380 That's a

00:44:55.640 separate

00:44:55.840 question.

00:44:56.420 But it's

00:44:56.600 not really

00:44:56.900 controversial

00:44:57.500 to say that

00:44:58.760 the population

00:44:59.400 might self-regulate

00:45:00.820 if the country

00:45:01.980 does better.

00:45:05.440 All right.

00:45:08.840 Birth rate

00:45:09.460 goes down,

00:45:10.100 but infant

00:45:10.460 mortality

00:45:10.960 improves,

00:45:11.620 so does

00:45:11.920 wash.

00:45:12.360 I mean,

00:45:12.560 you could

00:45:12.780 argue that

00:45:13.240 he has

00:45:13.500 the math

00:45:13.860 wrong.

00:45:14.380 That's a

00:45:14.700 separate

00:45:14.960 question.

00:45:18.480 How much

00:45:19.180 market share

00:45:19.800 is Apple

00:45:20.340 versus Android?

00:45:21.600 Quit selling

00:45:22.280 Apple products

00:45:23.660 you sell

00:45:24.180 out a lot.

00:45:26.640 Now,

00:45:27.360 I'll say it

00:45:28.240 again,

00:45:29.100 as many

00:45:30.360 times as

00:45:30.780 it takes.

00:45:31.920 We can't

00:45:32.540 treat the

00:45:33.540 companies that

00:45:34.560 have established

00:45:35.280 business in

00:45:36.140 China the 0.81

00:45:36.640 same as a

00:45:37.760 company that's

00:45:38.260 planning to

00:45:38.960 go there.

00:45:40.120 That's just

00:45:40.720 not the same

00:45:41.200 analysis.

00:45:41.840 You have to

00:45:42.240 let the big

00:45:42.680 companies unwind

00:45:43.560 at their own

00:45:44.160 speed,

00:45:44.700 whatever makes

00:45:45.280 sense economically.

00:45:46.060 But I think

00:45:47.780 you can be

00:45:48.500 assured that

00:45:51.520 Apple and

00:45:53.600 their management

00:45:54.920 team,

00:45:55.520 they're looking

00:45:56.340 at alternatives

00:45:57.100 to China.

00:45:59.180 If you think

00:46:00.040 they're not

00:46:00.420 looking pretty

00:46:01.180 hard at

00:46:01.660 alternatives to

00:46:02.480 China just to

00:46:03.120 minimize their

00:46:03.640 own risk, 0.99

00:46:04.340 you're crazy. 0.99

00:46:06.020 But I'm just 0.99

00:46:06.560 saying that we

00:46:07.060 don't need to

00:46:07.540 make them

00:46:08.320 leave today.

00:46:10.120 It would be

00:46:10.740 enough to

00:46:12.740 just give them

00:46:13.440 their flexibility

00:46:15.240 to get out

00:46:16.360 at their own

00:46:16.880 speed.

00:46:19.280 A question

00:46:20.880 about Boo,

00:46:21.500 my cat.

00:46:22.020 I have only

00:46:22.460 bad news about

00:46:23.240 Boo, 0.75

00:46:23.520 unfortunately.

00:46:24.080 She's not

00:46:24.480 eating on her

00:46:25.020 own.

00:46:25.300 I thought she

00:46:25.640 did for a

00:46:26.660 day.

00:46:27.000 She was

00:46:27.200 licking some

00:46:27.720 food, but

00:46:28.180 she stopped.

00:46:30.340 It's not

00:46:30.900 looking good

00:46:31.380 for Boo,

00:46:31.760 the cat.

00:46:32.840 But that's

00:46:33.300 another story.

00:46:34.760 All right.

00:46:35.040 So let's

00:46:40.160 see.

00:46:43.440 I got some

00:46:44.900 pushback on

00:46:45.840 Twitter for

00:46:48.420 mentioning that

00:46:49.400 vaccine mandates

00:46:50.960 would not be

00:46:52.920 unique.

00:46:54.600 And the

00:46:55.600 problem is we

00:46:56.060 just got used

00:46:56.720 to it.

00:46:58.180 Everything you

00:46:58.980 do is mandated

00:46:59.940 in terms of

00:47:01.640 the guardrails of

00:47:03.580 what you can

00:47:04.020 and can't do.

00:47:05.400 And I used

00:47:06.180 seatbelts as

00:47:06.840 my example,

00:47:07.840 and everybody

00:47:08.380 did the

00:47:09.000 analogy thing,

00:47:10.540 where if you

00:47:11.420 say, oh,

00:47:12.000 Scott, that's a

00:47:12.580 bad analogy,

00:47:13.100 because here

00:47:13.980 are the

00:47:14.200 differences

00:47:14.600 between a

00:47:15.900 seatbelt and

00:47:16.940 a vaccination.

00:47:19.080 Now, did

00:47:20.220 anybody think I

00:47:20.840 didn't know that

00:47:21.460 seatbelts and

00:47:22.000 vaccinations were

00:47:22.720 actually different

00:47:23.280 things?

00:47:24.400 I will stipulate

00:47:25.680 that everything

00:47:27.080 about a

00:47:27.540 vaccination,

00:47:29.260 everything,

00:47:30.100 is different

00:47:30.620 from everything

00:47:31.580 about seatbelts,

00:47:33.860 except one

00:47:34.700 thing, which

00:47:35.540 was my point.

00:47:36.660 Just one

00:47:37.280 thing, the

00:47:38.060 government makes

00:47:38.600 you do it.

00:47:39.720 That's all.

00:47:40.860 That's all.

00:47:41.440 Well, I'm

00:47:42.060 not saying

00:47:42.400 they're the

00:47:42.780 same.

00:47:43.720 I'm just

00:47:44.300 saying you

00:47:44.660 live in a

00:47:45.060 world in

00:47:45.400 which the

00:47:45.680 government makes

00:47:46.240 you do all

00:47:46.680 kinds of

00:47:47.040 stuff that

00:47:48.280 maybe you

00:47:48.700 don't want

00:47:49.000 to do.

00:47:50.060 So if

00:47:51.080 your argument

00:47:51.980 is the

00:47:52.540 slippery slope,

00:47:54.340 well, you've

00:47:55.160 been sliding

00:47:55.640 that slippery

00:47:56.260 slope forever,

00:47:57.940 which doesn't

00:47:59.360 mean I'm in

00:47:59.800 favor of

00:48:00.200 mandates.

00:48:00.700 I'm opposed

00:48:01.380 to mandates.

00:48:03.280 Hear that

00:48:03.900 part.

00:48:04.180 I'm opposed

00:48:04.620 to mandates,

00:48:05.260 but I'm also

00:48:05.960 opposed to

00:48:06.440 bad arguments.

00:48:07.100 I'm opposed

00:48:08.880 to mandates

00:48:09.500 and bad

00:48:10.320 arguments.

00:48:11.340 We live in

00:48:11.760 a world in

00:48:12.280 which we

00:48:12.840 have willingly

00:48:13.420 given the

00:48:13.920 government all

00:48:14.520 kinds of

00:48:15.020 control over

00:48:15.640 our bodies,

00:48:16.760 and we just

00:48:18.100 got used to

00:48:18.620 it.

00:48:19.020 So we don't

00:48:19.440 notice it,

00:48:20.000 really, I

00:48:20.420 guess.

00:48:21.160 It's just

00:48:21.580 that when it

00:48:22.100 comes to

00:48:23.300 this, we

00:48:23.640 notice it.

00:48:24.240 Now, let me

00:48:24.640 ask you this.

00:48:26.020 Why is it

00:48:26.640 that we're

00:48:26.960 treating this

00:48:27.760 particular risk

00:48:28.800 and mandate

00:48:30.220 so different?

00:48:31.780 Don't our

00:48:34.060 other mandates

00:48:34.680 have a potential

00:48:36.320 to kill us 0.89

00:48:37.000 or make us 1.00

00:48:37.760 lose money

00:48:38.300 also?

00:48:39.700 This isn't

00:48:40.440 the only

00:48:40.800 mandate that

00:48:41.380 has a negative

00:48:41.960 impact on

00:48:42.660 people, is it?

00:48:44.100 For example,

00:48:45.400 instituting the

00:48:46.100 draft.

00:48:47.540 And that's a

00:48:48.120 pretty big impact

00:48:49.020 on people.

00:48:50.120 But we allow

00:48:50.920 that under

00:48:52.120 the right

00:48:52.400 conditions.

00:48:54.320 So I'm

00:48:55.520 going to make

00:48:55.940 a provocative

00:48:56.620 statement that

00:48:59.440 your opinion

00:49:00.200 on vaccinations

00:49:01.040 was probably

00:49:02.120 assigned to

00:49:03.800 you.

00:49:04.920 You don't

00:49:05.580 know it.

00:49:07.080 Your opinion

00:49:07.900 on vaccinations

00:49:08.780 was probably

00:49:09.880 assigned to

00:49:10.840 you by the

00:49:11.260 media.

00:49:11.680 Because that's

00:49:12.000 where our

00:49:12.300 opinions come

00:49:12.820 from.

00:49:13.660 If you have

00:49:14.360 an opinion

00:49:14.680 that doesn't

00:49:15.260 match anything

00:49:16.040 that you're

00:49:16.420 reading in

00:49:16.820 the media,

00:49:17.780 it might be

00:49:18.280 your own

00:49:18.600 opinion.

00:49:19.760 If your

00:49:20.340 opinion exactly

00:49:21.300 matches stuff

00:49:22.160 you're seeing

00:49:22.560 on social

00:49:23.040 media, it

00:49:24.300 could be

00:49:24.600 because you're

00:49:25.040 all smart.

00:49:26.640 I don't

00:49:27.200 think so.

00:49:28.680 I think it's

00:49:29.340 more because

00:49:30.160 your opinion

00:49:30.780 got assigned

00:49:31.400 to you and

00:49:31.860 you accepted

00:49:32.920 it.

00:49:34.000 So not only

00:49:34.820 are you

00:49:35.340 accepting

00:49:35.760 mandates,

00:49:37.080 it's worse.

00:49:38.700 You're

00:49:38.980 accepting

00:49:39.360 opinions.

00:49:41.240 You're

00:49:41.760 actually taking

00:49:42.500 the governments

00:49:43.140 or in some

00:49:44.080 cases some

00:49:45.260 other entity

00:49:45.820 like Fox

00:49:47.240 News or

00:49:47.860 whatever you're

00:49:48.360 reading and

00:49:49.520 you're letting

00:49:51.260 them give you

00:49:51.920 an opinion

00:49:52.360 that you

00:49:53.680 think is

00:49:54.080 your own

00:49:54.360 now.

00:49:56.040 I know.

00:49:56.760 You think

00:49:57.020 it's your

00:49:57.280 own opinion.

00:49:58.160 That's how

00:49:58.520 it works.

00:49:59.300 It always

00:49:59.560 feels like

00:50:00.080 it's your

00:50:00.320 own opinion.

00:50:01.260 But unless

00:50:01.740 it's unique,

00:50:03.180 you can't

00:50:03.700 tell.

00:50:05.940 Scott's

00:50:06.440 trying to

00:50:06.820 label people.

00:50:09.200 What?

00:50:10.980 What?

00:50:11.800 Where did I

00:50:12.440 just label

00:50:12.920 people?

00:50:18.700 South Korean

00:50:19.540 doctors on

00:50:20.200 YouTube are a

00:50:20.780 good source?

00:50:23.620 Oh,

00:50:24.160 I'm

00:50:24.540 asking,

00:50:24.760 do you

00:50:24.960 believe Hunter

00:50:25.480 is actually

00:50:25.980 painting the

00:50:26.660 pictures he

00:50:27.220 selling?

00:50:28.940 I don't

00:50:30.580 think you

00:50:30.940 can assume

00:50:31.440 it.

00:50:33.320 But I

00:50:33.920 don't think

00:50:34.260 that they're

00:50:34.700 so good

00:50:35.460 that I

00:50:36.620 would rule

00:50:37.000 it out.

00:50:40.340 How about

00:50:41.020 my opinion?

00:50:41.780 Is it a

00:50:42.140 sign?

00:50:42.600 Well, my

00:50:43.140 opinion, I

00:50:43.800 believe, does

00:50:44.520 not match to

00:50:45.240 any of the

00:50:45.680 major opinions.

00:50:48.760 My opinion

00:50:49.440 is that the

00:50:50.400 vaccination is

00:50:51.620 a good idea

00:50:52.340 for lots of

00:50:53.220 people.

00:50:53.460 And I'm

00:50:55.360 in that

00:50:55.640 category where

00:50:56.360 the risk

00:50:56.880 reward, based

00:50:58.720 on, you

00:50:59.200 know, incomplete

00:51:00.180 information, but

00:51:01.860 it looks like it

00:51:02.400 might be a good

00:51:03.140 decision for

00:51:03.760 people in my

00:51:04.340 category.

00:51:04.860 It might be a

00:51:05.240 bad decision for

00:51:05.960 somebody in some

00:51:06.580 other demographic.

00:51:08.680 But I don't

00:51:09.580 think we should

00:51:10.020 have mandates.

00:51:11.420 So I don't

00:51:12.140 know which side

00:51:12.780 is telling you

00:51:13.500 that the

00:51:15.540 vaccinations might

00:51:16.520 be a good

00:51:16.960 idea, but you

00:51:18.300 don't need

00:51:18.680 mandates.

00:51:21.080 So I suppose

00:51:22.200 there are plenty

00:51:22.600 of people with

00:51:23.040 that opinion,

00:51:23.540 too.

00:51:26.400 Scott's opinion

00:51:27.060 seems like

00:51:27.600 things we've

00:51:28.120 heard before.

00:51:31.000 I don't know

00:51:31.740 that you've

00:51:32.120 heard my

00:51:32.460 opinion breaking

00:51:33.160 down the

00:51:33.900 risk management

00:51:36.180 before.

00:51:36.620 I think I'm

00:51:37.240 the only one

00:51:37.660 talking about

00:51:38.180 it that way.

00:51:43.880 Yeah, you

00:51:44.520 know, the

00:51:45.640 government

00:51:46.000 tracking down

00:51:47.820 to $600

00:51:48.740 transactions in

00:51:50.040 your bank

00:51:50.400 account, that's

00:51:52.460 going to

00:51:53.580 change a lot

00:51:54.120 of behavior.

00:51:55.820 Because here's

00:51:56.540 the problem.

00:51:57.940 A huge part

00:51:58.700 of the American

00:51:59.160 economy is

00:51:59.940 criminal.

00:52:03.060 Small

00:52:03.580 business.

00:52:05.200 One of the

00:52:06.140 dark secrets of

00:52:07.320 small business is

00:52:08.220 that they're

00:52:08.660 mostly criminal

00:52:10.420 enterprises.

00:52:11.540 No matter what

00:52:12.340 they look like on

00:52:13.080 the surface,

00:52:14.180 they're almost

00:52:14.880 certainly cheating

00:52:15.560 on their taxes.

00:52:16.940 Sorry.

00:52:18.300 Almost.

00:52:19.060 Not all of them.

00:52:19.780 There could be

00:52:20.780 small businesses

00:52:21.580 that are just

00:52:22.120 playing it totally

00:52:22.800 straight.

00:52:24.000 But small

00:52:24.460 businesses have a

00:52:25.380 lot of

00:52:26.100 flexibility to

00:52:27.160 take cash.

00:52:29.760 Pretty much

00:52:30.420 all of them

00:52:30.880 do.

00:52:32.340 Pretty much

00:52:33.020 all of them

00:52:33.420 don't declare it.

00:52:34.580 But they've

00:52:35.180 got to put that

00:52:35.600 cash somewhere.

00:52:37.000 So they put it

00:52:37.460 in the bank.

00:52:38.340 So what's going

00:52:39.140 to happen with

00:52:39.740 this bank thing?

00:52:40.600 Let's make a

00:52:41.340 prediction.

00:52:42.460 What's going to

00:52:43.120 happen?

00:52:43.460 Will the small

00:52:44.360 businesses stop

00:52:45.240 taking cash or

00:52:47.960 just start paying

00:52:48.920 taxes on it?

00:52:49.980 Probably not.

00:52:51.520 Will they take

00:52:52.400 that money and

00:52:52.940 still put it in

00:52:53.540 the bank where

00:52:54.800 they will easily

00:52:55.600 be caught because

00:52:57.080 their deposits

00:52:58.780 outweigh their

00:52:59.780 income so it'll

00:53:01.120 raise the flag?

00:53:03.040 Probably not.

00:53:04.440 Here's what's

00:53:04.900 going to happen.

00:53:06.460 You're going to

00:53:06.880 create a secondary

00:53:07.980 market for cash.

00:53:10.420 And it won't be

00:53:11.340 banks.

00:53:12.960 You're going to

00:53:13.640 create this

00:53:14.060 underground cash

00:53:15.920 network where

00:53:17.380 people will be

00:53:18.220 laundering their

00:53:19.000 cash through

00:53:19.620 friends.

00:53:21.340 Let me give you

00:53:22.520 an example.

00:53:24.540 If I make a

00:53:25.540 let's say I made

00:53:27.660 a $5,000 cash

00:53:29.880 deposit in my

00:53:30.940 bank.

00:53:32.820 Would it raise

00:53:33.840 any flags?

00:53:35.920 Nope.

00:53:36.780 Nope.

00:53:37.360 Because the

00:53:38.220 amounts of my

00:53:39.040 transactions are

00:53:39.880 large-ish.

00:53:41.440 And even if I

00:53:42.280 have never made a

00:53:43.240 I don't think I've

00:53:44.020 ever made a $5,000

00:53:45.060 cash deposit.

00:53:46.140 But even if I

00:53:47.340 did people would

00:53:49.360 say that's within

00:53:50.940 the range of what

00:53:52.100 he does.

00:53:52.820 So I could

00:53:53.700 launder your

00:53:54.520 money.

00:53:55.580 You could come

00:53:56.340 to me and say

00:53:56.820 hey you know I

00:53:59.140 got this $5,000

00:54:00.100 can you put it in

00:54:01.380 your bank and

00:54:02.880 we'll trade

00:54:03.420 something that

00:54:03.980 can't be noticed.

00:54:06.040 I'd say sure

00:54:06.620 because I have no

00:54:08.300 problem depositing

00:54:09.000 it.

00:54:09.200 It just looks like

00:54:09.800 normal business

00:54:10.420 for me.

00:54:10.800 So you're

00:54:13.140 going to find

00:54:13.400 these money

00:54:14.460 laundering will

00:54:15.160 just be pervasive.

00:54:17.560 You know cash

00:54:18.420 laundering.

00:54:20.500 And then crypto

00:54:21.440 is probably part of

00:54:22.220 the answer.

00:54:22.640 Yeah I'm seeing

00:54:23.300 I'm being prompted

00:54:23.980 for that.

00:54:24.440 Crypto will have

00:54:25.520 some impact.

00:54:26.260 I don't know

00:54:26.560 exactly what that

00:54:27.660 will look like.

00:54:29.860 Look at Europe

00:54:30.520 to see where this

00:54:31.160 goes.

00:54:31.600 Don't try to

00:54:32.060 guess.

00:54:33.880 Interesting.

00:54:34.640 Somebody says

00:54:35.200 in Europe it's

00:54:35.840 already there.

00:54:36.260 so repeat

00:54:39.960 after me I

00:54:40.660 just sold my

00:54:41.260 boat.

00:54:43.240 Exactly.

00:54:44.600 But if you

00:54:46.240 sell your boat

00:54:46.800 every week

00:54:47.420 they're going

00:54:47.780 to notice.

00:54:48.780 See that's

00:54:49.100 why I could

00:54:50.360 put $5,000

00:54:52.040 in the bank

00:54:52.640 and say I

00:54:53.500 sold the

00:54:53.860 boat.

00:54:54.340 Nobody's going

00:54:54.780 to look at

00:54:56.600 it twice.

00:55:00.580 Yes the

00:55:01.260 Dilber calendars

00:55:02.100 are made in

00:55:02.740 China and

00:55:03.760 almost all of

00:55:04.520 the products I

00:55:05.140 use probably

00:55:05.680 are made in

00:55:06.140 China is for 1.00

00:55:07.880 those of you

00:55:08.500 who want to

00:55:09.120 do a gotcha

00:55:09.940 on me it

00:55:11.340 doesn't work

00:55:12.180 because I'm

00:55:14.320 telling you I'm

00:55:15.760 not going to

00:55:16.360 stop buying

00:55:16.960 Chinese products

00:55:17.820 if I need

00:55:18.460 them and it's

00:55:18.960 the only place

00:55:19.360 I can get

00:55:19.780 them or even

00:55:20.680 just convenience.

00:55:21.960 I'm telling you

00:55:22.700 that we have to

00:55:23.360 stop new business

00:55:24.160 going in that's

00:55:24.880 practical and

00:55:26.460 stopping buying

00:55:27.340 everything from

00:55:27.940 China is 0.85

00:55:28.380 impractical and

00:55:29.280 making all the

00:55:29.820 companies move

00:55:30.380 out right away

00:55:31.320 is impractical.

00:55:33.680 So I'm in

00:55:34.720 favor of

00:55:35.760 practical things

00:55:36.860 I realize that

00:55:39.400 this creates an

00:55:40.180 inconsistency

00:55:41.100 philosophically

00:55:42.040 but you're not

00:55:44.040 catching me I'm

00:55:45.400 telling you I'm

00:55:46.080 doing that.

00:55:47.220 There's no gotcha

00:55:47.980 here.

00:55:50.120 Yes Dilber products

00:55:51.700 are printed in

00:55:52.540 China.

00:55:53.220 I hate it. 0.99

00:55:54.600 It's not going to

00:55:55.260 change overnight.

00:55:57.800 Will I talk to my

00:55:58.880 publisher about it?

00:55:59.640 Of course.

00:56:00.760 Do they have

00:56:01.240 options?

00:56:01.760 Probably not.

00:56:02.460 All right.

00:56:07.640 Yeah.

00:56:08.340 I mean we can

00:56:09.080 be practical.

00:56:10.300 We don't have to

00:56:10.780 be absolutists.

00:56:12.980 All right.

00:56:13.560 That is all I

00:56:14.440 needed to say

00:56:15.060 today.

00:56:15.480 I'm pretty sure.

00:56:16.980 Yes it is.

00:56:18.140 And that means I've

00:56:19.100 got to go do

00:56:19.500 something else.

00:56:20.400 It's time.

00:56:21.620 Somebody says

00:56:22.140 that's a lame

00:56:22.720 excuse.

00:56:23.240 Is it?

00:56:26.080 Is it?

00:56:27.320 Is being

00:56:28.020 practical a lame

00:56:30.320 excuse?

00:56:30.660 No it isn't.

00:56:34.220 Being practical

00:56:35.080 is always

00:56:35.620 practical.

00:56:37.840 Anyway I'll

00:56:38.620 talk to you

00:56:38.940 later.

00:56:39.100 you sure is.

00:56:44.280 You

00:56:47.180 you

00:56:48.400 you

00:56:49.080 you

00:56:54.920 you

00:56:55.840 you

00:56:55.940 you

00:56:57.200 you

00:56:58.460 you

Real Coffee with Scott Adams - October 06, 2021

Episode 1521 Scott Adams： Probably the Best Coffee With Scott Adams of All Time

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript